Kevin DeYoung's Blog, page 173

Ten Principles for Church Singing (Part 2)

(Go here for Part 1)

6. We should strive for excellence in the musicality and the poetry of the songs we sing.

I'm not for a moment suggesting elitism. A tine has to be relatively simple for hundreds or thousands of people to sing it at the same time.  But we can still insist on undistracting excellence (to use Piper's phrase). We want the cross to be the stumbling block, not our poor musicianship or faltering powerpoint.

While I believe a wide variety of styles can be used in worship, I am not a musical relativist.  Some songs are better than others. Some styles work better than others. And when it comes to lyrics, we should avoid obvious sloppiness like using thee and you in the same song or heaping up trite cliches. I heard a song on the radio a couple weeks ago whose chorus had something about a fragrant rose in the early spring and an eagle soaring to spread its wings. If your church sings this on Sunday, love your worship leader all the same. But if you're the worship leader picking this song, try for something with a little more artistry, something that doesn't sound like it came from a random page in your inspirational pocket calendar.

Some songs are simply deep and some are deeply simple, but there is a way to do both well.  With so many songs to choose from, there's no reason churches can't make an effort to sing songs with some sense of poetry and musical integrity. The Hallelujah chorus is repetitive, but it's musically interesting. Most songs, choruses, and verses aren't good enough to be repeated for very long.

7. The main sound to be heard in the worship music is the sound of the congregation singing.

Everyone is responsible to sing.  The young girl with her hands in the air and the old man belting out the bass line. What people want to see in your worship is that you mean it. And no matter how chill or how reverent your worship is, if no one is singing, it's lame.

And if the main sound is to be the congregation singing, this will have implications for how we play and choose our songs.

Is it singable? Pay attention to range (too high or too low), and beware of syncopation and lots of irregularities in the meter and rhythm. Make sure the melody makes some intuitive sense, especially if you don't have music to look at or people can't read music. When your guitar strums between G, C, and D there are a lot of notes to choose from.


Is the instrumentation helping or inhibiting the congregation to sing? This means checking the volume. Is the music too soft to support the human voices? Is it so loud it's drowning them out? One mistake music teams make is to think that every instrument needs to be used with every song. Some songs should get the whole kitchen sink, but just because you have a drum, piano, guitar, bass, lyre, zither, flute, chicken shaker, banjo, cello, and djembe up there doesn't mean you have to use them all.


Is this song familiar. People cannot handle a new song every week, let alone two or three new songs. Stick with your basic sound and core songs and go out from there. On occasion you may have to admit, "That's a great song, but I don't think we can do it well."

8. The congregation should also be stretched from time to time to learn new songs and broaden its musical horizons.

Every church will have a musical center. You should not reinvent the center every week. But you should not be enslaved to it either. We need to be stretched once a while, not only with a new song but a new kind of song–something from the African-America church, or something from Africa or Latin America (with an English translation so it is intelligible), or something from the classical choral tradition. It's good to be reminded that belong to an ancient and global church.

9. The texts of our songs should be matched with fitting musicality and instrumentation.

Music should support the theme of the song.  Different texts have different moods. The words for "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God" would not work with the tune for "Children of the Heavenly Father." The campy song "Do Lord" does not quite capture the mood of the dying thief's final words. On the other hand, you have to love the Getty song "See What a Morning" where the triumphant, celebratory music perfectly matches the resurrection lyrics.

Musical style is not neutral, but it is elastic. Music conveys something. Some melodies are too syrupy or too raucous or too romantic.  I've always felt like "This is the Air I Breathe" was too sensual sounding. Plus I'm not sure what the song means. But styles are not rigid categories.  There isn't a sharp line between contemporary and traditional, or classical and popular, or high culture and low culture.  We don't have to make absolute rules about musical style, but we do need to be intelligent.

Let me just say a word about organs. No church should die on this hill. But if your church already has an organ my advice is to keep using it. Organs were originally associated with paganism.  So there is nothing inherently spiritual about them.  When they were introduced into churches, the average Christian in the Middle Ages new as much about organs as your average teenager does today.  They were introduced into worship because of the fitness of the instrument. As Harold Best argues in his fantastic book Unceasing Worship, there is no instrument we know of in the West better suited to support congregational singing (73). The organ fills in the cracks, provides an underneath sound, and encourages churches to sing louder and freer. If you don't have an organ they can be expensive to get. We mustn't lay down any commands. But if an organ is an option for you, don't ditch it.

