Last week I wrote about the importance of utilizing discernment in worship, and I interacted with T. David Gordon’s six criteria for liturgical song assessment. If you missed last week’s post, you can read it here.
This week I want to focus on how worship leaders can practically apply Gordon’s criteria in their song selection process. Let me begin by stating that Gordon’s criteria is just that, criteria. It is not meant to be an exhaustive list, and not every biblically-grounded, musically-edifying song will check off every criteria each time. This list is meant to help guide you into thinking about the songs you select for worship, and it helps provide guardrails to keep you in biblical lanes.
For review, here are Gordon’s criteria:
- Theologically orthodox lyrics
- Theologically significant lyrics
- Literarily apt and thoughtful lyrics
- Lyrics and music appropriate to a meeting between God and his visible people
- Well-written music with regard to melody, harmony, rhythm, and form
- Musical setting appropriate to the lyrical content
The following paragraph is from my original paper on this topic:
Gordon’s purpose of mentioning these standards emphasizes the need for continual review of worship repertoire because “worship song, like preaching, is regulated by apostolic authority, and corrected when it needs to be corrected.”1 This important aspect of evaluation and correction cannot happen if there is not a theological, doctrinal, or musical standard to which we hold our songs. Our question should always be centered on a corrective and a call, “a corrective to sing lyrics that will not only make us ‘wise for salvation,’ but will also be profitable for ‘training in righteousness’ (2 Timothy 3:14-16), as well as a call to return to the Word of God . . . in our worship of him.”2
With evaluation and correction in view, let’s see how to select songs based on Gordon’s criteria. I am only choosing two criteria to highlight here, which will help you see how to apply them in practice. (Note: all songs chosen for evaluation have been sung in worship services where I have been present.)
Beginning with Theologically Orthodox Lyrics, we must remember that shallow words and a negligent understanding of worship creates shallow theology. If we analyze the lyrics of “Come Thou Almighty King” (1760, anonymous), we immediately notice the Trinitarian references to God. Trinitarian references to God in song have been around since the Early Church, so we continue to sing about God’s sovereignty, Jesus’s Incarnation, and the work of the Holy Spirit today. This three-fold focus helps us to remember that Christian worship is “our participation through the Spirit in the Son’s communion with the Father, in his vicarious life of worship and intercession.”3
However, when we compare “Come Thou Almighty King” with the lyrics of “Ever Be” (2015, Bethel), there are no direct references to God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit. Instead, the author uses an ambiguous “you” in place of direct references, leaving the singers wondering exactly to whom they are singing. Without direct references to God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit, it is further difficult to mention direct acts performed by any member of the Trinity. And since there are no mighty acts of God referenced, the shallowness of the lyrics becomes apparent. Thus, this hymn does not help aid in the disciple-making process, which is one of the purposes of Christian worship.
I will combine Gordon’s final two points to focus on music, and more specifically, the text-tune marriage. Not only should our congregational songs be full of rich theological truths, but they should be set to beautiful tunes. Theologian Kevin Vanhoozer discusses the idea of “fittingness” and how it applies to Christian worship practices. He, and I, advocate for an appropriate marriage, or fittingness, because both text and tune work together to form the entire being of the believer.
When we review the lyrics of William Cowper’s “O for a Closer Walk with God” (1769), and notice that his text is most often used with the tune CAITHNESS, we see the tune compliment the text through its walking tempo and gentle ambulatory rhythm. This tune spans an entire octave, utilizing dedication and intentional participation from the singer. These musical points aid the text, providing a fittingness between the text and tune, which helps the singer meditate upon biblical truths appropriately and accurately.
For comparison, if we evaluate “Good Good Father” (2015, Brown & Barrett), we see that it consists only of three chords throughout the entire song, and the primary use of only three tones in the melody. The rhythm is monotonous, requiring little to no effort from the singer. Because of this, the music ceases to be a vehicle of instructing us into “greater affection for God.”4 Instead, because of its superficiality, this “repetition of praise wedded with emotional music and void of concrete reasons for the praise produces shallow sentimentality.”5 Shallow sentimentality is the antithetic goal of a mature believer, thus rendering “Good Good Father” incapable of adequately expressing right lyrics and music in gathered worship.
I have tried to provide a few examples of how you can evaluate worship songs for appropriateness in corporate worship settings. As I have mentioned in multiple posts, God weighs our worship carefully and heavily. It is our duty to respond in the manner that he has set forth. This responsibility is heightened for worship leaders, so it is vitally important that they lead us in right worship music that aids us in an accurate disciple-making process.
For more on this topic from Acceptable Worship, read The Weightiness of Worship.
- T. David Gordon, Why Johnny Can’t Sing Hymns: How Pop Culture Rewrote the Hymnal (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2010), 34.
- Douglas O’Donnell, God’s Lyrics: Rediscovering Worship Through Old Testament Songs (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2010), xxiii.
- James B. Torrance, Worship, Community, and the Triune God of Grace (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1996), 15.
- Scott Aniol, Worship in Song: A Biblical Approach to Music and Worship (Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books, 2009), 170.
- Aniol, Worship, 174.
