Guest Post: The Hymnal Revision, Part 1 — Gently [, Accurately, and Kindly] Raise the Sacred Strain[s]

by danahc

Part 1: Theology and Practices

Note: This post is the first of a three-part series examining problematic lyrics as part of the Church’s hymnal revision.
Part 1: Theology and Practices
Part 2: Culture
Part 3: Gender

In June 2018, the Church announced a revision to the 1985 hymnal in order “to offer a consistent core collection of hymns and songs in every language that reflects the diverse needs of the global Church in our day.” To achieve that goal, members were “invited to participate in the revision process in unprecedented ways.” I was pleasantly surprised by this call for member input, including an online survey which encouraged suggestions of both additions and possible deletions.

And yet, the survey itself made me uneasy. While swapping out a few of the most problematic hymns would mark a great step forward, substitutions alone will not be sufficient to meet “the diverse needs of the global Church in our day.” A meaningful revision also will require re-assessing the lyrics in many of the retained hymns. Over the past 33 years, diction and syntax have evolved—erratically but unmistakably—toward greater linguistic inclusion, accuracy, and kindness.

This trend is consistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

This series of three posts examines the lyrics of our current hymns, categorizes some recurring issues, and suggests guidelines for revision.

Guiding Questions

Many of our current lyrics are beautiful and inspiring. However, some do not resonate with our time. For example, the traditional use of man (meaning everyone) is no longer a widely accepted way to describe all humans. Fortunately, a variety of more contemporary substitutes exist: we, us, one, you, all, or people. Even given the constraints of meter and rhyme, one-word solutions will suffice in some cases.

In other cases, the resonance problem lies not in a single word but in a hymn’s overall tone. For example, the hymns that call for armed conflict or revenge may be difficult to revise without a complete overhaul. Revising for tone—even when feasible and legal—is rarely a quick fix.

Quality revisions will include lyrics that are aspirational and true-to-life, that call us to our loftiest ideals and resonate with our times. Specifically, our scriptures teach that “all are alike unto God” (2 Nephi 26:33). If our hymns contradict this idea, what doth it profit to sing them? The way we select, edit, and revise the hymns, especially the beloved and traditional favorites, will reveal our values.

Toward that end, I propose some guiding questions for evaluating the lyrics of our current LDS hymns:

1. Do these lyrics honor, include, and apply to all God’s children regardless of race, gender, class, religion, culture, geography, marital status, household composition, sexual orientation, etc.?
• Do they welcome visitors as well as members?
• Do they imply a monopoly on goodness and truth for any one group of people?
• Do they single out any group of people for judgment or criticism?

2. Do these lyrics promote unity and peace among God’s children?
• Do they represent others respectfully and in ways that they could acknowledge as fair and accurate?
• Do they aggravate divisions, rely on conflict imagery, or teach the language of us-and-them?
• Could they inspire attitudes of moral and cultural superiority or behavior that condescends and offends?

3. Do these lyrics simplify general concepts in ways that cannot withstand scrutiny or fail to account for diverse human experience?
• Do they make limiting assumptions (obedience = happiness; sin = unhappiness; woman = mother; family = father + mother + biological children living at home, etc.)
• Do the lyrics teach lessons that might be traumatic to unlearn later?

Even minor edits to the text of beloved hymns will jar the tongues and ears of long-time singers. Some people will surely experience needed revisions as loss: attacks on our truth claims or submission to fickle political or social norms.

And yet, the gospel asks us to embrace necessary discomfort in our efforts to love ourselves and others, to welcome strangers, and to serve God in myriad unexpected ways. Let us ask no less of our hymns.

In that spirit, the following sections detail three categories of problematic lyrics: Theology and Practices, Culture, and Gender.

Problematic Lyrics: Theology and Practices

Outdated Language and Programs

Issue: These hymns made more sense in another era.
Recommendation: Revise or omit. For If You Could Hie to Kolob, consider the alternative lyrics I Heard the Voice of Jesus Say.

#3 Now Let Us Rejoice (“none will molest them”)
Do we want this sexual connotation?
#59 Come, O Thou King of Kings (“the chosen race”)
Could this phrase connote cultural superiority or even white supremacy?
#285 If You Could Hie to Kolob (“there is no end to race”)
Could this idea of “race” be used to condemn racial mixing or even to justify segregation?

Thirty-five years into the era of block schedules—and on the cusp of a new two-hour version with biweekly classes—these Sunday School hymns feel dated:

#276 Come Away to the Sunday School
#278 Thanks for the Sabbath School
#280 Welcome, Welcome, Sabbath Morning
#282 We Meet Again in Sabbath School

Saints or saints?

Issues: Saints functions as a proper noun when it is shorthand for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, so it should be capitalized. As a broad descriptor for followers of Christ, saints is a common noun that should not be capitalized. Over-capitalizing the word saints may appear to be a self-serving reference to the LDS people that excludes all other Christians.
Recommendation: Follow standard English capitalization rules. When in doubt, err on side of inclusion by using a lower-case s.

#3 Now Let Us Rejoice (“when all that was promised the Saints will be given”)
#55 Lo, the Mighty God Appearing (“sinners perish from before him, but his Saints his mercies share”)
#56 Softly Beams the Sacred Dawning (“and to Saints gives welcome warning”)
#57 We’re Not Ashamed to Own Our Lord (“the world will know the only name in which the Saints can trust”)
#59 Come, O Thou King of Kings (“that Saints may tune the lyre”)
#77 Great is the Lord (“well may the Saints in latter days His wondrous love proclaim”)
#81 Press Forward, Saints (“press forward, Saints, with steadfast faith in Christ”)
#82 For All the Saints (“for all the Saints who from their labors rest”)
#201 Joy to the World (“and Saints and angels sing”)

Dubious or Out of-Use Theology

Issues: These lyrics imply doctrines or refer to little-known concepts that are not part of current LDS curriculum—and perhaps theology.
Recommendation: Revise questionable theology to account for diverse human experience. Omit out-of-use theology.

#22 We Listen to a Prophet’s Voice (“the sacred message that he brings will witness and agree with ev’ry prophet called of God throughout earth’s history”)
Do all prophets throughout time “agree”?
#48 Glorious Things are Sung of Zion (“for in Adam-ondi-Ahman Zion rose where Eden was”)
Are we prepared to defend a historical location for Eden? Is this idea doctrine?
(“we’ll all see eye to eye”)
Is complete agreement feasible or consistent with contemporary notions of agency and pluralism?
#85 How Firm a Foundation (“I only design thy dross to consume and thy gold to refine”)
Does God “design” our suffering (cancer, car accidents, spina bifida, depression)?
#128 When Faith Endures (“I will not doubt”)
Is doubt bad or forbidden?
#266 The Time is Far Spent (“the favor of Ahman”)
Do most members know this terminology? Does it distract or confuse singers?
#285 If You Could Hie to Kolob
Do most members know these words? Is Kolob doctrinal?

Continued: The next post examines culture in the LDS hymn lyrics.

danahc is a chamber choir singer, professor, and ward music chair in Indiana