# Hymns to Jesus-As-He-Was



## au5t1n (Dec 26, 2010)

Around this time of year, it is common for churches to sing hymns directed to the infant Jesus. It is also common to sing from the perspective of the wise men who visited Jesus ("We Three Kings"), or the shepherds ("Angels We Have Heard on High"). Often these Advent hymns speak of Jesus as though he were just being born today. "Yea, Lord, we greet thee, Born this holy morning." ("O Come, Let Us Adore Him") This song and others speak as though Jesus were just being born today, and the song encourages hearers (the congregation itself?) to come see him being born.

I have been pondering whether these things are appropriate for the corporate worship service. Is it right to sing hymns to "baby Jesus"? Is it right to sing outside of our time, or from someone else's perspective? What do you think?


----------



## seajayrice (Dec 26, 2010)

“We Three Kings” I love but find the lyrical content lacking for worship. “Angel’s We Have Heard on High” fits the bill, no problem there.


----------



## au5t1n (Dec 26, 2010)

Those are just examples. It's the concepts in the second paragraph I have questions about.


----------



## Rich Koster (Dec 26, 2010)

My personal convictions lead me to want to hibernate through the month of December. As to the OP, there are some traditional hymns that I would like to see removed from the Trinity Hymnal for some of the reasons you mention. I prefer to sing my praises to a resurrected and glorified savior.


----------



## seajayrice (Dec 26, 2010)

austinww said:


> Those are just examples. It's the concepts in the second paragraph I have questions about.


 
Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. 


Specific hymns are more than examples, we don't sing to a baby Jesus. The baby Jesus is pregnant with doctrine.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Dec 26, 2010)

austinww said:


> Around this time of year, it is common for churches to sing hymns directed to the infant Jesus. It is also common to sing from the perspective of the wise men who visited Jesus ("We Three Kings"), or the shepherds ("Angels We Have Heard on High"). Often these Advent hymns speak of Jesus as though he were just being born today. "Yea, Lord, we greet thee, Born this holy morning." ("O Come, Let Us Adore Him") This song and others speak as though Jesus were just being born today, and the song encourages hearers (the congregation itself?) to come see him being born.
> 
> I have been pondering whether these things are appropriate for the corporate worship service. Is it right to sing hymns to "baby Jesus"? Is it right to sing outside of our time, or from someone else's perspective? What do you think?


Don't texts such as Is.9:6 lend themselves to making statements concerning the specific fulfillment of such promises and hopes? Why would it be improper to sing of such matters, adopting as it were the same attitudes of the prophet? Or, in history, the attitudes of the people of the moment, as though we had been there?

I can't speak for every minister, but quite often when I am preaching an historical text, I want my audience to in some sense put themselves into the shoes of those who are experiencing those events. I want the moment to come alive for those now present; I don't simply want them to "identify" with those ancient folk with regard to some "higher" or "timeless" principles that the particular participants merely "occasioned."

I want us to be delivered from Egypt, with my fathers, mothers, and siblings. I want us to be driven from hearth and home by the consequences of Jacob's (our father's) sin, and to thrill to the success of making it alive to Haran, and the reception we have there. I want us to engage in the circumstances that find Daniel and his three friends in Babylon, with us, in exile. And, I want us there, when the Promises are coming true in the birth of the Son.

We can "emerge" from the story as we leave the worship gathering, like exiting the theater where we just spent two hours inside another life or adventure on celluloid. Meanwhile, the songs we sing help that moment linger, as we transition out of an eternal moment into the historic moment in which we live and move. I think we can do it better than Hollywood.


----------



## jwithnell (Dec 26, 2010)

I think you could make the same argument for any of the events of Jesus' life -- He's already ascended into heaven so we can only sing about the kingdom and awaiting his return??? The Old Testament tells us over, and over, and over to remember! Write these words on your heart, tell these to your children, repetition of the story of the Exodus. It is so precious to recall how God delivered us; to recount all the times in history He intervened bring redemption to his covenant people.


----------



## JennyG (Dec 26, 2010)

Austin, thank you for that question - it really made me think, though I ended by agreeing with Bruce. 
How's the Scripture handicap progressing?


----------



## Philip (Dec 26, 2010)

I think it's perfectly appropriate to do: indeed I think it is exactly what happens every time we sing a psalm or other piece of poetic/sung Scripture.


