Let the word of Christ dwell richly among you, in all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another through psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, signing to God with gratitude in your hearts. – Colossians 3:16 (CSB)
A recent blog post by Mark Terry addressed the sad reality that what were once termed the “worship wars” still rage in some churches today. An animosity exists between old and new—what are the proper songs and styles with which to worship God in the 21st Century church?
I want us to consider some of the things the Bible tells us about our musical worship of God.
In Old Testament Judaism and New Testament Christianity, worship in song is a major aspect of our spiritual formation. And while the Bible does give us some commands to sing, it is more largely assumed that we will just sing. Song, after all, has been long ingrained in human history as a way to express our greatest joys and deepest sorrows and everything in between. This should not surprise us, though, as we are creatures created in the image of God and we worship a God who “will delight in you with singing” (Zephaniah 3:17).
One of the commands we find is in Colossians 3:16, with close parallel in Ephesians 5:19. Paul had been teaching the Colossians and us how to live a heaven-focused life where we cast off sin and put on our new righteousness. One mark of this new life is letting the word of Christ dwell in us richly.
Today, in our culture, we are more hard-pressed to not have a copy of God’s word than we are to have a copy. In fact, as I sit in my office and type these words, I look around and count 18 copies of the Bible on my desk and shelves in various translations and languages, and that doesn’t include smart phone apps.
But this wasn’t so in the days that Paul wrote. There were no printing presses and greater illiteracy existed among the culture. You didn’t just break out a copy of a scroll from your shelf and have family devotions before dinner. So, how then would they let the word of Christ dwell in them richly? Through song. They would set scripture and its theological truths to music.
The singing of Scripture’s words and ideas accomplished three main things, according to Paul: First, it let followers of Jesus teach one another. In setting God’s truths to memorable music, it allowed these to be more easily kept in one’s heart and mind and it helped Christians remind one another of the greatness of God and the gospel. Second, it let followers of Jesus challenge one another. This is the idea of admonishing—not only do we share truth, but we also help press one another into living the truth by encouraging the good and warning against the bad. Third, it produces thankful worship of God. When we sing as a gathered church, we have two audiences: one another as we teach and admonish, and God as we sing corporately to him. In these ways, our singing is always both vertical and horizontal.
In the midst of detailing these accomplishments of singing, Paul also charged us to sing a variety of songs. If you read any reputable commentary, you will find that you can’t press the differences too far between the psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, but you also will find a nuance intended. Paul didn’t use three terms simply to pad his letter’s word count.
Psalms was the word most often used for those 150 songs found square in the middle of our present day Bibles. These songs and prayers were not simply inspired writings of gifted persons in their praise of God, no, they were breathed out by God’s Holy Spirit in the hearts and minds of those who wrote them. They are a God-written song book for us to sing.
Hymns is the vaguest of Paul’s three terms and the most all-encompassing. Today, we largely use the term for a particular style or perhaps even songs of traditions. There may be a hint of that in Paul’s usage, a reference to the songs of Moses and Hannah, of Mary and Zechariah, and of short, familiar choruses that Paul even used. But in large part, these were songs in general. Songs that the churches knew and shared.
Then we have spiritual songs or perhaps songs of the Spirit. This seems best a reference to the charismatic songs, again not in the way the term is popularly used today, but in reference to men and women in the church gifted musically and lyrically by the Holy Spirit to edify their brothers and sisters. These would be new songs introduced or spontaneous songs sung in the moment of worship.
With these three categories, Paul did not write to the church telling them to sing psalms or hymns or spiritual songs, whatever your greatest preference, but to sing all across the spectrum. The only qualification is that they teach and admonish and lead us to thankful praise of God.
The simple fact is that when we let preference, style, or taste in music rule then we are guilty of not letting the word of Christ dwell in us richly. When we engage in the so-called “worship wars” we are robbing ourselves and those around us of the chance to grow deeper in our spirituality.
This is true of those who want to cling only to the old, the “traditional.” Which is really only “old to us” since even the most traditional song was contemporary at the moment someone first wrote it. And this rejection of the contemporary based on its newness is itself a rejection of Scripture which commands us to “Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise in the assembly of the faithful” (Psalm 149:1). Robbing ourselves of depth is also true of those who want to sing only the new, the “contemporary,” and hold an attitude of disdain for the old.
