For those who resist watching videos like the one posted earlier today from “King of the Hill,” here is the text of Bobby’s prayer, which is a brilliant illustration of the enormity that happens when trying to put sober truths into vulgar words.
I want to give a shout out to the man that makes it all happen. Props be to you for this most bountiful meal that’s before us. Okay, check it. God, you got skills. You represent in these vegetables and in this napkin and in the dirt that grows the grains that makes the garlic bread sticks that are on this table today. Yes. Yes. Thanks, J-man. Peace.
Of course, Reformed Protestants don’t need to go the Anglicans to read prayers before meals. Most of the older psalter-hymnals of the Dutch Reformed churches include liturgical resources at the back of the book that reproduce prayers, many of them attributed to Calvin, for public worship, ecclesiastical assemblies, and family devotion. The following is the prayer for before a meal. At the risk of offending contemporary worship leaders, I’d argue this is, like “Of the Father’s Love Begotten” is a better hymn than “Shine, Jesus, Shine,” a better prayer than Bobby’s.
Almighty God, faithful Father, You have made the world and uphold it by Your powerful word. You did provide Israel in the desert with food from on high. Will You also bless us, Your humble servants, and renew our strength by these gifts, which, through our Lord Jesus Christ, we have received from Your bountiful Fatherly hand. Give that we may use them with moderation. Help us to put them to use in a life devoted to You and Your service. May we thus acknowledge that You are our Father and Source of all good things. Grant also that at all times we may long for the lasting food of Your Word. May we thus be nourished to everlasting life, which You have prepared for us by the precious blood of Jesus Christ, Your Son, our Savior, in whose name we pray. Amen.
One additional advantage of Calvin’s prayer over Bobby’s is that the Frenchman’s thanksgiving is not blasphemous.
Old Life 
Of course it’s a better prayer! Calvin was a theologian par excellance. His meal blessing is probably better than most of the one’s said at Christian dinner tables.
LikeLike
But Dr. Hart, if it’s not a spontaneous prayer, it’s obviously not of the Spirit! 😉
LikeLike
I once used Calvin’s model intercessory prayer when conducting a service as an RE (not preaching – just doing everything but the sermon and benediction) and no one fell asleep or revolted. Would most evangelicals sit still or stay awake for an 8-12 minute prayer sans dramatics or tongue speaking?
LikeLike
I once used Calvin’s model intercessory prayer when conducting a service as an RE (not preaching – just doing everything but the sermon and benediction) and no one fell asleep or revolted. Would most evangelicals sit still or stay awake for an 8-12 minute prayer sans dramatics or tongue speaking? Calvin’s prayer found here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=omOqqHQ4ZEkC&dq=eutaxia%20baird&pg=PR5#v=onepage&q=intercess&f=false
LikeLike
We use the meal-time prayer from Luther’s Small Catechism:
Psalm 145:18-19 “The eyes of all look to you, and you give them their food in due season. You open your hand, you satisfy the desire of every living thing.”
Lord God, heavenly Father, bless us and these your gifts, which of your bountiful goodness you have bestowed on us, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
As a Southern Baptist, I think it weirds guests out a little bit, but they come around. It does beat the common liturgy: “God is great, God is good, let us thank him for our food…”
LikeLike
The song “Shine, Jesus, Shine” seems to be a popular whipping boy for Reformed bloggers who prefer traditional hymns. Is “Of The Father’s Love Begotten” better than “Shine Jesus Shine?”
Personally, I prefer the former. I can appreciate the depth of the ideas in the text. But many younger Christians, especially children, may not be ready to appreciate the gem that “Of The Father’s Love Begotten” really is. For them, ‘praise’ songs are not a bad option. There may be a time and place where the latter is ‘better’ than the former.
I would hope that the folks that prefer “Shine Jesus Shine” would at some point come to appreciate hymns with more substance, but until then, let’s at least rejoice that these ‘contemporary’ worshipers are in church singing Christian songs, even though the musical style may not be our cup of tea.
I have often heard praise songs described as 7-11 songs (the same seven words sung eleven times), and certainly there are songs like that, such as “Alleluia.” But to paint all of them with that brush is really unfair. There is a wide variety of contemporary worship music out there. Some of it is very high quality, musically and lyrically.
I myself prefer a rich liturgical traditional worship, but it is a mistake to look down on our brethren involved in contemporary worship. Yes, not all ‘praise’ songs are as theologically accurate as we would prefer, and some are actually pretty bad. But that does mean that the whole experience of contemporary worship, with drums, guitars, and amplifiers, is somehow illegitimate.
