Psalm 150 and dancing

Filed in Music Philosophy on August 29, 2011



Psalm 150 says this:

Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in the firmament of his power.  Praise him for his mighty acts; praise him according to his excellent greatness.  Praise him with the sound of the trumpet; praise him with the psaltery and harp.  Praise him with the timbrel and dance; praise him with stringed instruments and organs.  Praise him upon the loud cymbals; praise him upon the high sounding cymbals.  Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD.

It is always interesting to me to see how the church deals with this passage and specifically the elephant in the room: dancing.  In conservative circles, when this passage is discussed, it is most common to just see the elephant ignored.

So what does this passage say really about dance, or in more general terms, moving the body in worship?  I think it says two things:

1) There is no prohibition on worship music that leads to or encourages bodily movement (including dancing).  This is implied but obvious because music is always the catalyst for dance.
2) Some styles of dancing are acceptable and even encouraged in a worship setting.

And here are two things it does not say:

1) All dancing is appropriate in a worship setting.
2) Your worship has to include dancing.

Out of the four statements I just made, perhaps the most debatable is the last one.  But I don't think dancing is commanded and here is why: this psalm seems to be about encouraging passionate worship rather than commanding the use of specific instruments and/or dancing.  If dancing is commanded, then so would be the timbrel and harp.  I don't think any church is out of the will of God because they do not have a harp on the platform.

So what does this mean?  Well, a few things... 

First of all, there are people that claim that music that makes your body move is wrong.  Others make the blanket statement that all dancing is wrong.

People that say those kinds of things have a belief system that is in conflict with this passage.  And that makes them wrong.

There are others that use passages like this to say that dancing in any form is appropriate in a church.  Those people are overreaching and they are wrong too.

Before going further, I would like to say this.  Whichever side of this debate you are on, you should be gracious to the other side.  Not all conservatives are Pharisees; at least try to understand their concerns.  And if you are a conservative, when watching someone else move their body to music, think the best of them.  Unless you have convincing evidence to the contrary, assume those movements are within the framework of Psalm 150.

I recently saw a Catholic cardinal discussing the issue of dancing in church.  His opinion was interesting.  He said that in some cultures, it was perfectly fine; but in the US, it is not.  The reason? In the US, dancing is basically always sexual.

While I am no expert in dancing, I tend to agree.  All of the dancing that I know of in the United States culture tends to have sexual overtones.  The fact that our dancing is that way does not mean it is wrong.  I wish I was a better dancer.  I love to turn on some music, push back the furniture in the living room after the children go to bed and dance with my wife.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  In fact, it is a healthy thing.

But I don't see how that kind of dancing belongs in a church. 

On the other hand, I don't know everything about dancing, and some of you very well know of dancing styles that are absolutely appropriate for worship to God.  According to Psalm 150, such styles exist.  So if you know how to dance that way, do it to the glory of God. 

For that matter, come teach me to dance that way too.



Will you do me a personal favor?
If you use Facebook, please take a moment and comment on this post. I appreciate the feedback and doing this helps other people learn about my resources. Non-Facebook users can leave comments using the alternate form below.


Lance
8/29/2011 8:52:52 PM

Excellent Greg. A thoughtful, balanced approach to this is issue is in short supply.

---

James Carr
8/30/2011 9:52:54 AM

I am disappointed in this Greg. You are usually better than this. What gives you the idea that all dance in our culture has sexual overtones? Dancing with the Stars is designed to bring out sex whenever possible but there is plenty of dancing outside that paradigm that is not sexual in the least. Square Dancing comes to mind.

---

Greg
8/30/2011 10:03:57 AM

James, when I say there are sexual overtones, I do not mean that the dance itself is sexual. I am referring to the idea that the dances tend to be shared between a man and woman. Romance is a big element regardless of how innocent the dance itself is.

On the other hand, a non-sexual dancing style probably would not involve touching and the gender of the dancers would be unimportant.

---

Daniel Blomdahl
8/30/2011 5:11:46 PM

Right now I'm not against it as long as it isn't detracting from the focus of God. I have a problem with people who say that David didn't dance he just jumped for joy because of the original Hebrew. I use the reasoning that God preserved His Word and it says exactly what it meant. Why can't we believe what this says as easily as John 3:16. Sure the definition of dance has changed since then but if he jumped for joy the Bible could have said that too.

---

Lea Ann Garfias
8/30/2011 7:50:55 PM

I attended a performance of Handel's Messiah in a Baptist church that included dancing. Classically trained ballerinas interpreted the overture and interlude beautifully. They were dressed in long, flowing costumes that were modest and inconspicuous. It was an effective performance.

---

Glenn
8/31/2011 11:14:47 PM

Hate to pile on Greg but I think the others are right. There are non-sexual dances in our culture. They may not be the ones that you see on TV but they exist. Some ballet is not sexual for example.

---

Greg
8/31/2011 11:31:12 PM

OK guys, you are right. I forgot about classical dance and ballet.

---

Katrina
9/2/2011 7:35:42 PM

It seems to me that "appropriate dance" in a corporate worship setting must incorporate modesty in respect to fellow worshippers because dance is a visual art. And as sinners we are so easily be led into sin through our eyes - whether it's a man watching a dancing woman and wanting her, or a woman watching a woman and wanting to be like her.

At the surface, I see at least three applications for modesty: 1) Modesty in your interaction with someone of the opposite sex that is not a family member, meaning no touching. 2) Modesty in your dress, meaning nothing form fitting or revealing at all. 3) And modesty in movements, meaning abstaining from movements emphasizing the hips, breasts, ect...

I agree with Greg that much of dance in the US is sexual because in the broadest sense, dance in the US is immodest by the three standards described above. We ought not be surprised by this because our culture is immodest, even the Christian culture in the US, generally speaking.

---

Leave a Comment
All comments are reviewed for offensive content or spam. Your email is required but never used.

Name:
Website:
Email:
	Please email me follow up comments to this post.
Comment:	Note that HTML is not allowed, but your name will be linked to your site.
Verify Code: