One of the most repeated claims in popular church music discussions is the assertion that “many old hymns were originally bar songs” or that the church intentionally borrowed tunes from taverns and pubs in order to make worship music more familiar to ordinary people. The statement is appealing because it sounds rebellious, clever, and historically grounded. It is frequently repeated in sermons, church music workshops, and online debates as a defense for contemporary worship styles. Yet the historical evidence for this sweeping claim is remarkably thin. While a small number of hymn tunes may have connections to secular melodies, the broad narrative that churches routinely adopted drinking songs for congregational worship is largely a myth.
Part of the confusion comes from the way music functioned in earlier centuries. Before recordings, radio, or commercial copyright systems, melodies circulated freely among many different social settings. A tune might appear in a folk song, a dance collection, a theatrical work, and later in a sacred text. This does not necessarily mean the church “borrowed” a tavern song. In many cases, the tune already existed in broader musical culture long before it appeared in either a church or a pub. Folk melodies were communal property, not the exclusive possession of any one setting or institution. The English tune GREENSLEEVES (from approximately 1580), now commonly associated with the Christmas carol What Child Is This? (text from 1865), demonstrates this kind of circulation. Long before its later sacred association, the melody appeared widely in instrumental collections, ballad traditions, and popular secular settings throughout England. Its history reflects the fluid movement of melodies across society rather than a deliberate effort by the church to adopt bar music.
The claim also misunderstands the chronology of many famous hymn tunes. Some melodies now accused of being “bar songs” were actually composed for sacred or formal use first. Over time, popular culture adopted and reused these tunes in secular contexts because they were memorable and widely known. In other words, the movement of music often flowed from church to society rather than from tavern to sanctuary. This pattern was especially common in Europe and early America, where churches were among the largest and most influential musical institutions in public life. The tune OLD HUNDREDTH, now most closely associated with the Doxology, is a prime example. Originally connected to the Genevan Psalter of the sixteenth century, the melody emerged from a distinctly sacred Reformed tradition before later appearing in civic ceremonies, patriotic settings, educational contexts, and public culture far beyond the walls of the church.
One figure often pulled into this discussion is Martin Luther. It is frequently claimed that Luther took drinking songs and turned them into hymns of the Protestant Reformation. Historians, however, have found little evidence for this accusation. Luther certainly encouraged congregational singing and occasionally adapted existing melodies, but most of the tunes associated with his hymns were either newly composed, drawn from sacred chant traditions, or adapted from respectable folk music rather than tavern music. The charge that Luther filled the church with drinking songs appears to have originated more from later critics than from documented historical practice.
Similarly, the Wesleyan revival in eighteenth-century England is often cited as another example of pub melodies entering the church. Yet Charles Wesley and John Wesley generally paired their hymn texts with established sacred tunes or newly composed melodies intended for worship. While Methodism embraced accessible music and vigorous congregational participation, there is little evidence that the Wesleys intentionally raided taverns for melodies. In fact, many early Methodist leaders were deeply concerned about maintaining moral and spiritual seriousness in worship music.
Another source of misunderstanding lies in the term “secular.” Modern listeners often imagine a sharp divide between sacred and secular music, but earlier societies did not always organize music in that way. A melody used for a folk dance could later appear in a sacred anthem without scandal because tunes themselves were not considered morally fixed objects. The moral meaning of music was shaped more by its text, context, and performance than by the melody alone. Thus, the occasional overlap between sacred and secular repertories should not be interpreted as deliberate attempts to smuggle drinking culture into worship.
Ironically, there is strong evidence that taverns, theaters, and popular entertainment venues frequently borrowed from church music because hymns were among the most familiar melodies in society. Congregational singing gave people a shared musical vocabulary. A tune learned in church on Sunday could easily reappear in political songs, patriotic music, folk ballads, or comedic stage productions during the week. This direction of influence is often ignored in modern retellings of the “bar song hymn” myth because it disrupts the more dramatic narrative that churches succeeded by imitating popular culture.
The persistence of this myth today often reveals more about current debates than about historical reality. The story is commonly used to justify stylistic innovation in worship by suggesting that the church has always copied popular music trends. Yet history is more nuanced. Churches throughout the centuries have certainly adapted musical languages familiar to their communities, but they have also cultivated distinct musical traditions meant to elevate worship and support theology. Sacred music has never been merely an imitation of entertainment culture.
Ultimately, the history of hymnody is far richer and more complex than the simplistic claim that “old hymns were once pub songs.” A few isolated examples of crossover certainly exist, as they do in nearly every musical tradition. However, the widespread assertion that churches routinely pulled melodies out of bars in order to attract worshippers is historically exaggerated and often backwards. In many cases, it was secular culture that borrowed from the church’s music, not the other way around. Understanding this distinction allows for a more honest and historically grounded conversation about worship, tradition, and the evolving role of music in the life of the church.
Recommended Reading