LikeLike
Reformed Protestants may not need to go the Anglicans to read prayers before meals, but those who have inherited their grandmother’s Book of Common Prayer (EPCUSA, 1952) one could do much worse:
“To our prayers, O Lord, we join our unfeigned thanks for all thy mercies; for our being, our reason, and all other endowments and faculties of soul and body; for our health, friends, food, and raiment, and all the other comforts and conveniences of life. Above all, we adore they mercy in sending they only Son into the world, to redeem us from sin and eternal death, and in giving us the knowledge and sense of our duty towards thee. We bless thee for thy patience with us, notwithstanding our many and great provocations; for all the directions, assistances, and comforts of thy Holy Spirit; for thy continual care and watchful providence over us through the whole course of our lives; and particularly for the mercies and benefits of the past day; beseeching thee to continue these thy blessings to us, and to give us grace to show our thankfulness in a sincere obedience to hi slaws, through whose merits and intercession we received them all, they Son our Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.”
Take that, B-man, semicolons and all.
John, I know your point involves song but a counter-point involving prayer might do. I don’t know, this was one I read recently before dinner (in the presence of the kids). Don’t you think there is something to be said for expecting youth to grow into a form of prayer (or song) not immediately accessible? To me, the “intelligibility” argument you suggest seems like a way of simply prolonging an adolescent piety and may be why evangelicalism is rightly viewed as embodying the shallowest form of Christian expression.
LikeLike
Richard, but the test is whether you can call Bobby’s prayer blasphemous. Does “J-man” push any buttons for you?
LikeLike
Zrim, I’m loving that the prayer includes a reference to cole slaw, plural even.
LikeLike
They only make low slaws in Arkansas where I come from. Hi slaws are for Yankees.
LikeLike
Has anybody here ever done cross-cultural missions?
LikeLike
John,
I won’t argue your point that we should be grateful that people who sing lame praise songs desire to truly worship God. What I do disagree with, however, is the notion that we ought to be ‘tolerant’ toward such faulty worship.
We don’t purposefully dumb down worship so that our children or young people will understand or ‘want’ to worship. If you consider the Passover ceremony, children were an integral part of the event. Children were lead through a liturgy where they asked questions about the meanings of the Passover and fathers answered them.
Worship is accessible to all mankind regardless of maturity or knowledge. We don’t dumb down worship for the immature, but good ministers will explain and educate the immature during the process. If we set the bar low, they will only ever remain immature. Chances are if someone grows up with immature worship they won’t someday wake up and say, ‘I’d rather sing a Psalm.’ Maybe they will but that’s the exception to the rule.
Worship isn’t about preference, it’s about what God says is true worship. So let’s ‘just’ sing a psalm and not Shine Jesus Shine. Sorry Dr. Hart had to add that last ‘just’, just for you.
LikeLike
“Has anybody here ever done cross-cultural missions?”
My family were involved in it when I was growing up – additionally we were transplanted between cultures, so it’s something that i’ve thought about a little.
Most non-Western cultures tend to be much more prone to hierarchy with all the attendent language of respect that goes along with that.
I’m not sure we can take teenagers outward lack of respect for anything and extrapolate a culture from that.
LikeLike
Dgh and Brad, hardy-har-har. Shut up.
LikeLike
Props to you D.G. man- you got skills; check it-nice post. Peace out!!
LikeLike
Darryl:
Commendable.
There’s some progress being made here.
From an Anglican-in-exile,
Philip
LikeLike
Zrim:
You cited a very familiar prayer above, often used by Bishop Theophilus Herter (the old REC) as a class began. Of course, he knelt. From frequency of use, it was memorized by us. The old Bishop knew them all by heart.
“To our prayers, O Lord, we join our unfeigned thanks for all thy mercies; for our being, our reason, and all other endowments and faculties of soul and body; for our health, friends, food, and raiment, and all the other comforts and conveniences of life. Above all, we adore they mercy in sending they only Son into the world, to redeem us from sin and eternal death, and in giving us the knowledge and sense of our duty towards thee. We bless thee for thy patience with us, notwithstanding our many and great provocations; for all the directions, assistances, and comforts of thy Holy Spirit; for thy continual care and watchful providence over us through the whole course of our lives; and particularly for the mercies and benefits of the past day; beseeching thee to continue these thy blessings to us, and to give us grace to show our thankfulness in a sincere obedience to hi slaws, through whose merits and intercession we received them all, they Son our Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.”
