Worship leaders, musician, writers know what I talking about here…
The line in “How He Loves” (John Mark McMillan) that says “Heaven meets earth like a sloppy wet kiss” is this point of conversation. David Crowder came out w/ his cover of the song with his edit that says “Heaven meets earth like an unforeseen kiss”.
I’m not going to talk about my opinion on the lyric change. I just wanted to express my take on why I sing “sloppy wet kiss”.
There is something beautiful and intimate in the line. Our Creator meeting us in an intimate exchange. When my son Elijah sometimes leans in to me and kisses me w/ the most joyful playful affection, it could be described as a sloppy wet kiss. Personally, the simple idea that God leaned down and allowed us (the earth) to be met w/ on such an intimate level brings a smile to my face and worship up in my soul.
So, for those that wonder, discuss, and converse on this type of approach of thought provoking lyrics, please dream and compose on. Part of my philosophy is to teach people within the Church through songs that not only encourage and cultivate a spirit of unity and volume in singing uplifting songs to our God, as well as to learn, think, and even contemplate the layers to the lyrics that we sing every Sunday. Conversation over lunch afterwards, in community group, or even at home w/ the family is a good thing. Especially if it is honest.
Chad Jarnagin
J.J. Merrick
April 20, 2010 at 8:17 am
Good words. The song itself is so powerful and if you have any doubt watch JMM do it live here…
Whit
April 20, 2010 at 8:55 am
It annoys me how the church will openly say that God loves us more intimately than we can imagine, yet when we describe God’s love intimately, people get weird about it. Intimacy requires trust and the change in lyrics is, I believe, a symptom of the larger issue that is a culture with too much outside of God to rely on.
Chad Jarnagin
April 20, 2010 at 10:31 am
I feel you Whit. You’re on to something. I too believe that it is a symptom of a larger issue.
We had a short convo this morning in my mentoring group about this. It might even go to the degree of the way we are sharing the Story through songwriting and worship leading. Like many have said on Twitter today, this line shows an intimate connection that invokes an emotional response.
Continue the discussion please.
Thanks for the input guys.
Nic Allen
April 20, 2010 at 10:57 am
Okay – I think the wet kiss lyric is certainly provocative and for that I like it. If it makes us think about the words we sing and what they mean to our covenant relationship to God – then it’s worth it. I wrestle with the word sloppy (a little not a lot) – not because I don’t think it emphasizes carefree intimacy well but because it might border on carelessness which to me can’t ever describe the nature of God. For me, it’s really neither here nor there. I also like the lyric change because the way we’re loved by our Maker is definitely unforseen and also undeserved.
If I may switch gears, my absolute favorite lyric in the song is “We are His portion and He is our prize,” emphasis on the first clause. It comes from Deuteronomy 32:9 which reads, “For the LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance.” I love that. With all the mentions in scripture of God being our portion, I am fascinated by the fact that we are also His portion. Referencing the holy land being divided up to the tribes…each one receiving his portion of God’s blessing…I am mystified by US, believers, Christ followers being God’s portion of the covenant blessing.
While I like singing a lyric of HOW God loves us (sloppy and wet and intimate and unexpected) I am also so glad to sing one that tells WHY he loves us…cause we’re His portion, His piece of the blessing. That’s a hill I could spend some time on. Woah! Neat discussion. Happy I stumbled in on it.
Sarah
April 20, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Love the conversation. There are great things being said by everyone. I personally have always loved the song and that lyric…I think it does represent an intimate God…a Creator…a passionate Savior…My thought is two-fold…I think it makes me more sad than anything that a line like that would cause someone to not be able to worship…that it bothers them to the point of having to say something. And at the same time I love that it bothers people…to the point of having to say something…to me that is proof of God working in that persons life. Someone who “doesn’t care” …well…doesn’t care. SO the fact that people are talking is a sign that they care. It is how we respond that either encourages them to pursue the questioning…or stop. I hope we have more of this. :)
Leslie
April 20, 2010 at 2:11 pm
I agree with you. I totally like the words “wet sloppy kiss” as opposed to the alternative. Reason being, it shows intimacy without perfection. Our relationships with God are messy. Sloppy or not sloppy, the intention is always the same. God’s love is there.
Alastair
April 20, 2010 at 2:17 pm
I sing “wet sloppy kiss” because that’s the way John wrote it. This is a piece of art in a sense and I wouldn’t feel right changing that to suit me. If I had a problem with the lyric I would just pass on the song as a whole.
It’s similar to buying a Randy Elrod painting, taking it home and painting on a bikini to cover the boobies. Randy would not be impressed. (Came here through Randy’s retweet).
Kit Palmer
April 20, 2010 at 4:46 pm
The first time I heard this song (Kim Walker’s version) I was unaware of the controversy, but I was blown away by it. I listened to it at my desk over and over, trying to not breakdown and cry around my co-workers.
After all the “”hoopla” started going around about the “sloppy wet kiss”, I thought the whole thing was ridiculous, and I was a little disappointed about the fact that DC*B altered them for their version, until I read a post on John Mark McMillan’s blog.
I think JMM’s own explanation sums it up best:
“The idea behind the lyric is that the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of earth converge in a way that is both beautiful and awkwardly messy. Think about the birth of a child, or even the death of Jesus himself. These miracles are both incredibly beautiful and incredibly sloppy (“gory” may be more realistic, but “Heaven meets earth like a gory mess” didn’t seem to have the same ring)…..I applaud David for changing the line to serve his people, and at the same time I boo the machinery that would cause him to have to do so.”
You can read John’s full post here: http://johnmarkmcmillan.blogspot.com/2009/09/how-he-loves-david-crowder-and-sloppy.html
And Alastair, I love you example of the Randy Elrod painting…spot on!
Ken Allen
April 20, 2010 at 9:26 pm
My wife and I were talking about this very line a couple of months back. This is good conversation. I love everyone’s points here actually. Well, all but “Dooger”. Not sure what his deal is.
We too have been moved to tears by the anointing on this song. Such a moving spirit to it. Funny how one line can spark so much discussion when it isn’t even the most powerful line of the song.
Thanks the post Chad. Love YOUR songs and the heart you lead people with.
Chad Jarnagin
April 20, 2010 at 10:39 pm
Thank you Ken. Bye Dooger.
Kit Palmer
April 21, 2010 at 7:22 am
Dang. Sorry I missed Dooger’s comment. Sounds like it was a “good one”!
Mark Jaffrey
April 21, 2010 at 9:14 am
Isn’t the issue one of culture? When leading worship and therefore choosing worship songs, we are putting words into the mouths of the people we are leading. We have a responsibility therefore to make sure we are choosing songs that express what the people want to say in worship. If you are leading a congregation of peeps under the age of 35 then “Sloppy Wet Kiss” will probably not cause them to wince. If you are leading a more conservative, or older crowd, then that phrase might be a barrier to their worship instead of an inspiration. It could cause them to wince, not wonder.
Personally, with this song, I wonder, my wife winces, and she’s neither older nor conservative :-)
Chad Jarnagin
April 21, 2010 at 9:41 am
YES Mark! Good thoughts mate. I was hoping we would go there in this conversation.
Most of my thought on this is that it should be allowed to be a “teaching” moment. As I share the story of my little one coming up to me to give me one of “his kisses”, there is an understand that might begin there in that moment. Dots begin to connect. Wonder might even be birthed from there…
This isn’t something that I’m not sure I would welcome on every single song, every single Sunday… but is it a valid effort to pursue? I hope it is.
Being conservative is fine by nature, and I’m not willing to judge people’s emotional connection w/ their Creator, but if we’re content w/ just believing that older conservative believers are the way they are and we should “play nice”? Well, I would need more dialog on this.
Mark, love your heart and friendship. Hope this comment is making sense. Hope I’m not not opinionated. If so, that’s on me.
Dominic Menard
April 21, 2010 at 12:14 pm
I think the simple response to any criticism of the “sloppy wet kiss” notion is to make a simple change in the lyric preceding those words:
Original:
And heaven meets earth like a sloppy wet kiss.
Dominic’s suggestion:
And earth greets heaven with a sloppy wet kiss.
This picture is of a baby trying to kiss his father.
Just my 2¢
Peace,
Domnic
Devon
April 21, 2010 at 5:12 pm
I have to admit that I just heard John Mark’s version. Having heard David Crower Band’s version I can see how they wanted to change that one lyric. It wouldn’t work for the masses. Basically because I believe that Christians overall are conservative.
I actual like how you have put it here Chad. You have given me something to think about. Thanks.
Matt
May 29, 2010 at 4:04 am
One thing that the body of Christ seems to have lost is the ability think. People, Jesus is our lord, not our boyfriend. God is our Father, not our sexual lover, although he loves us. It seems that many within the body today are getting Agape Love (the love God has for us, which is unconditional) and Eros Love (the love I have for my wife, which causes me to desire to do things with her and to her sexually). We do not think of those things in relation to our father (unless we are from an area known for inbreeding, like the bayou’s in the States or Tasmania if in Australia as I am) so why do we talk and sing about this sort of intimacy in relation to our heavenly father. It sounds very incestuous and is theologically incorrect. The Song of Solomon is a portrait of human relationships and intimacy within marriage, not a Eros Love realationship between God and Man!!!
Matt
May 29, 2010 at 4:09 am
Oh and by the way, God wishes to use us to get his grace to sinful people like a hose gets water to thirsty people. And, the reason a hose works is because it is not full of itself Chad Jarnagin. Songwriter. Worship Leader. Artist. Pastor. Creative Ideologist. Vocal Coach. Experience Architect.
:)
Matt
Chad Jarnagin
May 30, 2010 at 10:57 pm
Matt. Thank you for your thoughtful input and for your obvious arrogance.
I would dare to say that some over think. I understand and have to agree to your definitions. However, I believe you find yourself off base in this conversation. Don’t get me wrong, I AM grateful for your time, readership, & input… but it is His Spirit that resonates in me thru the lyrics in question. Not argument or theological debate can or will influence that.
That’s why I shared it on my “full of myself” site.
Thanks for the love, brother.