----------



## au5t1n (Dec 26, 2010)

These are basically the same responses I gave myself when these questions came to mind, so at least I'm not alone.  I'm not sure it's a good enough defense yet, though, as I still am not sure when the line is crossed between singing about salvation history in a personal way versus pretending and making up details about the story, which seems to be the case for a lot of these carols. It still seems strange to sing to "baby Jesus" as well. I'll need to ponder it some more.

---------- Post added at 05:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 PM ----------




P. F. Pugh said:


> I think it's perfectly appropriate to do: indeed I think it is exactly what happens every time we sing a psalm or other piece of poetic/sung Scripture.


 
The difference being that these are Scripture and we don't have to make up details about the events.

---------- Post added at 05:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:45 PM ----------




JennyG said:


> How's the Scripture handicap progressing?


 
Still going cover-to-cover, but at a somewhat slower pace. I'm shooting for more like 5-8 months. My biological dad's getting me a very nice leather Bible on the occasion of my first visit next week, so I'll have a good motivation to start reading even more. How about you?


----------



## JennyG (Dec 26, 2010)

austinww said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> 
> JennyG said:
> ...


I was aiming to start on Jan 1st, but I found things were already easing off a bit after Christmas, so I've begun as of today, while the going was good. I did the sum - I need to cover a constant 10 and a quarter pages in my Bible to make it through in 4 months. 
I already love the straight-ahead method though. It's already seeming like the only natural way of reading, whether fast or slow!
And I treated myself to a very nice leather Bible too.... it's such a pleasure to handle, it really does spur me on. Hope you enjoy yours as much when you get it


----------



## Philip (Dec 26, 2010)

austinww said:


> The difference being that these are Scripture and we don't have to make up details about the events.



Making up details about the events is a separate issue. The issue here is whether it is appropriate to sing from a different period of salvation history/about a particular event in the life of our Lord. I think this practice perfectly fine, given that we have no problem singing the psalms.

Consider this carol:

_Yea, Lord, we greet thee,
Born this happy morning,
Jesus to thee be all glory given,_

The notion that this baby born in Bethlehem is God incarnate is not (chronologically) fully realized until long after the fact. We can only sing this from this side of the cross. Is it not right for us to praise God that He became a helpless baby? That He became an embryo, went through the whole of human life and died? It is just as right to praise the newly-incarnate Lord as it is to praise the Lord crucified, risen, and ascended. Our hymns ought to celebrate the whole of Jesus' earthly life, and His resurrected and ascended life. 

_God of God, Light of Light,
Lo, He abhors not the virgin's womb,
Very God, begotten not created,
O come! Let us adore Him! Christ the Lord!_


----------



## au5t1n (Dec 26, 2010)

P. F. Pugh said:


> Is it not right for us to praise God that He became a helpless baby?



Of course it is. I would just point out that there is a difference between "We praise you that you became a helpless baby for us" and "We praise you, helpless baby."



P. F. Pugh said:


> Our hymns ought to celebrate the whole of Jesus' earthly life, and His resurrected and ascended life.



Agreed.


----------



## Gloria (Dec 26, 2010)

austinww said:


> Around this time of year, it is common for churches to sing hymns directed to the infant Jesus. It is also common to sing from the perspective of the wise men who visited Jesus ("We Three Kings"), or the shepherds ("Angels We Have Heard on High"). Often these Advent hymns speak of Jesus as though he were just being born today. "Yea, Lord, we greet thee, Born this holy morning." ("O Come, Let Us Adore Him") This song and others speak as though Jesus were just being born today, and the song encourages hearers (the congregation itself?) to come see him being born.
> 
> *I have been pondering whether these things are appropriate for the corporate worship service. Is it right to sing hymns to "baby Jesus"? Is it right to sing outside of our time, or from someone else's perspective? What do you think?*


 
It's fine.


----------



## au5t1n (Dec 26, 2010)

seajayrice said:


> “Angel’s We Have Heard on High” fits the bill, no problem there.





Gloria said:


> It's fine.


 
From now on, all of my questions have an automatic appendage: "...and why?"


----------



## seajayrice (Dec 27, 2010)

That’s unfair to lump me in with Gloria’s two word response. I gave a clear juxtaposition on which and why certain hymns are appropriate for worship; essentially lyrical content, musical quality and doctrinal clarity. Verbosity does not make for precision or profundity.


