The following are not good reasons to sing carols or hymns of any kind:
- To set the record in the Guinness Book of World Records,
- To show a "surrounding community" that a particular fundamentalist university is "open to the public,"
- To show a surrounding community what that particular institution of higher learning "has to offer,"
- To get an "I sang!" sticker,
- To give the community something memorable, or
- To make yourself a "testimony of God's love" (I am not really sure what that means).
May we always sing our hymns and carols of worship primarily to God and to Him alone.
"For the LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God." – Deuteronomy 4:24
Immoderate 
What other reasons for singing carols could there possibly be?
Right. I say “primarily” because all other legitimate secondary reasons will flow from this worship principle of singing to God alone (and these secondary legitimate reasons will not include any of those given above, I might add). For example, as our preaching is rightly considered worship, and done primarily for God alone, it has certain other “God-ward” secondary purposes that God uses to benefit the assembly (edification, rebuke, teaching, etc).
“Primarily to God” doesn’t seem to fit with “to Him alone.” “Primary” seems implies a secondary reason. “Alone” rules out any secondary reason. Am I missing something in the grammar?
Another question: How is preaching primarily for God alone? (Same primarily/alone issue here, but on to the main question). I think it is just the opposite. Preaching is not “for God,” as in “to him.” He doesn’t need to hear what we say. We are not preachign to God as if to convert him to something. Preaching is the voice of God to us. We preach to convert man to the truth about God in mind and life. Preaching is for man to hear from God. Preaching should exalt God, and lift him up in the eyes of man. It seems to me that your secondary reason (benefit of the assembly) is actually the reason.
Funny. If it is a problem, it is not a grammatical problem. If it is a problem with my writing skills and lack of clear thinking.
I did not say “to him.” I said “for him.” That is, God is ultimate, and He alone. Preaching is done, as you say, to “exalt God and lift him up.” Therefore we preach, not for man, but for God–for His glory and exaltation and to stir people to worship Him. He should always be ultimate and the primary reason we do anything. Always. When He is not, we are guilty of idolatry. The first reason (first in rank, importance, and value) for our preaching, singing, or caroling is the worship and glory of God alone. SDG.
Yes, after I put “grammar” and hit the submit button I thought to myself that “grammar” wasn’t the word I was looking for. But alas, it was too late to find a better one. Perhaps it was an issue of definition or logic.
I agree that everything is about God and for God, or at least should be. Your comment on preaching just struck me as a strange way to put it.
I read “for” in relation to your comment #2 where you used preaching as “an example” of singing “to God and him alone,” where you also said that the “secondary purposes … benefit the assembly.” That is where my comment came from. To me it seems the primary purpose of preaching is to benefit the assembly by holding God and his truth up.
It is entirely possible that I am simply confused.
It is entirely possible my sloppy thinking (and writing) have made you confused!
I hope we can all agree (at least) that the reasons given in the original post are not sufficient for singing carols or hymns.
I thought you would enjoy this link http://maniladrive.blogspot.com/2005_02_01_maniladrive_archive.html
It is the one called “The Semi-Pelagian Narrower Catechism “
A couple musings on this:
1. While a “hymn” may be classified as a musical prayer, addressed to God, yet it is one of those things we are to “speak to one another” (Eph 5:19).
2. The NT commands to witness certainly have as their object testimony of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ to every creature on earth, yet Christ says, “Ye shall be witnesses unto ME.”
Since we live coram Deo, God will always be the receptor of Christian activity, since he is always its source and means also (Rom. 11:36), even if others are blessed along the way.
Joe
Joseph, I agree with the gist of what you said, but let me ask you, should Christians ever sing a hymn to set a silly record for a book full of freaks?
Ryan,
An interesting post to which I am not sure of my response. In a somewhat less articulate manner, I think I echo some of Joe’s sentiments. You state, “May we always sing our hymns and carols of worship primarily to God and to Him alone.” It would trouble me if anyone found fault with this statement. While you accurately recount some of the stated purposes for the carol sing, I cannot but wonder if a man of straw has been erected.
Can carols and hymns only be worshipful to God and God alone when they are sung in a corporate worship service? Or in time of private devotions? Could a believer go to such a function as the carol sing and still sing for God and God alone? It is all well and good to say we worship as an assembly for God and God alone, but is it altogether accurate? Do we not also exhort one another? Edify one another? Indeed, the very New Testament verses that command singing in our meeting say our “speaking” “teaching and admonishing” are to one another. You would mention my repeated use of “to” and your focus on “for.” A point well taken. We do all things for the glory of the Lord, even those done to or for another. Do the several profane reasons given for the carol sing completely negate the possibility of the sacred reason?
