Royce wrote,
The Christian assembly was never intended to be attractive to unbelievers.
Should it be attractive to our children?
Or only to our oldest members?
Assuming God doesn’t care whether our music is folk, blues, a march tune, or organum, whose taste is the deciding taste?
In my opinion, the answer is found in,
(Rom 12:10 ESV) 10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.
Years ago, when my partner and I founded our own law firm, we asked the staff if we should play music over the speakers. Most urged us to do so. But I wasn’t keen on the idea. And so I asked, “Which style of music?” Some wanted country. Some wanted classic rock. Some wanted easy listening. Some wanted classical. And all felt strongly about their taste! There was no consensus. Nearly all wanted music. No one could agree on a style.
(We settled the issue by letting each staff member bring his or her own radio or tape player — to be played quietly at their work space, but that won’t work at church — a purely corporate activity.)
That’s the nature of people. We all like music. We don’t like the same music. And in church, the decision is usually made on the basis of power — money or influence — and rarely based on sacrificial love. We don’t decide by being as much like Jesus as possible.
So who wins? Well, I do because I win by surrendering. Like Jesus. So does everyone else who chooses not to get his way. That’s how you win in Christianity.
(Phi 2:5-7 ESV) 5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
The harder question is: to whom shall I surrender? Answer: the weakest.
(Mar 9:35-37 ESV) 35 And he sat down and called the twelve. And he said to them, “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.” 36 And he took a child and put him in the midst of them, and taking him in his arms, he said to them, 37 “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me.”
Who among us is most like the child?
Well, children. And new converts. And unbelievers.
And I think they get to pick. Until they are no longer children, or new converts, or unbelievers. Then they have to surrender to the next generation of children.
And, no, I never get a turn. Well, to be fair, I already had my turn. Now it’s someone else’s turn.
We take turns.
(Luk 22:26-27 ESV) 26 But not so with you. Rather, let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. 27 For who is the greater, one who reclines at table or one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at table? But I am among you as the one who serves.
We serve those who have least earned the right to be served because that is what it means to be Christ-like.
One my fellow elders recently visited the church he grew up in — a grand old church that hasn’t changed in 50 years. He had lunch with daughter and complained, “I love that old church, but the worship is so boring!” She said, “Yes, daddy, just like your church.”
You see, most of the “contemporary” music we sing is 30 or more years old. It’s as old to my children as Frank Sinatra and Glen Miller are to me. That’s my dad’s music, not mine.
Even when we sing songs from 1970s and 80s, we’re still a generation too old, singing the music that was new to today’s elders, who have to listen to complaints from the oldest members — even though we’re singing music older than their grandchildren.
You aren’t truly contemporary until you sing music written in the last 5 years. “Humble thyself in the site of the Lord” is at least 40 years old. It’s just not “contemporary” music any more.
Church is not about nostalgia. Nostalgia is not worship. Indeed, anything done for selfish reasons is not worship. Ministry, service, submission, sacrifice, self-emptying … these are worship.
We have to pick some style. We can’t make everyone happy. But we can grow up. We can act like Jesus — and those who are oldest and most spiritual must set the example by surrendering first.
In Virginia we have a church planting fellowship – VEF. They have been planting congregation all over Virginia and helping with renewal within existing congregations. Part of their advice when setting up a new congregation is keep the music within five years of “now” and keep adjusting to the new “now.” Now again these are church plants, intended primarily to reach out to unchurched folks and they have the freedom to conceptualize and try things many of us cannot in our more traditional multi-generational congregations, but these plants show remarkable spiritual and numerical growth here in some of the oddest places – urban, suburban and even small town.
(Remember however I said this guidance on music is just one part of their advice and therefore am not saying their success is solely based on their music. They also have a lot to say about rented spaces, names, advertising, events and ministry and preaching/teaching styles that factor into the equation as well.)
Todd wrote,
It should be obvious to all readers that an established, multi-generational church isn’t “intended to reach out to unchurched folks” and shouldn’t “have the freedom … to try things” (to be read sarcastically).
If established churches have become more interested in catering to the tastes of the members than in reaching the lost, how are they much of a church at all? (not sarcastic in the least).
Sorry Jay, was just pointing out uncomfortable political realities. We should be all about reaching the lost in whatever means we can, but we also find ourselves having to acknowledge the fact that a lot of our membership worships at the Church of Smith (or Jones, or Collier, etc.) instead of the Church of Christ. We need to teach against that attitude and do what we can, but many elders will always have the fear – and no few preachers – that as we bring folks in the front we will lose folks out the back. though is has to be noted that the numbers leaving are proving in most congregations to be far less than feared.
