Multicultural Worship in the Song of Zechariah and Contemporary Christian Worship
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author explores ethics of “speaking” the artistic language of diverse cultures in the earliest Christian communities by examining the New Testament text, the Benedictus (Luke 1:68–79) and argues that the text was meant for communal performance while connecting to modern Christian worship. The author attempts to provide evidence for the Benedictus as a lyrical poem containing the “multi-lingualism” of both Hebrew and Greek poetic idioms while connecting artistic communal expression in its first century context with Nathan Myrick’s Music for Others (2021) concept of musical caring, then broadens the topic to allow for uncertainty of the Benedictus’s first-century performance methods. The author concludes by considering the twenty-first century implications from such care and inclusivity in the first century, framing the argument around the idea of what is or is not inclusive.
This is a very interesting and relevant work, particularly as it comes at a very divisive time in American history. The suggestion that “acceptance and inclusivity” plays a larger role in the narrative seems appropriate. However, I wonder if the author should refer to Paul’s “all things to all people” passage. Below is a valuable passage that might be more engaging if connecting to Paul’s passage (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). I have provided the extended quote below.
“Similarly, the adoption of a foreign or even ‘pagan’ artform into a liturgical context provided an opportunity to the early Jesus followers to realize that those different than them were not inherently the enemy. They could live as a community of believers peacefully within a larger culture, engaging with that culture, and welcoming aspects of that culture into their communal practices. Other cultural practices of civic and cultic participation—these two were closely intertwined—never found a home in the Jesus movement: animal sacrifice, cult prostitutes, gladiatorial games, polytheism, or ancestor worship. Various aspects of these ran in contrast to instructed behaviors for the followers of Jesus. However, styles of song, at least initially, seems to have been an area of welcome acceptance and inclusivity” (6).
The author argues that The Song of Zechariah’s “layering of both Hebrew and Greek poetry together in the same lines suggests that multicultural worship is not having a worship jukebox that jumps from one genre to the next with each song, creating a musical schizophrenia.” Instead, with the appropriate blending, “it invites simultaneous joint participation from the diverse cultures represented in the community” (7). This point is certainly appropriate, particularly within the context of our modern “jukebox” world as modeled by digital service providers (DSPs) such as Spotify and Apply Music.
The use of sacred music (how it has evolved with culture and technology) has been the subject of debate for centuries. The church has debated over the primacy of acapella music, the acceptable use of instruments, and the perceived evil of the violin, the organ, and the drums. Naturally this extended to genre and style with the beginning of contemporary Christian music as the genre’s evolution closely paralleled that of rock & roll. The author briefly touches on this, suggesting that “while different genres are not inherently evil or prone to causing listeners to sin as 20th century Christian traditionalists claimed, the exclusion or inclusion of artistic styles and musical genres speak to the ethics of who does or does not naturally belong in the community of faith,” going on to claim that “a single genre or artistic idiom receive preferential treatment within the faith” (7). I think it would be wise for the author to include another reference to current scholarship as it relates to contemporary worship. They have rightly chosen to Ingalls, Porter, Taylor, and other relevant scholars. It would be nice to see how this might connect to the modern world of multiple, evolving genres. Not required, but would be nice.
I think this is a valuable contribution to the larger debate about the evolution of worship music and sacred text.
Author Response
COMMENT 1: Reviewer provides an accurate summary of my article.
RESPONSE 1: Thank you for this summary I feel you have accurately captured and understood the form and major points of the article.
COMMENT 2: "I wonder if the author should refer to Paul’s “all things to all people” passage. Below is a valuable passage that might be more engaging if connecting to Paul’s passage (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). I have provided the extended quote below."
RESPONSE 2: Thank you for this recommendation. From a Biblical Studies perspective, I am reticent to overly claim that Luke is "saying here" what Paul is "saying there." But from a Theological perspective, this is a helpful insight to demonstrate the correspondence across the New Testament. I agree with the recommendation and have added on to the paragraph referenced on pg. 6 to continue: "Here we see an example of the Pauline concept of “being all things to all people . . . for the sake of the gospel, that I might share with them in its blessings” (1 Cor 9:22-23, ESV) both expanded and constrained. The liturgical experience of a multicultural hymn expands this Pauline adage by inviting every member to practice “being” something that they “might share with them in [the gospel’s] blessing.” In its historical-cultural context, it also constrains the Pauline passage, demonstrating that Paul and other believers would (or should) not break certain moral principles “that [they] might save some” (v. 22). Hymnic or poetic styles, like dietary habits (Gal 2:11–14; 1 Cor 9:21), were negotiable practices while the previously mentioned cultic practices of the dominant pagan culture were not acceptable in the name of winning “those outside the law.” "
COMMENT 3: I think it would be wise for the author to include another reference to current scholarship as it relates to contemporary worship. They have rightly chosen to Ingalls, Porter, Taylor, and other relevant scholars. It would be nice to see how this might connect to the modern world of multiple, evolving genres. Not required, but would be nice.
RESPONSE 3: This is a great recommendation and a self-assessment I had post-submission. I have added an extended footnote [22] on pg.6–7.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is simply an original, well-argued, well-structured, and well-referenced paper that I wouldn't have anything to add to (unless, I'd really look for something to criticize, which I don't think is my job). Hence the (very) positive review results.
Author Response
COMMENT 1: This is simply an original, well-argued, well-structured, and well-referenced paper that I wouldn't have anything to add to (unless, I'd really look for something to criticize, which I don't think is my job). Hence the (very) positive review results.
