You don’t have to know your homoiousios from your homoousios to write a good tune. Nor does theological accuracy guarantee musical proficiency. (Have you ever listened to theologians singing?!) Stylistic questions are important. When someone brings me a song to comment on, I’m not just interested in the words but whether it’s aesthetically pleasing to sing; whether it makes sense musically given the cultural context of the country, city and decade we’re in; and whether it will strike the right tone in a worship time.
I also recognize it’s not my “theological credentials” that equip me to make such comments but my so-called “creative streak.” Both critical faculties need to be combined.
There are language questions that have to be considered: Have the technical terms been used correctly? Is it understandable to those singing it—Christian believers or not? Have these words actually been in common parlance at any point in the last two centuries? Is it clear to what the idioms and metaphors refer?
I mean, I like “Come, Thou Fount of Every Blessing,” but I’m not really sure what an Ebenezer is, where I get one or how and why I should raise such a thing. And let’s be honest, though many of us would happily sing a rousing rendition of “Crown Him with Many Crowns,” who of us (St. Stuffed Shirt aside!) uses the phrase “ineffably sublime” in everyday speech?
In our church, the preachers have commented on a few songs and had them removed from the repertoire because of their theological inaccuracy.
When a new song is written by one of our worship team, often one of the elders or I look over it for theological accuracy. And that’s great. But it’s not heavy policing. It’s not that we see the worship leader as a theological dunce who’s likely, unless we enlightened ones step in, to lead people in praising Baal by accident.
Actually, my experience has been that worship leaders are deep thinkers who read the Bible, are shaped by it, are genuinely aware of the power their songs have and so humbly want to make them the best they can. Simon Brading’s comments about the missional-charismatic “tension” are a great example of a worship leader seriously thinking through and taking responsibility for more than simply crafting good songs. Or check out Matt Redman’s interview on men and worship, where he talks about the need to ensure our language is scripturally watertight, but also to make sure it means what we think it means in our cultural context.
My point is … worship leaders aren’t idiots, and sometimes, I think the “we’re scared about theology being shaped by worship music” argument is based on a mischaracterization of worship leaders and perhaps a theological-preacher-elitism.