When I was in my 30’s (nearly 40 years ago), I preached for a church where many of the young people getting married wanted IM in their weddings. The church had a policy of not having any at all in the building (taped or live). Accordingly, I performed more weddings at the local Christian Church than in our own building.
At the time, I felt as Jay has expressed himself in this post. Why won’t the older people give in to these desires of the young folks? I wondered the same about the younger people who insisted on going elsewhere instead of surrendering their desires for the music they wanted at their weddings.
The reasons were much as Jay has stated. Power and influence – plus the feeling, “We have earned the right to have our way in this church” and that “If we yield on this, where will it lead?”
Jerry
The children in our church grow up a-capella, my own ones sing along, and we also sing at home – my guitar remains on the wall. It was one of our youth who gave a testimony a few years ago why he dropped his desire for IM and CCM. He have no contentions aboput this in our congregation, but harmony between the generations.
But you bypass my objection, Jay:
This means, we don’t furnish our worship according to worldly tastes. But what I see here is that Christians strive for worldly fashions – and that’s something to really think about.
So far no new convert or guest during the last years frowned at the way we sing – they became Christians anyway, Praise the Lord! Seekers don’t seek in the church what they can fiond in the world anyhow!
But there are an awful lot of Christians who look for things in the church that can only be found in the world. They need to be taught in Christ’s ways a lot better!
Alexander
hmmm … I dislike this perspective on the issue. It’s upside down to Biblical values and relationship between the generations. Upside down!
The children have to grow in the fear of the Lord; the younger ones shall submit to the older ones – we should respect grey hair and not tell them: “Surrender toi the children!” What kind of a spirit is this?
Alexander
Perhaps the same Spirit that commanded fathers not to exasperate their children but bring them up in the nurture and admonishion of the Lord – which to me is about helping them find Jesus as He is and where He can be found and not in forcing them into any unnatural human regulations:
Colossians 2:20-23 (NIV)
Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.
We can make all the rules we want but they will not change the Spiritual realities of our people. On the truth of the Gospel can do that. On the other hand if we see true Spiritual fruit being born in a place we do not expect it to be then it is obviously our expectations that should change. On the other hand painting ourselves into a sharp corner and making harsh judgments on how and where and through what media God may choose to work may just cause us to miss out on what He is doing and where He is going and like the former Pharisees we may find ourselves actually opposing God’s true work in favor of our own desires.
Now fully aware that this sword cuts both ways I stress again that we must move beyond our arguments and look for fruit. If true Spiritual fruit can grow in CCM soil – and here in Virginia there is strong evidence that it does in broken addictions, changed lives and the production of true disciples – then I will not condemn it. If I find hearts that tend toward a love of performance and self aggrandizement as opposed to true worship I will challenge that ungodly attitude- no less than I have done in non-IM settings (or in myself in other aspects of Christian service which can be warped to serve self instead.)
Alexander,
My remarks about the older people giving in to the younger was based on the principle of the stronger bearing with the weaker expressed in Romans 14.
Obviously, the older should be teachers of the young. Yet, in that situation no teaching was taking place. It was simply, “You must do what we have always done.” The young people were confused – and reacted in (what I thought then and still think) was an inappropriate way. Yet, I put the blame for it on the rules adopted through the traditions of the congregation.
Jerry
Romans 14 contains two principles:
a) Those who are weak in faith should still be accepted,
b) but they cannot decide on the direction of the church.
If we don’t offer CCM we cause no one to sin, rather we don’t serve every preference.
Alexander
But the same Paul said:
How do you bring these two together?
Alexander
With humility.
First you don’t automatically assume the worst. That is the attitude of the Pharisee. Jesus said to look for the fruit. The fruit will tell you where God is at work. From what I have seen God is indeed working through CCM. There are many aspects of it I do not like personally but i have seen true discipleship developed through that music. I have witnessed young believers dump trully worldly music for the output of groups like Skillet and Relient K or even a group like Apologetix which takes old rock standards and rewrites the lyrics to teach Bible stories and Biblical living.
Too much good fruit to dump them. Besides as others have pointed out, and been ignored, many of our old standard hymns were written to be sung to the tavern standards of the day. The church has always known how to commandeer the work of satan and sanctify it for Christ. The fruit will bear out God’s active presence.