----------



## Jack K (Dec 27, 2010)

Many Christmas carols get the story wrong, and that's a problem. But singing from the perspective of a worshiper at the time is okay. If not, we'd have to rewrite many of the Psalms before we used them today. What those worshipers experienced is part of our family history as people of God. It's helpful to occasionally see ourselves as part of those experiences. If there's any problem, I suspect it may be that we get overly sentimental about that particular time and seem to forget that Jesus is still alive now and is ours today.

As for songs that express worship of Jesus as a baby... He absolutely was worthy of worship, even as a baby. The Son has never, ever ceased to be worthy of all worship. It's good to worship the risen, ascended Son also. But his exaltation does not make him more worthy of worship in the sense that beforehand he was less fully God and therefore less worthy. His being clothed in ordinariness was a stumbling block to many would-be worshipers while he lived on earth. It should not be so with us.


----------



## au5t1n (Dec 27, 2010)

seajayrice said:


> That’s unfair to lump me in with Gloria’s two word response. I gave a clear juxtaposition on which and why certain hymns are appropriate for worship; essentially lyrical content, musical quality and doctrinal clarity. Verbosity does not make for precision or profundity.


 
I was only talking about your first response. You expanded later. Thanks for your help. I wasn't complaining -- I just thought it was interesting that you both initially responded with a direct yes or no answer and no explanation. That's all I asked for, though, so it's my fault.

---------- Post added at 10:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:31 AM ----------




Jack K said:


> Many Christmas carols get the story wrong, and that's a problem. But singing from the perspective of a worshiper at the time is okay. If not, we'd have to rewrite many of the Psalms before we used them today. What those worshipers experienced is part of our family history as people of God. It's helpful to occasionally see ourselves as part of those experiences. If there's any problem, I suspect it may be that we get overly sentimental about that particular time and seem to forget that Jesus is still alive now and is ours today.
> 
> As for songs that express worship of Jesus as a baby... He absolutely was worthy of worship, even as a baby. The Son has never, ever ceased to be worthy of all worship. It's good to worship the risen, ascended Son also. But his exaltation does not make him more worthy of worship in the sense that beforehand he was less fully God and therefore less worthy. His being clothed in ordinariness was a stumbling block to many would-be worshipers while he lived on earth. It should not be so with us.


 
There is no question that Jesus was worthy of worship as a baby. The question is whether we should sing to baby Jesus, when Jesus is no longer a baby. It seems better to sing to Jesus, praising him for the things he has done, including his incarnation as an infant. As I mentioned before, there is a difference between "We praise you that you became a helpless baby" and "We praise you, helpless baby." The latter strikes me as being strange.

As for the psalms and other Scripture, those are given by the Holy Spirit, and in the case of the psalms, put directly into our mouth (i.e. we are commanded to sing them). The question is whether we can write hymns to "baby Jesus" as opposed to writing hymns to Jesus (the one who currently sits in the heavens) while making mention, as appropriate, of his incarnation in the form of an infant.


----------



## seajayrice (Dec 27, 2010)

Thanks Austin. My reply was a bit cranky. Forgive me. Some troubles, lack of sleep and a blizzard . . .


----------



## Phil D. (Dec 27, 2010)

austinww said:


> As for the psalms and other Scripture, those are given by the Holy Spirit, and in the case of the psalms, put directly into our mouth (i.e. we are commanded to sing them). The question is whether we can write hymns to "baby Jesus" as opposed to writing hymns to Jesus (the one who currently sits in the heavens) while making mention, as appropriate, of his incarnation in the form of an infant.



If the Psalms often state things in the manner being discussed, then it would seem fine to use the same form when writing other hymns.


----------



## au5t1n (Dec 27, 2010)

Phil D. said:


> If the Psalms often state things in the manner being discussed, then it would seem fine to use the same form when writing other hymns.


 
The psalmist was there for those events and records them accurately. Also, the psalmist is said to have written from Christ's perspective and his words are the believer's words. We, on the other hand, do not know whether there was an echo in the mountains when the angels sang ("And the mountains in reply, Echoing their joyous strains"), to name but one Christmas hymn where the hymnist has to explain the event in terms of his own imagination. Also, the psalms do not address "baby Jesus" as though he were currently a baby. 

