On Music in the Church

In recent years there has been a growing trend among conservative Anabaptists to invest substantially in singing more advanced forms of music. On a general level, this has happened through things like choirs, more music education in schools, and a strong emphasis on learning how to “sing well.” There is an accompanying, though much less common, rise in the number of those who pursue expertise in music as a career choice. (This is part of a broader trend in conservative Anabaptism to invest more heavily in specialized expertise, which is another conversation worth having, but beyond the scope of this essay.) These trends are not inherently good or bad, but when they supplant the more fundamental goals that we ought to be pursuing for music in our churches, the growth of God’s kingdom is hindered. Since the primary role of the church’s music-making activity should be to raise one another up in a collective admission of God’s sovereignty, the church’s primary musical push should be toward congregational participation rather than proficiency.

There seems to have been a push in our circles lately toward a mindset in which taking music seriously means undergoing extensive musical studies and attaining ever higher levels of musical proficiency. I do not disparage those who seek to develop themselves in such ways, having invested invested significantly of my own resources in this effort, but this should not be a primary focus of the church’s musical energy. When an emphasis on technical accuracy and formal study eclipses a prioritization of singing for group benefit and magnification of divine beauty, the church’s primary musical role is undermined. The point of singing is not just singing; it is much grander—much more profound.

On the social level, much wonderfulness comes about when people sing together in groups. This is by no means unique to Christians, but it is worth considering the variety of benefits derived from singing with others. Increased levels of oxytocin, reduced cortisol, improved moods, and overall facilitation of social bonding are just some of the known benefits of this collective exercise. (Keeler) This is boots-on-the-ground brotherhood. It does not require a vast store of technical knowledge, nor is playing an instrument or being solidly grounded in music theory a requisite quality for healthy participation. These social dynamics should not be viewed as being in competition with the spiritual component of our singing, but as a way to increase the degree to which we engage with brothers and sisters on a different level than we may often think is important.

There are significant relational benefits that can be experienced collectively through song. When singing together, breathing patterns and heartbeats often align in ways that foster a very physical sense of togetherness. (Müller) Singing together can make and strengthen social bonds in a group of willing participants. This togetherness is not the same thing as worship, nor should it be mistaken as such, but it can helpfully augment our collective sacrifice of praise to God, besides being generally helpful in developing a sense of oneness within a brotherhood of believers. Singing together tends to minimize perceived differences within a group, and whenever barriers are broken down between church members, pathways of love are enabled to cross over. Singing together can be a tool to help us in this area.

Some would say that the route to better participation in church music is through more intensive music education. I agree with this position to an extent, but beyond engagement and participation, a comprehensive grasp of music theory and vocal technique seems a poor thing to push on a broad scale. The church can greatly benefit when it affirms the pursuit of such things by certain individuals, thereby enabling a nourishment of the body through the intentionally developed and nurtured capacities of its members, but the primary goal of music in the church is not to describe the harmonic progression of a musical passage or to know what each symbol on the page represents. Music-making is more intuitive than technical, and technicality is not a prerequisite for fuller participation. That being said, participation in music does greatly benefit from the singer having at least a working familiarity with the style of music being sung, and a literacy of written church music can be very helpful in this area, besides greatly expanding the scope of a congregation’s access to the historic and global church’s music library.

Singing together as a congregation can be helpful for a variety of purposes. Since the church’s music making activity exists primarily to strengthen the corporate response to and about God, there is a reasonable space for music-making that is not specifically “worshipful” according to the traditional use of the word. Just as Jesus taught through the use of lilies and birds, we can affirm the goodness of God by singing the goodness of his creation. The human experience is common to us all—cannot honest appraisals of humanity’s joys and sorrows be appreciated by God’s people? It is helpful here to recognize that singing songs which we do not appreciate is generally a dismal experience. Singing with other people who have different musical tastes means we will sometimes have opportunities to sing songs that we don’t like. Love for the brotherhood can be practiced here by maintaining an attitude of willing participation even when we do not feel like it. Learning to participate well sometimes means temporarily adopting the preferences of others that we would not generally hold, and doing so graciously.

I urge us toward a philosophy of church music that seeks to both reap and sow the benefits that congregational singing can offer. This requires an awareness of potential pitfalls and things that would distract us from our primary aim. When the promotion of a primary idea necessitates the diminution of a more peripheral idea, a lesser flow of energy to the latter is not a bad thing.

I grew up in a setting where the cultivation of good musical practices has been made manifest in a higher level of musicianship than may be typically found in a congregation, but I would posit that the primary cause of this greater musical vitality has been in encouraging people to pay closer attention to what and why we sing (and then singing), more than in trying to educate about how to exercise more excellent musicianship. The difference in these foci is not necessarily immediately apparent, but it is significant. When a congregation sings because it is well trained in music, beautiful sounds are made. When a congregation sings because it loves singing and believes in the good of singing together, an excellent sacrifice of praise is offered.

Bibliography

Keeler, Jason R., Edward A. Roth, Brittany L. Neuser, John M. Spitsbergen, Daniel J. M. Waters, and John-Mary Vianney, Sep 2015, The neurochemistry and social flow of singing: bonding and oxytocin.

Müller, Victor, Ulman Lindenberger, Cardiac and Respiratory Patterns Synchronize between Persons during Choir Singing, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024893