Jack K
Puritan Board Doctor
In the "dealing with contemporary worship" thread Austin posted:
In seems our cultural background and the corresponding ideas we have about types of music does enter into the way we think.
I grew up worshipping with Native American believers. Their language is tonal, meaning that Western hymns translated into their native language don't really work when sung with the traditional Western tunes. The melodies mess with the tonality of the Native language. Their language really ought to be chanted in order to be sung and still be intelligible. This was suggested more than once, but the Native believers would always protest that chanting was completely inappropriate for Christian worship. In their minds, chanting belonged to the medicine man's healing ceremonies of the false religion they were leaving behind.
Well, I'm not convinced there's anything inherently wrong with chanting in worship, especially if that's the only intelligible way to sing in your own language. But for them, coming from their cultural context, is it indeed wrong? Could it be redeemed for those whose consciences allow it? Or could it be that chanting is inherently wrong?
And what about my cultural context? It's hard for me to see how, let's say, heavy metal music could ever be appropriate for Christian worship. But is that because there's something inherent with the music itself (perhaps it's clearly rebellious and angry or intentionally dissonant)? Or do I think of it that way because of the cultural trappings that come with it? Might someone from another culture find it perfectly appropriate for corporate singing (at least for the imprecatory Psalms)?
What role, if any, should our cultural backgrounds play in what music is appropriate for worship in our churches? Thoughts?
I'm sure that one could find examples of hymns set to tunes derived from Arabic, African, or South American sources that most Americans would see no problem with. BUT, for Christians coming out of Islam or African or S. American paganism, those tunes would be wholly inappropriate.
Could it not be that for many of us Christians in the West that we find certain styles offensive, in bad taste, or 'inappropriate for worship' b/c of our own cultural baggage?
In seems our cultural background and the corresponding ideas we have about types of music does enter into the way we think.
I grew up worshipping with Native American believers. Their language is tonal, meaning that Western hymns translated into their native language don't really work when sung with the traditional Western tunes. The melodies mess with the tonality of the Native language. Their language really ought to be chanted in order to be sung and still be intelligible. This was suggested more than once, but the Native believers would always protest that chanting was completely inappropriate for Christian worship. In their minds, chanting belonged to the medicine man's healing ceremonies of the false religion they were leaving behind.
Well, I'm not convinced there's anything inherently wrong with chanting in worship, especially if that's the only intelligible way to sing in your own language. But for them, coming from their cultural context, is it indeed wrong? Could it be redeemed for those whose consciences allow it? Or could it be that chanting is inherently wrong?
And what about my cultural context? It's hard for me to see how, let's say, heavy metal music could ever be appropriate for Christian worship. But is that because there's something inherent with the music itself (perhaps it's clearly rebellious and angry or intentionally dissonant)? Or do I think of it that way because of the cultural trappings that come with it? Might someone from another culture find it perfectly appropriate for corporate singing (at least for the imprecatory Psalms)?
What role, if any, should our cultural backgrounds play in what music is appropriate for worship in our churches? Thoughts?