New Hymns

I love the old hymns.  I love singing substance.  A number of folks are updating hymns and are doing a fantastic job.  Indelible Grace (RUF) is excellent and Sovereign Grace Ministries is doing some good stuff too.

Al Mohler points us to a great new hymn-writer, Keith Getty, who has written "Oh, To See The Dawn" ("The Power of the Cross") with Stuart Townend.  These two have also written "In Christ Alone," which is one of my favorite hymns, old or new.

I agree with Mohler, who writes...

Are we entering a great new era of hymnody? There are signs of hope, and we can see the emergence of new hymn writers and composers who combine the best of old and new, recovering the ancient form in a new age. Best of all, these hymns are rich in biblical truth and Gospel content.

Comments

[Travis Prinzi]

It's great to see old hymns revived and new hymns written that actually have substance. I've been so discouraged by modern praise music that I've actually felt most comfortable in a psalm-singing church of late. Some new, deep, theological hymns are much-needed.

[joe kennedy]

Louie Giglio often refers to Chris Tomlin and Matt Redman as two of the current-day new hymn-writers. I can appreciate that. My first and favorite real hymn as a Christian became Come Thou Fount. I'd never heard it until this little known band from Waco, Texas played it at a youth camp back in 99. They kinda re-made it famous.

[Kyle]

I do appreciate many old hymns, and many new priase/worship songs.

However, to equate old hymns with substance is a bit scary.

[Steve McCoy]

I'm not equating old hymns (as in every old hymn) with substance, and neither is Mohler. But in comparison, old hymns are typically more substancial than newer songs. You disagree? Why?

[Broken Messenger]

Steve,

I love how modern artists such as Third Day and Jars of Clay are blending old hymns with a modern style. Same great depth and one that I can more easily relate to...

Brad

[Rich]

I'd classify Tomlin and Redman more as anthem writers than hymn. See Wonderful Maker, How Great is Our God, and Indescribeable for some sweet anthems.

Now, Getty and Townsend, wow, in addition the ones you mention Steve, how about "How Deep the Father's Love for Us"? Man oh man...

And Steve, yes, I agree, for the most part, the older hymns have more meat than the newer choruses. That isn't to say both do not have their place. If we look at some of the Psalms, you see the same thing. Some are 'thicker' than others.

Just worship leader's 2 cents... :)

[Marty Duren]

Steve,
Do you distinguish between praise and worship and if so how?

[Steve McCoy]

Not really Marty. I might for conversations sake, and I know how people use those. I could say a lot on this, but I don't want to tonight. :) But feel free to respond.

Here's something to throw out and see what happens... I don't mind using songs with only a little substance IF there is substance prior to it in the service that is recognizable. So, for example, sing And Can It Be and then follow it up with Alleluia.

I think when your life is deeply invested in knowing God, the simpliest of lyrics can be powerful. And of course there are emotive elements as well.

[Marty Duren]

Yeah,
I think the emotive thing is what draws me more to newer songs. Most of the newer songs, whether Tomlin, Townend, Redman or others are designed to be an expression of our hearts to God, whereas many of the older never got beyond being about Him. (That isn't wrong, but it is incomplete.)

I do distinguish between praise and worship in that specifc way. Praise can be a declaration of the majesty (or other attribute) of God, but worship is our response to that revealed truth or some other aspect of God working in our lives. For that reason worship is necessarily emotive. Charnock said, "The tongue without the heart is a liar."

One of our seminary presidents told me in a one-on-one conversation that new music would lead to weak Christians because it had shallow theology. He also said that after preaching, hymns were a primary way of learning theology in the church. That may be so, but there is no indication in the Scripture that the purpose of psalms, hymns and spiritual songs is to learn theology, but to sing with each other and make melody in our hearts to the Lord.

I do believe that the theology of any song must be accurate, but I do not think it of necessity must be "deep" in order to be acceptable to God.

[Steve McCoy]

Marty, I think I'm okay with what you said. I do like substance, but often the song is an emotive response to substance and not the substance itself. But to do that, of course, there must be a little substance.

[marc]

Steve,

Your comment about using weightier/dense songs up against more emotive songs is a good one. WHen I craft worship services at my church I do this all the time. Too much density and the mind gets congested, too much emotive and after a time you forget what you're emoting about/to.