10. All of our songs should employ manifestly biblical lyrics.

We must start by asking of all our songs: is this true? Not just true, but accurate to the biblical text. For example, I like the Third Day song "Consuming Fire" but the lyrics, while true, misuse the biblical text. According to the song, our God is a consuming fire because he reaches inside and melts our cold hearts of stone. That's true, but the text in Hebrews is about God our judge.

Similarly, our songs should be manifestly true. That is, we shouldn't have to put a spin on the lyrics to get them to be ok. We are looking for subtlety. We don't want to sing songs that leave us wondering "what exactly does that mean?"

On the flip side, don't be too hard on "I" songs. About 100 of the 150 Psalms have the word "I." "I" is not the problem. The problem is with songs that are too colloquially, or use I thoughtlessly (I just want to praise you – well then praise him), or never move from how I am feeling about God to who God is and what he's done to make me feel this way.

In all our songs we want to be teaching people about God. If we aren't learning good theology and biblical truth from our songs, then either we don't care much about our songs or we don't care much about rich biblical truth, or both.

Kings of Judah: Jumpin' Jehoshaphat

2 Chronicles 17:1-21:3

And Judah assembled to seek help from the Lord… (20:4a)

You don't have to be a genius to follow the Lord. Simply ask the Lord what he thinks and do what he says. That's the story of Jehoshaphat's life.

"The Lord was with Jehoshaphat because in the early years he walked in the ways his father David had followed" (17:3). He did not consult the Baals. He established the kingdom. He sent out teachers. He sought God and God blessed him. He didn't discover the polio vaccine or invent the internet. His obedience was pretty plain. Yet, it was still obedience, and that pleased the Lord.

His secret to success was simple. He asked the Lord what to do and then did it. Before going to war with Ramoth Gilead he admonished Ahab, "First seek the counsel of the Lord" (18:4). Before fighting Moab and Ammon, Jehoshaphat prayed, "We do not know what to do, but our eyes are upon you" (20:12).

This is the glorious and mundane life of a Christian. You pray, do the right thing, ask for help, say no to bad things, trust the Lord in hard things, and depend on him for everything. Jehoshaphat didn't get everything right. But he was still a great, ordinary man. And we can be too if we ask the Lord what he thinks and do what he says.

Ten Principles for Church Song (Part 1)

When it comes to singing on Sundays, churches have more options than ever before. From hymnals to Hillsong to homegrown creations, pastors and worship leaders have thousands of songs to choose from. A nice problem to have.

But still a problem. No music leader or pastor can keep up.  No church can sing all the great hymns and all the latest greatest songs on the radio.  No musician can excel in all the available styles. No leader can please all the people all the time.

The proliferation of choices often leads to conflict.  Should we do hymns (Wesley, Watts, or Fanny Crosby?) or contemporary (70′s folk music, early seeker service contemporary, or edgy punk rock?). Should our music have a Latin flavor or an African American feel? Should we use chants, chorale music, metrical psalms, jazz, country western, or bluegrass?

There are other questions too. What sort of instruments should we use? How much should cultural context come into play? Is there only one right kind of song to sing? If not, are there any wrong ways?

I can't possibly answer all those questions. But there are some general principles we can use to make wise decisions with our church music. Let me suggest ten principles for congregational singing.

1.    Love is indispensable to church singing that pleases God.

There are more important things than the kinds of songs we sing.  Music should not be the glue that holds us together–the cross, the glory of Jesus Christ, the majesty of God, and love should. But even churches centered on the gospel disagree about music. So love is indispensable when we sing and when we are trying to discern what is best to sing.

