This is a follow-up on the article I published this morning. Most of you young whippersnappers don’t know what a hymnal is, but it is a book of songs the church has sung through the years, to teach theology and to lead the church in worship. There is (though many of you perhaps have never seen one – getting the sarcasm?) a “Baptist Hymnal” – one designed specifically for use in Baptist churches.
It has hymns by Anglicans like John Newton (Amazing Grace).
It has hymns by Charles Wesley (of the Methodist Wesleys!).
It has hymns by another Methodist, Fanny Crosby. (To God Be the Glory)
It has hymns by a Foursquare Charismatic megachurch pastor, Jack Hayford. (Majesty).
It has hymns by an English nonconformist, Isaac Watts. (When I Survey the Wondrous Cross, At the Cross).
It has hymns by a Salvation Army evangelist, George Bennard – also an Iowan! (The Old Rugged Cross).
It has hymns from another Anglican, William Cowper. (There is a Fountain Filled with Blood).
It has hymns from a Presbyterian turned Methodist turned Methodist Episcopalian, R. Kelso Carter. (Standing on the Promises).
It has hymns from the Church of God, Anderson, IN’s Bill and Gloria Gaither (Because He Lives.)
And, if you sing contemporary, you are likely singing either charismatic or Calvinist songs.
Need I go on or have I made my point?
So, here’s my question.
If it is okay for Southern Baptists to open a hymnal on Sunday morning and sing songs from people of all stripes of Christianity that have been vetted to make sure they are in agreement with Baptist doctrine, why is it not okay for Southern Baptists to open a Sunday School curriculum that is distinctively Baptist in theology, but which quotes people of a wide variety of denominations?
If the Gospel Project is denominational treason, why is not the Baptist Hymnal also denominational treason?
Just wondering.
*******************
I thought I would add a picture of the Baptist Hymnal I grew up with – the one that was inspired, the KJV of hymnals – so that you young whippersnappers could see what one actually looks like.
I’d love someone to explain how TGP quoting non-Baptists and Baptists singing songs from non-Baptists are essentially different. One is a problem, evidently, the other is not.
Instruct me.
Every time I try to instruct you I get a html “666 error”. What’s the deal?
I’m 26 and love the hymnal. More hymns please. Of course I also ask for more Psalms please.
Joshua,
Do you have anything to confess? lol.
David
Maybe you will get your eschatology in order as a result of that error message.
There *are* some hymns by Baptists in that hymnal, I hope?
As long as there are no dance moves, I think we’re good.
I made that comment as a joke, mostly, and I’m not myself that worked up about TGP, but I wonder if the amount of available SB hymnody compared to the amount of available teaching could mitigate Dave’s argument a bit here. If we insisted on only SBC-origin hymns in the hymnal, how thin would it be? Would you say that SBC-origin teaching is comparably thin?
It seems to me to be a fairly weak mitigation, but it’s there.
I would guess that the number of hymns by SOUTHERN Baptists is proportionally very small. I did not do extensive research. My “methodology” was simply flipping through the hymnal looking at some of my favorite hymns, then googling the author.
A simple look at copyright dates would also show that number to be small–anything prior to 1845 must be non-SBC, so you would just look at anything later.
And by golly, I had to learn to read shaped notes.
well, Christians have been singing one of the Southern Baptist hymns in the hymnal since around the 4th Century (from the Liturgy of St. James), this:
http://www.hymnary.org/hymn/BH1991/80
the tune is from a French carol, but the words are very ancient in origin in Christian worship . . . it’s a beautiful hymn! . . .
This is a wonderful hymn for Christmas and it’s in the Baptist Hymnal, number 80 . . . beautiful!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK73ppFVvjE
I was going to mention the old Broadman Hymnal which was also a cherished Southern Baptist standard AND had shaped note editions.
As an aside, in Indonesia we used numbers that corresponded (roughly) to the do-re-mi scale and therefore were more like shapes notes. The leader would provide the pitch and the congregation followed either by number or by memory of the tune.
Are there degrees of treason? I mean if I quote a Baptist who isn’t SBC will I just receive a fine or will there still be jail time involved?
I am bringing a motion at the next SBC to institute flogging as a form of denominational discipline.
Steady, Dave, that’s how rumors get started.
