Music has been a controversial topic in nearly every generation since the beginning of the church. And while I don’t plan to solve anything with this post, I propose the following four principles as a baseline for what I think is acceptable music in a worship service:
- The music should be singable by a congregation
- The genre of music should be appropriate to the lyrics
- The lyrics should be theologically accurate
- The lyrics should be understandable to the congregation
In this post, I want to talk about the last two. Consider the song And can it Be. Passing over the curious fact that it starts with a conjunction, I would argue that the song does not clearly meet the criteria of the last two principles. Before looking at my comments below, see if you can discern where the song falls short.
And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain—
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
’Tis mystery all: th’Immortal dies:
Who can explore His strange design?
In vain the firstborn seraph tries
To sound the depths of love divine.
’Tis mercy all! Let earth adore,
Let angel minds inquire no more.
’Tis mercy all! Let earth adore;
Let angel minds inquire no more.
He left His Father’s throne above
So free, so infinite His grace—
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam’s helpless race:
’Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!
’Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!
Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray—
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
Still the small inward voice I hear,
That whispers all my sins forgiven;
Still the atoning blood is near,
That quenched the wrath of hostile Heaven.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.
No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
As for the first two principles, this song passes (though some congregations may decide that its antiquated style makes it difficult for their congregation to sing). But that the song passes the third principle—i.e., the lyrics should be theologically sound—is questionable. One question concerns whether we can say “God died.” Theologians disagree on this question, and it is wrapped up in understanding the relationship between the natures of Jesus and the persons of the Godhead. I don’t want to get into that conversation here, but I would say that the statement is open to misunderstanding.
The second concern is the line, “emptied Himself of all but love.” Undoubtedly, Wesley was thinking of Philippians 2. Yet, I think the best way of interpreting Philippians 2 is to take κενόω as a figure of speech, not meaning, “empty,” but meaning, “made Himself nothing.” If it means “empty,” we must answer the question, “Of what did Jesus empty Himself?” Paul’s use of the word elsewhere in the NT, however, suggests the figure of speech we noted above—to make oneself nothing (Rom 4:14; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:15; 2 Cor 9:3). This has the additional benefit of highlighting the main point Paul is making in the passage—i.e., Jesus humbled Himself.[1] Consequently, stating that Jesus “emptied Himself of all but love” is clearly not true, and can lead to further confusion within the congregation. I could also develop the potentially confusing line about the “small inward voice” or the suspect line, “nature’s night,” but the previous has been enough for our purposes.
This song also falls short of the understandability principle. The turning point in the song is masterfully crafted in the fourth verse to shift the congregation’s focus from the death of Christ to the application and benefit of that death for forgiven sinners. Indeed, the fourth verse is theologically rich in that it appears to refer to regeneration and the necessity of God’s action in salvation.[2] Nevertheless, I wonder how many congregants even recognize that this is what they are singing about. “Thine eye diffused a quickening ray.” Read that line again and ask yourself what most people think it means. Images of superman’s laser eyebeams may not be far from some people’s conceptions. Of course, quickening means life-giving, but many people don’t know that. Understanding that line makes the next line understandable—“I woke, the dungeon flamed with light.” But if we failed to understand the first line, this second one also makes no sense (though one could imagine an eye beam catching things on fire!).
Why be concerned about this? Colossians 3:16 says, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” (ESV). Our songs are to “teach one another” and this “in all wisdom.” None of us would think bad theology in the pulpit is OK, so why should bad theology in our songs be OK? None of us would think incomprehensibility in the pulpit is OK, so why it is OK in our music lyrics? Of course, there are differences between preaching and singing, but both share the role of communicating and teaching.
So, if we want to sing “And Can It Be,” I suggest two options. First, perhaps someone should modify the lyrics. We have already done this on some songs (e.g., changing “all our race” to “every race” in Arise My Soul Arise), and I think this song has rich potential for modification. Second, if we keep the eye analogy in the fourth verse, perhaps a worship leader could explain the analogy along with defining terms like diffuse and quicken.
[1] For an excellent and short analysis of this passage see Rodney Decker’s Treatment.
[2] I say appears because I realize that Wesley did not believe in regeneration in a Calvinistic sense; nevertheless, it is hard to interpret his words in any other way. One might say that he speaks of prevenient grace, but it more naturally reads as grace that regenerates. Whatever Wesley’s original intention, certainly it can be sung with regeneration in mind!