John Calvin:

But because he [the Lord] did not will in outward discipline and ceremonies to prescribe in detail what we ought to do (because he foresaw that this depended upon the state of the times, and he did not deem one form suitable for all ages), here we must take refuge in those general rules which he has given, that whatever the necessity of the church will require for order and decorum should be tested against these.  Lastly, because he has taught nothing specifically, and because these things are not necessary to salvation, and for the upbuilding of the church ought to be variously accommodated to the customs of each nation and age, it will be fitting (as the advantage of the church will require) to change and abrogate traditional practices and to establish new ones.  Indeed, I admit that we ought not to charge into innovation rashly, suddenly, for insufficient cause.  But love will best judge what may hurt or edify; and if we let love be our guide, all will be safe. (Inst. 4.10.30)

Before we are quick to judge the lame songs some other Christians enjoy, remember C.S. Lewis' revelation. Listen to one of the century's most famous converts to Christianity talk about his early impression of church music:

I disliked very much their hymns, which I considered to be fifth-rate poems set to sixth-rate music.  But as I went on I saw the great merit of it.  I came up against different people of quite different outlooks and different education, and then gradually my conceit just began peeling off.  I realized that the hymns (which were just sixth-rate music) were, nevertheless, being sung with devotion and benefit by an old saint in elastic-side boots in the opposite pew, and then you realize that you aren't fit to clean those boots.  It gets you out of your solitary conceit. (God in the Dock, 62)

I imagine the Apostle Paul, if he were writing to the church today, might have something to say about our worship style.  "If I sing in style of the hippest music, but have not love, I am only a banging drum or a strumming guitar.  If I have a gift for reading music and enjoy the richest hymns, but have not love, I am nothing.  If I am discerning of excellent music and fine poetry, but have not love, I gain nothing." The first principle for singing as a congregation and choosing music for the congregation is love.

2.    Our singing is for God's glory and the edification of the body of Christ.

God is the one we want to impress, the one we most want to honor. Our first aim must not be to win over the culture or appeal to the unregenerate. Worship is for the Worthy One.

Following closely on this priority is the goal of edification. The singing on Sunday morning should benefit God's people. This is a fair application of Paul's concerns in 1 Corinthians 14. It's also part and parcel of teaching and admonishing each other with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Col. 3:16). We should never approach the music as an entertaining lead-in to the sermon. Before you employ secular songs as your background music prior to the start of the service, consider whether a vaguely spiritual song from U2 will really build up the body of Christ.

Congregational song is part of the teaching ministry of the church. Church musicians and pastors should ask themselves: if our people learned their theology from our songs what would they know in twenty years about God, the cross, the resurrection, the offices of Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, creation, justification, election, regeneration, the church, the sacraments, and all the other fundamental doctrines of the faith?

3.    We ought to sing to the Lord new songs.

Isn't that a command? A command we haven't exhausted yet? There are still new songs to be sung to the Lord. What if the Church had stopped singing new songs in the 15th century?  We wouldn't have "A Mighty Fortress is Our God."  What if Christians stopped in the 16th century?  No John Wesley.  No Isaac Watts. What if the Church stopped a generation ago? No one would be singing "In Christ Alone" this Sunday. What a pity.

Sometimes I want to ask to very conservative Christians: "Do you really think the last good song of praise to Jesus has been written?"

4.    Church singing should swim in its own history of church singing.



The metaphor is intentional.  We should swim in this big ocean of church music, a ocean that is continually receiving new streams. I am not advocating a certain percentage of old v. new–every church will look and feel a little different, but I am suggesting that we should understand ourselves to be  a part of this deep ocean of Christian song.

It's amazing to me that any church would consciously (or unconsciously for that matter) step completely out of the ocean of the historic hymnody and step into a wading pool of nothing but contemporary song. I'm not saying newer songs are inferior to older ones (see previous point). What I am saying is that it is an expression of extreme hubris and folly to think we have nothing to gain from older songs and nothing to lose when we throw out the songs Christians have been singing for hundreds of years.

Think of what you get with a hymnal (whether it's an actual hymnal or the contents of the hymnal on your screen):

A link to history. Our people, not to mention the world, needs to know that Christianity is not a novel invention. We sing in concert with two millennia of believers.


Diversity. I guarantee that those churches using hymns are being exposed to a wider variety of Christian song than those who are exclusively contemporary. The hymnal has twenty centuries of styles: chants, folk tunes, ethnic tunes, carols, psalms, Welsh ballads, English melodies, stout German hymns, gospel tunes (black and white), and dozens of other musical variations.


