Psalms, Hymns, and Songs from the Spirit
As I mentioned in my last post, Iād like to offer a series of short reflections on worship, spurred in part by two interesting posts by Tim Challies (1 2). I donāt intend this to be a polemical series, but do want to offer some thoughts on the ongoing āworship wars.ā Thankfully these have stilled for the most part, but Iām not always sure why the ceasefire. In many cases, I donāt think it has come from a sustained theological reflection, but rather simple exhaustion and a (wholly appropriate) desire for unity. But theological reflection is a good thing, so thatās some of what Iām aiming for today, as I zero in on one of the benefits Challies sees in switching from a hymnal to projected lyrics: variety.
Now, I love hymns, and believe strongly that we should be singing them regularly. I even argued in my last post that these are the songs I am absolutely sure I want my children to learn by heart, whereas my current favorite Crowder tune will only make it into the car CD player for a few weeks or so. However, there is a danger with our beloved hymns, that we will mistake style for value. What makes the great hymns great is their robust theology, deep pathos, and (in most cases, but not all) enchanting melody. Those are essential qualities. But if weāre not careful, we might begin to assume that some incidental qualitiesāinstrumentation, presence of rhyme, song structureābelong in the essential category as well. We can see this tendency in our phrase āmodern hymnody,ā which seems to be applied to songs that employ rhyming and follow a set structure (no bridge being the key piece here, as far as I can tell). Iām not sure why this sets apart a song as a hymn, when other songs (that donāt rhyme, have bridges, etc.) have equally robust theology, deep pathos, and enchanting melody.
And hereās where variety comes in. When we make the incidental essential, we limit the acceptable variety among our songs. Only those that bear the incidental marks pass through the gates. Paul encourages us to speak to one another in āpsalms, hymns, and songs from the Spiritā (Ephesians 5:19). Much scholarly ink has been spilled over the precise meaning of each term (though āpsalmsā seems pretty obvious). Whatever the difference between āhymnsā (which in Greek simply means āsong of praiseā) and āsongsā (assuming, as many scholars do, that āfrom the Spiritā modifies all three terms), what is clear is the presence of variety. There is something different about the three, whatever it may be. When we begin to limit variety, especially for incidental reasons, we neglect Paulās instruction here. Our God is a God of endless creativityāas his wondrous creation provesāand we honor him when we put that same creative spirit on display in our worship.
Of course, it is just possible that āvarietyā should encompass songs of varied theological depth. (Gasp! Heresy!) Give me just one moment before you hurl the stones. Iām taking my cue here from the presence of that tiny word āpsalmsā in Ephesians 5:19. I know of no one who would seriously argue that we shouldnāt use Psalms in our worship, and many would argue (rightly, I think) that we should use Psalms as our blueprint for worship. If youāve read Psalms, you know how wondrously diverse they are. Some are richly theological, and others are, well, a bit sentimental. Some trace redemptive history carefully (foreshadowing the cross time and again), and others focus on a single moment or issue. Is it possible that our worship today should do likewise? Isnāt there time for repetition (as in Psalm 136)āso that we can really meditate on a single profound idea, like Godās steadfast loveājust as surely as there is time for rapid theological reflection (as in Psalm 107)? Isnāt there time for raw emotion (as in Psalm 126), just as surely as there is time for heady instruction (as in Psalm 78)? And, of course, the Psalms invite us not just to praise and thank, but also to confess and lament, which in itself will add much-needed variety to our Sunday mornings.
As we āsing and make music from [our] heart to the Lordā (Ephesians 5:20), letās do so with a body of songs as richly diverse as the human experience and as wondrously creative as the Being they exalt, to the glory of our triune God, who is worthy of all praise. Soli Deo gloria.