As to Tomlin and Redmann, I don't think of them as hymn writers, but as writers who strike theological depths frequently missing in some contemporary worship music. Getty and Townend are more in the Hymn category, with the few you mentioned there. Again, not that it really matters, both are good and usefull in worship.

One reason why it seems Hymns are more theologically dense, is that the ones that survived to today are pretty solid. Go back to some hymnals from 100 years ago and you'll also find alot of... dare I say crap?

[Andy Lutz]

Steve,

You may already know of them, but I thought I would mention 3 other groups that are producing new tunes to old hymns.

http://www.redmountainchurch.org/rmm/index.html

http://www.reformedpraise.org/index.php

http://www.gettydirect.com/index.asp

[Steve McCoy]

Ahhh, I have two Red Mountain Church CD's and I knew there was someone I was missing. Thanks Andy.

And HEY! It's Andy Lutz. Sup?

[Michael]

I remember hearing Gregg Koukl say that he thought the main problem with modern worship music is that it is caught up with the Christian life and experience more so than God himself. I have found this to be generally true also...just tossing it out there.

Andy,

Thanks for the link I'm going to have to get this to my worship guy!

[Steve McCoy]

Michael, very helpful. However, all of our songs should be based in the human experience to an extent. How else do we "relate" to God? I'm weary of some who talk about focusing on God apart from human experience.

But I'm guessing Greg means that they focus wrongly on the human experience in some way. So I would generally agree, but with an asterisk.

[Michael Foster]

Steve,

Point well taken!

[Steve McCoy]

Michael, I was just thinking of your comment while listening to KLOVE radio. I NEVER listen to KLOVE, but was with my kids so I gave in.

We were listening to MWSmith "This is the Air I Breathe." Exactly what Greg and you were talking about, I think. "I'm desperate for you/I'm lost without you." Yeah, I don't mind some of this, but it's TOO focused on our experience.

[Marcguyver]

Mr. McCoy, so what do you use exactly during your worship services? Type? Style?

Just curious about the size of your congregation and what a typical worship service sounds like.

[Matthew Westerholm]

Can I caution us against "old hymns have more content than new songs"? This does seem true, but is actually an unfair comparison.

The hymns that we are singing have distinguished themselves from *many* other hymns written in the same time period. Wesley wrote 6,000 hymns. His top ten are the ones you know.

The poor have been forgotten while the best have lasted. This gives the appearance that all the old hymns are filled with rich content, while the truth is that the hymns that have LASTED are filled with rich content.

Fifty years from today, most of the new songs that we sing will have disappeared, and a very few will be sung by a new generation of worshippers . . . just like always.

And they'll probably say, "Those old praise choruses are SO rich. Not like these new songs. . ."

[Steve McCoy]

Okay, we've heard this a couple times now, that the old hymns aren't necessarily more substancial.

Here's my challenge. Would someone please name 5 modern worship songs with good content, something equal to the old hymns?

It's not that I don't think it can be done, I just want someone to actually try it. Most all of us could name at least 10-15 good old hymns with solid content. Can you name 5 modern songs with good content? The "new hymns" spoken of above are not acceptable answers.

And listen, there are some hymns that suck hard. No question. But generally speaking, I think there is little comparison between most modern worship stuff vs hymns as far as content goes.

[Marcguyver]

I for one think that you'd be hard pressed to name five moderns because old hymns just seem to have more words period.

It seems to be pretty rare indeed that a modern 'tune' would have three or four verses along with a chorus and/or bridge as well.

[Matthew Westerholm]

I'd humbly offer these as examples of the best of this new generation.

“Mission’s Flame” by Matt Redman (Soul Survivor)
“Great and Precious Promises” by Mark Altrogge (Sovereign Grace)
“Humble King” by Brenton Brown (Vineyard)
“Wonderful Maker” by Chris Tomlin (Passion)
“Knowing You” by Graham Kendrick (Thank-you Music)

I think the main problem with contemporary choruses isn’t (mainly) that they have bad theology or that they don’t have enough “content”, but instead that most of them (as far as I can tell) deal with the same 3% of the Christian life. "We love God. God is awesome." Both very true. . . but is that all? Where are the songs of brokenness and repentence? Then again, where are brokenness and repentence in the modern church?

[Steve McCoy]

Matthew, I appreciate making the effort to do this. These are good songs. And I agree with your take on certain important issues in songs.

I do think if you compare the lyrics (I've read the lyrics to the songs you've provided) that they aren't at the same category as top hymns in content. That's okay, I still love the new stuff too.