What is the place of music in worship? That question, I think, is misleading; for music plays many roles in worship.

If you go through the Psalms, for instance, you will find that some of them are praise (e.g., Psalm 8), some teaching (Psalm 1), some prayers for deliverance (Psalm 22), some testimony (Psalm 107) and some questions to God (Psalm 2). Benedictions in Scripture are musical (or at least poetic; that line is hard to draw): Numbers 6:24-27 (cf. Psalms 4:6; 80:3, 7, 19; 86:16), 2 Corinthians 13:14. Thus all of the generally recognized elements of worship (praise, prayer, testimony, teaching, benediction) can take the form of music or song.

Music, then, is not a specific act of worship distinguishable from others, an element of worship as it is sometimes described. Rather, it is a way of doing other things – of praising, praying, teaching, testifying, blessing.

Adds Vividness and Memorability⤒🔗

A better question than the question about the place of music is this one: What does music add to worship? What is the difference, for instance, between a musical prayer and a nonmusical prayer? Well, Scripture isn't very specific about that. But I get the impression that in the Bible God tends to speak poetically-musically when he has something especially important to say. He tends to speak poetically when he introduces new covenants, makes new promises or declares judgments: see Genesis 3:15ff; 8:22; 9:6, 25-27; 12:3. This is rather different from our own time, when it often seems, music is given over to trivialities, while important (or supposedly important) matters are expressed by (often legalistic) prose.

In the Bible, music-poetry expresses the important truths, I think, because it imparts vividness and memorability to the words. Vividness is important, for God wants us to be overwhelmed by his truth. It is not enough to agree; we must be shaken. We must see the earthshaking importance of what he is telling us. And since it is so important, it must also be said memorably. God wants us to write his words on our hearts and to pass them on to later generations (Deuteronomy 6:4ff, Psalm 119:11).

Should all of worship be music, then? Is there any role for nonmusical prose? Well, for one thing, the line between musical-poetic diction and nonmusical diction is not a sharp one. All language has the qualities of music (tone, rhythm, timbre, pitch) to some degree.¹ But Scripture tends toward a relatively nonpoetic diction when the main object is conceptual, intellectual communication, as in parts of the letter to the Romans. The advantage of nonpoetic language is its logical, literal, straightforward, argumentative character.

Addresses both God and Man←⤒🔗

From this analysis, we can see that music has a Godward reference (praise, prayer), but also a manward reference (teaching, impressing). In our choice of music, it is important first of all that the music be pleasing to God by conveying biblical truth and by using tunes which reinforce, rather than detract from, that message.

But it is also important that the songs communicate with people. Paul says that he will “sing with the understanding” (1 Corinthians 14:15). It is not enough for our songs to be true to Scripture; they must also be understandable. Even an unbeliever should be able to understand what is being taught in worship (1 Corinthians 14:23-25), and that includes song. It is not wrong then – in fact Scripture requires us – to use songs that speak to people in their cultural setting. It would surely be wrong to preach to a modern American congregation in Serbo-Croatian – or even in Greek or Hebrew! Similarly, it is wrong to restrict the music of the church to idioms not well understood by people today (such as German chorals and Geneva Psalms).² And it is quite proper to write new songs in the musical languages of our times (just as it is right to translate Scripture into new spoken languages) even if those musical languages include guitars and tambourines.³

A New Perspective←⤒🔗

This analysis suggests that music is a richer and more flexible medium of worship than we are often inclined to think and puts some commonly asked questions into new perspective. Note the following points:

• Music is not a mere preliminary to something else in worship. In fact, it would be profoundly appropriate, in biblical terms, sometimes to make a musical expression of the truth the very centerpiece of the service.
   
• We should not be embarrassed about singing music with an emotional thrust. In the first place, there is no music (or prose!) which lacks some such thrust. In the second place, it is God's very purpose to give us, through music, something more than a logical argument, something which overwhelms. Biblical worship is full of emotion (see the Psalms, Revelation): joy, godly sorrow for sin, longing for Christ's appearing, reverence and awe, expectancy of blessing, love for God and one another. In some passages (e.g. Psalm 133, Romans 11:33-36) expressing emotion seems to be the main point.
   
• Music is not limited to praise. It is appropriate to use music to pray, to bless or to teach. (And teaching includes preaching; it is proper to have musical sermons!) We ought to be more flexible and to experiment with new ways of using music in services. Why not a musical benediction or call to worship? Why not a musical selection in place of the normal pastoral prayer or baptismal instruction? Why not, on the other hand, a prose reading in place of the choir anthem?
   
• It is appropriate to use music which is short and simple, as well as music which is long and complex. Compare Psalm 23 (or 117!) with Psalm 68 or 119! Our music should speak to children and new believers as well as to the mature. We should not despise simple songs because of the simplicity,⁴ nor should we refuse to grow by turning away from more complex musical expressions when that complexity results from biblical richness. Repetitious songs, too, are not necessarily bad. Note the repetitions in Psalm 136 and the short song which the angels kept singing (i.e. repeating) in Isaiah 6:3. Repetition can reinforce the central functions of music – vividness and memorability.

The above analysis does not distinguish between formal and informal worship, between morning and evening services or between Sunday services and other services, for Scripture does not make such distinctions. Music pleasing to God is pleasing at any time, and music which dishonors him is never appropriate. The category “Hymns for Informal Occasions” at the end of the present Trinity Hymnal makes an unscriptural distinction which I am glad will be eliminated from the proposed revision.

We ought to keep writing and learning new songs, songs which speak to new situations, to new generations and to different ethnic and cultural groups, so that our music may better reflect the universal character of the church.⁵

Music should be a way of welcoming people from every tribe and nation. The church is no place for musical snobbery. Those who love the Reformation hymns should learn the new Scripture songs – and vice versa.