Welcome to a Blog Community!

I want to welcome you to my blog. Please feel free to add your thoughts and comments and join in the discussion.
I feel I learn best when in conversations with others, so let us search and muse together!

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Theology in Worship: Song or Sermon?

Don E. Saliers builds the case in his book Music and Theology that theology requires music. He notes that while the theologian’s realm is language, the subject of theology is beyond words. However, music expresses the verbally inexpressible, helping to clarify spiritual truths that seem complex and sometimes far-fetched. As Saliers writes, “we are asked to say some things that we don’t truly think we believe until we sing them, or hear them in appropriately complex activities” (Saliers 6).

Saliers also explains that when “great theologians wish to speak of the deepest realities, they move toward poetry and music – heightened speech – as an attempt to ‘sound’ spiritual matters” (Saliers 72). However, he cautions that not all music inspires contemplation, functions theologically, or is appropriate for religious reflection. Musical settings of liturgy in particular must be true to the message and spirit of the words.

Of particular interest is Saliers’ discussion of hymns in chapter four of his book. Sacred songs are often characterized by simplicity and redundancy, qualities that make them ideal for religious messages. Especially in Christian hymn traditions, succinct verses convey theological viewpoints argued elsewhere, or emphasize religious themes such as praise, commitment, longing, and lament. By the careful partnership of music and words, an effective song can capture succinctly the essence of both religious ideas and the sacred moment, producing what Saliers calls a “theological miniature” (Saliers 36). And because hymns are “hedged” by the demands of unity and clarity, they also serve an important didactic role. However, the role of the hymn in doing theology is unique, especially compared to other forms of theological reasoning. Saliers states:

… there is still a difference between singing theological beliefs in hymns, anthems, and more extended musical forms, and the work of systematic inquiry into the meaning of theological claims, with the use of philosophical reasoning… While sung theology is not intended as conceptual or analytic, it nevertheless can make profound contributions to our theological experience and understanding (Saliers 40).

In the mind of many theologians hymns do not step back and examine, but step in and worship. Thus, hymns are “vehicles” of theology through worship. However people are not shaped and formed by vehicles. Brian Wren argues in his book, Praying Twice, that theology is more than the expression and conveying of faith – it also an exploration, a discovery, and a challenge to know more about faith. Theology must use reason and imagination. Wren makes this profound statement: “There is a level of knowing that involves nonverbal learning – it takes experiencing something, practicing it out along with written theory. It takes time to truly understand and more fully grasp art” (Wren 364).

In light of such arguments, we must step back to ask a dangerous question – are sermons a more superior way of doing theology? We must first be fair and offer a critique on the nature of hymns. Hymns can’t be complete by themselves. Hymns use a few succinct words to explain what a sermon can do in paragraphs. Often, hymns only convince us if we already agree with the viewpoint or have heard their content explained elsewhere. However, Wren believes that the economy of words and metaphor play to the poet/lyric writer’s favor. The poet/songwriter can in a few lines draw in, walk through a story, and evoke thoughtful images. The use of simile and metaphor can bring unrelated things together in powerful ways. Wren explains the power of this usage of language:

…hymnic metaphors organize our thinking, generate insights as we transfer ideas and associations from intersecting image to main subject, help us to express and make sense of powerful feelings, and move us at a deep level by their appeal to the senses and the imagination. In doing so, the hymn-poem does theological work as valid and important as the reasoned article, lecture, or book (Wren 374).

Certainly both mediums – hymns and sermons – have their limitations. Reason can be used to manipulate. Metaphors are limited. However, hymns still have a very unique nature in the way they do theology. There are important benefits to lyrical theology. As Wren writes, “It is conceivable that a congregational song tune can express and generate theological insights” (Wren 355). For Wren, part of knowing is experiencing. Thus, he believes the worshipper experiences theology through good lyrical form – whether read or sung.

Hymns give memorable and imaginative liturgical expressions to theological themes elaborated elsewhere more systematically, such as in sermons. Thus, one great aspect to hymns is that they reinforce theological content. They express Christian faith in metaphor, epigram, and descriptive imagery within an economy of words, expanding knowledge in ways much further than reasoned exposition can do. Hymns need sermons and sermons need hymns.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. I completely agree. This has been my theology/method behind planning worship or a long time. I like things focused and flowing. However, sometimes I wonder if it's okay if things are unrelated. Do we still get theological truth, even if the truths focus on two separate things? For instance, it can be difficult to find songs that fit well with a sermon text on Samson and Delilah or the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, (yes, I admit those are unfair extreme examples). Could songs still do appropriate theology by focusing on God as Creator and King, even though the sermon may not mention these aspect of His character? I believe there is still reinforcement that takes place here, and possibly the songs help interpret the text in a different way. Regardless, you are well heard in saying songs should still not be randomly chosen. There needs to be intention and purpose behind the theology of what is sung.

    I will always prefer everything in worship to be a unified whole. However, when it's not, instead of criticizing the worship for it, I now am trying to find what theological truths are still being reinforced even when a song may not be completely related to other parts of the service. Sometimes we would just miss out on good theology if we didn't allow space for certain things that don't really fit with everything else. But they should still be placed intentionally and purposefully in the service. So I guess in that since, I still can't let go of the idea of a unified whole.

  3. I totally understand when there is an unusual topic and one has to choose songs that focus on something else, and even when songs might not present a unified whole but require us to meditate on it. But I admit I've been in services where the hymn choice was a "huh?" when compared with the rest of the service, as though the worship leader and the pastor/liturgist hadn't spoken to each other at all. And the "huh" part of the service does throw me off a bit. Now, it is my responsibility to refocus myself on the sermon, even if the hymns throw me off. But I will say it's easier if the hymns and scripture and sermon flow together.

  4. I would like to add that sometimes I get more out of "just the music" and not a word has to be sung. I can't count how many times I come out of a service, not remembering the sermon, but singing the song all day long!

  5. Abbi - I am with you on the "huh?" factor, and was just thinking about that after I wrote my comment. There have been plenty of times nothing really seems to tie together and worship almost seems haphazard (or as I've also heard said, schizophrenic), rather than purposeful. Of course, this bleeds into other elements of worship as well. Revelation and response need to go hand-on-hand in a worship service. Of course, this means the response must be spurred from the revelation. I have recently been asking myself, how does the idea of revelation/response become an important way of considering worship flow?

    Kim - I often joke around that more people will be singing a hymn sung in church rather than reciting the sermon Monday morning in the shower. Music is a great tool at helping us remember.

    Music is also an important tool that has emotive power. Though some may at times fault on the side of being over-emotional in worship, some of go to a greater danger of eliminating emotion altogether in worship. I often fault on this side of things because so much importance is often placed on the cognitive aspect of worship. A balance we must consider is how to keep worship emotional without being overly so, as well as cognitive without being overly so.

    Another thought regarding your comment, talking about "just the music" brings up a very interesting thought. I had a professor once ask me if music without words is secular or sacred. Yes, the purpose it is meant for means something, but it is still interesting. If an organist were to begin a service by playing an instrumental version of "Freebird," some people may laugh while others got uneasy in their seats. (And I'm sure many just wouldn't care.) However, if the organist plays "Greensleeves," most people would find it fitting because we know the tune as "What Child Is This?" However, "Greensleeves" is an old, secular madrigal tune from Renaissance Britain. We have contextualized it with words. What does that leave the music itself as though - secular or sacred?