Excellence. Yes, there are some real clunkers in most hymnals. But by and large, the bad songs have been weeded out. If we are stilling singing a song five hundred years later it probably has strong lyrics, good poetry, and a singable tune.


The whole counsel of God. Hymns give you a wide range of themes and biblical categories. Contemporary music is getting better in this regard, but the hymnal is still the best place to find a song on the ascension or the exaltation of Christ or a song of illumination or a lamentation or a communion hymn. Kudos to the Getty/Townend team and Sovereign Grace for trying to fill these kinds of gaps.

5.    Sing the Psalms.

I am not convinced by the arguments for exclusive psalmody. But in 95% of our churches the problem is not that we are keeping out good non-Psalms. It's strange, even though we are commanded to sing Psalms and even though Psalms have been at the center of the Church's singing for centuries, still we easily ignore the 800 pound gorilla in the middle of our Bibles (to borrow a phrase from Terry Johnson). On a cheerier note, I'm thankful we are beginning to see some contemporary musicians turn their attention to the Psalms.

Check back on Thursday for Principles 6-10.

A Summer Sabbatical Summary (So Far)

I don't usually write about personal family matters or share pictures of my kids. But I know there are people from my church reading this blog. I thought I could give them (and the rest of you) a few pictures of our time at the cottage in South Haven. We leave this week to visit my wife's family in Colorado Springs. I know, I know, spending your summer at the beach and in the mountains is pretty rough.

This is is the view from the end of our driveway. For those of you who think Lake Michigan is like the little watering hole you paddled across at grandma's house, I want you to note that this is a really big lake. It's like the ocean, only better. No sharks and no salt. We may not have as many jobs or as many people in Michigan as we used to. But we are still surrounded by the largest concentration of fresh water in the world. You can all dis the Mitten now, but you'll be driving up to Pure Michigan when your state runs out of H2O.

We've had some fun times, including a birthday party.

And a baseball game. The Sox beat the Cubs 4-3. Take heart Cubbie Nation, you had more drunken, belligerent, foul-mouthed fans tossed out by security. In our section, Cub fans won that contest 2-0.

I've had some time to read and write, and lots of time with the kids. The great part about our children is that they always play together so nicely.

Well, they may fight sometimes. But when we do something special for them, they always really appreciate it.

I hope your summer is just as good.

Retro Monday Morning Humor

Sorry for the ads, but this toy will change your life.

Glory of God: Preventing Truth Decay

John 16:12-15

He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (v. 14)

If last week we looked at the importance of following Jesus with more than words, today we look at how our words about Jesus still matter. The work of the Holy Spirit is to take "what is mine"–who Jesus is and what he has done–and declare it to us.

In other words, speaking good theology glorifies God. Sometimes people say "I'm into the person of Jesus, not propositions about Jesus." This sounds pious, but how can we have one without the other? Is your wife honored when you profess undying love for her, but describe her as a tall, blonde when she's really a short brunette?  How can you make much of God if you cannot tell me who he is? How can you magnify his character if there is no definition to it? How can you honor his worth if you don't know why he's worthy?

Don't buy the "deeds not creeds" mantra. Truth matters. God does not get glory by our being uncertain and ambiguous about who he is, what he has done, and why is supremely valuable. God gets glory when we lovingly and truthfully declare theological, propositional truths about his internal excellencies, his saving work, and the weight of his glory.

What's Up With Lutherans?

This isn't meant to be a snarky rhetorical post. It's a genuine question.

What up with Lutherans?

More to the point: where are they? I'm looking for help from those of you out there who know the Lutheran world better than I do. I look around at what's seem vibrant in evangelicalism and see lots of Baptists and Presbyterians. I see a lot of Free Church folks and a growing number of Anglicans. I see non-denominational guys aplenty. The Pentecostal world is a little outside my circles, but I certainly see continuationists and charismatics in conservative evangelical circles. But I don't see many Lutherans.

I don't know of Lutherans speaking at the leading conferences. I don't know of many popular books written by Lutherans. I don't know of church planting movements among Lutherans. I know lots of people who look up to Martin Luther, but I don't see the influence of Lutherans.