Also, reminds me of another Prayer, the “General Thanksgiving.” Given that my family moved alot with the military, we finally settled here at Camp Lejeune, NC. My daughter, age 16 at the time, entered the local public school. She joined the Bible Club. She was new to the school and the club. They did a “round robin,” a circle-the-students-prayer-effort-by-everyone at the end. My beloved daughter, being reared on the BCP, prayed as trained and without a text before her:
“ALMIGHTY God, Father of all mercies, we thine unworthy servants do give thee most humble and hearty thanks for all thy goodness and loving-kindness to us, and to all men; We bless thee for our creation, preservation, and all the blessings of this life; but above all, for thine inestimable love in the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus Christ; for the means of grace, and for the hope of glory. And, we beseech thee, give us that due sense of all thy mercies, that our hearts may be unfeignedly thankful, and that we shew forth thy praise, not only with our lips, but in our lives; by giving up ourselves to thy service, and by walking before thee in holiness and righteousness all our days; through Jesus Christ our Lord, to whom with thee and the Holy Ghost be all honour and glory, world without end. Amen.”
She came home and told me of the surprise by all, including the teacher-facilitor. (This area is reknown for bucolic religious outfits with hothouse exhorters.) Like all good catechetizing and all good Prayer Book Churchmanship, it “gets into the bones.” None of my family will or can be involved in this modern loondom they call worship. Eviscerally and intellectually, we all “clash” with it.
LikeLike
And, in one concluding postscript, which may have interest. Being retired, I took a NT course at a local community college being taught by a Southern Baptist. His church is large, quasi-charismatic and does the modern worship. By way of background, I take some classes “to get out and about.” (Focusing now on the fascinating courses in law, but I digress. Actually, a wonderful case being taught by a retired federal judge. Convinced that able jurists and judges wouldn’t waste a minutes worth of time in these hothouses.) The NT instructor required that we attend some church that is different than our own. I complied. 106 minutes of anguish.
You’ll get a sense of it, that is, an Anglican in a modern hothouse, one of the largest in our area.
http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2011/05/my-recent-experience-in-pentecostalist.html
LikeLike
All our Sabbath School copies of the Shorter Catechism always included at the end the Apostles’ Creed and Grace Before and After Meals.
Grace before meal – “Gracious God, we have sinned against thee, and are unworthy of thy mercy; pardon our sins, and bless these mercies for our use, and help us to eat and drink to thy glory, for Christ’s sake. Amen.”
Grace after meal – “Blessed God, in thee we live, move, and have our being; make us thankful for thy mercies; and as we live by thy providence, help us to live to thy praise; looking and waiting for a better life with thyself above, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”
It was more oatcakes and porridge though – nobody really believed in coleslaw in those days.
LikeLike
Cath, speaking of praying after a meal, Tom Skerritt played a Presbyterian minister in “A River Runs Through It” and had his family do that, and it always struck me as curious. The other thing I recall him doing was cracking a disapproving joke when his son wanted to marry a Methodist girl: “Methodists are Baptists who wear shoes.”
LikeLike
Johnny Y. – gratitude out.
LikeLike
DPV, after reading your notes on “worship,” I feel your pain. Wow!
LikeLike
Darryl,
Thanks for not taking my post the wrong way. After spending 19 years listening to long winded and “vulgar” spirit-led prayers it is with gratitude that the pastor of the Lutheran Church I attend uses the prayers from the Lutheran hymnal and small catechism in all activities at the Church. In trying to avoid sanctimoniousness the contempory worship becomes sanctimonious, vulgar and shallow. It is much better to be meticulously careful in trying to follow the biblical pattern of worship as described in the New Testament and how the reformers “reformed” the worship service during the reformation.
LikeLike
John, I rarely take offense, unless your name is “Paul.”
LikeLike
I can’t say I have not wondered what you had to delete when you bid him good riddance. He is still going strong at the outhouse where he posts with reluctance on occasion and then spouts off another 5 to 10 posts or so. It is such an honor to lend on ear to what he has to say. His logical and philosophical “expertise” has gone to his head it seems. He is a legend in his own mind and demands you adhere to his standards of dialog. He has made some of the best arguments in the country on some topics (I can’t remember which) according to himself.
LikeLike
Zrim, you asked, does the singing of praise songs prolong an adolescent piety? I would say the answer is, ‘it depends.’ It depends on the lyrics. If the lyrics are Biblically faithful and reinforce essential Christian doctrines, then I would conclude that ‘praise songs’ (for lack of a better description) can certainly be used by the Lord to bring believers to a mature faith.
Keith, you wrote, “What I do disagree with, however, is the notion that we ought to be ‘tolerant’ toward such faulty worship. We don’t purposefully dumb down worship so that our children or young people will understand or ‘want’ to worship.”