The attitude found in both sides is a symptom of spiritual immaturity, a symptom of placing personal enjoyment over the edification of others. But, oh, the richness and depth we find when we seek to embrace the old and the new, the ancient and the contemporary. What a richness of God’s word in our souls when we open ourselves to sing together as a gathered congregation the psalms and the hymns and the spiritual songs. So, let us sing and let us sing broadly!
A Postscript: What Does This Look Like Practically?
In an age where we speak about traditional or contemporary or blended services, how do we practically apply the principles of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs? Some thoughts:
First, you have to play the cards you’re dealt. That might be an odd way to put this, but it’s a reality: Not every church is going to have the same levels of musical abilities. The first church I pastored was a small country church. When I first got there, we had an average attendance of 15. That doubled in my tenure, but our gains did not include people with musical experience. Our lone instrumentalist was a largely self-taught piano player who had about 20-30 songs in her repertoire. We were occasionally graced with visiting musicians who led in a variety of other songs that the church enjoyed and sang along with, but our normal worship gathering was very “traditional” and limited. But that was how God had gifted our church at the time, and that’s okay. The people showed a willingness to sing a broader spectrum of songs when available, and that’s where we must remember to operate: The level of the heart. Do we leave out the new (or even the old) because of the giftedness and abilities of those in the church to lead music, or do we do so because of our stubborn refusal to step beyond our comforts and tastes? The former is “playing the cards you’re dealt,” and that’s alright. The latter is the attitude that I write against above.
Second, mix it up as able. This is one of my great loves about my current church. We are not clearly traditional, contemporary, or blended. The way to describe us depends on the week. I have two main musicians who rotate, in part because of the work schedule of one (four Sundays off, two at work, repeat). One is able to lead with a pianist or to play a guitar. The other is our pianist who can also sing well while playing. In a typical week, whoever is leading the upcoming Sunday will get my sermon notes on Monday, spend a few days thinking and praying about the music, and get back to me by Thursday with their song selections they think go with my notes. Some weeks it’s all songs straight out of the hymnal. Other weeks it’s all contemporary songs. Still other weeks it’s blended. Some weeks it’s just the piano. Other weeks it’s all on the guitar. Still other weeks it’s a mixture of both. Again, this is how God has presently gifted us in terms of available musicians. It allows us to mix it up across the spectrum as our musicians feel led.
Third, remember the aim should always be to love God supremely and love others deeply. This should produce two driving questions: First, does the song honor God (aka: does it present him and the truths of Scripture accurately and lead us to worship him)? Second, does it edify others through teaching and admonishing? And neither of these questions are about style. Yes, there are still some who say that certain instruments or rhythms/beats/styles shouldn’t be used in church because they’re too “worldly.” The simple reality, though, is this: God inspired lyrics to some songs in Scripture, but he didn’t give us the tunes. And nowhere in the Bible does God condemn using a particular musical style. Calling styles too “worldly” is a man-opinionated addendum to the Scriptures. If all your church has available is a piano, then use that piano to belt out songs to the glory of God! But also remember that pianos aren’t mentioned anywhere in the Bible, but trumpets and harps and tambourines and loud crashing cymbals are. So if you have those and people who can play them, then use them to belt out songs to the glory of God!
Good practical section at the end. You basically said it already in a positive way (“play the cards you’re dealt”)…but I would add the negative: “Don’t try to be something you are not!”. If your church musicians only know how to play bluegrass and old gospel styles…don’t ask them to do a rap to “reach the young people.”. It wont work. Do what you can do well, rather than do a “better” style poorly. This is not to say don’t learn new styles…but put in the work to LEARN them BEFORE you do them in church. 🙂
We can all learn that no matter the church, each of us will likely go back and forth between preference and deference, even song to song…some songs will be what we prefer…others will be ones in which we defer to the preferences of others, not begrudgingly, but joyfully, as a grandmother who never liked soccer in her life suddenly becomes its #1 fan when her grandson is playing!
Yep.
I’ll definitely agree about “Don’t try to be something you are not!”. I grew up as a Christian on the Jesus Music of the ’70s and ’80s (and am also comfortable with the old hymns (provided they’re not sung in a lackluster manner – lackluster singing, I think, contributes a lot to why some don’t like hymns – John Wesley’s for singing seem to be unknown by some congregations)). I’ve sat in church services where contemporary style songs are done by people who aren’t really that familiar with the style or the culture it comes from, and it sticks out (in a bad way). It comes across not as a Christian singing about the Lord in a a style he’s familiar with, but as an obvious marketing ploy.
