Majesty Music And Getty

[Covenanter]

Christopher Idle is a living hymnwriter (not CCM), retired vicar, & committed evangelical. He retired when the CofE moved out from under him by ordaining women.

He writes in the notes to "Praise" -

Though it is as firmly rooted in the Christian faith and church as any hymn in the book, this one has made its mark on a communal tradition well beyond any church boundaries. It is widely recognised as a minor Victorian classic, identified by its tune as much as its words, on a level in the popular mind with such others as 23B, 260 and 915; but now it is as much criticised as celebrated. Hymnal editors have been blamed as much for including as for omitting it, in Britain, N America and elsewhere. Most hymnals and reference books attribute it to the new young curate in a Yorks mission district, Sabine Baring-Gould, adding that the occasion was a grand Whitsuntide procession by the Sunday School at Horbury Bridge near Wakefield, Yorks, in 1864. Many also provide the detail that it was written (or at least completed) on the Sunday night and sung by the assembled hundreds the next day, Whit Monday—all without benefit of photocopier. Certainly the Church Times printed it on 15 Oct that year, headed ‘Hymn for Procession with Cross and Banners’, and 30 years on Baring-Gould is quoted as describing its hasty composition and less-than-ideal rhyming.
....
What appears here in stz 1 and the refrain as ‘looking up to Jesus ...’ (other books offer ‘unto’, from Hebrews 12:2), was originally ‘with the cross of Jesus going on before’—wording which reflected the highly visual effect of the processions.

The attributed author, Sabine Baring-Gould -

was a ‘high’ Anglican, keen to distinguish the orthodox Catholic faith from Romanism and popery.

[Covenanter]

I'm posting this parody as a challenge to us all, not to mock:

John Betjeman (?)

1. Backward Christian soldiers,
Fleeing from the fight,
With the cross of Jesus,
Nearly out of sight.
Christ our rightful master
Stands against the foe
Onward into battle, we
seem afraid to go.

Chorus: Backward Christian soldiers,
Fleeing from the fight,
With the cross of Jesus,
Nearly out of sight.

2. Like a mighty tortoise
Moves the church of God.
Brothers we are treading,
Where we've often trod.
We are much divided,
Many bodies we,
Having different doctrines, but
Not much charity.

3. Crowns and thrones may perish,
Kingdoms rise and wane,
But the cross of Jesus
Hidden does remain.
Gates of hell should never
'gainst the Church prevail,
We have Christ's own promise, but
we think it might fail.

4. Sit here then ye people,
Join our sleeping throng.
Blend with ours, your voices
in a feeble song.
Blessings, ease and comfort
Ask from Christ the King,
But with our modern thinking,
We won't do a thing.

[Covenanter]

What has all this got to do with the OP ? We look far more critically at new hymns & their writers than at the published, old-accepted hymns. If the same words were published today, we would be prejudiced against them & quote the words of Jesus:
KJV

'>Luke 5:39

No man also having drunk

old

wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The

old

is

better

.

[Invicta]

What has all this got to do with the OP ? We look far more critically at new hymns & their writers than at the published, old-accepted hymns. If the same words were published today, we would be prejudiced against them & quote the words of Jesus:

Luke 5:39

No man also having drunk

old

wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The

old

is

better

.

I don't agree, Ian. There are modern hymns which I find acceptable and old hymns which I don't.

[JerryNumbers]

John,
you have raised a good point about the consistency in our critique of music. I understand exactly what you are saying, that there seems to be a double standard in how we use an argument against a modern song that, if applied evenly, would disqualify what is now a standard hymn.
Here is my take on that issue:
It takes a long time to see the fruit born of a seed. We can very easily look back through the corridors of time and see what songs have been a tremedous blessing and help to God's people, despite the author's weaknesses/faults, etc.
For instance, we can easily point out that Fanny Crosby wrote secular tunes, and dismiss all of her hymnody.
However, here is where the fruit is borne out.
She wrote literally 1,000's of hymns, yet how many of them do we actually have in our hymnbooks today, and out of that small selection, how many do we actually sing on any kind of a regular basis?
Maybe 15? 20? I would say 20 would be the very, very most.
So the overall ratio of Fanny Crosby's songs that we actually sing vs. the overall number of songs she wrote is a very, very small percentage.

So let me make the appropriate application.
Bill and Gloria Gaither have written (x) number of songs (I have no idea how many they have written - I just know they have written a large number of songs.) Out of all the songs they have written, I can only think of a very small handful of songs that are anywhere near appropriate for church specials (at least IMO - and I know some probably would not sing ANYTHING by the Gaithers....more power to you! REMEMBER...this is just an illustration!)