Keith, your choice of the word “faulty” is worth noting. What makes worship faulty? Is it the use of guitars and drums? Or is it faulty lyrics? I would say that the lyrics are the key. The musical style is secondary, and subjective.
I have attended services in spiritually dead mainline churches where the liturgy is rich, the music is by Bach or Mozart and is beautifully performed by the choir, but the smell of spiritual death is unmistakeable. I would say that such worship is faulty. The unbelievers in the choir seem to be openly mocking God by singing such wonderful music while refusing to join His heavenly choir.
I also have been in liturgical churches where the worship is truly God-honoring and edifying to the participants, including me.
And some liturgical music does not say a whole lot, lyrically, yet I would assume everyone on this board would affirm its use in worship. I think of the Doxology. The ideas in the song are Biblically faithful. The melody serves the text well. But many essentials of the faith are not mentioned, such as the Resurrection or the Atonement. Yet we value the Doxology as a valuable, practically indispensable part of rich liturgical worship, and rightly so, I think.
If we can value the Doxology this way, I think it’s a very short step to acknowledging the idea that many Christian songs written in the last 50 years can be of equal value in worship.
I just took a moment to review the lyrics to “Shine, Jesus, Shine.” I was blessed by the Lord as I read. Notable was this section:
By the blood I may enter Your brightness,
Search me, try me, consume all my darkness,
Is there anyone on this board who can read the lyrics of that song and find a line or idea which ought to be considered ‘faulty’ or ‘adolescent?’ If so, which ones?
LikeLike
John, what I notice in your response is something I think is fairly widespread and unchecked, namely the relative divorce of content and form. You wrote, “I would say that the lyrics are the key. The musical style is secondary, and subjective.” My point isn’t to diminish concern for content but to wonder why form is so seemingly negligible to you. May we use pizza and coke for the sacrament, so long as the words of institution are “biblically faithful”? That may sound silly as an analogy, but this is how I hear arguments like yours which seem so lyric-driven and form-latitudinarian.
I also see that you have some strong words for mainline churches. With experience in the main- and borderline denominations, I can sympathize to a large degree, but at the same time I think you overstate matters when you suggest “spiritual death, etc.” I think the problem is better evaluated in terms of what we see going on and not what we think is happening deep down below (you know, overturning inward stones and all that). That said, I think what we see in those contexts is how the tall-steeple class works to meet the felt needs of the upwardly mobile liberal-evangelicals, while the P&W choruses meet the felt needs of the perpetual adolescence of conservative-evangelicals. The problem with both is how they are more human-centered. Also, not to sound lazy, but I tend to think that the lyric-driven argument is one that makes the “sola scriptura” argument more attractive. What I mean is that if, assuming uninspired music is a given, lyrics are what really matters in then there’s a lot of work to be done in order to ensure worship is faithful. Fine. But why work harder when you can work smarter and just go with the Psalter (set to simple, reverent and plain tunes)? I know this will rub feathers wrong, but music is just one aspect of Christian worship, and I can’t help but think that hymnody-ism is at least as much about the more musically gifted amongst us wanting to show off their wares. Singing is important to Christian worship, but does the fact that it has become such a cottage industry perhaps suggest that we over-realize its importance?
LikeLike
John, you might want to listen to this re: “Shine, Jesus, Shine”:
http://www.tabletalkradio.org/content/node/111
LikeLike
Nate, I listened to the podcast you referenced. What exactly is it about their review of “Shine Jesus Shine” that you thought was noteworthy? If you could let me know what they said that you agreed with, perhaps I could better respond to you.
Zrim, thank you for the friendly interaction. Pizza and coke would not be appropriate, because the elements of the Supper are named in Scripture. Not so musical styles.
You suggested we sing psalms to work smarter, not harder. I have a hard time disagreeing with that, because of course your suggestion has great merit. And many churches do exactly that: sing only psalms, and often without instrumental accompaniment.
The reality for most congregations, though, is that exclusive psalm-singing is not going to implemented. So for those churches which are trying to decide between hymns, contemporary songs, or some mixture thereof, the questions must be considered:
Are lyrics the most important part of a song or hymn sung in worship?
Are pipe organs to be preferred over guitars and drums? Why or why not?
LikeLike
John,
I don’t have much of a desire to get into a debate over such a tawdry song. But, for starters, how about the fact that it doesn’t mean anything? How about the highly mystical content? The confusion of Law and Gospel seems fairly obvious. Who is “river” and why is he put next to Jesus and Spirit? Why are we giving imperatives to God?
LikeLike
John, I beg to differ that style of worship is not named as clearly in Scripture as are the elements for the means of grace. Hebrews 12:28-29: “Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire.”