How about they simply be punished by having to watch sub-standard football. Like Big Ten football.
You know, that is the kind of comment I’ve usually held back from making this year, being an officer and all. I hope people realize I was kidding, but if anyone wondered, it is a big fat joke (like my running style).
Man, I’m glad we just do Gregorian Chants in Latin around here.
Oh, wait.
I would suppose that one issue is this: I don’t pay much attention to who wrote a song, and so I’ve never been curious to learn more about who wrote “Majesty” and therefore read any of Jack Hayford’s books. However, if I were to see him quoted in a Sunday School lesson, especially if the quote was properly cited, I would be inclined to look up the quote, possibly read the book.
So, more caution should occur with teaching literature than does with hymn/song authors–not that no caution should occur with the latter.
However, we’ve had people “SBC” in their pedigree who wrote bad books as well, so I would assume that the authors and editors of any Official Lifeway Resource are going to do due diligence on the sources cited in their work. I know that may mean approving a quote from one book by an author when the whole of that author’s work may not be endorsed, but that at least we would find a better source for a one-liner if that one line was the only good thing the author ever said.
So, perhaps TGP is treason, but the Hymnal’s just fraternizing with the “enemy?”
Since when did anyone who is a redeemed, blood-bought, saint of God who believes in Christ, holds to the inerrancy of Scripture, and preaches the Gospel become an “enemy” anyway? Which is what you have to have to commit treason as I understand it. Not apathy or minor cooperation, but true enmity. That does not seem like a descriptor we should be applying, no matter how we feel about the issues at stake. (again, *assuming* we are not talking about the difference between truth and heresy)
Okay, that’s a fairly reasonable distinction. Not sure I agree, but its a point well made.
I think it’s a pointless distinction–we are asking, for example, Jack Hayford to help lead us in worship if we sing a song he wrote.
So would you do that, personally, if he were in town?
Obviously, we would exclude asking anyone who is physically dead, so “Would you let Isaac Watts lead worship?” is a moot point. But what of others? Would we let all those people? Or would we call it treason.
I was just aiming for one reason why it might be different, but I think it hinges on separating the person from their activities.
You are kinda on fire today. I’ve been to churches, though, where I’m quite sure that both the song leader and perhaps the organist were dead folks who just hadn’t had the good grace to lie down somewhere.
Quit talking bad about my first pastorate. Those were nice people, even if the music was slow.
well, there IS a connection to Gregorian Chant in the Baptist hymnal,
# 99 (Baptist Hymnal, 1956) ‘When I Survey The Wondrous Cross’ . . .
it’s in the source of the arrangement, this:
Arranger: Lowell Mason, 1792-1872
Meter: L. M.
Key: F Major or modal
Source: From a Gregorian Chant
http://www.hymnary.org/hymn/BH/99
“… I don’t pay much attention to who wrote a song … However, if I were to see him quoted in a Sunday School lesson, especially if the quote was properly cited, I would be inclined to look up the quote, possibly read the book.”
A very good point Doug regarding the difference between the pedigree of an “influencer” and his level of “influence” … between brief exposure to hymn lyrics and a continued thread of exposure to a teaching.
Doubtful. Much of our theology comes through the songs we sing in worship, whether we admit it or not. Songs are much more effective tutors than books. Further, very few people will: a. look up the reference at the end of the chapter and b. then run off to their nearest theological store to buy a nice new copy of Bavinck or the sermons of wesley. It is doubtful that they would find these at a Lifeway.
Fact is, hymns were, in the days before Sunday School and our modern means of transmission, one of the primary carriers of doctrine and instruction.
So, I do not think the distinction between a hymn and a SS lesson is entirely apt.
‘When you sing, you pray twice.’
(St. Augustine)
I suppose you are right Dave. I must have been indoctrinated by singing “Whosoever Will” and “Whosoever Meaneth Me” as a child. And then I went to Sunday School, Sunday morning church services, Sunday evening training union, and Wednesday night bible studies where that message was reinforced. I’m still bummed out that those songs didn’t make the cut in LifeWay’s 2008 revision of the Baptist Hymnal.
“When I Survey the Wonderous Cross” is my favorite spiritual song and I cannot get through it without chocking up. If we should not have this one in the Baptist Hymnal then I need to take a close look at ….what was it? …..Oh yes, English non-conformists.