:)
Matt
June 1, 2010 at 1:02 am
Hi Chad,
Glad to see the gift of sarcasm still operating in the modern world. I would also encourage you to take your tongue out of your cheek before biting down as it will hurt if you don’t.
Matt
p.s.
I don’t know if you have noticed, but the first six sentences in your description of yourself start with ‘I’. A bit like a lot of modern ‘worship’ music really.
I sincerely pray that God will have his will in your life, and , ask that you will do the same for me. If I am wrong Lord, please let me know.
Jen
June 2, 2010 at 8:45 am
Matt,
Really? You seriously spend your time criticizing and insulting others in the name of Christ on THEIR sites. Not very Christlike. You also did not read properly. Not once did Chad mention sexual love as an metaphor. He used the example of the love between a child and his father. Last time I checked, that is the relationship we are supposed to have with our heavenly father. Please don’t bother responding to me, b/c you might make me stumble in anger and I’m sure you wouldn’t want that being so superior and all.
Chad Jarnagin
June 2, 2010 at 1:23 pm
Matt, honestly I’m not sure what your “beef” is. Most of your comments are off topic and abrasive. Obviously I did jab back. That’s part of the “fun” right? :)
Those “I” are for those coming to my site that don’t know who the heck I am… Really? G’day to you.
Jen, thanks.
Matt
June 2, 2010 at 3:29 pm
You win Jen. You don’t need to read my comments anymore.
Chad, my ‘beef’ is with the way worship music has become more about our relationship with God, in a mushy way, rather than the magnificence, glory, impotence, mercy and grace of God. And this is a symptom of the feminisation of our society. The same feminisation of our society which causes authentic maleness and manliness to be demonised in an effort to make little boys into little girls so they won’t be ‘violent’. The same feminisation that disempowers men to the point where they no longer feel valued or worthwhile enough to remain in families and so abandon their children. Much of my anger about this comes from the fact that I am a School Chaplain in a public school and see the results of what I am talking about every day in the lives of the kids I deal with. The sexual abuse by mainly stepfathers, the promiscutiy of young girls, owing to their femininity never being validated because they have been abandoned or even abused by every man who has ever been in their life, the willingness of young boys (and even some older ones) who are so ready to exploit young girls who are vulnerable in this way, young boys ready to take their own lives because they’ve never had a man to show them how to behave and so are very confused at the dissonance they experience beyween their natural male instincts and the disapproval of society regarding these things. The same feminisation that causes men to be painted as bumbling morons by the sitcoms and media generally whilst women are painted as competent and powerful. All of this is points to a great travesty; -and the body of Christ has run with this. We have not only accepted this ugly, damaging, ungodly philosophy, but have promoted it to the point where young guys in our churches look more like girls than the girls do, and we justify it by calling it fashion and men don’t even want to be in church because we do not cater for manliness at all.
I was a bit harsh in my prior post and for this I apologise. I stand by the essence of what I said however.
Here is a link that may interest you and there is a book called “No More Christian Nice Guy” that spells this out very well.
http://turnabout.ath.cx:8000/node/2
Regads Matt
Chad Jarnagin
June 2, 2010 at 4:45 pm
Matt, THIS is where I would have hoped your 1st or 2nd post would have gone. THIS might be worth conversation… I can see this here in America in some circles. I do NOT believe this is a place that me, my family, or my fellowship live. I take it you’re aware of Mark Driscoll (Mars Hills Church – Seattle).
However, embracing an emotional capacity for the Almighty is a heathy and life changing thing. The means in which a believer communes w/ the Holy God thru His Spirit shouldn’t be a judgement from anyone.
Anyone else want to jump back in?
Tanner Dalton
June 2, 2010 at 8:30 pm
To navigate back to the topic
Chad,
Well said. As a matter of fact I was going to blog about this but now I’ll just post a link to your post. As an artist, when I worship its word pictures that speak to my soul about the truth of God’s word and his promises. McMillan did a beautiful job at painting a picture with his lyrical content. I lead with this song in the set often and I’ve always sang this version. I love Crowder and like his rewrite but the original has a raw quality about it that I love. The students are responding in such a huge way to McMillans version and that’s what we’re doing after all, leading believers. :)
Thanks Chad,
Tanner
Chad Jarnagin
June 3, 2010 at 1:50 pm
I can understand that Tanner. It continues to be refreshing to see younger people have a desire for the raw and passionate side of the faith.
hope you are well man. stay in touch.
Jeff
August 28, 2010 at 8:14 am
This is absolutely the lamest discussion in the world and the fact that anybody even cared enough to get bent out of shape about it is such a distraction and waste of time and furthermore those who engage the discussion and defend the lyric need to get off our computers and go do something useful for God: you know, like argue Calvinism vs Arminianism, or whether or not Christians should go to Disney World or which Bible translation is best or whether we are premillenial or not…you know, the stuff that matters to a dying world looking for light from the church.
I’m tired of seeing forums about this; if you like it sing it if not find a different song. The way this thing is being played out anyway is going to turn it into the next “I Can Only Imagine”; I’m waiting to hear it playing on muzak in Walgreens or an elevator.