Sunday, January 7, 2007

Church music

I have been inspired to write a bit about church music after reading other blogs on this topic. It has been a sore issue for me in the seven years or so that we have been living in America. It seems to me that there was a major shift in church music while we were living overseas. I am slow to change and to see good in something new. Recently I have begun to acknowledge that there is something good in new music. I grew up with such good music/hymns in church (for the most part) that I've been reluctant to give them up. What frustrated me at the beginning was, even though we had a great hymnbook, we would sing the same choruses or hymns over and over, and never sing some of the great ones in the hymnbook. It's taken me all these years to get over being frustrated and resign myself.

However, in visiting other churches and then coming back to my own, I am happy with the way we do our music. For one thing, our elders are very concerned with words. And I believe that the words should be central in my thinking. But music WILL distract me!!! For example, today we sang "I am bound for the promised land" to the new RUF tune. It's a nice tune, but it sounds very "westward ho!" to me. There's some folk tune similar to it, but just out of my recognition. Because I was one of our music "leaders" I was in front so I could see everyone's reactions to this tune. We have a few men from a local rehabilitaion house and one of them was laughing and swaying to "I am bound! I am bound!" in the chorus. Like we used to do in choir to those 6/8 time songs. The waltz effect. To me, the tune detracts from the song, but I'm not too sure how well I like the song, anyway. We sang it in high school but to a different tune.

We sang a new song that I really enjoyed. Our friends heard it in John Piper's church during Christmas. "I will glory in my Redeemer". If I had to sing it in church as part of the congregation, I would have been frustrated without the music, but because I could practice it about six times before church started, I had it down by the time the congregation joined in. It has a great tune once it gets learned, but it didn't seem easy at first. The words are great, too. So I learned a new song, and I'm still happy!

Not having the music was one of my major frustrations in church music when we returned to America. When we moved to Scotland, we/I had to learn to sing using sol/fa, no notes. I kept getting mixed up between fa and la, so I'd write the scale on a sheet of paper next to my psalmody. Then I could read the notes for new tunes and harmonies. But not having anything left me learning songs by ear. It's not hard for me to hear a tune or parts, but what will happen to the church in the next 20 years when all music is learned by rote and many of the songs are sung in unison?

And that's another idea...unison, but I won't get into this any more.

1 comment:

Linnea said...

Wow, yeah, there's a lot I haven't thought of in terms of reading music and the whole idea of singing in unison because most people can't read music or pick out harmonies. This probably also influences the tunes that are written. It's so funny how tunes become dated so easily.