Bad worship songs - Names (Cook, Ingram, Hudson)

From time to to we examine the lyrics of worship songs. Our desire is not to mock or humiliate, but rather to honestly examine content with a view to calling forth a better worship expression.

With the great volume and variety of worship music available, none of us should have to settle for bad worship songs. We should be able to select hundreds or even thousands of top notch songs very easily.

What makes a song a worship song? Is it enough to contain words like God or holy? How about vaguely spiritual sounding phrases? Should Jesus be mentioned?

We think an excellent worship song should contain the following elements:

• A direct expression of adoration (God, you are...)
• A progression of ideas that culminates in a coherent story
• A focus on God, not us
• Lyrics that do not create uncertainty or cause confusion
• A certain amount of profundity
• A singable, interesting melody
• Allusions to Scripture
• Doctrinal soundness
• Not excessively metaphorical
• Not excessively repetitive
• Jesus is not your boyfriend

It's worth noting the most worship songs contain at least something good. That is, there might be a musical idea or a lyric that has merit. Such is the case with this song, Names.
--------------------

(video)

Lyrics:

[Verse 1]
You are the medicine
The only cure for everything I feel within
Redeeming what was lost and all that could have been
Oh, this is a healing kind of love

[Verse 2]
You are the truest friend
Staying through the night when I was at my end
Comforting my heart till it was light again
Oh, this is a faithful kind of love
Yes, it is

[Chorus]
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace
Immanuel, God with us, You're here with me
Wonderful Counselor
The government is resting on Your shoulders

[Verse 3]
You are the final word
You alone decide when every page will turn
So I will trust Your timing, I will rest secure
Oh, this is a steady kind of love
Oh-oh-oh-oh, You are

[Bridge]

Your names say it all, they say it all

I stand in awe of you.

Overview

This is a pretty basic production, with no indigo lighting, smoke machines, or laser beams. The version we linked to is a live performance in an informal setting, with worshipers encircling the band. Swaying worshipers with pained expressions, unfortunately. 

The video carefully edits the camera angles in a manner that reflects the music arrangement, so at the beginning we see only the piano player and the singer surrounded by the crowd. We start to see brief glimpses of the other band members as the song approaches the second verse. 

Though the band will fully arrive at the chorus, we don't actually hear much of them apart from the piano, a single sporadic background vocal, some muffled drums, and an occasional note from the bass. No electric or acoustic guitar at all. And we were unable to determine who was playing the synth pad, it was apparently added post-production.

During the big build through the bridge the crowd is thrashing with their arms and they're bending over in fervent worship, but right at the very moment the bridge reaches its climax and goes into a quiet section, the gesturing and histrionics suddenly stop as if the crowd knew exactly what was going to happen and when. We found this very odd.

The Music

The singer approaches the song with the irritating sound of little girl, coupled with Elmer Fudd pronunciations. We don't wish to demean the singer, but if British rock groups can sing and sound like an American rock band, this singer should be able to adapt her pronunciations to something a little less distracting.

The song is almost entirely derivative. There is nothing new under the sun, of course, but this song feels like the songwriters had nothing to offer. The verse melody is lifted from "Heart of Glass" by Blondie with different chords. The chorus is also somehow familiar, reminding us of Forever by Kari Jobe. The bridge melody is largely quarter notes, and it reminds us of Build My Life's bridge.

It seems every slow worship song starts out with a sustained synth pad. But at least this gives way to an actual piano intro. However, it's nothing to write at home about, with a quarter note/quarter note/half note pattern. 

The intro chords are I sus - I (repeated) - V/1 bass - V sus (repeated) - I sus (2nd inversion) - I (2nd inversion) - I sus/6 bass, vi, V sus - IVsus2.

The verse chords are I sus -I - I sus - I - V sus, followed by I sus/VI - vi - V sus - IV sus.

Subsequent verses have some variation from this.

The melody has no skyscraper notes and is simple and singable. The chorus chords are I - V/I - V - vi - IV, then repeated.

The bridge chords are I - I (2nd inversion) -vi - IV, which varies as the song proceeds. 

The Lyrics

The first thing we do regarding the evaluation of a song's lyrics is to read them aloud to see if they make sense, tell a coherent story, and are not confusing. The title of the song is Names, so we would expect the song to extoll the many names of our God. And it does this in the chorus, but for some reason the verses are about entirely different topics.

All three of the verses make conclusions regarding various kinds of love. Verse one is about redemption and healing love. But it doesn't mention who is being sung about. We as Christians of course would infer that the lyrics are about God, but honestly, they could be about Buddha, or even the singer's boyfriend. 

Again, the song is called Names, but verse one doesn't do any naming. 

As we evaluate lyrics we also want to know if they include odd or unbiblical metaphors. The first verse tells us He is the medicine, the cure for whatever it is the songwriters are feeling inside. The reader might be forgiven if he thought this is about salvation or healing. But it's not, it's about feelings. Medicine that fixes feelings, rather than salvation that makes a new creation.

Let's fix verse one:

You are salvation
The only cure for creation that is lost in sin
Redeeming from the grave, and the death that could have been
Oh, this is a saving kind of love

It's now consistent with itself and focused on God with no self-referents. But it still fails to lead us into the topic of the song, Names. Let's try again:

You are Hosanna

There is no other name by which we can be saved

Lamb of God, the one who died and rose again

Oh, this is the God who conquered death

We didn't spend a long time on this, so it isn't perfect. But it isn't terribly hard to write lyrics that are about and sung to God without making it about us.

Verse two is about about friendship and being comforted with faithful love. Again, these lyrics could be about anyone, since the one doing the comforting is not mentioned. Also, this comforting lasts only through the night, because the lyrics tell us that the comfort stopped when it was light again. Though it would seem to a literal night, metaphorically it could be a dark period of life, subsequently breaking out of it and into the light of a new season. But because the song has yet to mention names, this isn't immediately apparent. 

When we arrive at the chorus we discover who we've been singing about. And these are direct quotes of some of the titles of God, taken from Isaiah 9:6 and 7:14. This is a welcome development. Plus, it fulfils the topic promised in the title.

Verse three is about faithfulness and being secure in steady love. Astonishingly, the subject is still not named. Granted we just came out of the chorus to arrive here, so we do now know who we are singing about, but we still regard this as a grave flaw in the narrative.

The bridge is a proclamation, "Your names say it all," with a further statement of being in awe. This lyric seems profound but is actually meaningless. "Say it all" about what, exactly? About the songwriter's previously noted feelings? "Say it all" as in everything about God's nature? "Say it all" as in God having the final word? "Say it all" as in the songwriter's conclusion that they have said it all?

The verses didn't set us up for this idea, and in fact we are supplied with only four of God's names (Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace, Immanuel, and Wonderful Counselor), in the chorus. So the song itself does not "say it all." 

The verses, then, should have created a narrative that leads up to this grand proclamation. Verse one, God the savior, God the healer. Verse two, God the faithful comforter. Verse three, God the steadfast sustainer. Clearly stated because we shouldn't have to guess. The worshiper should not be forced to stop to consider what is the meaning of the lyrics.

There are a good amount of words, which we think constitutes a wasted opportunity, because the lyrics, aside from wandering about, repeatedly turn towards self when they should have been about God. Every section of the song contains at least one self referent.  

This is just bad lyric writing, making a worship song solipsistic. 

Conclusion

There's nothing particularly heretical or inappropriate about this song. It's not hard to sing or play, It is a typical generic worship song with nothing profound to say. There are ten thousand other songs that better express the worship of  God.

Despite the video depicting fervent worship, the song isn't particularly worshipful. We tepidly recommend it.