Alexander/aBasnar wrote,
Really? So who is to find the assembly attractive? The traditional Sunday school class answer is: God should find it attractive. But God, I’m convinced, is much more attuned to our hearts and minds than to the style of our singing. And that means we should select musical styles that help the members have hearts attuned to God’s will.
Sadly, we live in an age and culture that is highly divided. The music that stirs your soul makes me want to climb the walls. The music that moves my heart puts you to sleep.
Thus, we have some unavoidable choices —
* We can compromise by alternative styles throughout the service (a blended worship)
* We can compromise by alternating Sundays
* We can compromise by having multiple services
* We can let those with power and influence have their way
* We can let those without power and influence have their way
Compromise sounds very fair and very American — and it is — but compromise inadequately reflects the heart of Christ. And I think the best way to convert the lost is to hold up Jesus by acting like Jesus. And that means not getting your way even though you have the power and influence to get your way.
Or I guess we could all sing Gregorian chants with parallel 4ths — and sound really ancient and very unsecular — and claim we’re not being “worldly” by our choice of music very far removed from secular music. But that seems Gnostic to me. Why not redeem culture rather than fleeing from culture? I mean, the next thing you know someone will argue that covered dish meals shouldn’t include store-bought meals because they are associated with evil corporations that open on Sundays.
I’ve lived with that kind of thinking before, and it’s a dead end. There’s no limit to the rationalizations we can come up with, leading to rules to sniff and snort over. I’d much rather express gospel truths in the contemporary cultural context, just as Paul preached on Mars Hill from Greek philosophy. If Paul can find the gospel in the Stoics, we can find the gospel in contemporary Christian music.
Alexander/abasnar wrote,
Exactly. You can’t serve every preference. So what is the most Christlike way to resolve the conundrum?
Alexander/abasnar asks,
The passage you quote from 2 Cor 6 is referring back to —
It only applies to worship styles if we were to contend that contemporary worship music is the music of unbelievers, reflects lawlessness, and is darkness. I’m just not persuaded that a musical style becomes dark and wicked because some people in some places use that style to express wickedness. By the same logic, microphones, beds, and hotels are wicked. They’re all used for wicked things.
The test is therefore entirely subjective. If your conscience is defiled by the use of CCM, then you are the weaker brother and those with stronger faith than yours would be right to yield to your scruples — if not yielding to your scruples would tempt you to sin.
But to a man with strong faith, the association of popular music with idolatrous practices does not make it unclean.
I think you still don’t get it, Jay. it’s also not about traditional Sunday school answers of which we all know how shallow they are, don’t we. (sarcasm intended)
But I fear that you need a massive paradigm shift in order to grasp it. A paradigm shift away from
a) “outreach-worship” to the pattern of the temple
b) mega church and multiple choice church back to the pattern of the NT church
You see, all the reasons and all your logic builds on the status quo of churches that have left the old paths (both conservatives and – much more so – progressives).
The way you deal with the unclean-clean issue here shows to me that you still did not get the “hermeneutics of Jesus regarding Moses” – Paul is making an application of the OT Law in NT context and speaks clearly and strongly of separation from the world.
But Megachurches and “multiple-choice-churches” are anti-spearation, because the strive to attract masses, therefore they need to be appealing to their taste(s). And that’s what I hear over and over in this discussion! And that’s what I object to strongly.
I entirely miss a scriptural understanding of separation in your posts. And in case you have no idea how that should look like, read the ECF on this. Their view on music in worship was embedded in their understanding of separation. Their meetings were not generally open to the public, either. They were neither large nor multiple choice. They did not fit the expectations of their common neighbors at all: No images, no incense, no clergy, no nothing that could be likened to “true treligion” as they understood it.
But you and probably the majority of US churches think, if we offer the same kind of music, the same kind of life style the world around us is used to (and both DO go hand in hand, Jay), we can make more disciples. But such an approach does not produce disciples – the fruit I see (and it is an ugly fruit) are worldly churches and worldly Christians.
Alexander
BTW, Todd, the brother who brought this up immediately took it back because it is a myth.
If you look a standard old Hymnal, you can find melody references that go back to chant, to folk tunes, to classical tunes – and you’ll most likely notice that the same tunes are used for differernt texts.
In most traditional churches the repertoire of hymns rarely changed. the changes were always gradual, adopting a few newer songs here and there, but not changing the overall style of the hymnal. CCM is throwing over board everything that is as old as 30 years and older, or as some say: older than five years is too old.