How well music is done often matters. I’ve heard Graham Kendrick’s lyrically excellent “Knowing You” (based on Phil 3:7-11) performed in an upbeat fashion by a perky Choir – and it comes off in a rather “Plastic Christian ” way. OTOH, Matthew Ward’s rendition I don’t think can be classified as anything other than “worship music”.
We were sitting on a Wednesday to begin an evening service when out of the blue an 87 year old lady started a song all by herself, a song no one every heard. Everyone sitting around were shocked by her singing. After she finished, she said the song just came to her as a gift from the Lord.
Good post.
Mike,
What a delightfully encouraging article you have written. Interestingly, you have precisely done with word and exegesis what we need to do with our music ministries. You have also reminded me that thoughtful application of scripture to our ministry as it relates to music is not always so very thoughtful.
The movie “Hoosiers” comes to my mind for many reasons:
1-This is the team we have boys. We are who we are. We have who we have until…
2-The basketball court is of the same dimensions in our town and in the playoffs.
3-Leadership is tough when emotions are high and opinions matter more than truth.
4-Not just anyone gets to lead on the court.
Perhaps our musicians and music, both, need to be vetted just as we do our Sunday School teachers, Elders, Deacons and other “Ministers”? Maybe even more stringently?
If all we have is a musician/player who hasn’t grown to a place musically or spiritually for leadership, perhaps A Cappella is in order. (and leadership training)
Concerning “worldly” and “too-worldly” music…
I must respectfully disagree with you. This is all too obvious today.
Music has both intrinsic and associative values. Not to respect this truth is to open ourselves up for perpetual worship wars and never ending American-Idol-For-Jesus applicants.
Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs begin in chapter 2 describing people who have died with Christ and are becoming more like their creator. These “gentle, kind, humble, meek and patient, along with forgiveness traits, qualify us to “teach and instruct one another”. (lead)
As such, they are more substantive that stylistic–Typical of the attitude of our corporate worship that needs leadership committed to these realities.
If this were a choice about what style of music one finds pleasing to his ears, it would simply be a matter of deferring to others and compromising. But regardless of how insistent proponents may be that this disagreement is nothing other than that, it is a deeper matter. The hymns that many want to continue to sing in worship service are the hymns that our grandparents gladly sang, and the hymns that our great—and even great-great—grandparents sang. Do you really think that these represented the sound of contemporary music for five generations (or more)? No, they didn’t—because the hymns of the Church have always sounded distinct from the world. Anyone walking down a road and hearing music coming from a building, but without being able to make out the words, could immediately identify a church—even if the hymn was unfamiliar to the hearer.
There is in the human heart an insatiable hunger for the new. A.W. Tozer said it was really a hunger for what is other—a hunger for God Himself, but which is subverted to seeking satisfaction elsewhere. Tozer had much to say about the god of entertainment creeping into our worship services. His books are at most Lifeway stores, so I won’t bother quoting at this time. The point is that this is about far more than preferences of style. It’s about whether style is a legitimate consideration—whether style preferences are a just reason for changing the kind of songs used in worship for multiple generations. Before one even argues regarding style preferences, one ought to first address why, after multiple generations of hymns, does style suddenly rise to importance?
The reasoning that comes from the world, that the older generally prefer older styles of everything and the younger generally push for change to newer styles of everything, is a dodge and avoids the real issues. Many of those older in the faith have lived long enough to grow cautious and suspicious of new trends and even current conditions. When some new trend starts taking over which seems ok but is actually detrimental to the church (can we agree that it might happen?), then who is most likely to warn against it—the young or the old? The old, of course. And what would be the universal defense against objections of the old? Of course, it is to dismiss them as preferences of older ways by older people. Such dismissals may be correct in some cases. But, at least in the Church, when we are warned by some that a current trend may involve more than style but also may be spiritually detrimental to the Church, we ought to give serious consideration to it; and not merely write it off as generational style preferences.
For the record, I am condemning no one. I am not putting forth my views as doctrine or Scripture. And this will likely be my last comment here.
I’d challenge your notion that songs have been sung by parents, grandparents, and great great grandparents sung. There are some of those, by Luther or others, for sure. But many of what people would call “great old hymns” are less than 100 years old. And regardless of when they were written, they did represent contemporary standards when they were written, just as songs today do. To say otherwise goes against common sense. I have rarely heard older people complaining of the doctrine of the songs, and much more often about style.
I believe that Amazing Grace was written around 1790, right? that means it is around 230 years old. Since the church is nearly 2000 years old, that makes Amazing Grace a contemporary hymn.