Now, maybe you folks are right. I'm just thinking through this and thought it would be worth bringing up on the PB. Some of these songs rub me the wrong way sometimes. They can seem a bit presumptuous on the part of the hymnist. Perhaps certain songs have value in meditating on the life of Christ outside the worship service, but less value as an actual congregational hymn. I think most of us would agree that "We Three Kings" fits that category, but is it the only one?

---------- Post added at 10:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 AM ----------




seajayrice said:


> Thanks Austin. My reply was a bit cranky. Forgive me. Some troubles, lack of sleep and a blizzard . . .


 
No worries. We Texans are spoiled with a lack of blizzards. 

---------- Post added at 11:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 AM ----------

Here's a question to consider: Would we sing a hymn that says, "We praise thee, O Son who has not yet been incarnate in the world, O Son who has never yet taken on human flesh"? If not, why not? Perhaps there is a difference between praising Christ for what he did as the pre-incarnate Son versus "We praise thee, O pre-incarnate Son."


----------



## py3ak (Dec 27, 2010)

Austin, in _The Abiding Presence_ Hugh Martin has an argument about the perpetual contemporaneity of the Scriptural revelation which might help you with the propriety of speaking/singing/thinking as though some particular redemptive event had just happened.
But I think it's clear that "We Three Kings" crosses the line: neither I, nor any quantity of my acquaintances, are three oriental kings.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Dec 27, 2010)

py3ak said:


> Austin, in _The Abiding Presence_ Hugh Martin has an argument about the perpetual contemporaneity of the Scriptural revelation which might help you with the propriety of speaking/singing/thinking as though some particular redemptive event had just happened.
> But I think it's clear that "We Three Kings" crosses the line: neither I, nor any quantity of my acquaintances, are three oriental kings.


But, it's poetry; its meant to be taken in the sense that metaphors are taken. Can I sing Mary's, Simeon's, or Hannah's words, and use the same self-referential pronouns?


----------



## au5t1n (Dec 27, 2010)

Contra_Mundum said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > Austin, in _The Abiding Presence_ Hugh Martin has an argument about the perpetual contemporaneity of the Scriptural revelation which might help you with the propriety of speaking/singing/thinking as though some particular redemptive event had just happened.
> ...


 
In that particular instance we have plenty of other problems besides just the personal pronouns. For instance, the chorus of the song is directed to a star ("guide us to thy perfect light"). And then there's the question of whether we know for sure that there were, in fact, three kings as opposed to some other number. The number of gifts does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that there must have been three Magi.


----------



## py3ak (Dec 27, 2010)

Contra_Mundum said:


> But, it's poetry; its meant to be taken in the sense that metaphors are taken. Can I sing Mary's, Simeon's, or Hannah's words, and use the same self-referential pronouns?



With "We Three Kings" I see four choices. That we view ourselves as professing to be the kings, which is absurd; that we are impersonating them, which seems unlikely; that we are attempting to enter into their experience (by making random stuff up); or that we are appropriating their sentiments, which is not inherently absurd but in this particular instance is quite difficult. Some of those may be appropriate for Simeon, though of course there is a division in the Reformed world about that. But in no case does using Simeon's words run you into the same difficulties of "We Three Kings".


----------



## Philip (Dec 27, 2010)

austinww said:


> The psalmist was there for those events and records them accurately. Also, the psalmist is said to have written from Christ's perspective and his words are the believer's words. We, on the other hand, do not know whether there was an echo in the mountains when the angels sang ("And the mountains in reply, Echoing their joyous strains"), to name but one Christmas hymn where the hymnist has to explain the event in terms of his own imagination. Also, the psalms do not address "baby Jesus" as though he were currently a baby.



I do recall certain psalms using a bit of poetic license . . . also do you sing about God speaking through the "music of the spheres" (referring to a mistaken medieval notion of the structure of the heavens) in the hymn? Also, are you implying that the mountains around Bethlehem don't echo?

Which carols are you referring to that sing _to_ baby Jesus as opposed to _about_ Him? I'm struggling to think of one (I honestly am) besides "I love thee, Lord Jesus, look down from the sky . . ." which probably is just a switching of tenses to our perspective, given that only the ascended Christ could possibly do that. In fact. most of the carols are not "hymns" at all, given that they are not prayers or addresses to Christ at all, but rather songs describing what He has done.


----------

