Christian worship is inherently political. As Bernd Wannenwetsch points out, this isn’t because worship is a tool for ginning up enthusiasm for a candidate or for stirring the fires of patriotism. On the contrary, “It is just because Christian worship is not a means to an end that it is political.” Worship is political because it “opens out into” the kingdom of God, and because in her worship the Church “anticipates the city of God” with its eternal liturgical assembly.
Though the notion of “political worship” has become axiomatic in recent theology, it is rarely applied to church music. Tastes in liturgical music are often based on nostalgia on the one hand, and a desire for relevance on the other. When musical choices are made more deliberately, the standards are typically aesthetic. We want to offer our best, and our praise should be suitable to the God we worship: What music is fitting to the Church’s entry into his presence?
Worship music should of course be beautiful and appropriate to the occasion, but if worship is political, worship music should be political too.
No scene in the Bible makes this more obvious than John’s vision in Revelation 4-5. When the Spirit catches John to heaven, he enters a worship service already underway. At the center is an enthroned Someone, surrounded by four cherubim and twenty-four white-clad ancient ones on thrones of their own. Creatures and elders are engaged in continuous rounds of praise—the Sanctus, prostrations, acclamations to the King on the throne, again and again.
But something is missing. Beside the Enthroned One is a sealed scroll, and initially no one anywhere is found worthy to open its seals. Then the Lamb appears and takes the scroll, and the eternal worship of heaven rises to a pitch of ecstatic intensity. Initially, John sees no lyres. The cherubim and ancient ones are shouting praise, but not singing. But when the Lamb ascends the throne, the creatures and elders have harps to accompany their new song.
This escalation of heavenly worship mimics a sequence in the Old Testament, and that gives us a clue to the significance of John’s vision. When Moses sets up the tabernacle in the wilderness, he is given no instructions about instruments or choirs. Tabernacle worship may have included song, but we are not told so. As David prepares for Solomon’s temple, however, he creates new orders of Levites to sing and to play harps, lyres, and cymbals, to raise songs of joy before the throne of God.
In both the Old Testament and Revelation, the shift from spoken worship to sung worship occurs because of the enthronement of a king. At the beginning of the Davidic dynasty, music and song are added to the smoke of the sacrifices. When the Lamb who is the Lion of Judah takes his throne, the heavenly hosts take up lyres and begin to sing.
Scholars have discovered analogies between the heavenly worship of Revelation and the ceremonial of the Roman imperial court. Some condemn John for making an obsequious accommodation to worldly power, but the point is the opposite: The acclamations and praise of the Lamb show that the Lion-Lamb, not Caesar, wears the crown. Worship music is coronation music, praise to a King now enthroned.
Judged by Revelation’s political liturgy, hymn writers have served the Church poorly in recent centuries. Too often, hymns reflect the privatized role to which our world confines religion. They give little place to themes of battle, judgment, oppression, and rule. For every “For All the Saints,” “The Son of God Goes Forth to War,” and “A Mighty Fortress,” there are a dozen hymns about intimate encounters with Jesus in the warmth of his Spirit. To judge by hymnody, the Church Militant has largely been replaced by the Church Quiescent.
The Psalms, on the other hand, provide a standard for the proper political song of the Church Militant. Psalms are sometimes embarrassingly intimate, but you don’t go very far in the Psalter before encountering nations in turmoil and the enthronement of God’s son (2). Psalm after psalm calls on the Lord to bring justice to the nations (7, 9, 50, 96, 98, 135), and psalm after psalm identifies him as the world’s true king (10, 22, 24, 29, 47, 84, 95, 98, 145). Psalm 72 portrays an ideal king, and Psalm 82 and 94 issue bone-chilling warnings to oppressors. But the Psalms, with their exultant praise of God’s kingship, their hard-edged realism, their acknowledgment of conflict, and their passion for justice, have disappeared from some churches and are expurgated in others.
The songs of Revelation, like the Psalms, exalt the power, might, and glory of the enthroned Lamb and his Father. They are acclamations to “him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb,” sung prayers that “blessing and honor and glory and dominion” would be his forever. A church that sings such praise is inoculated against hope in princes. A church singing such praise is prepared to be a kingdom because a church that sings such praise is genuinely and properly the Church Militant.