Now, if only we still used hymnals.
This is terrific, but I suspect the folks who don’t like The Gospel Project aren’t interested in terrific thoughts when it comes to their prejudice.
BTW, my Church sings off of screens….we sing a mix of old hymns and praise choruses…..it’s very worshipful.
David
Overhead projector and 8 1/2 by 11 transparencies I bet 😉
I used those until 2005!
Andrew,
Where you talking to me? lol. No…we’ve got the latest, baddest, coolest projectors and screens you can get. lol
David
David – I still recall vividly asking my father years ago how the new church was that they had joined after relocating to another city. He said he was still trying to figure it out, but was concerned that they were “singing of the wall!” We are all now singing off the wall!
I suspect the existence of some Irish blood in Southern Baptists if they are singing the translated words of a prayer written by an 8th Century Irish monk . . .
the hymn is a link that connects Southern Baptists to the celebration of the Christianizing of pagan Ireland by St. Patrick.
The fascinating history of this hymn involves a pagan king, a pagan place called ‘Slane’, and a forbidden fire courageously lit by Patrick to honor the Resurrection of Christ.
http://www.sharefaith.com/guide/Christian-Music/hymns-the-songs-and-the-stories/be-thou-my-vision-the-song-and-the-story.html
Folks, if you want to discuss the topic, please do. If you want to insult me, it is davemillerisajerk@hotmail.com.
Dave,
At first I thought your picture was of the 1975 Baptist Hymnal, but then realized just how much older you are that I and concluded that it must be a picture of the 1956 Baptist Hymnal 🙂 Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
In all seriousness, you make a great argument using the non-Baptist hymns included in The Baptist Hymnal. I don’t see anything wrong with singing those songs or with using quotes from non-Baptists in Bible study literature/Sunday School Curriculum as long as those quotes and/or resources do not conflict with our doctrinal beliefs. In fact, I just used “No, Not One” (“There’s not a friend like the lowly Jesus, No, not one! No, not one!) in a sermon I preached this past Sunday. Since the words were written by Johnson Oatman, Jr., an ordained Methodist Episcopal minister from, of all places, New Jersey, I guess I am somehow in violation of my SBC oath. I won’t even go into our congregation’s use of certain “patriotic” hymns included in The Baptist Hymnal 😉
While I think Norm Miller’s use of the word “treason” — even assuming the context could warrant such language (which I don’t think it can) — was unfortunate, this whole skirmish is but another example of how positions in the ongoing Calvinist/non-Calvinist debate can become hardened and toxic. This happens on both sides. We can certainly debate the merits of TGP, but I am well aware from my own experiences that using incendiary words — even if not meant to be taken the wrong way — often leads to bridge-burning rather than bridge building. Thanks for the post. God bless,
Howell
Hey, I graduated from high school in 1975.
Dave,
I wasn’t even to double digits in 1975! As to your other comment, I completely agree. I would say that I don’t see the problem either, but you and I both know (or have reason to know) what the real problem is with this whole kerfuffle (I love that word). It goes much deeper than the use of one word. Unless and until we as Southern Baptists can begin to let some issues go and not feel the need to counter-attack every point — however minor — then the battle will continue. God bless,
Howell
Amen.
The hard part is figuring out when to force the kerfuffle and when to let it ride.
Why do I hear a Kenny Rogers song playing in the background?
Ben, I think I hear that Kenny Rogers song, too!
Dave, I agree that it is hard to figure out when to hold ’em and when to fold ’em in our various Baptist battles, but there are certainly minor points that most reasonable people would agree are not worth nit-picking and fighting over. There are other points that are in a gray area, where some folks will think it necessary to enter the fray and others will think it silly to engage in the battle.
Finally, there are those points where we must contend for what we believe in but, even in those areas we can — and should — do so with Christian love and just plain common courtesy and civility. Although we are all apt to miss the mark from time to time (been there, done that), if we find ourselves continually struggling with our responses toward those we disagree with, perhaps it’s time to retreat, look in the mirror, and attempt to remove the log from our own eye 🙂 Thanks and God bless,
Howell
Wow – I hear that Kenny Rogers’ song, too! I look for it to be the opening “hymn” at SBC-Houston. By the way, has anyone seen Kenny Rogers lately? He’s had so much plastic surgery that he has lost his identity … sort of like not being able to recognize the SBC I have known for 50+ years.
