Josh, I’ve been enjoying your blog for a few months.. Although here I do wonder why you are quite so skeptical.. Of all the things worthy of critique within the Tim Hughes school of thought on worship, that it was a happy day when Jesus died seems to me beyond rebuke.
Phil.

I’ve heard worse lyrics (not saying these aren’t bad), though the music sucked pretty badly. But the real question is, “didn’t someone already do the ‘oh happy day’ thing?”

Yeah the guy that wrote that song actually does have a couple of songs you’d probably side with. You should check out his “God of Justice” song.

The lyrics are centered on the narrow gospel ME: MY sin, you saved ME, you rescued ME, MY eternal life: ME ME ME! Pardon me, but Jesus’ death is a WHOLE lot deeper than getting MY sorry butt into heaven! And also, Jesus wasn’t just resuscitated (he’s alive!) - he was resurrected into a NEW body, starting the restoration project of all creation. Pretty shallow song, theologically.

And then the mushy line:
I am Yours Jesus You are mine
(won’t you be my valentine?)
(can I gaze into your eyes divine?)
Hey I can write this stuff!

Few things:

1. You sound like Driscoll. Specifically, in his now famous (in the sense that a D-list celebrity is famous) comment regarding “prom songs to Jesus”.

2. So some people you consider shallow/not “getting it” are celebrating that Jesus was ressurected. I think there’s probably some better choices in Christendom to make fun of. I agree with Phil on this one.

I don’t think that singing a song celebrating how Christ has washed our sins away is “shallow.” I think it’s actually a very important point to keep in front of us.

As a worship leader, while there are better songs, lyrically, that I could recommend to focus on such a topic, “Oh Happy Day” is really written as a particular type of celebration song, stylistically. And it’s a pretty decent one at that.

But to really take a look at the song requires looking at all of the lyrics, not just the chorus and one line from a verse:

The greatest day in history
Death is beaten
You have rescued me
Sing it out Jesus is alive
The empty cross, the empty grave
Life eternal You have won the day
Shout it out Jesus is alive
He’s alive

Oh happy day, happy day
You washed my sin away
Oh happy day, happy day
I’ll never be the same
Forever I am changed

When I stand, in that place
Free at last, meeting face to face
I am Yours Jesus You are mine
Endless joy, perfect peace
Earthly pain finally will cease
Celebrate Jesus is alive
He’s alive

Oh happy day, happy day
You washed my sin away
Oh happy day, happy day
I’ll never be the same
Forever I am changed

Oh what a glorious day
What a glorious way
That You have saved me
Oh what a glorious day
What a glorious name

I don’t know, the more I look at that song the more I agree with it. If you don’t see your own conversion as a happy, glorious day, then maybe you’re missing something in your perspective and you need to be reminded of it.

Is there too much emphasis on “I” in worship today? Definitely. Would I prefer more songs to include topics of community and the purpose of the church as the body of Christ? Heck, yeah. But that doesn’t mean there’s a problem with a song like this.

I think the issue is much larger than this one song. If you listen to much of the popular “Christian Rock” lyrics, they largely deal with personal salvation, and personal “buddy-Jesus”. They all seemed to take a list of “church words” and plug them into the song (praise, glory, blood, holy, power, almighty, majesty, sin, righteousness, King, savior, etc.). I used to listen to this stuff, but the repetitive narrow personal gospel message and lack of creativity started to grate on me.

Brian McLaren talks about this issue here:
http://www.anewkindofchristian.com/archives/lettertosongwriters.pdf
Here’s an example of lyrics of a song written by Brian McLaren:

Oh God of love and justice, let your will be done!

Newscasters amuse,/ distracting from the truth
The advertisers use/ sex for profit
Entertainers choose/ to seduce our youth
Life gets cheaper every day/, who will stop it?

Terrorists plot violence/ and governments do too
Scientists and engineers/ improve our kill-power
Parents sit in silence/, not knowing what to do,
Who will stir the dying embers/ of good-will power?

The churches pray for peace/ but then they vote for war
The preachers preach for profit/ and twist our story
No wonder people don’t/ believe anymore
They’re waiting for good news/ of hope and glory

The human race is building/ a suicide machine.
The people cheer and dance /as gears are turning.
When will we wake up from/ this self-destructive scheme
So everything can change … God’s kingdom coming!