I always wonder what standard we use when we start saying that new is less worthy than old. How old is old enough?
It is a spurious argument to say that 200-year-old music is somehow spiritually preferable to 2-year-old music. Both are basically contemporary. ALL of our music is contemporary. We aren’t singing the music of the NT. We don’t sing medieval hymns often. We are simply singing variations of contemporary music.
To say that 300-year-old music is somehow preferable to 200-year-old music or to 100-year-old music or to 10-year-old music, or to a song written yesterday is WHOLLY without biblical warrant.
It is an attempt to sanctify preference.
And I think there is more of an insatiable desire for the old – to elevate nostalgia to spirituality. “Sing to the Lord a NEW song.” That’s what is commanded – over and over.
We never look sillier than when we try to make one style of music more holy than another.
“We never look sillier than when we try to make one style of music more holy than another.”
That’s a great statement Dave. Some songs are instantly good, some instantly bad, some start good and turn bad, or vice versa. I think the moment “In Christ Alone” was written it was an instant classic. Others have gained meaning as I grew in spiritual maturity, and others lose lustre as I mature as well. I’ve not read that bit from Tozer about desiring the new, but it raises some questions in my mind. There is a great hunger for old things, as you said.
You realize that the highest measure of intelligence is agreeing with me?
I highly doubt this debate has ever been about the age of songs; it is purely about style and preference. With the marketplace of churches available to the average person, and with most people “choosing” a church for mostly superficial reasons (yes, I know there are exceptions); preference is elevated to the level of a doctrinal issue.
As long as there are churches who are willing to use music, lighting, and sermon style as a means of attraction; then there will be people who get to hop from one experience to another serving their preference. And the worship wars will rage.
Here’s a thoughtful article on worship from Dr. Al Mohler: The Whole Earth is Full of His Glory: The Recovery of Authentic Worship.
And you do realize that toward the conclusion of his thoughtful article Mohler states that styles change from time to time, place to place, and culture to culture, and that’s okay?
The admonition is to teach one another.
The precedent is “a new self, in which we no longer lie to one another”–in which we show preference and honor to one another as evidence of a Christ within.
The medium is song.
The attitude is thankfulness.
My son just finished 4 new hymns. I finished two. His works are being published by companies that serve our “more liturgical” brothers and sisters. Their church culture still has an appetite for music and text within the church that moves more than the arms, hips and feet.
This doesn’t make them more holy (or theologically correct) or somehow superior. It does demonstrate that appetites (sales) do matter.
When I look closely at which appetite I am preferring, I can know a great deal about myself.
As a leader, I will feed others from my preferences. (so will most any leader) This puts a bright spotlight on the leader.
Such preferences must be:
—broad enough to relate (music reading skills, songs then and now, theological understanding–poetically mature)
—narrow enough to protect (some music/text/instrumentation is simply unacceptable–either inappropriate and or misleading) (like singing great hymns at a sports event)
—proven by fruits of Christ-likeness
More than impressive talents, we need giftedness. (but talents, not giftedness, sells)
Whatever happened to the class of ministers who loved, read and wrote great lyric/poetry/hymnody out of theological maturity? This explains much of our predicament.
That one class in Music/Worship for preachers at seminary may not have been enough for today’s multifaceted entertainment driven society. And that’s just the church.
Glenn, thanks for the list of preferences. It’s helping me sort things out.
You are welcome Paul.
Great article Mike! Not that I’m the grader, but this gets an A+.
Ken, thank you for your comments!
Though I don’t agree with everything, I think there must be a balance that recognizes that the situation we find ourselves in is (in some ways, not all) unique, and facilitated by the rise of recorded music.
While some the gospel songs of the 19th and early 20th century had some of their own problems of questionable theology and sentimentality…there was still an aspect of the music being essentially related to folk music and fundamentally designed for corporate singing…a pattern seen since the reformation.
MUCH of the most popular Christian music now, even “worship” music is more related to “pop” music than “folk”, which I think is a distinction. It began as a professional recording, which churches try to emulate. While some of these songs DO and CAN work well for corporate worship (10,000 reasons, as a good example), others lean toward a solo performance, especially when each chorus or verse is sung a slight different way on the recording, or by the worship leader.
I’ve heard it repeatedly from otherwise young, culturally-engaged Christians in growing modern churches with good preaching…that the music is not well participated, in part due to song selection, and in part due to the way the songs are led.