And actually, my suggestion was “sola scriptura,” not exclusive psalmody. One other advantage here is for those who oppose EP in worship because it means we can never sing the name of Christ. But in SS that would easily remedied, for obvious reasons, by SS. Even so, I am quite aware that this is a minority suggestion.
To answer your questions, no, lyrics are not the most important part of a psalm, hymn or spiritual song. Its form (both implicit and explicit) is just as important. And I suppose I’m still going to be the odd man out as I would suggest that deciding between pipe organs and guitars seems like a false dilemma and really only serves to keep a sustained (and so tired) worship war going. Isn’t worship warring as draining as culture warring? How about nobody gets to have their favorite instrument and we just use our voices?
LikeLike
Zrim, thanks for the clarification. Singing ‘sola scriptura’ in worship is an idea worth considering.
Worship that is acceptable to God, with reverence and awe, can be offered using voices only, or with pipe organ, or with rock instruments. I don’t see how the Hebrews passage limits the musical style that we use for worship.
I must disagree about form vs. lyrics. Lyrics are the only part of the song which can carry true spiritual meaning. Form can emphasize one part of the lyrics vs. another, but it is the lyrics themselves which are the heart of any song we sing to God.
Using only voices is an idea worth considering. I have sung ‘a cappella’ music in several choirs, and have always found the experience to be enjoyable and edifying.
Nate, you seem to be going out of your way to be offensive. The song does not mean anything? I will not claim that the song is the finest poetry since Shakespeare, but to say that it does not mean anything is just silly.
Mystical content? Please tell me which part is mystical, and please tell me what the word ‘mystical’ means to you.
Confusion of law and gospel? Please cite the lyric and explain.
Who is ‘river’? I think this is personification, a legitimate literary device. The reference to the river perhaps comes from John 8:38, “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.” We need not assume the author is trying to name a fourth person of the Trinity, as the TableTalk radio host does so flippantly.
Why give imperatives to God? The Psalmist said, “Arise, O God!” and “Answer me when I call.” Also “Make them bear their guilt.” It seems giving imperatives to God has Scriptural precedent.
LikeLike
John, is it possible that style is not *absolute*, but culturally bound — and within our culture, certain styles are basically impossible to use in worship to convey reverence and awe?
LikeLike
John, just to be clear, I’m not suggesting that sola vox (as opposed to voice-plus-whatever instrument) conveys and instills reverence and awe. After all, we could sing any praise chorus unaccompanied and still be flippant. The point about unaccompaniment is to help get us away from fights over preferred instruments, which I think is mainly a fight about which human-centered form of will worship we prefer, which I think is 99.6% of the discussion. My guess is that you disagree, but from my own experience that’s all it really boils down to.
I suppose we have a fundamental disagreement, then, about the nature of and relationship between form and content. I think you give way too much weight to content, which is understandable given the evangelical emphasis on being Word-centered. That’s not to take anything away from the primacy of the Word, but to suggest that there is a down side to it, namely a tradition that gives rise to a lot of impropriety and not much of a way to resist it and also nurture a more sober piety, which is actually what the Bible calls for.
LikeLike
John,
What was offensive?
Are you really going to argue that the song has a clear meaning?
The mindless repetition of vague phrases is what I had in mind for mysticism. The point seems fairly obvious, “check your brain at the door, we’re here to feel something.”
The one tiny little snippet of Gospel is surrounded by (again) vague statements about God’s “awesome presence,” “radiance,” where we’re telling Him to “search me, try me.” That’s not good news. Also, why am I the one doing the movement in this one little portion of the song that mentions some Gospel? Is “shine on me” Law or Gospel? Is it even possible to tell?
Is the “river” reference clear? Is it wise to put “river” in the same context as Jesus and Spirit? Funny that you would call the TTR line “flippant.” That’s what I would say about this song. Flippant.
Are you really equating these imperatives with the ones from the Psalter? Blaze Spirit? Set our hearts on fire? Flow river? Maybe I should have asked “why these imperatives,” but it seemed pretty obvious from the outset that there’s no comparison to be made between this song and the Psalter.
LikeLike
John, We should not sing with instrumental accompaniment because there is no
Biblical command to do so; the early church did not do so; the synagogue did not do so. Only the Levitical priesthood did so, by express command of God and their rites and worship were abolished with the coming of Christ. We should not sing uninspired songs because the Bible tells us to sing Psalms (psalms, hymns and spiritual songs). God has given us a hymn book in the Book of Psalms: they bear the inscription of the Divine Spirit, their composition and use commanded and approved by God and implemented by the office-bearers of the ancient (Israelite) Church. The synagogues did not sing uninspired songs; the early church did not sing uninspired songs.