My point is this....there could very well indeed be some modern songs written by CCM artists that actually have good words. The music could even be cleaned up to be suitable for a conservatively minded Baptist Church.
The problem is ASSOCIATION. By singing those songs in our churches, we are by default ENDORSING the current "ministry" of people that we would otherwise condemn on many fronts - doctrine, practice, separation, methods, etc., etc., etc. While many people might be blessed by the song because they have no idea who wrote it, or even who the authors are, let's not kid ourselves into thinking that there would not be a sizable percentage of people in the church who DO know the songs from the CCM artists. THose are the people that will see the inconsistency in our stated/preached position on music, and the use of the very same music that we condemn from the pulpits.

If in fact these modern songs are any good, they will stand the test of time, just like that very small percentage of Fanny Crosby's songs did and Bill Gaither's songs have.

Down here in the South, Southern Gospel music is such a problem that I avoid Gaither's songs because I don't want anyone to think that I condone his music or lifestyle or "ministry" or anything like that.

"Abstain from all APPEARANCE of evil."

Anyway, maybe that helps someone out there understand why some of us have such a problem with the Hamiltons including modern CCM songs in their songbooks.
I mean, that video someone posted - the performers do everything that Garlock and Hamilton told us NOT to do....so why would they use their music??? (FWIW - I really could not tell the difference MUSICALLY from there performance and a typical rock band performance....same lighting, same makeup, same musical structure, same chord progression, same repetitive riffs, etc.....)

The bottom line is this.....we are in Laodicean times....God's people are more interested in pleasing their FLESH than pleasing God....and will use any excuse to do so!

PS - Ian, I disagree with you...the words and music of Onward Christian Soldiers is vastly superior to the posted video. At least the music makes you think of marching!

In Christ,

Now I can agree with this.

Years to come, if our Lord don't come 1st, there might be some of the songs, written portions, set to some decent music, being listened to, sung, by conservative Christians.

[John81]

I'm posting this parody as a challenge to us all, not to mock:

John Betjeman (?)

That actually sounds all too accurate with regards to much of Western Christianity. We talked of this today in Sunday school, as so many Christians today have the idea prayer is to cast our wants before God, living our lives as Christians before the world means we act nice, we prefer to ignore and not talk about the parts of the Bible that make us uncomfortable.

As to the idea that conservative Christians will come to accept some CCM songs in the future, that's actually already happening. Just as little by little the conservative churches in the late 1800s and early 1900s began accepting newer music (much of which we today consider as standards) there are conservative churches today accepting some newer music. Some of these churches are praised for their thoughtful selection of a few modern songs while rejecting most, yet there are those who denounce these churches for using any modern song.

[Steve Schwenke]

Here is the problem with accepting the new CCM music, in my opinion.
What is the source?
How do the music leaders and pastors come across these songs?
Well, the answer is pretty obvious.
1. They are listening to CCM
2. They are buying the CCM sheet music, music books, etc, and reviewing them for "new songs"
3. Maybe a combination of both.

And to me, that is a dangerous proposition.
It is one thing to buy the old Stamps-Baxter song books with the "newer" gospel songs that have become "standards" like as I alluded to earlier (i.e. Gaither, Dottie Rambo, even John W. Peterson and Alfred B. Smith.) These song books have the old standard hymns with some of these "newer songs." And the songs I am referring to here as written have good lyrics and appropriate musical style.
When I go to the local Christian bookstore and look through their music books, I have little use for anything "modern" or contemporary. Once I see who produced and wrote it - I discard it. I want no association with the CCM crowd whatsoever. Their doctrine, practice, method, and philosophy are all wrong. They have bought into the New Age Versions which bring along a New Age mentality - whether or not they are aware of it.
If they do accidentally happen to write a good song, time will carry that song forward to be loved and cherished by saints all over the world....and I can live with that.
But I am not ready to go looking for something "new" when we already have more songs from the old days than we know what to do with. The typical hymnal has over 500 hymns. How many of those do we actually sing? Why can't we learn more of those? True - some of them are not fit to sing.....but we could learn more of THOSE, and we would be better for it. (Actually - this is what we do - we try to learn several "new" hymns every year from our Hymnbook - and the people love it!)
Plus, when we add in the other song books - like the Stamps-Baxter Heavenly Highway Hymns - we add how many more "oldies but goodies?"
Then we add in stuff by Garlock and Hamilton....etc. etc. etc.

There is simply too much GOOD music available for us today for us to give ANYTHING by any CCM artist even 5 seconds of consideration.