Full disclosure, I have and do lead modern worship songs. I happen to like using “This is Amazing grace”, so I’m not against fast upbeat music, but it has to be singable and it has to say something true. But I’ve found that the songs that are aung the most enthusiastically across generations, are A) old hymns, done with updated accompaniments, but original tunes, and B) songs with a folk element, whether old (“I saw the light”), or new (“The King of Love My shepherd is”), and C) modern songs with simple tunes.
When I have looked for potential churches looking for a music Pastor/leader…many of the ministry listings will say “We worship in the vein of Hillsong, Bethel, and Elevation…”. I immediately move on, no matter how good the church sounds otherwise.
Sorry, but that’s where I’m at, and have been there for at least a decade. (I’m 37).
Andy,
First, thanks for seriously considering what I had to say, rather than using scorn as a tool of argument (as some have). Second, you’ve made a good point, and one which I’ve overlooked. There’s a difference between contemporary and pop. Dave seems to think I’m just against new music; but when I said “contemporary,” I meant the kind and style of music that grows out of the contemporary secular culture—in other, better, words, “pop music.” In fact I have no problem with new hymns being introduced into worship. Today I found an article from Sproul’s cite, “Corporate Reverence,” by Gene Edward Veith, that makes the point far better than I can:
I’ve asked numerous times, but no one has answered: Why is it that after so many generations, suddenly the demand is made “that the music they listen to in worship be in the same style as the music they listen to for entertainment.” But Dr. Veith brings up another good point, that newness is not the disqualifier, since new hymns are still being written. He goes on to tell us the difference:
Hymns are specifically written for corporate singing. Dr. Veith puts the question well: “The question is not whether or not we should make use of contemporary music in church, but whether we should make use of pop music. By its nature, pop music is catchy, entertaining, and thus “likeable.” It cannot have much content, much less complexity or depth. “ I would argue that in those cases where depth is found, such as in “In Christ Alone,” that such a song qualifies as a modern hymn, and has gone above and beyond the characteristics of the usual pop worship songs. Dr. Veith ends with this:
Judging by some of the responses to my previous comments, here and in the other thread, it seems that to be concerned with how much of the world comes into the Church is as anachronistic as the singing of hymns. This is what happens in most “wars.” At first, the new side pleads for mere acceptance. Then, when they have prevailed in the main, they move to ridicule of the older side. (The same progression can be seen in other movements.) Whatever “worship war” there was, it has been won years ago, according to R.C. Sproul:
I’m done with this whole subject.
Ken, sometimes the word “contemporary” gets “played with” in the discussions of worship wars — apparently since most everyone will agree that there is nothing wrong with songs simply because they are new (contemporary, in the present) . I write hymn tunes; have written one at the first of this month. It is contemporary (new/just written), Christian (with biblical text, to be sung by Christians) and music (at least I think so!). But it is not Contemporary Christian Music/CCM, which actually is a style or genre of music. The Dictionary of Christianese defines it this way: “A genre of music with a pop or rock sound and lyrics that are related to the Christian faith.”
http://www.dictionaryofchristianese.com/contemporary-christian-music-ccm/
Andy, you’re a distinction between pop and folk is significant, I’ve been trying to sort this stuff out. Could you give me some examples of “C) modern songs with simple tunes”?
Ken,
Youasked:
“I’ve asked numerous times, but no one has answered: Why is it that after so many generations, suddenly the demand is made “that the music they listen to in worship be in the same style as the music they listen to for entertainment.””
For me it is the same music. Usually one of the songs in Sunday church plays in my mind at various times during the week. Music, to me, is not about entertainment, at least it hasn’t for a long time. Rather it is about worship. And even when I hgear a secular song, I seek to change the words to worship God. Maybe not for everyone, but its that way with me.
The music of the world preaches a message of the world, and usually [not always] seems to preach against Christian values. Listening to it isn’t entertaining [to me].
What if the “Pastor Keep” committee comes and says, “Pastor, we’d like you to be a bit more “contemporary”? We want you to act your age and all that, but perhaps you could update your hair style and clothing to reflect the contemporary culture better. Also, we would like you to sit in a chair where the pulpit used to be. Just chill a bit more and teach more than preach. Please don’t get to heady, and dive off into deep theological treatises. Maybe you can add in hugging those traditional folks more and thus blend in with the Millennial scene?”
“I’ve asked numerous times, but no one has answered: Why is it that after so many generations, suddenly the demand is made “that the music they listen to in worship be in the same style as the music they listen to for entertainment.”