No wonder, brother, that this resulted in the so calles “worship wars”, because this attitude has been unheard of since the beginning of Christ’s church!
The Psalms of David have been sung for 1000 years and longer in Israel – no problem at all for them! Traditional churches still sing songs that can be traced back to the 4th century! Why is this so terrible? And for 1300 years a-capella was perfectly all right for virtually all Christians – and even toxday for a relatively large part of Christianity it is the norm.
Who are these people that cry for change and adaption to the styles of the world? Look at them in the perspective of church history, in the context of the whole spectrum of Christianity … don’t they look like selfish and worldly teenagers that would rather change the church than being transformed by the Spirit?
I am bit harsh here, Todd, but reflect ion this for a while. Put our last three decades in the context of the last 2000 years. Historically accurate, not repeating myths about drinking songs tht became hymns in the church. The ones with such an origin are very very few.
Alexander
Let me just relate an experience from last June. We opened a new museum on Anabaptist History in Lower Austria – around 300 Christians from (mainly) Evangelical background came to the opening and they also prepared the worship service that preceded it.
The (female!) worship leader announced a song from the 1970ies as “old”! There was one old Catholic hymn from the 1800s, but the other about 8 songs I did not know at all. And I am not a new Christian, but did not miss an assembly in 24 years for other reasons than being sick or seriously hindered otherwise.
I addressed those who were responsible for this later, and boy did I address them! There were so many traditional Catholics around that came for this opening. They did not give them the slightest chance to join in the singing – not the slightest! Nothing was even remotely familiar to them. Why I mention this? Because all this talk about “seeker-sensitivity” is revealed as a lie by such actions! It’s all about pleasing our own flesh! The band showed off, the speakers were loud enough to drown the voices of 300 “worshippers” – it was AWFUL to say the least, and absolutely unfitting both for the event (opening a museum to honor our spiritual ancestors! Where were the links to their times and music?) and for the visitors and guests (traditional Catholics).
I left in despair.
Alexander
No Alex they do not look like spoiled teenagers. They look like folks who will do anything to save souls. And they have not produced shallow Christians, but devoted disciples who have left drugs, gangs, broken relationships, and other self destructive behaviors. I keep telling you I do not accept your analysis because of the fruit I actually see. God IS working through CCM without regard to your opinions. They are coning out and being seperate in ways you apparently cannot imagine or credit.
And frankly, for your argument’s sake, what is the difference between a hymn being based on a tavern tune and a hymn being drawn from a “folk melody.” Wouldn’t either be something that celebrates the popular culture and therefore worthy of strict avoidance?
When the church meeting evolved into the main outreach mechanism to the lost, what was always a tension became a dilemma. If our meeting does not attract unbelievers, they will not hear the gospel, for we have delegated that task to our production team. Pity the production team. To make the meeting attractive to unbelievers, it must center on those unbelievers– their tastes, their desires, their needs. Then we complain that our meeting has lost reverence and piety and any real depth.
On the other hand, when the production team designs the meeting to fit the established believers, it embraces religious language that is unintelligible to outsiders. It holds to traditions which connect to previous generations of believers, specifically calibrated to be “separate from the world”. Such a meeting is as foreign to the local unbeliever as Esperanto. Then we complain that our church does not grow.
As long as we insist that our Sunday meeting accomplish our edification, enjoyment, AND evangelism, it will always struggle to be effective in one of those tasks. And most likely, like the old Boy Scout knife, it will continue to try to do all things, but will do none of them well.
Exactly! Hey – we agree on this one!! 🙂
Alexander
Why on earth is this an either / or question? Why does a service have to be either contemporary or traditional?
At the congregation where I worship, any given service may include primarily traditional songs, primarily newer songs, or a mix of both. It depends largely who who’s leading singing, and it’s not an older members vs. younger members division. One of the songleaders who has led primarily traditional songs recently is in his late 20s, I think; very early 30s at the oldest. One of the songleaders who often introduces new contemporary songs is well over 60, maybe in his early 70s; the other who does is in his mid-40s, I believe.
During our monthly all-singing services, there are several songs in Spanish, too, because the members who attend the Spanish language services meet with those of us who attend the English language services.
(If y’all are ever visiting the San Diego area, you’re welcome to visit us at Johnson Ave. — http://www.jacofc.org No congregation is perfect, but I think we’re doing a lot right.)