history working FOR us
2008 July 1
“A right use of the knowledge of historical forms of Christian worship could assist us in the 20th century American Church by helping us to break free from bondage to our own culture.” ~Jeffrey Meyers
do we have a right use of our knowledge of historical forms of worship?
do we have accurate knowledge of historical forms of Christian worship?
do you think a right use of this knowledge could help?
are we in bondage to our own culture?
believe me, i’m a worship leader. i want to hear what you think about this.
One of my favorite parts about being a music major in school was music history. The majority of the history of western music is closely tied to the church. So not only did we get lessons in how Beethoven used Neopolitan sixth chords, but also how the church determined where Easter would fall during the year and what types of music would be included in Mass.
Though, I’m not an expert by any means in the history of “Christian Worship” taking those basic music history classes opened my eyes to a lot of the pre-Reformation forms of musical worship that I really was clueless about.
Oops, I’m a typo nerd, just realized I misspelled NEAPOLITAN! My professor would eat me alive for that one!
Carry on.
Hmmm… I’ll try to behave myself on this one…
Being a Worship Leader for over 10 years, I’ve spent the past several years really struggling with this. My blatant answer… no, most churches miss the boat on worship (IMHO).
I think the title itself ‘worship leader’ is problematic. It just has connotations of a performance/audience relationship… if I’m a leader, they must be followers. The modern societal influence has turned it into a show.
Mandy has been incredibly transparent as of late. In the same way really ask yourself (the reader) how important ‘quality’ worship is to your decision to attend a church. By ‘quality’ I mean: are you entertained? are the musicians really skilled? do the vocalists have pristine voices and tight harmonies? is the A/V presentation interesting and visually stimulating? is there professional staging and lighting effects? OR if your ‘traditional’: is the organ true pipes or is just a digital emulation? is the choir large? do the choir members have pristine voices? does the acoustics of the church compliment the music?
I think for most readers (if they are truly honest) the ‘quality’ of the worship plays a huge part of their decision to attend a church. This coupled with the ‘quality’ of the pastor (another conversation) and the ‘quality’ of the facility lend itself to a consumerist, materialistic ‘Wal-Mart’ mentality of the church-goer.
I remember in our old church we had a couple in their late 70’s who would come and sing for the congregation. The guy had an 60 year old Gibson acoustic held together with duct tape and strings that hadn’t been changed in 20 years and the woman played an old slightly out of tune piano with arthritic fingers. They played old Southern Gospel renditions of hymns from the 40’s and when he sang it was with a gravely twang. No lights, no sound system (he refused to use a mic). It was some of the most worshipful things I’ve been a part of. I was thrilled when they asked me (some 45 years younger then them) to tour around with them sitting in on upright bass.
Bottom line. I think we have more than strayed from what worship should be. We need to look at history, not just early 1900’s, or back to 1700’s but further back to Acts, Luke 19:37-40, King David, the Levitical musicians, Isaiah 6, Moses in Exodus 15, even back to the beginning to Jubal (Genesis 4:21) [how about forward toRev 15, 19:6-10 ?]
I’m just sayin…
Ok, I have to ask…why is the ‘historical’ worship any better or more ‘biblical’ than modern interpretations of worship? What makes historical worship what worship ’should be’ and who really defines worship except to say that it is to bring praise, honor, golory and thanksgiving to Jesus our Lord? I’m not sure that if lights, mics, stages, projected lyrics, visual effects and sound boards were available to David, or any other historical worshiper, that they wouldn’t have made use of every single thing to bring glory and honor to God. I’m not sure that our ‘cultural bondage’ is any different from the ‘cultural bondage’of David. Looking back to historical christian worship for guidance I would think would put us in cultural bondage to a time and place we can’t relate to! All societies have leaders…David was a leader…and we need strong leaders in worship to usher all Christ followers into the throne room of God our King to bring Him glory and honor!
I’m new at participating in worship both from the congregation and from the ’stage’. I’m not a super skilled musician, but I put everything I have into what I do, striving for excellence and practicing my skills to bring Him glory. I play for Him, and if I start to think even for one minute that what I do is anything other than that I’m in the wrong place. There is NOTHING wrong with striving for perfection in worship…nothing at all…and to do anything less is to undermind the gift given by the one who is to be greatly praised!
K…i’m done.
Lori,
Absolutely, as a participant we should strive for perfection, give the Lord the best we can. My beef is with the ‘consumer’ who doesn’t feel their ‘getting their money’s worth’, so to speak, with the imperfect.
