I have watched changes in the music of the Christian Church over several decades and tried to see those changes in light of changes over the last two thousand years. I also want to make sure I examine my opinions of those changes in light of scripture.
Before we look at any particular music, we must understand what music is, its purpose and how we use it.
How many times have you heard a disgruntled person say "That's not even music!"? Or the phase, "It's music to my ears"? Those statements really don't define music. They are statements that give an opinion. A true definition of music is probably the farthest thing from their minds. And that's the crux of many arguments about church music.
When we begin to examine Biblical music, we almost always hear the familiar "Make a joyful noise unto the Lord" from Psalm 66. As we continue, we realize that the joyful noise included wind instruments, cymbals, stringed instruments and human voices. Depending on your translation, you might include tambourines and castanets as well. If we relate this joyful noise to praise of God, we should hear what Jesus said in Luke 19 when the Pharisees objected to the adoration of the people at Jesus' triumphal entry; "if these were silent, the very stones would cry out".
We should check out some of the songs of the scriptures as well. Obviously, the Psalms set examples for us, but we should consider other examples; Miriam's song after crossing the Red Sea, the antiphonal by the Israelites from either side of the valley, from mount Gerizim and mount Ebal in Deuteronomy 27, or David's music when he brought the ark to the tent he had set for it in 1 Chronicles 15. Some music was spontaneous. Some was rehearsed. Some may have been more spoken than sung, but the bottom line is that music appears to have been performed with whatever instruments or noise makers were available. The only constant was purpose. We can reasonably assume that music was used for entertainment in Jewish society because David was an accomplished harpist when he came out of the fields, and he played before the king to entertain. But, I can find no example of Biblical music used for entertainment during worship, nor can I find any time when music was used merely as a mood-setter or time filler in Hebrew worship. One might make a case that music was either a mood-setter or time filler in the incident of Shadrack and company and the fiery furnace, but then you're getting outside the venue of worship of the true God.
We should note also, that while most Biblical examples of music in public worship were songs of praise, some songs were meant to teach, some were statements of faith, and if we consider the Psalms to be songs of worship, then many were laments as well.
One other consideration before we move out of the Biblical era... I can identify at least nine times (in the King James translation) where we find "Sing..." or "Sung..." a "new song". Not only may we sing new songs, we are adjured to do so.
I believe we have established that music used for worship in the Bible was not limited to specific instruments, was not necessarily unaccompanied, was used for more than just praise and always had purpose.
From this point, I intend to look at church music as it progressed in Europe and the western world until the twenty first century.
As we trace music in the church since Biblical times, we don't find a lot of information until we get to the Gregorian Chants. There, we begin to find a lot of documentation. They were mostly unaccompanied and always in a minor key. Anything performed in a major key would have been considered out-of-place at the very least... more likely considered immoral, because folk music and drinking songs were often in the major modes. Over time, instrumental music began to show up in worship, and music on the pipe organ became the predominant form of instrumental church music. The chants evolved into choral anthems and orchestral accompaniment became more common. During this time, most church music was performed by rehearsed musicians, and the common people were not expected to participate. With the reformation came encouragement to the common people, and hymns as we know became commonplace. Many hymns were simply bar tunes with new lyrics. I have no doubt they were often performed with the same instruments that the bar tunes were accompanied with, but the greater resources of the church and the development of the piano encouraged the four part form with piano or organ accompaniment that has held favor until the late twentieth century. One should note, that in the last millennium, church music has usually been the recorded and recognized form of educated music, and in the last three or four centuries there have been enough educated musicians in the church that piano and organ accompaniment has been the recognized norm. In the United States, through most of the twentieth century, the vast majority of the population has been churched, and therefore at least minimally educated in the simple four part harmonies common to the hymns of the faith. Even those who claimed to "not read music" understood how to read the verses in the hymn book and most could roughly follow the ups and downs of the printed score.
Certainly, we have a wealth of secular music from the last half of the millennium, but one is hard-pressed to see any significant difference between secular and religious music until the twentieth century. Then with the advent of audio recording, radio and television, the secular music industry began to gain strength, but it wasn't until the 1960's that secular music began to lead public preference. Then we began to see guitars at summer camp and then in youth meetings, and finally, in Sunday morning worship services as well. As guitars gained acceptance, other instruments and percussion came along. Advancements in technology encouraged a change from the pipe organ and piano to the electric keyboard, and the acoustic guitar was amplified and electrified. We should also note that the rhythms of church music and secular music were very similar until the twentieth century as well, but it appears that church music was slow to adopt the twentieth century changes until the 1990's.
