Music and the Message

A can of worms, once opened, is difficult to close again, especially neatly.

I made a comment at the beginning of yesterday's 10:30 message and again during the discussions at the 7:00 service that there was a disconnect between the message and the service music. The disconnect took place in the difference between the theology of spiritual baptism - what happened to Jesus after he exited the waters of ritualized baptism - and baptism by water, which was highlighted in almost all of the service music.

Was Jesus baptized by the ritual of John the Baptist? Was he subjected to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins?

I believe that he was. I also happen to believe that such a baptism as part of the Jesus narrative, especially in Mark, is beside the point. The point of the story, I think, is that, once he emerges from the waters of ritualized purification, Jesus' genuine baptism takes place. It is a baptism performed by God. It is not performed by John. In Mark, Jesus' spiritual baptism enables him to fulfill the ministry to which God calls him. Without it, if he would have been baptized with water alone, Jesus would not have been able to faithfully and perfectly perform the ministry to which he had been called.

In Mark's baptism, the ritualized water rite of purification is transformed into a spiritual experience, one over which God presides and one for which only God provides.God pours out God's Spirit. God allows that Spirit to be embodied in Jesus. Jesus becomes the Spirit's incarnation. The entire message highlighted the fact that the spiritual baptism by God is far superior to the human rites of water purification.

So why did the music celebrate water? If Jesus' spiritual baptism eclipses the significance of John's water purification, why did we sing about gathering at the river, or about entering the waters? The topic is of particular interest when readers of The Shiloh Insider recognize that I am part of the group that sits and selects hymns and music for our worship services. How in the world could such a disconnect be allowed to take place?

The answer is both simple and dangerous. I made the comments at both 10:30 and 7:00 in order to draw attention to the main issue. Most hymnody, whether traditional or contemporary, embraces the imagery of water for baptism. There is little available for the Church to sing of and celebrate the spiritual aspects of baptism. Now, there are plenty of hymns/songs about the power of the Spirit. Few of them have a direct link to baptism, however. (I am well aware that there are a few of these examples in contemporary praise music, but, even in those cases, the spiritual side of Jesus' baptism is diminished.)

Did the disconnect between service music and the message make any difference? Unfortunately, probably not. Like the community that came to John in the Jordan, we have grown accustomed to rote ritual and familiar practices. Few would have noticed the disconnect had it not been mentioned as theme for the day.

All the more reason to mention it. The comments about there being a disconnect challenge the notion that we should take for granted what we sing, play, hear, say or preach. Those elements of worship which tend to become rote, unconscious recitation, meaningless traditions with no clear or reasonable purpose behind them need to be challenged. Especially in Epiphany, we could be aware of all that we do in worship. Worship can be an intentional exercise of praise and preparation instead of a cuddly recitation of familiar, traditional rites and liturgies.

So, there was a disconnect between the message and the music this past week. That disconnect gave us occasion to challenge our complacency. Until some amazingly creative folk write new hymns and service music (hint, hint), that situation will not improve. At least we can be aware of it and take it as a serious call for reform. This, after all, is Epiphany.

See You Sunday!