Now I’m wondering. How does “you never count your money when you’re sitting at the table” apply to SB kerfuffles?
@ Dave and Howell. I was born in 1981.
And as long as both (non-SBC hymns and quotes from non-SBC Christians) are vetted by standards of Baptist theology, I don’t see the problem.
Volfan are we not allowed to ask logical questions for fear of promoting strife? I think he communicated the point well without saying they’re being stupid.
Here’s the point, if a hymn or a point made in a SS book is not biblical then we should point that out, get it changed or discontinued.
If I were in charge of the hymn book I’d take out The Savior Is Waiting.
Why? That’s a really good invitation song.
When are we going to discuss that some of the best loved hymns were written by women? 😉
Actually, the inspired version is the Broadman Hymnal supplemented by Heavenly Highways Hymns. Always has been, always will be. We never could have had all those Saturday Night Sings without those two books.
this post is a good lead out from your first post today, DAVID . . .
whatever is considered to be good and true in Southern Baptist worship that derives from its roots in the Body of Christ ought to be celebrated,
not seen as a ‘betrayal’ of Southern Baptist teaching
Anne Steele was a prolific (Reformed) Baptist hymn writer. She’s hardly in the hymnals anymore, Baptist or otherwise. Look at the decline: http://www.hymnary.org/person/Steele_A
Or set to pub tunes
Great point, Dave.
Could it be the difference between worship and discipleship? Personally, I would not like to have to use someone of a different denomination to quote when the SB should have an ocean of great people to choose from. I’m sure we have developed someone in our colleges and seminaries who could meet the challenge. We also have a long history or great godly men to use. We are also a family denomination or we need to throw out the BF&M. I can understand why maybe one person would go as far as calling it treason to quote someone of another denomination. He is calling it the way he sees it in a certain dimension and the rest of us have a different dimension. I may not have done it openly, however, it is a point to consider. Why? We keep moving in the same direction of change and our churches are not reflecting spiritual growth by what we are doing. We have more to clean up than this, but it is a start.
Traditionally, our hymnals have included songs written by people coming from a variety of theological perspectives.
Traditionally, our Sunday School literature has NOT provided such widespread exposure to the theological commentary of Bible scholars representing denominational perspectives other than Southern Baptist.
Ed compared Sunday School literature to Dr. Patterson’s Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Dave has now compared it to a hymnal. Respectfully, I believe both comparisons are apples to oranges. A better approach would be to ask how the other Lifeway Bible Study curricula handle the matter of citing theologians and scholars outside of the Southern Baptist tradition. That comparison would be apples to apples.
Far too much has been made of Norm’s comment suggesting a simple betrayal of trust. I believe Ed’s unfortunate equivocation of “treason” with “traitor” moved the goalposts of the discussion in an inflammatory way.
Also, upon reflection, it seems disrespectful to me that he would invoke Dr. Patterson’s name in this discussion. Since Ed claims to hold such a genuine respect and appreciation for Dr. Patterson, why would he use the man’s name and reputation to score debating points among some of Dr. Patterson’s greatest admirers? Did he ask Dr. Patterson about the article prior to publishing it? If Ed simply wanted to praise the commentary, he could have written a book review. Instead, he “used” the commentary to make a point about something else entirely. I don’t feel good about that.
I still don’t know what to think about Sunday School literature introducing our people to theologians whose overall body of work might influence them away from Southern Baptist doctrines. But it’s not a silly issue. And I don’t think we should be talking about hymnals, commentaries and Southern Baptist statesmen.
” A better approach would be to ask how the other Lifeway Bible Study curricula handle the matter of citing theologians and scholars outside of the Southern Baptist tradition. That comparison would be apples to apples.”
It will be really hard to refute the wisdom of this statement. However, I am sure there are those who will give it the “Old College Try.”
Rick, Ed Stetzer and Nathan Finn already answered this question at the Between the Times blog, pointing to the fact that the other curriculums at Lifeway quote non-Southern Baptists as well, and have for years. Finn even pointed to curriculums quoting DL Moody (I’ve included Finn’s full comment at the bottom of my comment). And, you said that Moody didn’t bother you as much as quoting Sproul, Piper, and Macarthur.