I understand that exclusive psalm singing isn’t an option for a lot of people where they are and so one has to go for the lesser of two evils, in which case trad. hymns are the preferred choice. Where there is choice, however, one’s personal enjoyment of one form over another is irrelevant.
LikeLike
Alexander, thank you for your thoughtful comments. The first question that comes to mind is, when the pastor preaches a sermon, should he speak only the words of Scripture, or is he permitted to share his own uninspired thoughts?
LikeLike
Eh, let’s just chant the psalms. I’m not an exclusive psalmodist, but there are days when I wish we could really go back to our NT roots and ditch our contemporary notions of melody altogether. I fantasize that would produce a measure of peace, but then I suppose we would only displace the music fights and get into battles over architecture.
LikeLike
Preaching of the Word is an element of worship, prescribed by Scripture, delivered by a man called out to be ordained a minister of the Gospel. So, no.
LikeLike
John S., does an electronic guitar connote reverence and sobriety? Do drums? Does a pipe organ? I don’t think so. How about a pitch pipe followed by the human voice? Seems to work.
I’m with Nate, Shine Jesus Shine makes no sense, unless you’re a charismatic.
LikeLike
Michael, ding ding ding ding. You may win the book yet.
LikeLike
Michael, agreed, but I’m not so sure we have as many frustrated architects as frustrated musicians so I wonder if that would really be the next battle.
LikeLike
Jeff, you said, “John, is it possible that style is not *absolute*, but culturally bound — and within our culture, certain styles are basically impossible to use in worship to convey reverence and awe?”
Jeff, that’s possible, but terms like style, culture, and reverence have an element of subjectivity which makes it difficult to come up with concrete rules for music in worship.
LikeLike
Nate, you said, “What was offensive?” Nate, your use of the term ‘tawdry’ was unnecessarily provocative, and thereby offensive.
“Are you really going to argue that the song has a clear meaning?”
As I have said before, this is not the best song ever written. But the theme could be summed up by “Lord Jesus, shine on the world, and shine on me.” Not the most theologically sophisticated thought, but not heretical either.
Nate: The mindless repetition of vague phrases is what I had in mind for mysticism. The point seems fairly obvious, “check your brain at the door, we’re here to feel something.”?
Nate, I have read those lyrics again, and I just don’t see where you are getting that.
Nate: “The one tiny little snippet of Gospel is surrounded by (again) vague statements about God’s “awesome presence,” “radiance,” where we’re telling Him to “search me, try me.” That’s not good news.
Nate, the psalmist says, “Search me, O God, and know my heart!? Try me and know my thoughts!” (Psalm 139:23) I don’t think that line is meant to be ‘good news,’ but rather a reference to that psalm.
Nate: “Also, why am I the one doing the movement in this one little portion of the song that mentions some Gospel?”
Not sure what you mean by this.
Nate: “Is “shine on me” Law or Gospel? Is it even possible to tell?”
Again, the psalmist says, “You who are enthroned upon the cherubim, shine forth.” (Ps. 80:1) Is that law or gospel? I am not sure those categories apply. A similar passage is Psalm 31:16:? ”Make your face shine on your servant.”
Nate: “Is the “river” reference clear? Is it wise to put “river” in the same context as Jesus and Spirit?”
It’s not the best poetry in the world, I grant you. But to wonder if the songwriter thinks the river is the fourth person of the Trinity is not warranted. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt. Is it possible the author had in mind John 7:38, “Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.’?
Nate: “Funny that you would call the TTR line “flippant.” That’s what I would say about this song. Flippant.”
I would ask readers of this thread to listen to that podcast and see what they think about the pastor’s comments.
Nate:? Are you really equating these imperatives with the ones from the Psalter? Blaze Spirit? Set our hearts on fire? Flow river?
Nate, I was only addressing the point you raised, ‘why are we giving imperatives to God?’
But let’s look at the phrases: Blaze, Spirit. Set out hearts on fire. What is the problem here? Didn’t the Holy Spirit send tongues of fire to rest on the apostles (Acts 2:3)? Didn’t John the Baptist say “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”? (Luke 3:16)
Nate: Maybe I should have asked “why these imperatives,” but it seemed pretty obvious from the outset that there’s no comparison to be made between this song and the Psalter.??
Agreed. This song is not Scripture. No comparison, of course.
LikeLike
Alexander, apparently I did not make my point clear. When a pastor preaches a sermon, he often uses illustrations, makes applications, and gives explanations. These elements of the sermon are not the inspired Word of God, yet we do not object to them. Why then should we object when a song is sung during worship which is not a direct quote from the Bible, but is still Biblically faithful?
