Idolatrous Introit
Inevitably,
any discussion of corporate worship eventually seems to descend into a
competition of musical preference. Everyone wants to get their way all the
time. And the church has bought it. Like I alluded to in my post on the problem of multiple worship “styles,”
the almighty right to get our own way now governs much of what our
congregations do.
Of
course, the issue has been clouded by our American culture, with our long-held
consumerist, “customer is always right” mentality. Indeed, it has spilled over
and saturated Christian culture, as well. I have the right to pursue what makes
me happy all the time. To suggest otherwise is seemingly worse than denying the
basic tenets of Christian belief.
I
can think of one word that seems to perfectly describe this situation.
Idolatry.
I
think we’ve often made an idol out of our music.
Litany of Lies
The
truth of the matter is that we are all far too willing to bow down in front of
any number of God-substitutes. Like empty carbs in place of well-balanced
meals, it’s easier, it’s quicker, it’s momentarily exciting, it’s addictive.
But it’s a lie. It won’t last. Like striking a match, it erupts into an
thrilling flame, but then it’s gone. Just like that.
In
the words of great hymnwriter Dennis DeYoung (you know, the guy from Styx),
“All the heroes and legends I knew as a child have turned into idols of clay.”
Instead
of being an ideal vehicle for proclamation – for praise, for expressing the
truth of the Christian story, and for reflecting the imago dei within us
through human creativity – I think we’ve often expected far too much out of our
music.
Perhaps
the underlying problem is that we’ve expected it to provide a good emotional
experience for us. Instead of using music as an aid to something infinitely
more satisfying and lasting, we’ve sought for one emotional high after another,
Sunday after Sunday, year after year. And when one congregation can’t provide
it for us anymore, we go looking around for a new place to get our jesusy
thrills.
If
my suspicions are true, then it shouldn’t be any real surprise why the
christianized rock concert has taken over, and why the purported encounter with
the Holy often looks an awful lot like an emotional high. Maybe we’re bowing
down at the wrong altar without realizing it.
I
read this guest post on the terrific
Jesus Creed blog a while back. Though I suspect the
author and I might differ on some things, I found this to be a helpful
discussion. Singing, like most other parts of gathered worship, is a spiritual
discipline.
Problem
is, discipline isn’t always a lot of fun. That’s a reason why relationships
fail, why workout routines slide, why educations aren’t completed, why projects
collect dust, why results fall short of potential. Those things require oceans
of patience and effort in pursuit of something of real value. But in the end,
participating in the Christian story is something much more beautiful, much
more enduring, and ultimately much more exciting than an emotional high.
Call to Look at Worship Differently
If
we were to begin looking at our worship, especially our music, as a discipline
instead of bowing at the altar of individualistic and emotional experience, I
think our gatherings would be drastically different.
- We would stop mistaking
music-making for worship. Music can be an important worshipful act in a number
of ways, but it is not the only mode of corporate worship. Though good
songs give an added dimension to truth, all elements of a service are to
be worshipful acts.
- We would stop mistaking
evangelism for worship. We gather for worship because God is worthy, because
God is working through human history, because we are called out as covenant
people to play a part in the Christian story. If observers come to
Christian faith through the drama of liturgy, that is great, but we don’t
worship to attract unbelievers, or our gathering ceases to be Christian
worship.
- We would re-frame any
discussion of corporate worship from preference to meaning. Most churches ask
subjective questions like, “What are people going to like?” or “What will
connect with people? in essence asking “What will get the most positive
emotional reaction from the majority of our audience?” Better questions
push for more concrete answers: “What does our music mean textually?
Theologically? Musically? How well does this song communicate the
Christian story? What instrumentation best supports the congregation
voice? Even when the answers aren’t cut and dry, we should always be
pushing for better answers.
- We would be free of
slavish pursuit of our own personal preferences, and avoid the obligatory
nod to the false egalitarian ideal that all opinions have equal merit. All options are not
equally valid or edifying. Meaning, not taste, should be the primary
criteria for choosing music.
- We wouldn’t be reactive
if the merits of our favorite songs were questioned.
- We would open our eyes
to the fact we can’t worship “corporately by ourselves.” We don’t gather to find
music that creates an individual experience. If that were the case, we
might as well stay home and opt for comfort and convenience, without the
community and covenant.
- We would see increased
pursuit of musical and artistic excellence, and a reduction of
congregational loafing. Not because our music has to be perfect, but because
it’s part of the discipline of worship. Some of us are more talented than
others, but each must do their best.
- We wouldn’t split our
churches according to worship “style.”
- We wouldn’t mistake
emotional stimulation for divine interaction. As the Palmer article
mentioned, music can easily manipulate us into believing we’ve sensed
God’s presence (Was it the Spirit or the kick-drum?). There’s nothing
wrong with emotion, and good music will at times draw it out of us, but if
it’s essential for us to believe we’ve worshiped, we may be bowing at the
wrong altar.
- We would see a broader
range of human emotion during worship. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard congregations
labeled as “dead” only because their emotional displays weren’t boisterous
or bombastic enough. That illustrates the problem quite clearly.
- We wouldn’t run from the
discipline of liturgy, or mistake it as being a lifeless, rote exercise. I can’t count how many
times I’ve heard congregations labeled as “dead” only because their
emotional displays weren’t boisterous or bombastic enough. That
illustrates the problem quite clearly.
- We would expect to be
changed, renewed, re-centered, and reoriented by the retelling and
reenacting of the Christian story, instead of looking to be emotionally
charged. It’s
the work of the people, not the pop culture entertainment of the people.
If you’re bored, you might need to look in the mirror.
- Music would fulfill
specific functions in specific places in the liturgy, instead of being a
30 or 45 minute submersion in a crowded musical wave pool. I think Luther’s
assessment is right: music is the handmaiden of theology. It’s not the
worship. It serves worship. It gives dimension to our sacred storytelling.
- We would stop being so
sensitive and reactive when someone asks us to take a deeper look at how
we worship.
Just read the comment section on any of my posts to see what I mean.
A Changed Charge
It’s
like a lackadaisical college student who eventually develops a love of
learning. What was once a drudgery turns into a quest for deeper meaning, for
something that will last, for the vision to see God in what we used to think
was boring or mundane. Disciplining ourselves to forsake the idols of emotional
experience in our music-making is not easy, but it is imperative.
Otherwise,
we may look up and see the god we’ve been worshiping crumble into mere pieces
of clay.