Peter J. Leithart is on the pastoral staff of Trinity Reformed Church in Moscow, Idaho, and Senior Fellow of Theology and Literature at New St. Andrews College. His most recent book is Between Babel and Beast: America and Empires in Biblical Perspectives (Wipf & Stock).
Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.
Comments:
This politics is oft ignored by the right and denounced as Communist.
The liberation theology which arose from this understanding is closer to Catholicism, far closer, than the liberal economics that is supported by Acton Institute and its extremely wealthy supporters.
Worship is political. From the Canticle for Zacchariah to the Magnificat, Catholic worship in the Liturgy of the Hours announces a Kingdom in which the poor are blessed. Current religious right economic attachments deviate far away from this and are a worse example than left wing economic matters. The religious right may desire aggressive Church militant, but at an altar of economic libertinism, professing a base and perverse attachment to ensuring that "the poor will always be with you."
I understand the point being made, but the terminology seems a bit confusing.
A great article Mr. Leithart.
The liturgy of the church is political because it proclaims another is King of kings (and its not Caesar). It declares that all rulers and judges must submit to this King. The very allegiance in worship to another King and another City is itself political. The church is militant because she is doing battle with enemies of the Lord in worship (Or the Lord is doing battle for her). God’s people have always done battle in worship. The people cry out for God to deliver them from their oppressors and to bring justice. The church is also doing battle on behalf of others. She pleads with God to crush the enemies who are persecuting and oppressing His people.
Worship is anything offered as praise, honor, love, and sacrifice to God. Church is a community of believers, living and physically deceased, but spiritually alive, across the generations. The Kingdom of God is now, eternal, and living. As Jesus declared: "the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand."
Frankly, the matter of song used in worship is to me a diversion or tangent to the much more interesting question of how we are living eternal lives now in the Kingdom of God. But, I agree with Mr. Leithart that "the Church" has developed a hymnody that is detached from the public sphere. Political questions too are part of the Kingdom, and just as we worship within a building on Sundays, we also need to live lives of worship daily within the public square.
Greed is an attitude of the heart as is its worser evil twin, envy, which is running rampant in America today spurred on and jutified by hate---hate of those that have more.
So some of you may need to look at the supposed high ground you think you have. But this whole thing misses the point of the article---one that I agree with.
Since becoming a Christian in mid-adulthood, I have always felt uplifted, joyous and strengthened when I sing of victory. One of my favorite hymns is "Christ Arose." When I first sang it my heart soared: Up from the grave He arose, with a mighty triumph o'er His foes; He arose a victor from the dark domain and He lives forever with His saints to reign." What could anyone see against a little encouragement?
Just two days ago we had the feast of St. Apollonaire whose basilicas (the houses of the King) demonstrate so beautifully in stone and mosaics how in the liturgy we join with the heavenly warriors (God's angels), the saints, and the martyrs in giving glory to the true King of Kings: the picture at http://ex-corde-ecclesiae.blogspot.com/2007/11/in-mass-we-celebrate-with-all-warriors.html
The Council fathers drew on this to describe the mass: "8. In the earthly Liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that Heavenly Liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a Minister of the Holies and of the true Tabernacle [Cf. Apoc.[Rev.] 21:2; Col. 3:1; Heb. 8:2.]; we sing a hymn to the Lord's glory with all the warriors of the heavenly army; venerating the memory of the saints, we hope for some part and fellowship with them; we eagerly await the Savior, Our Lord Jesus Christ, until He, our Life, shall appear and we too will appear with Him in glory [Cf. Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:4.]." Sacrosanctum Concilium, [The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy.]
The issue of who is the true King of Kings has important implications for politics in the more limited sense. Father Neuhaus often cited James Madison's warning that the only true guarantee of our liberty is the acceptance that there is an Authority greater than the state. As Peter Leithart puts it with the lightness of a deft deer: "The acclamations and praise of the Lamb show that the Lion-Lamb, not Caesar, wears the crown." That is worth chanting about in martial hymns.



On the other hand, we might take a second look at the Sermon on the Mount and Jesus's admonition to "pay no attention to wars and rumors of wars..."