THESE are the kind of songs that need to be written, sung, and adsorbed!

i agree with you jeff. it sounds more like a sappy love song about a high school romance than it does about god. and when you put the music to it, it gets worse. it’s like the b-side to high school musical.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWYCYQ4rVRE

watch that video. and add jesus in 3 or 4 times and you get the same effect, and same meaning. sappy, over-sentimentalized drivel.

or lets take the goo goo dolls. its the same thing. just change out “love” and “girl” for “god” or “jesus”. it’s candy coated pop. the psalms and lamentations sound nothing like that to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITM2AKRT9cI

And you ask me what I want this year
And I try to make this kind and clear
Just a chance that maybe we’ll find better days
Cuz I don’t need boxes wrapped in strings
And desire and love and empty things
Just a chance that maybe we’ll find better days

So take these words
And sing out loud
Cuz everyone is forgiven now
Cuz tonight’s the night the world begins again

And it’s someplace simple where we could live
And something only you can give
And thats faith and trust and peace while we’re alive
And the one poor child that saved this world
And there’s 10 million more who probably could
If we all just stopped and said a prayer for them

So take these words
And sing out loud
Cuz everyone is forgiven now
Cuz tonight’s the night the world begins again

I wish everyone was loved tonight
And somehow stop this endless fight
Just a chance that maybe we’ll find better days

blah blah blah. gag gag.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6KqJGA7OFQ

and i rest my case.

What it sounds like, to me, is that you’re looking down on those who have different cultural tastes than you. A worship song that sounds like it could be from the Goo Goo Dolls might be too simple to some, too complex or modern to others. As someone who has been through issues with worship wars, I can easily say that looking down on another’s stylistic preference is inappropriate. Complaining about worship songs that sound like “candy coated pop” just makes you sound snooty. It’s like the person who drinks Starbucks coffee looking down on the person drinking Waffle House coffee. Whatever.

As far as lyrical content, when I look at a song I look for elements of truth. I do not expect a single song to fully represent everything that needs to be represented in worship. So if I’m putting some songs together, and one of them is something along the lines of “Happy Day,” I would certainly incorporate other songs that have a balancing effect. The issue is whether the individual song reflects truth and how the whole thing balances out.

I’m sure many churches and worship leaders focus on the “me” aspect, whether intentionally or inadvertently. But that’s a different issue from looking at and evaluating the truth represented in the song.

Finally, it’s incredibly difficult to take songs with lyrics like McLaren’s and adapt them to community worship. For multiple reasons. Song writing (and particularly worship song writing) is much more than just getting a point across.

We need to find some Christian music played at mega-churches that sounds like Iron and Wine.

Oh, and Derek, a better analogy (besides coffee) would be like taking someone who uses a MacBook Pro looking down on the person with a Dell Latitude D610.

OK, try this experiment:

First, bring up the Happy Day video song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjJrbB8vxR4

Next, bring up a new browser tab and then put up this picture: http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image?provider_id=260&size=550×550_mb&ptp_photo_id=333907

Now, do the lyrics seem a bit absurd?

Eric, as someone who is using a MacBook Pro now, but wishes it had a forward delete key and true home/end/page up/page down keys like any other decent keyboard, I can say that I’m definitely in the middle of that analogy.

Jeff, the question I have in response to that question is about how people in those situations feel when they understand the grace and peace that Christ offers, which is what “Oh Happy Day” intends to express. Are you saying that it’s absurd that we would view Christ’s forgiveness of our sins, and that He is alive, with happiness?

No, my whole point is (and maybe Josh’s, though I can’t speak for him) is that these “happy clappy” songs DOMINATE our worship services. The absurdity is that while half of the world lives on less than $2 per day, we isolate ourselves in our multi-million dollar state-of-the-art worship centers with hi-def screens and big sound systems, and then engage only songs that focus on US, and how much better OUR lives are. Yes, Jesus did die for our sins, but Jesus also died for those kids picking through the garbage for something to eat (see the picture link). Jesus also died for a 10 year-old girl sold into sex slavery. Jesus also died for the Iraqi citizen that was killed in the cross-fire.

We need more worship songs that make us uncomfortable in the tension of Jesus dying for the whole world, not just for US. We need songs that make sense when put against the context of how the rest of the world lives. We need songs that stir us into action and create a passion to take the love of Jesus to those in the margins in real, tangible ways. The starving child, the girl in sex slavery need Jesus NOW - they are in hell NOW.

Not going to disagree with you, Jeff. We shouldn’t dominate worship with light and “shallow” happy songs. But we shouldn’t begrudge the idea of them, either. When people turn to Christ, there is an immense weight lifted off of them, and they appropriately celebrate. And it is appropriate to be reminded of that celebration in a corporate worship setting.