So here we are in a new millennium. This is the age of freedom... The era of unrestraint... The generation without discipline. Secular music has exercised its independence by moving away from traditional harmonies, dismissing grammatical correctness, and taking tremendous liberty with rhythms and pitches. New instruments abound and the general public now has much more exposure to secular music than to traditional church music. As the church tries to reach out to the ever increasing unchurched population, it has adopted the secular musical forms to try to relate to those people who have grown up completely without exposure to traditional church music. This is really not at all unlike what we've uncovered all the way back to Miriam's celebration by the Red Sea... Secular musical forms and instruments used to praise God.
It would appear that neither Biblical directive nor any historical trend would limit musical expression in worship, as long as it is performed as worship to the true god. New instruments, new forms, different rhythms or different harmonies or disharmonies are not restricted. Praise music has been and should be an extension of the heart of the performer, an overflowing of feeling, an expression of everything that person has to offer to God, delivered in the way that individual has been most gifted and expressed in the most extravagant offering one can deliver. Such a performance, an offering of praise, must be limited only by the extent of that person's resources and abilities... with one exception. That exception is consideration of its effect on other people who are also making their offerings of worship and praise at the same time in the same place. This exception is at the heart of disagreement in Church musical performance. It is a defensible exception when we remember that Jesus himself admonished us that we not become "stumbling blocks" to others. Paul also, in his writings about meat offered to idols made clear that we must temper our actions so that they not offend others.
How then, does this apply to the performance of music in today's church? Should we use a praise band? Which instruments are appropriate? What about amplification? Should we use contemporary music... only Psalms... just the "Hymns of the Faith"... Gregorian Chant... a large choir... soloists... instrumental music without words... what about movements or hand gestures along with the music... clapping... the list goes on and on. At the risk of appearing too simplistic, I believe the answers lie in the interpretation and extension of the phrase, "Whatever works!"
If your worship group is composed entirely of young people whose exclusive musical diet is contemporary rock, I can't believe there would be any question on what music to use, how loud, or which instruments to play. If your congregation is composed entirely of a cappella psalm singers, again, I doubt you will find disagreement as long as you sing from their accepted book of psalms and don't introduce any accompaniment. The problems arise when you have a congregation, as most are, made of young and old, lifetime members and proselytes, educated and uneducated, extroverts and introverts and Old School, New School and No School. Every person added to the group increases the considerations exponentially.
Let me suggest some considerations.
1. If there are solid, supportable reasons for change, do them. Example: Music is so loud that a number of people complain of physical discomfort. Less volume won't hurt a thing.
2. If some people find that they worship more comfortably with one style of music and others prefer another, why not use a mixture? Most people are satisfied with compromise if they find at least something that works for them.
3. Beware of dismissing a group of people as "insignificant". Whether the consideration is numbers, financial contributions, race, age or anything else, it is dangerous to ignore "one of the least of these, my brethren". Who of us is qualified to judge which of our constituents is insignificant?
4. Resist committing to a single or exclusive choice of style, instrumentation or genre if any of the congregation have other preferences. Exclusivity is seldom defensible if there are reasonable options.
5. Consider the gifts and talents of those involved in worship. If there is performance or leadership talent available that's not being used to its best advantage, ask yourself why God has placed it there.
6. God is worthy of our best. Consider that "our best" may be better defined by our motive and commitment than by some standard of musicality that is currently in vogue. Availability of skilled musicians and leaders may limit the options of a particular congregation, but we must be careful that we not discourage participation that may blossom with exposure and experience. Extra effort to accommodate and develop budding or unique talent may be necessary to make the best use of what God has provided for the enrichment of His Church.
Church music is a gift from God; one that He has given to us so that we can give it back to him. As with most of His gifts, it is intended for the building up of the saints. It is to be used for worship. It is, for many people, the language of the heart. Quite possibly, it is the Holy Spirit speaking on our behalf when our own words fail us... and, as it is with most other of our abilities... "Use it or loose it"!