I’ve known many musicians (me included) who ’scripted’ their worship to try to squeeze out as much Holy Spirit as possible. Everyone who has ever lead worship is guilty of this. Putting the right song in the right spot in the service to create the right mood. Certain lyrics put in the right spot, or that breakdown section with the right prayer or scripture verse over top because “I know that’s going to get people crying”…. You WL’s know what I’m talking about [even if you won't admit it publicly]…
It’s human pride overriding God working. We all face it in every aspect of church… pastors, lay leaders, bible study leaders, musicians, trustees, etc, etc…
BO: it’s refreshing to find another “worship leader” out there who doesn’t like the title “worship leader”. whew. k. thanks. ’nuff said about that.
i’ve given a lot of thought to the scenarios you are mentioning above – of setting a tone to move the people into a predetermined response. i studied Sociology in undergrad, so i know how easily leadership can turn the heads of a group, therefore i vowed to not manipulate a crowd. i am highly highly highly sensitive to this. HIGHLY. on the other hand, i think we (being those who lead the crowd: pastors, “worship leaders” or whatever, elders, choir directors, musicians, etc) have a responsibility to steward the worship service – steward the direction of the people…
example: one of my all-time favorite passages in scripture comes outta nehemiah chapter 8. they were re-entering after exile, found the book of the law, Ezra saw fit to read it, the people assembled, and they read.
THEN:
Nehemiah 8:9-11 Then Nehemiah the governor, Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who were instructing the people said to them all, “This day is sacred to the LORD your God. Do not mourn or weep.” For all the people had been weeping as they listened to the words of the Law. Nehemiah said, “Go and enjoy choice food and sweet drinks, and send some to those who have nothing prepared. This day is sacred to our Lord. Do not grieve, for the joy of the LORD is your strength.” The Levites calmed all the people, saying, “Be still, for this is a sacred day. Do not grieve.”
it seems to me that the priests and levites had a strong hand in the emotional response of the people. granted, their motivation was clearly right. some would say that pastoral/worshipleader motivations for manipulation could be wrong. yes, sometimes human pride might be involved. sometimes. but sometimes not. sometimes there’s a genuine desire and motivation for the people to rightly respond to God.
we need to make sure we’re not throwing the baby out with the bath water.
ok. back to the original post: how does our understanding of historical worship influence our current practice of worship?? should we consider it at all? is what has been done in the past important to what is being done now?
Russ: i wish i had your education! i’m clueless when it comes to music theory. absolutely clueless.
Lori: yes. we should definitely give our best. Psalm 33:3 Sing to him a new song; play skillfully, and shout for joy.
do we have a right use of our knowledge of historical forms of worship?
yes
do we have accurate knowledge of historical forms of Christian worship?
yes and no
do you think a right use of this knowledge could help?
yes
are we in bondage to our own culture?
yes
Just like you were saying the other day that authenticity is your pill – I think that we can safely say that authenticity is necessary in worship.
I just stumbled through, and thought that I would respond from a “non-leader” lay person viewpoint. And I think I will check my list off against BO’s comments:
First off, if we are all caught up in titles from a personal standpoint then it is problematic. But you could go on to say that about all “titles” within the church, senior pastors, lead pastors, teaching pastors, priest, pope, cardinals, ministers, etc. My version of ‘worship leader’ was choir director and music director – they picked the hymns and lead the choir…they added to the service. Titles are what you make of them… you can be a dictator, or you can be leader, or you can be a fellow follower – your choice.
Following that point is quality of music, sermons, comfort all play a role in my decision to attend the church I attend. But so does the bible based sermons, the men’s groups that allow me to grow closer to God, the mission trips that effect not only my city but the world. If I am being honest, each of these pieces of my little c church affect me at different times throughout the year. There are times when a particular piece of music has me tingling all over, then there are other times when the service does, and then there are other times when my bible study does… again they are all a part of it for me. Ultimately, though, it is up to me to continue to grow, but the little c church is offering me one piece of that.
In terms of the contemporary Christian music, if you think through time, were any of the hymnal songs around when Jesus was around? I don’t think so. So obviously the same can be said for the contemporary Christian music. The one thing that they have in common though, is they praise Jesus. They praise our God. As long as the person up front is approaching it from the side of praise instead of “personal” performance and gratification there is nothing wrong with it.
To add to that thought, if a person comes to church for the first time and realizes that this is something s/he would like to explore more and the setting helps in the short term…I say fantastic! I don’t care if it was due to the kind person at the door greeting him, the latte machine, the stage, the sermon, the teaching pastor, the worship leader, or the prayer at the end – whatever brings a person closer to Christ is a good thing. If that thing is the Worship Leader and his/her song choices dove tail into the sermon I say “You go gal…”
In conclusion, have we strayed from the traditional thought of church? I would have to say yes. Is this a good thing? Well, the church is a living thing – it will grow – it will expand – it will touch more and more lives. With that said, I lean toward yes it is a good thing if it is based in biblical truth. Why should we care if a person is coming to Christ because s/he likes the music and it opened the door for them? Why should we care about a title, if in our hearts we are doing what God wanted us to – praise him and spread His word.
@ng: hey cousin!!! your answers made me laugh. not because of the content, but because they were so short & sweet & to the point.
Michael: thanks for stopping by. thoughtful comments from new readers are what make my day. i appreciated your perspective. wish my church had a latte machine. not for outreach purposes but for “wake me up early in the morning so i can praise consciously” purposes!!
we gotta do what we gotta do! thank you again for your words. really…
I love reading the psalms- all the wonderful ways of praise and worship, the different instruments used for musical worship, the different stances (bowing down, reaching up, dancing…)
It’s quite amazing.
Mandy Mom: what a name! it makes me smile.
enjoyed looking through your blog. thanks for saying hello.
OK, back to your original question….
Being the deconstructionist that I am…. for me, deconstruction is not destroying history, doctrine, tradition, theology, etc… it’s like cleaning out the attic. I strip everything down to the basics, look at what parts came from man and what parts came from God. The parts that came from man, I try to look at the motivation, relevance, benefit, cost, etc… throw away the bad and try to learn from the good.
In terms of worship, there’s a lot of great stuff to learn from historical worship. This certainly starts with the material itself. Look at one of the oldest Hymns still sung, “Be Thou My Vision”, thought to be originally penned in the 8th century, with the melody possibly being older than that. It’s just a great song with awesome words. Authenticity is the key throughout history. There’s a ton there…
I think today we need to be careful of ‘being relevant’ just for the sake of being relevant… it’s a slippery slope. Being real is far more important.
Buddy makes some great points.
I grew up in a music minister’s home (that would be my dad) and thought I would become one myself. Studied music but really didn’t want to practice hard enough to become “good” enough…moved on to education. I kept singing in church, specials, choirs, worship teams…then I walked away from it all. Why? I realized I was doing it for the attention it was bringing me and not for worship of my Lord.
When we lived in England would went to a small college church for worship. One evening the minister asked us all to bow our heads and pray…nothing more…and spontaneously…throughout the body one person would pray…then another…someone would sing a verse to a hymn…another prayer…a spontaneous song would spring up again…quiet…more prayers…more songs…someone would quote a scripture…on and on…
I’ve never had a more worshipful experience since…
Sorry about the length of this post – I guess I found this interesting…
To answer your questions even further… I will pick on the one word repeated above that is hardest to define – “right.” How do you define right? If you define “right” is that actually defined by our culture?
To me, this is more about “method” than the message. I hope none of you reading this take this the wrong way, but I find it interesting that there are people who think that God stopped allowing His children to be creative. That one day in history (pick a day) we finally got it right. That the “religious experience” was perfect.”
Church is about Christ. Notice I did not say which bible is followed, what songs are sung, or whether a person wears a suit vs. a pair of shorts. Church is about Christ – plain and simple. History points that out for us. The bible points that out for us. Personally I am glad that things have changed. I like the fact that I can feel more relaxed in God’s house. I like that I can dress the same as I do every day, thus reinforcing the fact that every day is God’s day – not just Sunday. I like a lot of the changes we see today in the church. I like to hear contemporary Christian songs.
Back to my original point – for me it all comes down to the method not the message. As you read the Bible, God didn’t do the exact same thing ever time when He dealt with His people. Jesus didn’t either. He did things different, radically, in a way that bucked the current system. Then to top it off , He told the religious leaders that by holding on to their traditions and preaching those traditions they were basically making the Word of God have no affect (with an “a”). Talk about another conversation altogether– some churches are doing just that – they are so tuned into tradition that the Word of God has no affect when it is actually preached. As a perfect example to that – remember when Jesus gave us the Lord Prayer – his intent wasn’t for us to blindly recite it over and over again – no He was giving us a sample prayer because we wanted to know how to pray. I all we do is follow the tradition of saying the Lord’s Prayer without actually feeling anything then we missed the point…
So to sum it up, the methods have changed over the years. We have different types of music, different types services, different days of worship, different approaches altogether In terms of worship, for me history gives me a base, not an absolute. The only absolutes I have are God, Jesus, and the message that was brought to us.
