As we have examined the activities of revivalism, we soon find ourselves running into questions regarding emotions. When are emotions a natural by-product of Biblical conversion and when are they contrived-a by- product of a man-centered will? Let me be clear. I don’t cheer-on those who resemble Evangelical pop-sickles-right in their thinking, but live passionless in their lives. We do need to guard against the extreme on either side as we throw the spotlight on emotions in religion in this blog entry. The issue during the time of Finney was how emotion was deliberately concentrated to produce a desired effect. It was the adoption of means and methods in the explicit promotion of emotion that had no Biblical basis that was at the center of the argument. It was clearly affirmed across the board that emotions would definitely and clearly be expressed when people experienced conviction of sin, recognized the sacrifice of Christ, felt the joy of the Holy Spirit, etc. The fault line of conflict was that people who attended the meetings were confusing the feelings that follow forceful preaching of the truth in a revival with the excitement that can be worked up where there is no revival. Also, those who were holding revivals did nothing to guard against people who may fall prey to this mistake. Therefore, the older pastors deplored the deliberate use of emotion to increase converts without regard to the danger of counting as converts emotional based salvation (which is no salvation) as well as those convicted and secured by the Holy Spirit in line with the manifested fruit of repentance, faith in Christ alone, etc.
The point of contention is made by William Weeks (see Feb. 15th blog) when he wrote: “We complain that the whole system of measures seems to be adapted to promote false conversions, to cherish false hopes, and propagate a false religion, and thus, ultimately, not only destroy the souls of those who are being deceived by it, but to bring revivals, and experimental religion itself, into discredit.”
To Weeks, and other older pastors, the issue was not the immediate flash of emotion during a revival, but the reliance on those under the emotion of the moment to point to it, and not to Christ, as the basis for their hope. The mentality of associating proximity as the validation of confession (e.g. “I was saved on Tuesday, June, 21st during the revival at stump creek”) as opposed to confessing trust in Christ and demonstrating fruits of repentance in life long after the revival had left town. The older pastors warned that this issue demanded attention to keep legions from making false professions. However, the spell of emotion and the clamor for “powerful preaching” (e.g. those who used the new measures) gave no time for e valuation or discussion, they had another revival to conduct in a new city…
Tomorrow we will look at the real fuel that launched this debate – how people viewed God’s role and man’s ability in trusting Christ for salvation from sins. In other words, theology.
To whom this may concern, speaking of emotion, Where does one draw the line during corporate praise and worhsip? What is the purpose of instruments during worship? Is it to envoke emotion? Or is it simply to sound good? And is either of them okay? Is there a point at which one has “gone to far” in their style of church worship? Obviously styles of church worship has been an endless debate throughout the church era. Many early baptist churches thought it was sinful to use any instruments at all undoubtedly with a fear that it may stir up false emotions amongst the congregation. Some churches now debate over whether singing hymns, or using contemporary style of worship not only on the basis of tradition, but sometimes in order for emotions to be minimal during worship. Where does one draw the line on the sound and instruments of praise and worship? And why do we use instruments at all?
To Whom this may concern? Is this English Lit.? Come on Tyler, it’s me, “Digital Dan.” I will let Ken answer why we use instruments… Bottom line? The leadership of any particular church chooses which style of worship to promote. A church can promote heavy metal worship or hum together in a rhythmic cadence and both groups can be equal in their expression of love for Christ. Both can be legitimate. Unfortunately, we often equate if something is legitimate and true by our comfort level with it – how selfish and limiting. The issue should never be only the style of the music, but content of the message in the song (true or not), the heart of the worshipper (sincere or phony) and if the music distracts or invites based on the context. Back to the main point; before the worshipper can enter into corporate singing, the leadership of a particular church is responsible before the Lord for the content of the worship service. Why instruments? Because they choose to use them.
Kevin, John, David, music people…. What’s you got to say?
Just as Finney was reacting against the idea of hyper-calvinism and swung the pendulum in the opposite direction past Arminiansm right on over to Pelagianism, we must be careful not to do the same with the scapegoat of emotion.
The phrase “emotional decision” is often used to describe the type of decisions Finney was producing but I think the phrase “impulse decision” would be more appropriate. Like the advertising industry of today, Finney appealed on multiple levels of emotion, logic and benefit to the “consumer” – with a splash of social pressure thrown in – to make the deal. Whether we like it or not, it works to its end. (I recently saw a great Frontline on the Marketing industry.)