LikeLike
Dr. Hart, you said, ?”John S., does an electronic guitar connote reverence and sobriety? Do drums? Does a pipe organ? I don’t think so. How about a pitch pipe followed by the human voice? Seems to work.”
Dr. Hart, any of those instruments can connote reverence if used in a proper way. Similarly, any of those instruments, including the voice, can be used in an irreverent manner.
Also, you said, “I’m with Nate, Shine Jesus Shine makes no sense, unless you’re a charismatic.”
Dr. Hart, you are more learned than me, and I hesitate to disagree with you. But I must confess surprise to such a statement. What lyrics in that song are exclusively ‘charismatic?’
LikeLike
John: Jeff, that’s possible, but terms like style, culture, and reverence have an element of subjectivity which makes it difficult to come up with concrete rules for music in worship.
Yes, I agree. I tend to be more flexible on issues of style than some. Still and all: given that styles have a history, and that history comes out of certain definite ideas of message, would it not make sense to ask whether X style conveys a message in keeping with awe and reverence?
That’s not an absolute question, as you say. Folk style, for example, conveys reverence to some and a hillbilly hickness to others. But I think we could probably agree that the “lounge lizard” style, or circus-music style, or punk, could not possibly convey awe and reverence to anyone. Yes?
So rather than lay down concrete rules, I would want to lay down this one rule: We must consider carefully the history of our styles and what they convey, RATHER THAN assuming that styles are generically neutral. Fair?
LikeLike
Jeff, that sounds thoughtful, reflective, and fair.
LikeLike
John, your point was clear and I answered it. What in my answer did you not understand? Preaching of the Word, i.e. exposition of the Word, is a Biblically sanctioned- indeed required- element of worship. Exposition intrinsically involves speaking words not found in Scripture, in order to exegete Scripture. Similarly, singing Psalms is also a Biblically sanctioned, and required, element of worship on a par with the preaching of Scripture. There are two elements of worship: Word and prayer. Word includes: the reading of Scripture, the preaching of Scripture, the sacraments and the singing of Scripture. Prayer includes: prayer and can also include singing (offering a sung Psalm as a prayer, for example of confession or intercession).
The RPW does not say: only those very words found in Scripture may be uttered during the worship service. It says: God has revealed to us the acceptable way to worship Him, and He has revealed it in Scripture and only what He has commanded in Scripture is acceptable. God has commanded preaching, so men called out and ordained as ministers (or, in some circumstances, elders) preach; God has commanded us to sing Psalms and He has not commnded us to sing uninspired songs or to use instrumental accompaniment.
LikeLike
John,
I’m calling a thing what it is. Tawdry is a fair description of that song.
That’s the meaning of the song? What does that mean? When the point of singing is to “let the word of Christ dwell in you richly,” I don’t see how that even remotely qualifies. The song doesn’t make sense.
I didn’t say it was heretical, but a beach ball isn’t heretical either… so… maybe we should toss one of those around in public worship.
A short little definition of mysticism would be the attempt to ascend the ladder up to God by means of your emotion or experience. That stuff is fairly front and center in most P&W songs, including this one.
It would have been better if they had put all the law first in that line, as in, “search me, try me, show all of my sin,” and then the blood of Jesus covering me, not all mixed together and confusing. Those categories should always be at least considered.
I didn’t ask if it was good poetry. I asked if it had a clear meaning.
If you think they are making references to these passages of Scripture (which is not at all clear), then why are the verses ripped out of their context and stripped of their original meaning? For instance, if you think that “Blaze Spirit” is a reference to baptism by fire then we’re asking to suffer eternal condemnation at the last judgment. Fire, ouch, hot (as Dr. Riddlebarger always says). Is that what we would consider correctly handling God’s word?
Nearly the entire song is in the imperative mood. Shine Jesus. Blaze Spirit. Flow river. That’s just a little bit different than “Arise, Oh Lord,” in the context of what God has done to save us, don’t you think?
Anyway John, I’m not really interested in pursuing this much further. What’s the point? If you’re getting royalties on this song or something, just let me know so I can stop wasting my time (kidding).
LikeLike
Darryl and others:
This affiant averreth nothing further other than, “worship is in tatters.” Dignity and honour is amiss in the temper and disposition of our souls.
“Eternal God, Father of all mercies, to us, manifold and wicked sinners, justified by the sole imputation of Christ’s righteousness–in life, in birth, in baptism, agony, sweat, tears, and death–to us, restore worship that befits Thee in Thy dignity, honour and truth. For the love and sake of Thy only Son, Christ Jesus, Amen.”