Again, sorry about the length of my comment…
Hmm…. since I constitute a majority of the comments in this thread, I’m assuming that you are including me with these ‘people’… Where did you get the idea that I (or any of the participants in this thread) think God stopped allowing His children to be creative??
Wow, my philosophy is the exact opposite. I think that (as Mandy is alluding to) ‘being creative’ includes incorporating historical elements that are meaningful and powerful. Have you ever been to a service where hundreds of people are reciting scripture in unison using Gregorian Chant? It’s powerful… I was part of that in an ‘Emergent’ church we attended a couple of years ago. Actually Brian McClaren was the pastor that Sunday and was leading the chant.
As far a being creative in worship… I have a feeling that most readers of this blog would think the kind of worship my family and I are part of is perhaps too creative, even for you Michael…
Sorry about that BuddyO, I referenced you in the first comment, but did not mean to imply you in the second comment. Be careful not to assume
… I did not call you out, just people who feel that way. I continue to get this feeling that we are moving to a black and white type of scenario – those that like the “new look” of services, and those that like the the old look of services.
I agree with you completely that incorporating historical elements while. My point is that I don’t want to go through service reciting things to recite, singing songs just to sing, because that is the way we have always done it. Rather, if we bring new and fresh ideas of the method of delivery, while at the same time keeping the message whole – fantastic.
So, to put it simply – keep the old, and bring on the new.
One additional follow up comment – I was talking in general about society – not the participants in this tread when I made my comments above. Again, no one in particular just people I have personally run into.
Hey Michael no prob… Actually I was really interested in finding out if I was misread. I often find that my written communication skills aren’t the best (probably because I’m blogging in between putting fires out at work…) so I wanted to see if somehow I wasn’t being clear…
Anyway thanks for being concerned…
I’m with you there’s so much to be said about building new creativity upon the old. We we went to Cedar Ridge (McClaren’s church) we often would incorporate ‘old’ worship traditions into a ‘modern’ worship setting. For instance, the Gregorian Chant, recited liturgy, ancient prayers, etc.
Interestingly, I just read an interview with Brian McClaren on JesusManifesto called “A New Kind of Ancient”.
http://www.jesusmanifesto.com/2008/06/30/brian-mclaren-a-new-kind-of-ancient/
He just wrote a new book, which I have yet to read. McClaren has been promoting what is called the ‘ancient-future movement’. Here’s a cool quote from the article addressing those who might be critical of the reintroduction of the ancient in future worship:
Thanks for the info… I will look at and possibly post in the future… From your quote noted above, there has been so much discussion going on about the perception of Christianity… it should be an interesting read.
dang. y’all are having a party over here! i’m gonna take some time to sit down & read through this.
y’all rock.
Love the conversation… love to hear your thoughts as well…
My thoughts. i think we should live in a world of both. i agree with the point above that church is about Christ, but i would also like to add that i think church is about the Body of Christ.
and when we forget about the efforts and impact of previous generations of the Body, then we are only partially “doing” church.
on another note, i was talking to my husband the other night and he presented the thought that a lot of people prefer the “traditional” style of worship simply because (from their perspective) it’s trustworthy. it’s tested by time. it was set up by our forefathers, who took great pains to get it right. it is reliable, not new and “risky”… i’m not saying that i would agree with this potential reason for their preference, BUT i appreciated his effort to find the positive motivations behind some of our modern-day church members, instead of just chalking it up to hard-headedness and fear of change.
again guys, i’ve enjoyed reading through your comments, michelle and others as well. thanks for humoring me for a bit!
This is a really good discussion.
I’ve appreciated all that’s been said here. I am not sure I can add to it, but I can say this. We have to continually evaluate whether the music is being worshiped over the creator.
What I mean is that I think that what we do now in church services is absolutely nothing like was done in the first century. I think our culture now has taken us down roads that the culture back then would never have gone.
Here’s what I think though. I don’t think that is bad. I have no problem believing that culture played a part in worship from the time of the Israelites in the desert to the first century church to now. Who we are in personality and culture brings a lot to the worship process. Where we have gone wrong in every living century is to allow ourselves to lose focus of who we are to be worshiping.
