Music and Ministry: A Biblical Counterpoint, Second Edition

Features

• Cover Type: Paperback with 208 pages
• Published by: Hendrickson Publishers; 2 Sub edition June 1, 1998
• Written in: English
• ISBN 10 Number: 156563361X
• ISBN 13 Number: 978-1565633612
• Book Dimensions: 8.5 x 5.4 x 0.7 inches
• Weighs: 8.8 ounces

Book Description
Contemporary or traditional? Blended or seeker? Pop or "classical"? Chorus or hymn? Combo or organ? Questions concerning music in worship abound these days. Is there a practical way to deal with these issues?

In Music and Ministry: A Biblical Counterpoint, Calvin Johansson looks to God's Word for principles foundational to music ministry. Weaving together great scriptural truths, he establishes the need for a "directional balance" between pastoral contextualization and prophetic purity. In a time of facile musical accommodation of the gospel to culture, Dr. Johansson suggests that a heightened concern for musical style and quality is in order-not for the sake of music, but for the sake of the gospel.

About The Author
Calvin M. Johansson has served as a church music director for four decades. He is Professor of Music at Evangel College. He is the author of Music and Ministry: A Biblical Counterpoint, and Discipling Music Ministry: Twenty-first Century Directions.

Reader Reviews
Calvin Johansson does a commendable job of identifying the theological doctrines that have a bearing on how we view the relationship between music and congregational ministry. While I don't agree with all of his conclusions, he helped me to think of music in theological terms. The most beneficial part of the book for me, though, was more the development of this mindset than in the practical ways that it would be carried out in the church. I don't feel like the situation is quite as black and white as he makes it. I appreciate that Johansson takes the subject of music and ministry seriously, but some of his attacks on "bad" music are so brutal that he sounds almost like Calvin...er, John Calvin. For instance: "reducing art to the commercial level, to aesthetic insignificance, to sheer entertainment (religious or not) is to misuse, even profane, the creative gift," (p. 13), and "church music that does not clearly exhibit genuine creativity has no place in the church because it dishonors and demeans the imago Dei," (p. 31). I suppose I appreciate more what he says about the positive reasons we should have quality music in the Church than what he says to discredit (in theological terms, especially) Church music that is of a lower quality. I personally appreciate the classics and like to sing and hear quality music in church, but I don't know that using a lower quality of music (that nonetheless speaks, somehow, to the congregation) is tantamount toblasphemy. Another thing that I did appreciate about Johansson's book (before I get into the specific doctrines that he addresses) was his very approach of comparing theological doctrines to musical counterpoint. I think that is an appropriate approach to theology in general (as Johannson says, "Our finite minds understand God in dynamic paradoxes - in musical terms, a counterpoint," p. 7), and an especially useful analogy to make when discussing the theology behind church music. I have long felt that music helps me to connect with and understand God in new and deeper ways, but I had never thought much about how this happens, nor had I thought of musical counterpoint as a way of thinking about how all of the apparent paradoxes in theology can co-exist. The doctrines of creation and imago Dei are good starting points for a theological examination of why the arts should be included in Christian worship. The God who creates makes us in God's image, and thus we are called to mirror that very quality that brought us into existence by assisting in God's continual creation. I like that Johansson balances new art with the older art of our heritage ("It is implicit in creation that one cannot profitably discard tradition," p. 17). This, I think, is a proper understanding of the doctrine of creation - for anything worth creating should be able to stand the test of time, and God's continual creation generally adds to the creation that has existed before. I feel like there is a slight problem with Johansson's explication of these doctrines, though. He stresses throughout that music in the Church must be of a high quality, to reflect the high quality of God's creation (e.g. "to be `creative', then, means to originate with artistic excellence," p. 18). However, he also states that all people are called to this creative endeavor: "The notion that creativity is the possession of only a few is repudiated by the broad sense of the imago Dei," (p. 29... I don't fully agree with Johansson's statement here. I don't really think that all people made in God's image possess all of God's attributes in some degree. I say this because I've met people who just aren't creative at all. They have other gifts that reflect attributes of God. So I don't think that anyone who writes a piece of music should be able to sing it in Church. I'm more trying to point out what may be seen as an inconsistency in Johansson's view, to show that maybe his stance is a little too black and white [i.e. maybe not all people are called to create, and maybe not all of the music used in church needs to be of a concert hall quality...so long as it is written and/or presented in a spirit of worship]). Johannson's argument sets up a problem, since all are called to create, but the resulting creation has to be of a very high quality. Johansson writes of the various blocks, such as congregational apathy towards the arts (p. 20), that might inhibit an artist from creating. I feel like Johansson's demand for all music in the church to be of exceptional quality could serve as an equivalent hindrance to the creative aspirations of someone who is not an exceptional artist. I, personally, am scared to writes serious worship music because I'm afraid that it wouldn't be good enough (so I end up writing joke songs, because I have more confidence