A Calvinistic-Anglican-in-Babylonian Exile,
Philip
LikeLike
Royalties! I wish! (Or do I?)
LikeLike
John S., we have cultural assumptions about all sorts of instruments and I’d say that the electric guitar is generally part of a rock concert and an organ with a concert hall. I still don’t think either is fitting for what transpires in worship.
As for the lyrics, “Blaze, Spirit, Blaze” sounds charismatic to me.
LikeLike
“For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you . . .”
Dr. Hart, does that verse sound charismatic to you?
LikeLike
John S., not it doesn’t. Blaze Spirit Blaze is hardly a rephrasing of that quote.
LikeLike
Having grown up singing ‘Shine Jesus Shine’ almost every week in elementary school chapel I can say, with confidence, that I never thought twice about its content because I was having too much fun singing it.
LikeLike
Evan, this is poignant. H. L. Mencken hated Sunday school. His father shipped him and his brother off to keep the house quiet on Sundays during the winter so he could nap. But Mencken loved to sing the children’s songs. The only time children weren’t being shushed.
LikeLike
Yes, Dr. Hart, you are right. “Blaze Spirit Blaze” is not a rephrasing of 2 Timothy 1:6. But that was not my point, so apparently I am not communicating well.
The Scripture in question had a reference to flame, just like “Blaze” refers to flame in “Shine Jesus Shine.” And Timothy’s gift was certainly from the Holy Spirit. While the two quotations are not equivalent, they do both refer to flame and to the Holy Spirit.
So if “Blaze Spirit Blaze” sounds charismatic, because it refers to flame and to the Holy Spirit, then 2 Tim 1:6 sounds just as charismatic.
LikeLike
John S., Blaze Spirit Blaze sounds more charismatic than 2 Tim 1:6 because its text is a lot shorter than the rest of the canon of Scripture where such phrases may receive qualification. With Shine Jesus Shine there is no such qualification. Instead it usually comes with 27 other minutes of singing and lots of other texts that are charismatic in character.
LikeLike
Thanks, Dr. Hart, your thoughts are clearer to me now.
I also want to thank you for your podcasts on Machen, on the “Historia Ecclesia” programs from the Reformed Forum. I have listened to most of them, and they are an appropriate tribute to that hero of faith.
LikeLike
Friends of the Catholic Confessional (=non-Papist and non-Greek) Churches:
It’s bad down here in the south, to wit, Jacksonville, NC, home to Camp Lejeune, the largest base on the east coast for the few, the proud, the elite, the United States Marines.
All we have are hothouses, quintessentially.
Thinking of writing Donald Trump to make an investment. (1) Land, small English Chapel (grey-stoned) to seat 100 in old mahogeny pews, a suitable pipe organ, with appropriate and dignified decor. (2) Endowment for 10 years to support a “Prayer Book Presbyterian,” to wit, a WCF-Churchman, with the 1789 or 1873 (pre-Tractarian) BCP. This scribe would educate the youngster in Anglicanism. Would search for Prayer Book sympathizers at Confessionally Reformed seminaries, although their faculties have l(so very) little experience in Anglican Churchmanship. (3) If a failure, land and holdings to revert to Trump. (??). (4) Will advise.
This eastern NC city has nothing for Calvinistic, Prayer Book Anglicans (sorry, to stutter when saying “Calvinistic Anglicans”…historically, soteriologically, they were 5-pointers as was King James 1). A place where we can sing, every Sunday, prior to the processional hymn, that Naval and Marine Corps hymn, “Eternal Father, Strong to Save.” (The British anthem for US and British forces). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KCiMdR1ox0
We have Enthusiasts everywhere. “Lord, lighten our darkness, we beseech Thee, and deliver us from the perils and intellectual dangers, intellectual and emotional dangers, of these times. This we importune Thy Majesty, through Christ alone, Amen.”
Respectfully,
Donald Philip Veitch
PS. Don’t laugh, am thinking of writing and seeking an audience with the “old Trumpster.”
LikeLike
If you want true old school Presbyterian piety, stick with…
1. The Authorized Version;
2. The Scottish Psalter (1650);
3. All of the original Westminster Standards without exception (plus the General Assembly’s Directions for Family-Worship);
4. Ridiculously strict first-day Sabbatarianism; and
5. Full (Thursday through Monday) communion seasons observed four times a year at most, at tables, with common bread and common cup.
And yes, I’m serious.
LikeLike
@Sean McDonald- Sounds good to me.
@everyone else- All I know is that when I go the the lions I’ll be singing “The Son of God Goes Forth to War” not some namby–pamby Jesus-is-my-boyfriend drivel.
LikeLike