Music Has Charms to Divide the Local Church

Music has charms to soothe the savage breast." So the old saying goes. And there is much in that old saying. Music is recommended therapy for a variety of stress-related problems we human beings may encounter in life.

But there is a variation of that old saying that is also true. "Music has charms to stir the savage beast." Music has often been used to stir up anger and hatred and to promote violence, prejudice and a host of other social ills.

Music also has the power to confuse, to frustrate and to divide. This is the situation in the contemporary American evangelical church. Music which once joined congregations in worship of Jesus Christ and swept them into the presence of the Lord now pits one part of the congregation against another. It seems that no matter what a local church might do to address the issue, it only alienates one group or the other. We now have a thousand tongues to sing with, but those tongues have only divided us, not brought us together as one voice before the Lord.

An older lady was absent from her local church for some time because of health problems and hospitalization. During her absence, the older pastor moved to a new ministry, and a younger pastor came in to replace him. He brought with him a contemporary style of music that the church had not had before. Many enjoyed the new, lighter music style.

But when this lady returned to church after her absence, she was shocked by the music style used in worship. Gone were the hymns she knew, the songs that for so long had expressed her faith. She found many of the new songs had melody lines she could not follow and rhythms she simply could not master.

On the other hand, a young, newly saved couple was looking for a church they could grow in. They went to a church that was tied to a traditional style of music and service. An organ and a piano were the only instruments used, and every song was sung out of a hymnbook. Many of the words in those hymns the couple did not understand. They found the style difficult to follow, and boring. They continued their search for a church, even though the church they rejected was a church where the Bible was taught enthusiastically and faithfully.

This division in Christian music probably began in the 1970's, and possibly flowed out of the cultural revolution that took place in America in the 1960's. It was in the 70's that musicians such as Bill and Gloria Gaither began introducing new rhythms and styles to Christian music. This was not new, of course. Musicians had been introducing new variations throughout history. But the musical styles of the Gaithers and others became very popular with evangelical Christians. Not in church, at least not at first. In church Christians continued to sing traditional music written by Isaac Watts, John and Charles Wesley, Fanny Crosby and John W. Peterson. But at home, and in their fellowships with other believers outside the church, contemporary music was their choice.

In the 80's and 90's, when the Gaithers had themselves become "traditional," new musicians came upon the scene, introducing many different styles of music to Christians. And this music began inevitably to find its way into the worship services of local churches.

Now, these changes in music styles are not wrong, and they are not a new phenomenon. It must be remembered that when Isaac Watts began writing music for the church, one of his purposes was to introduce what were then more contemporary styles into church music because, as he observed, the music of the church had grown stuffy and boring. What to Watts was innovative is now just plain old. But the introduction of new music styles seemed not to have caused problems in the church, until today. Why?

The primary reason lies in the fact that changes come much more swiftly today than they did in previous times. When Isaac Watts was writing music for the church, no one was recording it and offering it for sale to the public. The technology to do that simply did not exist. It waschallenging enough just to get the music published and distributed. It took a relatively long period of time for the new music to reach the local churches. Since the changes came slowly, and were relatively mild, people had time to accept them. There were not sudden shifts and changes in styles. Music styles gradually evolved over a period of time. One writer would introduce a new musical phrase or style that would gradually make its way into the churches. Another writer would add another new element. There were not huge amounts of new music to accept. It was a little here, a little there. There was little concept of what was "popular" because there was no way to make a particular piece of music "popular" in the modern sense of the word. No radio. No television. No recordings of any kind. The music was performed live in church. People did not run from church to church, hearing something different in other churches that they then insisted be used in their own church. If they didn't hear it in their own church, they did not know it existed. Period.

All that has changed. Now people in a local church can be aware of just about any musical style within days, sometimes within hours, of its introduction. Radio. Television. Concerts. CD's. Videos. DVD's. MP3's, iPods. The vehicles to introduce new music to the public are endless, popular, readily available to nearly everybody and very influential. "Popular" is now an adjective used to describe Christian music and Christian musicians. And the church is faced with a problem. How does the average local church deal with this avalanche of music and music styles that do tend to divide people rather than unite them?

Several solutions have been tried by various congregations. Some have decided to stay traditional, singing from the hymnbook only. "If it is not in the hymnbook, we don't sing it!" Others have decided to wade full force into the river of contemporary music. "If it is in the hymnbook, we don't sing it!" Others have turned to two services, one traditional, one contemporary. And still others have tried a "blend," using both traditional and contemporary music in their services. And a few have simply banned music from their services altogether. Are any of these successful treatments of the problem?

The sad answer is that none of these solutions has actually solved the basic problem of division caused by the sudden rise of so many musical styles and forms. People remain divided on the issue of Christian music. Traditonal only style churches have difficulty attracting younger poeple. Contemporary only style churches have difficulty ministering to the older people in the church. Two-service churches wind up with two congregations and little fellowship between them. Even in the blend churches, which seems to be the best way to go, all things considered, the blend still produces two congregations. They sit together and attend services together, but they sing different songs. When a contemporary song is featured, the older members have difficulty singing it. They find it challenging to follow the melody lines and the rhythms. When a traditional song is featured, the younger members get bored and turn it off. And churches with no music have no practical way for the people to express their hearts to God. So, what is the answer?

There may not be an answer that will satisfy everyone. The conflict comes because technology has enabled the nearly instant popularizing of just about anything. In this technological age, Christians may just have to realize that there are going to be many different musical styles preferred by members of the same congregation. This is a fact we are going to have to get used to.

There may not be a solution, but there are Biblical truths that may help all of us to reduce the tendency for music to divide us.

First, we need to remember that truth is true no matter what style of music it appears in. When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died is true whether it appears in the traditional version of this song or the contemporary one. And can it be that I should gain an interest in the Savior's blood is no more or less true of something a believer might wonder about than is Will I dance for you, Jesus? I can only imagine. There certainly is no harm done in encouraging Christians to concentrate on the truth rather than on the style.

Secondly, we need to remember that today's contemporary music is tomorrow's traditional music. Music styles come and go. And they come and go faster today than they ever have because of technology. There certainly is no harm in encouraging Christians to realize that music styles are fleeting and fragile. As I heard a radio announcer say recently, "Remember, all music was once new."

But it is not okay to think that the purpose of worship music is to entertain us. The Christian who says, "They never sing my favorite song in church" does have an attitude problem. The purpose of worship music is not pleasing us. The purpose is to worship God the Father and God the Son through God the Holy Spirit as the body of Christ. There certainly is no harm done in encouraging Christians to realize that Jesus is the One we sing to in our church services. Our music should please Him. Of course, it is okay if we are pleased, too, but not essential.

Fifthly, we need to remember that the purpose of Christian music is not to evangelize the lost. There is little or no Scriptural basis for believing that music can bring the lost to Christ. It may get their attention, that is true. But it cannot by itself bring them to Christ. The Bible strongly teaches that preaching, (teaching, presenting) the facts of salvation, backed by a life that shows obedience to Christ is ultimately the only thing that the Spirit of God uses consistently to win people to Himself. If we think that this or that musical style will have sinners thronging to our churches, we are wrong. It won't happen. And it won't happen because they can hear any kind of music they want to any time they want to without coming anywhere near a local church. Music will never, by itself, be able to bring the lost to Christ.