RESPONSE 1: Thank you for the encouraging words and review.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsFor general impression and essential comments - see attached file, sections 1-2.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
For typos, grammatical and stylistic inaccuracies - see attached file, sections 3-12.
Author Response
COMMENT 1: "the keywords are not set and what appears instead is still: "keyword 1; keyword 2; keyword 3 . . . "
RESPONSE 1: Good point. This was an oversight on my part in the submission phase and has been remedied in its proper place.
COMMENT 2: "
b) footnotes nos. 1-14 and 17 are designated with “●” instead of the numbers;
c) numeration in References section starts with an empty line numbered “1.” and ends with an empty line numbered “39.”: correction needed."
RESPONSE 2: I combine these because the both appear to be a technical glitch that occurred during the submission and download process since neither existed in my saved copy that i submitted. However, I have remedied these problems in the v2 file I downloaded and hope the corrected formatting is retained in this round of uploading.
COMMENT 3: "The Abstract literally quotes the second paragraph of the Introduction, word for word. The only difference is the hyphens in "Bene-dictus" and "multi-lingualism" in the Abstract compared to the same text in the Introduction, where there are no such hyphens;"
RESPONSE 3: in preparing an abstract, this introductory paragraph provided an abstract as good as anything else I could think to write. I also see this quite commonly in journal articles in general. If this is problematic for this journal, please further confirm. For now, I have left the abstract and second paragraph as-is with any other revisions mentioned elsewhere.
COMMENT 4: the title refers to “Song of Zechariah,” while the Abstract/Introduction refers to Benedictus. There is no further mention of Benedictus in the text, and the Abstract/Introduction does not explain that they are the same. For example, after the first mention of Benedictus one might add: “aca Song of Zechariah” or “also known as Song of Zechariah.”
RESPONSE 4: Thank you for pointing this out. I tend to use the labels interchangeably, however, in this article, as you rightly note, I do not other then in this paragraph. I have remedied this by always using "The Song of Zechariah" in the prose and clarified its label of "the Benedictus" in parentheses after its first use (see pg. 1, the Abstract and paragraph 2 of the body).
COMMENT 5: P. 7, last phrase before Appendix: “...other than for some of my Catholic friends” – You seem to be making quite a personal reference in the very last sentence of your article. Is that what you want the reader to remember? You might consider using the word "generally" ("...is generally not...") instead, without specifying who might have a different opinion.
RESPONSE 5: Thank you for this comment. This emdashed statement was supposed to provide a friendly nod to those that might give a place of preference to the Latin language. However, after re-reading the final sentence after your observation, I find this language distracting. I have changed it to read "Just as a single language or idioma is not premier within the majority of the Christian faith," (8).
COMMENT 6: Incorrect abbreviation: p. 1, “Introduction,” line 5: “e.i.” instead of “i.e.”
RESPONSE 6: This was actually supposed to be e.g. (for example) and has been changed to such.
COMMENT 7: The following passage may need to be rephrased: “...certain melodies are more idiomatic for violins than they are flutes of voices” (p. 1, “Introduction,” line 6). This may mean: “voices of flutes” or “in the voices of flutes.”
RESPONSE 8: This was meant to say "flutes or voices." I have made this change and clarified further: "than they are for flutes or the human voice.)" (introduction, para 1, lines 6–7).
COMMENT 9: P. 3, line 28: “...based on the stories of the patriarchs journey to Egypt and later Exodus” – an apostrophe is required after the word “patriarchs.”
RESPONSE 10: Thank you for catching this. I have added the apostrophe.
COMMENT 11: P. 4, line 9 from the bottom: “int eh” seems like a typo that should be omitted.
RESPONSE 11: This was actually supposed to be "in the" and has been corrected as such.
COMMENT 12: P. 4, fn [11]: “I will treat the surviving poetic elements of the songs as musical elements are refer to them as such.” – something is wrong or missing: consider revising/rewording. Perhaps, “...referring to them as such.”
RESPONSE 13: Thank you again. This now reads "and refer to them as such."
COMMENT 14: P. 5, line 2: “a idiom” – should be “an idiom.”
RESPONSE 14: You are correct and this has been changed.
COMMENT 15: P. 5, lines 21-22: “this article focuses on the role music can plan in uniting previously incongruous communities.”: perhaps, “play.”
RESPONSE 16: You are, once again, correct and this change has been made.
COMMENT 17: P. 7, lines 7-9: “Converts from new cultures should not be asked to participate in the cultural normal of the original or dominant people group.” Consider rewording: “in the cultural norms of...”?
RESPONSE 18: Again, great recommendation and catch. I have modified this to say: "Converts from new cultures should not be asked to adopt the cultural norms of the original or dominant people group." (p. 7)
COMMENT 19: P. 7. Conclusions, first line: “Embedded in the Lukan nativity narrative lies [the Song of Zechariah which offers a combining of both Hebrew and Greek poetic forms into a song intended for corporate worship and edification.]” Please check if you mean to use this exact word.
RESPONSE 19: Thank you for this comment. There are too many verbs in this sentence. It now reads: "Embedded in the Lukan nativity narrative, the Song of Zechariah combines Hebrew and Greek poetic forms into a song intended for corporate worship and edification." The word "lies" was not needed, nor was the laborious "offers a combining."
Thank you again for all the insightful recommendations.