I’ve struggled with the worry about the “I” and “ME” thing. Some songs use a lot of “I”, but sung in a corporate setting, still feel more like “US”. But the reality is, this celebration of the forgiveness of sins is personal.

“Amazing love, how can it be that you my King would die for me.”

“Jesus paid it all, all to him I owe.”

“The cry of my heart is to bring You praise, from the inside out, Lord, my soul cries out.”

Salvation is both personal and corporate, individual and communal. And when we sings songs like those above, with others who have had similar experiences and have similar burdens, the “I” becomes the “US” - that’s the whole point of corporate worship as opposed to just listening to a CD.

The concerns you have are very valid concerns, they’re just more valid to speak against the structure of the church and the control of the gatherings by the clergy, as opposed to the wordings (or style) of the songs we sing.

Derek,

You’ve said some very wise things in this discussion; especially the comment on “snooty” musical preferences.

I do take issue, though, with your very last comment;

The concerns you have are very valid concerns, they’re just more valid to speak against the structure of the church and the control of the gatherings by the clergy, as opposed to the wordings (or style) of the songs we sing.

I’m not sure I could disagree more with this point. Part of the trouble we have with worship music today is how incredibly open-source the “Christian” music industry is; and also how very few (relatively artistically lacking) “Christian” bands are the ones writing the songs that are then used under CCLI and sung across the land. So it’s not a clergy/institution/control thing (sounds like you projecting a little), it’s a “Christianese syndrome” with words plugged in like Jeff spoke of and the same guitar chords in nearly every song.

Put another way, it’s the opposite of a control problem; it’s a “tyranny of the masses” problem. We live in a society of rampant individualism. This rampant individualism, idolatry I’d say, has infected “Christian” music to make it more and more like the culture, and therefore as sappy and fluffy as most of the songs we hear on the Top 40 radio stations.

which is to say that it’s bad art and has nothing to do with being snooty.

“Artistically lacking” is completely relative. Your personal music preferences are individualistic.

It’s funny that you complain about a “tyranny of the masses” while complaining about individualism in the church. Aren’t they exactly the opposite?

It most certainly is an institutional issue. In an institutional church, the music liturgy is controlled by clergy. It has to reach a broad audience, and in today’s church environment in specializes to appeal to certain types of preferences (much like preaching style did just 20 years ago).

But in an organic worship setting, all individuals are free to contribute, and there is no controlled liturgy (music or otherwise). So people can learn, on a personal level, how people connect with the songs that they have been drawn to (or written!). They can learn the stories behind these things, on a deep and personal level.

To put it another, the structure is far, far more important than the style or quality of the worship music on an artistic level. You could say the same thing about preaching.

As far as the similarity between Christian music and the popular culture, honestly, spare me the discussion. I’ve been arguing about this since I was a Stryper fan in the 80’s. The church was complaining about how Stryper sounded like all the rest of the rock bands. But Christian/worship music doesn’t have to be completely separate from a Top 40 sound in order to be relevant.

And Josh, your comment doesn’t help reduce how snooty you’re sounding. Calling something “bad art” when another person can see value in it, well, it just sounds snooty. It’s a matter of personal taste. There’s a reason why pop music is popular - people like it. You shouldn’t be surprised to find that the modern tastes aren’t very different in the church than they are outside of it.

i don’t care if i sound snooty.

fluff = bad art. if that makes me an elitist because we live in a dumb downed culture where people no longer know how to appreciate good art, then so be it. it’s not my fault that people prefer daughtry and kelly clarkson to mozart. or that dumbass lie detector show to LOST. or fast and the furious to schindlers list. popularity is not the best indicator to whether or something is “good” or not. especially in a culture that is as dumbed down as ours.

if you know what is going on in britney spear’s life over the past few months, i don’t think you should even get to vote in the election. how’s that? if you paid money for a gossip magazine in your life, you shouldn’t be able to share your opinion about what is “good art”. it’s funny how the people that like pop music are the same ones who watch TMZ and give a damn when somebody picks their nose. or is dating someone new.

bad art is bad art whether its popular or not.

plato, socrates and aristotle would be rolling over in their graves if they knew this is what the republic had devolved into.