And so we tend to single out parts of our “Eden intended” humanity and label them as inherently evil or secularize them as having nothing to do with our faith (see also sexuality). To deny emotion is to deny part of what it means to be a human made in the image of God. Everything we do involves emotion on some level – even quiet meditation. (I can’t look at God’s sunset without getting emotional.) Insert the baby & bath water cliche here.
I see the church’s responsibility as to use various mediums (lecture, arts, activity, etc.) to both COMMUNICATE and REINFORCE the Gospel on EVERY level of what it means to be human (logical, emotional, physical, etc.) – and on every level, being careful not to promote an “impulse purchase.”
I have a sort of odd take, speaking as a sometimes “music guy.” I very seldom “hear” the words in sung lyrics… I’m aware of them, of course, and reading them off liner notes or projected on the wall, I make some kind of mental connection with them… but that’s not exactly a huge investment of emotion I’ve got there.
So with such a loose attachment to what is at least half the value of the worship in song, why do I play in the band?
I wrote in a comment on Kevin’s blog:
…
To the original question of emotions: I suppose it comes down to discerning which are redeemed emotions rather than those that elevate man at God’s expense.
Any thoughts on how we do that?
Here’s a snippet from Piper on the topic:
I would expand “music and singing” to all the arts in general. Full Article
Perhaps it’s just my musical background, Hugh, but I can’t help but get emotionally invested in music…lyrics too. But I’m talking about instrumentals, even…again, this is a classical-music background we’re dealing with…but I get emotional listening to a Chopin etude, or a Brahms ballade–there’s communication in music, and it’s not restricted to words. It does take more of an active listening role than a passive one, though. I bring my emotions and experiences to the table in music, and if the music is good, it will return something to me that I find meaningful–most of all, it can assist me in worship. Both intrumentals and lyrics can do that, if they are done well.
So, for me, it’s not just a series of ordered steps that reflect the design of our Maker…I find meaning in the very essence of music, occasionally being spoken to by some words, as well. Lyricism is tough, done by many and done well by few. Communication with words is easy, and communicating emotions with words is hard–but communicating emotion without words is masterful. Music alone, nonvocal, can be used to tap into our very being and its desire to worship God. If we allow it to do so, that’s worship right there–facilitated by music, and sometimes helped along by words.
Am I a bit off-topic? Yes, but your comment made me think, and I could talk all day about music and emotion anyway… :’)
Wow, interesting point-of-view. I would say God calls us to love with our entire being, including our emotions, as we slide along on the zip-line of truth.
Agreed.
Jeffrey – I’m not sure if I understand your comment correctly – it sounds like you’re opening with a counterpoint. Let me be clear – I don’t disagree! That was actually quite the point I meant to make.
I echo your thoughts on classical music… I also love film scores for that very reason – they’re supposed to be emotional and even communicative.
It reminds me of a story Steven Spielberg told about John Williams when they were filming Jaws. Spielberg was having a terrible time getting the mechanical shark to work, and their production schedule forced them to go ahead with much of the principal photography without the shark. Spielberg said that Williams saved the picture because his score put the shark on the screen even though there was nothing there to see – and it did so in a more powerful way than a visual ever could have done.
In the same way, I think music (with or without lyrics) can “put God on the screen” of our worship, even though we cannot see him with human eyes.
No, I wasn’t arguing with you…just wondering how you could not get immediately invested in the lyrics you’re hearing, because I get emotional over the notes themselves, not just the words!
Not to speak for Hugh but for me (and I think Hugh feels the same), lyrics are really secondary to how I interact with a song. The musical expression speaks first then the content of the lyrics.
I particularly enjoy vocalists that treat their voice and lyrics more like an instrument than just as a “melodic tele-prompter” of the message they want to communicate.
I agree, but I also think that lyrics sometimes get in the way. If people would take the time to do a song right, they wouldn’t need lyrics to get the message across. That’s why I love playing hymns–I can perform a great song, in whatever style the arrangement is in, and know for sure that the audience is “thinking” the words as I play the notes. It’s that kind of allusion to a text through melody that I find impactful.
When you say “thinking” do you mean A.) mentally repeating the words in their head or B.) some how feeling the meaning of the words based on the musical expression?
If you mean option A. then the problem is unfortunately very few people these days actually know the words – myself included.
Yes, I was referring to them actually recalling the words (or at least the theme/main point) of the hymn text. That knowledge is reinforced and taken to the next level through the text’s expression through musical notes alone.