I am not positive Ken, but I believe the boomers were the first to invent a solution to their “forbidden cravings”. Set against Carlos Santana, the Byrds, the Beatles, Cream and the like, the church and it’s music became “a very boring scene man”. We are the ones who figured out how to have our cake and eat it too. We are the ones who cleverly tricked our unsuspecting parents who had been far too influenced by Gothard and the evil beat story.
We put Jesus words to the music we liked and wah-lah, there you have it–silent parents. Then, when we performed our new and improved Jesus rock music in church for proud parents and grandparents, all is well in contemporary music heaven. Subsequent generations have perfected this and a shrewd, capitalist marketing system has sanctioned it for the money maker it has become. Attacking this beast is futile.
The solution for me is to do what I did in Youth Ministry.
–Have more concerts – not less. But not in, for, or as a worship service. Teach the difference between the two. As long as the texts are acceptable, play the music you like and enjoy. Skate too it, dance, date, hug and swoon–live your youth as God has blessed. When you go to an art museum, do not put blinders on and ask that you be directed to art only that has a cross painted on it. Neither expect the curator to deface the art by painting crosses on each as to justify a wayward expectation on your part.
–Affirm the truth that there is no such thing as “Christian Music” and “Secular Music”.
A Bb chord is not holy where a C7 major chord is secular–minor chords all evil.
There are no Christian doctors, musicians, lawyers, etc. — only docs, musicians and lawyers, etc who are Christian.
Respect the truth that all music has both intrinsic and associational values. “A time and place for everything under the sun.” Use accordingly.
–Broaden musical and textual criticisms. Take music appreciation classes. Go to concerts of many styles of music and often. If you are a performer, perform often, and get the applause of man into biblical perspective. A church platform of worship must never become a stage for earthly performance. (it is comfortably so today where pastoral leadership is lacking )
–Carefully choose and enjoy the cultural music of your youth. You will be listening to it as a preference, almost exclusively in 30, 40, + years. Then, resist the temptation to convert it to music for worship and insist that everyone “like it”. They won’t.
–In your church, expect and allow the gospel, your music, and worship to be “Other-worldly”. You will know when you have cheapened it and brought it down to ankle-deep. Pray for and welcome leadership that understands this and knows how to lead us all, each generation.
–From your personal walk in Christ, write new texts and tunes for both your own personal worship and perhaps too for the corporate gatherings of believers. I will teach you how to do both. We want our church to be thus indigenous.
–As a Christian, being correct is better than being contemporary.
The “gospilization” of life (painting crosses on secular necessities as a means of unnecessary justification of use) pits us against them and creates the bland one size fits all attitude we promote so often today. It tells the church within to cease resistance, “come along peacefully”. It tells the world without that “we really have nothing to offer you that you cannot get just by shopping anywhere in this world.”
Forgive my “scorn” Ken if that was for me. I apologize to you and all the readers. I too am weary of the matter. You and others have provided excellent, helpful and valuable insights to me. Thanks.
I’m following a thread in one of the Jesus Music groups on Facebook (on why did the Jesus music of the ’70s and ’80s have more impact on the music scene than current CCM does), and someone posted this video on “Why is Modern Pop Music so terrible“. Given that Christian labels are generally owned by secular companies these days, some of the points might be relevant.
His point on the factor of familiarity strikes a chord with me, as I think the effect of familiarity on our preferences is often understated.
Mike, thanks for this post. The implication of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs for worship is thought-provoking. “First, you have to play the cards you’re dealt.” is a really good point. And the part about loving God and loving others central. I still haven’t sorted out all the ideas and implications of your post but I wanted to comment before got too late.
Andy said: “I’ve heard it repeatedly from otherwise young, culturally-engaged Christians in growing modern churches with good preaching…that the music is not well participated, in part due to song selection, and in part due to the way the songs are led.”
Me too. That happened to me this weekend. I brought a dear older Lutheran relative to visit our large contemporary service, full of young adults & families. The praise band invited us to stand & join as lyrics appeared on screens in the darkened room. She didn’t know the song so she just looked around. After a few minutes she asked me: “Don’t people sing in your church?”
It appears from her question that she was more interested in the health and condition of the church than having her own musical palate and preference satisfied.
That is quite refreshing and typical of a mature believer. (even a Lutheran one)
Karen,
My wife and wanted to go to a CCM concert, so we went. Young and old sang out loud and strong. My question to you is the same as your dear old Lutheran relative with a word added: WHY dont people sing in your church?
People in my church, and we sing CCM and old hymns and most music in between if it is Word-based, sing out as well, young and old.