Is this perhaps the reason for Deuteronomy 12:15-28? In a chapter that pretty clearly lays the foundation for the regulative principle of worship, the verses seem a little out of place at first. Could these verses be an exposition of Ecclesiastes 7:16? God had set out clear laws about the sacrifice and eating of meat at the tabernacle, but was use in “official” worship the only time meat could be enjoyed? Not at all, meat could be enjoyed in the comfort, convenience, and celebrations of the home as well. Demonstrating the same principle from the opposite direction, Jesus used the example of David and his men eating the showbread.
I wonder if you might be trying to make the divide between sacred and profane impassible? Is it not possible to worship the Lord while simultaneously breaking a record, being winsome to the community, and receiving a sticker? As trivial as those things are, I think it is possible.
There are more thoughts, but inadequate ways of expression. Perhaps the critiques of others will birth the words I cannot presently conceive.
Merry Christmas!
I would highly discourage taking some sacred thing like a hymn to God and using it to set a record. Psalm 137 comes immediately to mind. You would think that if this event had, indeed, some kind purpose for worship they would have at least indicated that it. Instead, we are provided with a bunch of silly reasons like getting a sticker and hopefully getting listed beside the man with the world’s longest beard. The problem is not the setting, or the time. Indeed, the reasons you give are good (assumed under the priority of the glory of God), but I think some profane reasons do negate holy things. Holy things should remain holy. After all, the very meaning of the word “holy” is that which is separate from the profane. The Christian life is all liturgy now, as New Testament makes plain in several places (Romans 12:1-2 comes immediately to mind), but what this does is take profane things (like eating and drinking in 1 Cor 10) and make them an act of worship by our doing them for God’s glory. But never do we take the holy things and make them profane. Our lives are indeed living sacrifices, but that does not mean that we take the things already dedicated to God and rip the meaning apart from them.
I always appreciate the way you disagree, Brad.
Ryan,
I’ll be pondering your response. One thing that comes to mind is the nature of carol singing itself. In most such activities there is a mixture of sacred and secular. The rather amusing paradox of Jingle Bells and Silent Night comes to mind (sort of like the secret rapture with a shout, the trump of God, and the voice of the archangel…but I digress…).
Stepping back from the BJU event, would you consider all such caroling activities wrong? In your mind, for caroling to be an acceptable activity must all the songs speak of Chrit’s birth? Conversely, would you have any problem caroling with all secular songs? (Assuming it wasn’t presented as a church/religous activity.)
Thanks for the compliment. I’m not sure how I pleased I should be, however, since such a statment must mean I have established a pattern of disagreement!
In the joy of Christ.
Have you done much caroling? I have rarely mixed sacred and secular when I have gone around. I think I understand your point, but I have always carolled to edify believers and to worship the Lord for His incarnation. I have no problem singing “winter songs,” but am not sure I would want to take the energy to gather a group to travel around in the cold singing them. Singing songs to the Lord makes it far more worth-while.
Ryan,
Sorry for the slow response to your question (#9), but as Brad observes, clearly the answer must be, No.
Nor, do I think, is it the only valid question for this discussion. Some others have been advanced since then and been good discussion points.
Although I am a graduate of BJU (’89), I was actually responding to your’s and Larry’s points without knowing the specific thing referenced (I didn’t follow the link until just now, believe it or not!). It has put a somewhat different slant on the discussion for me that we are speaking of my alma mater (not that we always agree, and not that I always defend; but I am grateful for their investment in me).
In brief: after reading the article, I’m not thrilled that the event was promoted in the way it was. You are striking at motives and protesting the sensationalism of the event; I would agree. However, it looks like mission creep to me: something that started out with purer motives, no doubt, has become cluttered with PR interests.
I will say this: if someone is to be recognized for the largest group of carolers on record, I’m glad at least it’s a fundamental[istic] Christian student body. But it seems better that recognition be an effect, not a cause.
Joe,
I think we are in near, if not full, agreement. You have seen in part what I was responding to. I was not intending to embark in a full discussion of purposes and ends and so forth, as much as I was trying to highlight some of the same concerns you seem to have. Thanks for stopping by.
And Bob Meredith, thanks for the link to the Arminian catechism. Very good indeed.
I will say this: if someone is to be recognized for the largest group of carolers on record, I’m glad at least it’s a fundamental[istic] Christian student body. But it seems better that recognition be an effect, not a cause.
Seconded