This question perennially raises a cloud of dust in the African church. Someone once said to me that he grew up singing repetitive songs at church until he became Reformed. Repetitive songs, he said, are not only considered biblically shallow by some but also galling by others. The discussion that follows is a reflection on this brief anecdote.
What makes a song shallow or sound is the presence or absence of substance.
In this article, I argue that what makes a song shallow or sound is the presence or absence of substance; not necessarily its structure, repetitive or non-repetitive. To try and calm the dust, I will show that repetition, as a rhetorical device, isn’t substance; rather, repetition serves substance as modelled in the Psalms. But let’s begin with why I think repetition in church liturgy is a boon to believers.
The Place for Repetition: Rhetorical Device
Writers do not employ repetition in their works for repetition’s sake. No. “Repetition is no numerical joke,” writes Mark Forsyth. In their presentations, preachers and poets use repetition as a rhetorical device that aids memorisation; evokes emotions; and emphasises specific arguments. We see this, for instance, in African folklore and song, where life lessons are generally conveyed through repetitive proverbs, poetry, story and song.
Through church music, theology can be administered in smaller and repetitive doses.
African church life is similar. In Uganda, for example, some songs like “Bwetusaba Mukama awulira” (God hears when we pray) are repeated choruses, emphasising that God indeed answers prayers, something Christians often forget amidst hardship. In fact, many Christians, including those in Reformed circles, often sing only hymn choruses and stanzas, so much so that they are unaware that these hymns have several verses. Because choruses or stanzas generally distil the song’s core idea, I find no drawback in singing them repetitively. This welcomes deeper reflection and understanding of the song’s theology.
Repeating choruses is also a good way to prevent theological overload. If some theological concepts are complex to understand in indigenous languages, how hard will it be in a second or third language? Since most songs considered “sound” are written in English, repetitive choruses can benefit the African church, especially children, new converts and new church members. For such people, theology in church music can be administered in smaller and repetitive doses to allow room for sustained reflection, memorisation and understanding. Otherwise, it is all too easy to sing truth mindlessly.
When Repetitive Songs Become Dangerous
It is also possible to perpetually sing lies. A friend said to me that, good as repetition may be, “there’s a syncretic tendency in African congregations to act like the prophets of Baal. The more we sing and repeat a part of a song, the stronger our experience of God’s presence.” This, he said, is endless repetition not of truth, but lies. Famous choruses like “Set a Fire” by Jesus Culture or, recently, Victoria Orenze’s “Too Oiled” tend to position man in God’s place and focus on man’s emotions and needs, misrepresenting God as a genie.
Repetitive songs aren’t worrying; it’s repeated lies in music that are terrifying.
Another friend said that “there’s something suspicious about singing the refrain ‘God is good’ for an hour, the godliness and goodness of the song withstanding.” Such singing only achieves a transient adrenaline hype, leaving singers theologically inept. And it’s galling to others. Yes, God is good. But what’s good about his goodness? If the answer to this question is not firmly grounded in God’s word, then the singing, however melodious, ceases to fortify the believer and the church.
We see now that repetitive songs aren’t worrying; it’s repeated lies in music that are terrifying. False ‘Christian’ artists use repetition as a rhetorical device to appeal to the masses while selling lies—music with no ties to historic Christianity. The end result is theological degradation and spiritual deprivation in the church.
Imitate the Repetition of the Psalms
Repetition as a rhetorical device should serve substance. Psalm 136, for example, models this.
The suppliant of Psalm 136 doesn’t leave us guessing what God’s goodness and steadfast love entail. Aware that the ink and paper were expensive, he spent money repeating two phrases for a reason. The refrains “his steadfast love endures forever” (repeated 26 times) and “give thanks to the Lord or God” (repeated four times) affirm profound theological truths worth pondering.
The refrains affirm profound theological truths worth pondering.
In recalling the events of their enslavement in Egypt (Psalm 136:10-16), the exodus and after (Psalm 136:17-22), the suppliant expresses gratitude toward God’s constant loyalty, love, goodness, and kindness. If you remember the story, God’s people weren’t loyal to God. They weren’t lovable or good. But the God who is good and gracious redeems his corrupt people. Importantly, the suppliant’s theology of redemption (Psalm 136:10-25) is built on his theology of creation (Psalms 136:1-9, 26). God sustains himself and all creation—including humanity, the jewel of his creation. The structural emphasis of Psalm 136 suggests that if we get the theology of creation wrong, everything dissipates.
False theology of creation begets false ‘Christian’ music. Psalm 136 uses repetition as a rhetorical device to emphatically affirm who God is and what he did. Likewise, let’s stop singing repeated choruses that invite and welcome the Holy Spirit. As an omnipresent God, he needs no invitation. Let’s stop singing those repeated, sweet-sounding lines that appear to strong-arm God and glorify man. God indeed works, albeit according to his will and not ours. Ultimately, for his purpose and glory. There’s nothing sweet about singing false theology (see Psalm 119:103). Thus, repetition, as a rhetorical device, ought to present God’s word in a compelling way.
Are Repetitive Songs Less Than Reformed?
No. Repetitive or non-repetitive church music doesn’t make one Reformed any more than playing a few chords makes one a musician. Rather than the repetitive nature of the chorus or stanza, our primary concern should be the correctness of its theology. As a rhetorical device, composers and singers can employ repetition to emphasise biblical truths. Psalm 136 models this, above. However, as a caveat, repetition is not set in stone in the Psalter, save for a few places, including Psalm 150 and Psalm 118. Therefore, we should be careful making it a norm for our church worship and liturgies.
Repetition grounded in theology has a unique way of allowing us to ponder God.
Avoid making hasty generalisations. Not every repetitive song or chorus is shallow. Repetitive choruses grounded in correct theology have a unique way of allowing us to ponder and wonder about God’s infinite beauty and goodness. So, slow down. Repeat that chorus. And, if need be, sing only that chorus. It might be a providential boon to that new convert or new church member.
DON’T HAVE PAYPAL TO SET UP A MONTHLY DONATION? If you would like to donate via Payfast – a secure payment gateway available to donors both inside and outside of Africa – please click here.