in my ability to make people laugh than I have in my musical abilities). These sections did nothing to encourage me to try to use my creative abilities to benefit the life of the Church. I feel like these doctrines should govern more the attitude that we take to creating than the quality of the product (if we are to insist that the imago Dei enlists all of us as co-creators with God). I agree with Johansson (p. 38) that a lack of preparation or energy in our creative endeavors reflects poorly upon the God's in whose image we are made, but I feel like, if we give our best effort, God will honor what we offer (I also believe, though, that the more talented artists in the Church should be able to use their creative gifts in worship more often than an average congregant, so I agree that the general level of musical quality should be high). In the sense of giving our best effort in out artistic endeavors, I agree with Johansson's attack on pop music (pp. 67-79). I cannot condemn it wholly on the grounds of musical quality, though. I think that any medium can be used to glorify God, and I've seen many youth introduced to the gospel through the pop medium. What I agree with is Johansson's argument that pop culture is designed for commercial purposes and mass- production. A lot of it is of poor quality not because of the genre, per se, but because it is produced so quickly and carelessly. Again, I see it as a matter of the artist's mindset. I believe that a heartfelt song carefully and prayerfully composed by someone with moderate musical ability honors God more than if the same song were whipped out in a few minutes by a talented musician who is capable of better work. If a church is choosing music that is written by people not in the congregation, I don't see any reason not to use good Christian pop music, though (if one is able to concede that it exists). Johansson's discussion of relevance in the incarnation section (pp. 44-50) is a good check on the temptation to become musical snobs in the Church. It would be easy, especially for a musically gifted and forward-thinking music director, to become overly concerned with presenting great music at the expense of the congregation's needs. I agree that quality music should be used in the Church, but I don't think that the Church should become the pulpit for preaching the benefits of good music if the congregation is at an entirely different place. I agree with most of what Johansson says about faith, especially the argument that there needs to be a balance of intellect and emotion in church (pp. 94-99). Either of these at the exclusion of the other can have harmful effects on a church's theology and spiritual life. The same argument could be used to support occasionally accommodating to the musical tastes of less musically-minded congregants. The risk element to faith (we can experiment with music that the congregation is not comfortable with and have faith that God will bring about eventual gratification with it, p. 99) can also be used to argue that we should have faith that God will honor whatever music we offer sincerely and worshipfully. The stewardship section, too, provides a nice counterpoint to some of Johansson's other arguments. He presents here the cogent argument that we need to be pleased with giving the best we have, since every effort will necessarily fall short (p.122). This illustrates the main strength of the book as a whole - most of the arguments that one can level against him are addressed in other sections. The discussion of mystery and awe would be a good section for Zwingli to read, were he still alive. Perhaps the most powerful argument for the use of music in the Church is that it is capable of expressing things that nothing else can express: "[the arts] have a feeling tone and a drive that words do not possess," (p. 125). The "ethereal quality" (p. 126) of music allows it to express mystery and awe in ways that even James Earl Jones's acclaimed reading of the King James Version of the Bible cannot bring across. I don't know that all music has to serve this purpose, though. Johansson flatly condemns hymns that are "mildly sweet, pretty, and tritely sentimental" as "destroyers of awe" (p. 137... I know that Johansson intends this to be a bad thing, but "Destroyer of Awe" is such a cool title, it almost makes me want to become myself a tritely sentimental hymn. People would ask me who I am, and I would boldly reply, "Why, I am In the Garden: Destroyer of Awe!"). I think that there is a place for hymns that are pretty and peaceful, which express God's comfort, rather than God's mystery and awe. We don't have to limit ourselves to John Tavener pieces. Johansson's concluding section on application is helpful, since much of the book deals with music in more abstract terms. He outlines here a model that is very similar to Michael Bauer's developmentalism approach. The music director should begin where the congregation is at, and then slowly replace the bad music with quality music, once they have built the congregation's trust that they have their best interests in mind. This is great, except if the congregation doesn't grow to appreciate or understand the new music. This approach may leave out some simpler pieces that have meant a lot to people in the congregation over time. The more valuable part of the conclusion is Johansson's stress again on the attitude that the church puts forth toward worshiping God with music. The choir, for instance needs to "see their music as ministry to the Lord," (p. 158), and while we can't expect the congregation to express impeccable musicianship, there is no reason why they should sing praise songs "half-heartedly," (p. 159). Johansson notes that "even more important than doing the work of a servant is one's attitude while serving," (p. 157). This, I believe, should sum up the church's music ministry. The quality of the music is important to consider, but any product that represents our best efforts and which is offered in a humble and worshipful spirit will glorify God and minister to the congregation. Comment | Permalink | (Report this)