I also need to say that I’m not sure you guys have any clue as to what actually makes a song work in a corporate worship setting. I’ve done it for years, and there are lyrical rhythms that work and rhythms that don’t. A song has to be “singable” in order to work. And the more refined your musical tastes are, the less likely those kinds of songs will work. Believe me, I’ve tried many times to use a song that just wouldn’t work. It’s relative because it depends on who you’re introducing the song to. But the fact remains that it’s something that every worship leader has to be aware of - who they’re trying to lead and what kinds of songs will work in that environment.

Josh, I’m sure that there are many things that we would agree are bad art, and there are many things that we would not agree on. (I like Kelly Clarkson’s 2nd album, and Daughtry.) And I’m not condoning the media circus that surrounds musicians and movie/TV stars. That’s a totally different thing than the issue at hand.

I’m saying that just calling something “bad art” is completely and totally subjective. Take even the most refined tastes from two totally different cultures and they’ll say the other culture’s best and most profound art is horrible.

That when my six-year-old writes a song that is incredibly simple and dumb, it’s still beautiful to me. But from God’s perspectives, we’re all six-year-olds, so writing a song that sounds simplistic and shallow can still be beautiful to God.

One thing you’ll have to realize is that the majority of people in this world will never have refined tastes. They will be perfectly happy this way. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

And that it has always been this way, and always will be. And that there have always been people lamenting how bad it’s gotten.

Again, whatever. I’ll argue with you about the lyrical content of the song and whether or not it’s appropriate. But I simply can’t argue whether or not the idea of “bad art” is subjective any more than I already have. It’s one of truths that are so painfully obvious that it’s difficult to argue.

so you’re saying the liturgy in the temple was based on pragmatism? and the psalms on pragmatism too? and i would imagine that the early church in their “house churches” were pretty pragmatic too. only singing what worked and made the people happy?

the problem is that we have a skewed idea of what worship is to begin with. to think that singing out loud with words that are “singable” is going to convince me probably isn’t the best route.

As we’re doing the full half hour on worship and that.. We do ourselves no favours at all by pouring scorn on ‘bad art’.. Were blogging an art, this thread would constitute bad art.. I would hope to bless anything that says it loves Jesus.

I do have a great many questions, and I am consicous of my own hypocrisy, and I am not condoning bland uncritical christianity, however, I remain confident of the counter-productive nature of such conversations and that the position of the church as it is now - individualistic and confused about appropriate worship types - is because its best informed prophets and reformers -your good selves- chose so self-gratifying and indulgent a means of expressing their critiques.

http://phil-blogs.blogspot.com/2007/11/questions.html

But if you want to pick a fight within this domain of questionable ‘christian’ music.. you could try here:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4884304926

Driscoll, who this post and others love to hate, offers his thoughts in his regulative principle talk from two weeks ago - marshillchurch.org

I don’t know that comparisons to OT temple worship are entirely appropriate, because the idea of worship being a highly refined art isn’t really supported by NT methodology. If our gatherings are supposed to be “every-member functioning,” as Viola would say, then the idea that church worship should necessarily reflect the best of available art doesn’t match up.

Singing is not worship, but it can be a part of worship, and it can help lead people deeper into worship. It definitely should not be as professionalized as it is now. But if we are to take the route that worship should reflect “good art” and refined tastes, it can only lead to further professionalization. And a heck of a lot of disagreement about what is good and what isn’t.

At the heart of the issue is understanding that there are many different kinds of tastes, and a taste that might be sweet to one person might be bitter to another.

Setting worship music to popular styles has always been an issue. Derided by those in the church who were quite elitist and detested the idea that worship lyrics could be sung in a common, “vulgar” style. Much like how the church detested the idea of translations into common tongues for hundreds of years. (Even if the “vulgate” was the common tongue when it was produced, and the Greek was the common tongue when it was written.)

The point isn’t to make people happy with worship music. It’s to help them connect with God in an intimate way. And you can use worship music to expand people’s tastes and lead them into deeper worship, using music they would have never normally enjoyed. (I’ve done it.) But it can’t be done in a divisive way. If I just outright discount someone’s musical tastes as awful (even if they are), I’ll have little chance of helping them to explore the beauty of my musical tastes. Our relationships in the church, regarding music, should not be approached with such an attitude. And if we truly understand that what is “good” or “bad” about art is entirely subjective, then we can approach each other with love and grace and share with each other what we love about the styles that we connect so deeply with.

As opposed to just being an elitist snob who thinks they’re always right in their artistic view. Which trust me, is way too easy for me to do, as is true with many musicians. I’ve grown out of the position of thinking my way is objectively better. So I understand where you’re coming from, and the pitfalls associated with that kind of mentality.