It seems your issue isn’t with the quoting of non-Southern Baptists in Lifeway Curriculum; your issue is with Lifeway curriculums quoting non-Southern Baptists who are more Calvinistic than you are (even though they do not violate the BF&M2K).
Also, how do you read the BF&M2K’s statement on “Cooperation” in Article XIV? The final section of this article says, “Christian unity in the New Testament sense is spiritual harmony and voluntary cooperation for common ends by various groups of Christ’s people. Cooperation is desirable between the various Christian denominations, when the end to be attained is itself justified, and when such cooperation involves no violation of conscience or compromise of loyalty to Christ and His Word as revealed in the New Testament.”
I think when Southern Baptists quote non-Southern Baptists who make statements that Southern Baptists believe are biblical, we’re just revealing our cooperation with other evangelical Christians. You seem to agree as well, at least when someone like DL Moody is quoted.
Nathan Finn’s comment at the Between the Times blog:
http://betweenthetimes.com/index.php/2013/04/10/paige-patterson-is-not-a-traitor/comment-page-1/#comment-29337
Jared,
There is a clear difference between these curricula in the AMOUNT of exposure given to non-Southern Baptist viewpoints. I am concerned about it myself, and can understand why Norm Miller might feel a certain “betrayal of trust,” or treason. Of course, he used that word not in the Benedict Arnold sense, an all too common connotation, that may have made it a poor choice of words. When pressed, is Ed Stetzer more SBC or more NAE? How will those loyalties be reflected in our literature?
It will do you no good to quote Stetzer and Finn to me, for Stetzer misrepresented Norm’s comments before using Dr. Patterson, while Finn overreacted so harshly to my comment people were messaging me and commenting about the way he unloaded. I have no problem with the associations he mentioned. I may have a problem introducing lots of non-Southern Baptist theologians into the Sunday School classroom.
Really, brother, this thing has gone too far. Perhaps Norm and Ed need to apologize to each other. Personally, I believe Ed owes Dr. Patterson an apology. Someday, if I disagree with Nathan Finn about something and he writes one sentence about it, I may return the favor and respond with TEN examples to prove a point he readily agrees with anyway.
The topic is Sunday School and the theological influences shaping the Gospel Project. When we shifted matters and began discussing hymnals, commentaries and Southern Baptist statesmen, we got off track.
Rick, how many times do the editors of TGP have to say, “The BF&M2K was our guiding confession for this material” for you to believe them? It still has yet to be proven that anything in The Gospel Project violates the BF&M2K.
Also, do you realize how arbitrary your complaint sounds when you say you’re okay with some amount of quotes from non-Southern Baptists, but that The Gospel Project does it too much? How much is too much? If The Gospel Project only quoted non-Southern Baptists you agree with, would you complain about how much they’re quoting non-Southern Baptists?
I had people messaging me too about Finn’s comment, but for the opposite reason.
I don’t see the difference between singing the songs of Calvinists and Arminians that we agree with, and reading the quotes of Calvinists and Arminians that we agree with. You say there is a difference. I say there isn’t. If we agree with the comment, why does it matter if a Southern Baptist said it or not? If we really affirm the Cooperation (Article XIV) described in the BF&M2K, why does it matter what evangelical Christian said the quote? I’m fine with Arminians being quoted, New Traditionalists being quoted, Calvinists, New Calvinists, and everything in between, so long as the quote is in agreement with our confession.
Finally, I think your issue is Calvinism; and that’s why you complain when you do. You have a clear double-standard here.
Jared,
Please stop trying to argue me into liking the Gospel Project. You and your friends need to accept graciously that your theology, though found within the BFM2K, is not for everyone, just as my theology, though found within the BFM2K, is not for everyone.
I don’t know that it’s a double standard as much as a difference of opinion. If you will simply give us the space not to like the Gospel Project, then I think we can cooperate on a great many other things together.
Rick, where did I say anything about liking TGP? I don’t care if you like it. Just don’t misrepresent it.
If we did have a hymnal that was filled with songs written by only Southern Baptists would we not be debating such a hymnal as being arrogant?