Acts 17:21 (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)

[OLD fashioned preacher]

I don't mind if a church wants 1 hour of music, but after it I want to hear 1 1/2 hours or more of preaching. You only preach 45 minutes, kindly keep the singing and other stuff down to less than 30 minutes.

Many Baptist churches prior to the late 1800's handled offerings, announcements, etc AFTER the singing and preaching rather than interrupt worship with the interjection of secular business.

[OLD fashioned preacher]

Sorry, I didn't realize I was reading the bottom of pg1 when I posted on pg3 -- leaving it totally unrelated to any post in its proximity

[JerryNumbers]

Sorry, I didn't realize I was reading the bottom of pg1 when I posted on pg3 -- leaving it totally unrelated to any post in its proximity

That's OK, I've done it! Perhaps others have too!

[John81]

I don't mind if a church wants 1 hour of music, but after it I want to hear 1 1/2 hours or more of preaching. You only preach 45 minutes, kindly keep the singing and other stuff down to less than 30 minutes.

Many Baptist churches prior to the late 1800's handled offerings, announcements, etc AFTER the singing and preaching rather than interrupt worship with the interjection of secular business.

Agreed! There should be more preaching than singing. It also helps if the preaching of the Word is the main focus rather than stories and tales. Nothing wrong with a story or tale that enhances or gives illustration to the Word being preached, but some preachers go off on one rabbit trail after another until it's just a series of stories that don't really tie into the sermon. By the time they get back to the sermon, whatever they began the sermon with has been forgotten.

For myself, I wouldn't want to sit through an hour of music before hearing the sermon. A song or two and then get to the preaching!

[OLD fashioned preacher]

I'm not talking about that much "special singing", I'm talking about 90-99% congregational singing; 0-3 "specials" (depending on length of "song service") is plenty.

[John81]

Our church typically has three or four congregational songs and on occasion one special song, usually by one of the ladies in our church.

I visited a church in Missouri that had a loud band that the music director led and the congregation sang along with the loud band. I didn't care for that at all. If I recall, they only played one song I recognized so I really couldn't sing along except to that one song.

In an Assembly of God church I attended for awhile in the early 80s, every service they sang "soon and very soon" over and over again. That was only slightly less annoying than the few churches I've been to where they play "come to Jesus" over and over again until someone finally gets up and goes to the front.

[Salyan]

Our Sunday morning service has 1/2 hour of songs, announcements, testimonies, etc., usually including about 4-5 congregationals. Sometimes there is a special, and we don't take up an offering. Then there'll be 45-50 minutes of preaching. I love our evening service, because we take favorites and just sing for 1/2 hour straight, followed by another 45+ minutes of preaching. I believe music - congregational singing, not specials - is an important part of the service, although it shouldn't supersede the preaching of God's Word.

[JerryNumbers]

I'm not talking about that much "special singing", I'm talking about 90-99% congregational singing; 0-3 "specials" (depending on length of "song service") is plenty.

Years ago, a church I was invited to preach at, I can't remember exactly how it went, yet I think I can give you a good idea. At 11:00 AM they had 2 songs, had a prayer, took up the collection. them sang two more songs. Them 3 men came up & sang some songs, the 2 women sang a couple of songs.

When I got behind the pulpit, I looked at my watch, it was 11:47 PM, & as I opened my bible, the man that seemed to be in charge setting on the 2nd row to my right, held his wrist up in front of his face looking at his watch, making sure I saw him, I suppose. Yet, that was not the end of it, he did this about every 2 to 3 minutes.

One other church that I visited sand till 11:30 AM. Most all of the others that I visited had me behind the pulpit by about 11:10 AM. That one church was a singing Baptist Church that did not want to hear much preaching, I believe there's several of those singing Baptist Churches out there.

I've mentioned this before, a fried that moved to Mississippi told me he had visited on Baptist Church 3 or 4 different times looking for a church home. He said, I gave up on this one, the 1st 2 times the pastor was not present, & they had a program, the 3rd time he was present, yet still no preaching, only another program.

So I suppose there's several Baptist churches out there that only has singing & or programs, & no preaching. I suppose preaching of the Cross is foolishness to them, & the pastor has more important things to do than waste time preaching on Sunday mornings.

I never time my sermons, when I'm through, I try & shut up, some last till 12:00 noon, a very few have gone just a bit past that, not very many, & some have ended at 11:30 AM, others a bit longer, a very few even a bit shorter.

Through the years I have notice some pastors try to preach till right before 12:00 noon every Sunday, & I have tried not to copy them.