I'm genuinely curious to know why the big tent of conservative, confessional evangelicalism doesn't have more Lutherans. I understand that the Calvinist soteriology of TGC and T4G types doesn't fit with Methodism or parts of the Holiness traditions, but Luther's doctrine of predestination was Calvinist before there was Calvin.

I know Gene Veith is Lutheran. So is Doug Sweeney. White Horse Inn has worked hard to include the confessional wing of Lutheranism. But after that, I'm drawing a blank to come up with contemporary Lutheran leaders/theologians/pastors I know or read. I'm not blaming anyone–Lutherans or the Young, Restless, Reformed movement or the blogosphere or Sarah Palin. It's just something I've thought about from time to time: Where have all the Lutherans gone? I know you exist outside of Lake Wobegon.

So which of the statements below best explains why quandry?

1. I'm ignorant. This is, no doubt, a  big part of the explanation. I'm sure there are thousands of good Lutheran churches and pastors. I just don't know all the good they are doing and saying. And there may be thinkers and authors I like who are simply Lutheran without my knowing it.

2. With their high church, confessional tradition, Lutheranism has always been a little out of place with the sometimes rootless, low church expressions of evangelicalism. They never got on board with evangelicalism after the Great Awakening. This may be part of it, but evangelicalism has been influenced by many Anglican theologians and preachers, hasn't it?

3. Lutherans are content to remain in ethnic enclaves. Again, that could be part of the issue, but then how do you explain the influence of the Dutch Reformed on evangelicalism?

4. The Lutheran view of the sacraments is a bridge too far for many evangelicals, and the faddish nature of evangelicalism is a bridge too far for many Lutherans.

5. Lutheranism in America has bigger problems and less influence than many people realize. The bulk of Lutherans have gone liberal and the rest have gone into bunker mode.

I'll read the comments more carefully than usual. I blog so that I might understand. Help me out, especially if you are part of the tribe: What's up with Lutherans?

Holiness is Indicative and Imperative

John Webster, professor of Systematic Theology at University of Aberdeen, provides another way of saying what I've been trying to say:

Evangelical sanctification is not only the holiness the gospel declares but also the holiness that the gospel commands, to which the creaturely counterpart is action. Holiness is indicative; but it is also imperative; indeed, it is imperative because it is the indicative holiness of the triune God whose work of sanctification is directed towards the renewal of the creature's active life of fellowship with him.

Indicative holiness is no mere inert state in which we find ourselves placed and which requires nothing of us beyond passive acquiescence. Indicative holiness is the revelation of the inescapable conclusion under which our lives have been set—namely, that as those elected, justified, and sanctified by the mercy of God, we are equally those who are determined for the active life of holiness. Because grace is 'double grace', it is election to activity.

Double grace is always, of course, wholly grace; the active life of holiness is never apart from faith's assent to God's sheer creativity. But in a Christian theology of the holy life, grace is duplex, extending into the generation, evocation and preservation of action. 'Grace'—which is, of course, nothing other than a shorthand term for the great history of God's mercy, at whose centre is the passion and resurrection of Christ and his sending of the Spirit—is the gift of life, and life is active holiness in company with the holy God. (Holiness, 87)

Kings of Judah: Growing Old Ungracefully

2 Chronicles 16:10-14

Then Asa was angry…And Asa inflicted cruelties upon some of the people at the same time. (v. 10)

Most of us will grow old.  Only some of us will do it gracefully.

Verses 10-14 record the last stubborn days of a great king. Asa was a grumpy old man. His major offense? He got a disease in his feet and didn't ask the Lord for help. Now, there's nothing wrong with going to doctors. God wants us to be wise.  But he also wants us to trust him–more than counselors, therapists, doctors, and pills–and trust him to the end.

There are two types of old Christians. There are those who fret and fuss about how bad things have gotten and how rotten kids are these days.  These cantankerous old rascals don't like the church's music, people, or pastor. But then there are Christians who, like fine wine, get better with age. The pray more. They get wiser and kinder. They understand what really matters. They love the Lord and everyday they read their big print Bibles with the devotional tucked in as a book mark. They pray for their kids and grandkids without ceasing. They're a pastor's best friend and they long to be with Jesus. These are the un-Asa-like believers the church desperately needs.

So what type of senior saint will you be–crotchety or Christlike?

