open your hymnal and turn to page...

That's the kind of church music i remember as a child...

"The Hymnal".

Nothing wrong with the hymnal.

The hymnal is simply a book full of songs. Mostly songs about God and to God, about themes found in the Bible, as well as patriotic songs and songs with themes more specific to whatever type of church to which one belongs. I remember it was always kind of a big deal when our particular church's national offices put out a new hymnal. There were always a few newer songs included in it, and maybe a few older ones that were discontinued. It was as if a few new songs had acquired the "holy stamp of approval" from the higher-ups as "acceptable to be sung in OUR churches"... Somewhere, someone had crossed the line from, "here's a bunch of songs bound in book form useful for using in your church gatherings", to, "here are the songs we have decided are sacred and must be the only ones sung at your gatherings in order to receive approval". Approval from whom? Well, from your particular church's national leaders, of course, but certainly implied in that kind of conversation is approval from God himself.

What is wrong is that somewhere along the way, the hymnal began being viewed as a sacred book. The implied sentiment is that "The Hymnal" is equal with "The Bible"... I'm sure the church leaders would argue against that, but it's certainly what I perceived as I was growing up.

As a songwriter who shares songs in a church setting, I so appreciate when people identify with what I've written and even find hope and perhaps develop an emotional attachment to a particular song. As a music lover, I completely understand that and have many songs I feel that exact way about - including some from my childhood hymnal. We experience certain events at certain times in our lives and identify certain songs with those times, so we feel certain emotions when we hear those songs again. This is exactly what happens and has happened in all the years past in people's church experiences: the song they remember singing at the time they opened their heart to Jesus' love for the first time; the song they remember singing when they went to church during a difficult time in their life; the song they remember hearing when they were a child at church with their parents who have now passed away. These songs have great sentimental value, and for good reason! But, that doesn't mean they should be the songs that are sung during church gatherings now. What about the people in the audience who can't identify with that song at all because the language is Shakespearean in style? Or simply because it is the language of a church culture from 100 years ago? Or, even 50 years ago?

I find it sad that we've allowed ourselves to care so much about things that don't matter at all in the eternal context to which God calls us to live. And, even more so, that we've allowed these insignificant things to make our message irrelevant to so many who desperately need it today.

I have written many songs that I've shared in our church gatherings which I hope and pray affect people's lives positively, with which I hope people can identify, and to which I hope some people perhaps even grow emotionally attached, but if someone bundles them up someday and says, "these are the only songs you should sing at church", I would wish I had never even written them.


more thoughts on this topic at an older post of mine:
http://lorendahouston.blogspot.com/2009/03/worshipand-other-misunderstood-words.html


c2010 lorenda houston