All Out of Whack

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the average reader of this blog is a fan of theology. Most of you are thoughtful, doctrinally attuned Christians. I also imagine a few of you might be a wee bit opinionated. It takes one to know one.

I don't use "opinionated" as a bad word. We should be immovable on some matters, absolutely convinced of others, and it's not bad to have strong informed opinions on all the rest. But let's be honest: sometimes in conservative evangelical circles the intensity with which we hold to our convictions (let alone our opinions) is all out of whack.

See What I Mean

The Lord has been gracious over many years to preserve the unity at our church. So I'm not writing about the members of University Reformed Church. But I've seen and heard enough—from other church leaders and from church visitors who end up not staying with us—to know that some conservative Christians can make things that are secondary (or tertiary or whatever words come next for four and five) into things that are primary.

There are Christians who want homeschooling to be the top agenda for the church. Others insist that every church leader must embrace private Christian schools. I've met Christians whose number one passion seems to be age-integration in church ministries. Others are adamant that kids should be in all church services and aren't allowed to draw pictures or look at books. For others, paedocommunion is a must. For some the issue is the Ten Commandments every Sunday or the presence of two services (morning and evening good; two in the morning bad). I've heard of other Christians getting up in arms about Christmas trees, the use or non-use of wine during communion, and whether infants should wear white garments or black when they are baptized. And too many have taken the regulative principle, which as a general principle is helpful and scriptural, and made the detailed application of this principle the end all and be all of church life.

Please hear me out. I like Christians who know what they believe and why they believe it (I've never been criticized for having too few convictions and opinions). So, I'm not saying the items above are unimportant issues (okay, a couple might be). The problem is not that we care about all sorts of issues or that we want to think carefully about every aspect of church ministry. The problem is we haven't always thought carefully about how we express and hold to our careful thoughts.

And Here's Why

First, we are not always gracious in the way we talk about secondary issues. Most Christians speak kindly and calmly about their convictions. But sadly it often feels like the less important the issue the more intensely someone will hold to it. We make up for the lack of gravity surrounding the issue by promoting that issue in the gravest possible terms. And even if we are right and someone else is dead wrong we should still correct our opponents with gentleness and grace (2 Tim. 2:25), not with hand grenades.

Second, some of us have never considered that certain issues in the Christian life belong in a Romans 14 category. Don't get me wrong, I believe in polemics. I believe in dying on some hills. I believe in standing fast on doctrine, even on "non-salvation issues." But on some matters we should say with Paul, "Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind" (Rom. 14:5). And sometimes we must ask, "Why do you pass judgment on your brother?" After all, "we will all stand before the judgment seat of God" (14:10-11). It's okay on some matters (not all!) for Christians to agree to disagree (even if you know you're right like Paul did!). It's not a failure of theological nerve to recognize that some good believers we'll make different decisions than other good believers. The mature Christian can hold strongly to his opinions without insisting strongly that all other Christians do the same.

A third problem is that some Christians inquire too early and too often about their particular hot-button issues. When a brother visiting the church for the first time asks where I stand on Rushdoony, I'm a little freaked out. It's like taking a girl out on a first date and asking if her parents have digital cable. What?! Don't you want to know a few other things first? In checking a church I hope you'd be interested to hear about the role of prayer, the importance of missions, the understanding of the gospel, the integrity of the leaders, their view of Scripture, and a dozen other things before launching into the rareified air of Rushdoony. Besides, I would also hope visitors, as a matter of courtesy, would not land at a church ready to insist on items 16-25 on their theological checklist.

Finally, we must be careful our passions are not out of proportion. There is no problem with Christians who feel strongly about schooling, the placement of the congregational prayer, or the frequency of communion. The problem is when our passion for these issues exceeds our passion for the gospel, for the cross, for the lost, for the afflicted. Not every issue matters as much as every other issue. Not every position deserves out fieriest passion. Save the big guns for the big ones. Get the heart pounding for the doctrine of the Trinity or penal substitution or God's sovereignty. If your "thing" is Christmas trees or the kind of beverage in the communion cup, it's time to get a better "thing." The Christian life allows for lots of passion, discourse, and detailed application—as long as we don't get everything out of whack.

This article first appeared in the June issue of Tabletalk.