You asked, “Do we have a right use of our knowledge of historical forms of worship? Do we have accurate knowledge of historical forms of Christian worship?”
We absolutely have the ability to have a right knowledge of what worship is and who we should worship. The bible gives us complete guidance in that, but music is secondary.
“Do you think a right use of this knowledge could help?”
YES! Here is where we have a problem. People come into churches and feel that music is worship time and teaching is listening time and so on. They then establish what they like or don’t like and whether or not worship was good based on their opinions. When in reality, the whole service is a time of worship as much as their everyday life is. If people correctly understood “surrender”, it would then play into all aspects of their lives. It would then poor out in a time of music and teaching and listening and service and so on. We would be less consumer oriented and more God focused.
“Are we in bondage to our own culture?”
Only when we are not truly worshipers. If we don’t know who we are worshiping and if our only time of “worship” is the 1/2 hour of music on Sunday AM, then we have allowed our culture to hold us in bondage. If our lives and everything it consists of is surrendered over to God and poured out in glorifying Him, then our culture is just a part of the personality of that worship.
Culture isn’t the issue, our hearts are.
I really don’t know the first thing about music, but culture I can discuss.
Brent wrote: “Culture isn’t the issue, our hearts are.”
I agree…to a point.
But that’s a post for another time.
my brain hurts.
Wow! Great questions and fantastic, thoughtful answers! These are probably some of the best-worded comments I’ve seen on any subject like this. Deep without sounding cerebral, and very God-focused.
I linked to this post from my blog this morning and tried to focus a little more on the last question of the four — http://deanlusk.blogspot.com/2008/07/historical-vs-modern-worship.html.
(Forgive me for potentially not observing blog etiquette on a trackback or what-not. I’m honestly not sure of the correct way to do it; don’t mean to blog-jack by pasting a link to my blog here…)
Brent, nicely said, you sound like a pastor or something…
I have really been focusing on the holistic approach to worship that you alluded to. That’s the main thrust of the Simple Church movement: church (worship) happens everyday all day, amongst believers and non-believers alike, what happens on Sunday is just the icing.
Dean… you are in trouble dude… Mandy is pretty harsh with blog-jackers… be very afraid.
Brent: thank you for your perspective. man, i’ve got lots to think about in all this!
TheNor: tell me when you write that post.
Alece: MINE TOO!!
Dean: welcome to the party! you know, you’re not the first blog-hijacker to come around here. and i’ve yet to kick one off. so stay. hijack all you want! don’t listen to anything Buddy-O says, unless he’s right.
BO: trying to scare away my new readers??? you should be afraid.
Buddy siad,
“I have really been focusing on the holistic approach to worship that you alluded to. That’s the main thrust of the Simple Church movement: church (worship) happens everyday all day, amongst believers and non-believers alike, what happens on Sunday is just the icing.”
This is what worship truly is. There is no other way to see it in scripture under the new covenant. With that said, there is a lot of Old testament scriptural backing to more ritualistic styles of worship that I think can be nicely incorporated into the corporate service. Things like music and prayer. But it is when we take these rituals and make them THE act of worship, that we start to lose site of the the heart and intent and it ceases to be worship.
On. The. Money.
Things like: Stations of the Cross, Chant, Incense, Read/Response Liturgy, Hymns, etc. can all be wonderful, powerful elements when used, not abused…
(couldn’t resist the rhyme)
Rhyming always makes me smile
Sweet that I haven’t somehow been booted due to my blog-jacking.
When we talk about now-ancient liturgies, etc., what established them in the first place? Did the Scriptures do it, or was it someone’s way of trying to make sure that the Word stayed planted in the common man’s mind? I think it’s probably the latter. And doesn’t that present the same danger to us as it did to the Pharisees? Observing traditions rather than the intent and goal of the law?
Buddy’s note that “church (worship) happens everyday all day, amongst believers and non-believers alike” doesn’t seem to ring quite true unless he means that believers worship God and non-believers worship other things, which, by definition, cannot be God.
My big thing lately has been to remind the Church that they’re the Church. The stuff they do on Tuesday tells people a LOT more about the God they serve than what they do on Sunday. And that is definitely one of the things Buddy was talking about.
Can I do that by using incense? I’ll just BET that I can! Stations of the cross? Probably so… So yes, I think that “history” is wonderful. Most wonderful, though, because most people don’t know it, and that means it’s not history, but it’s a new idea. I mean, haven’t we as worship leaders had to INVESTIGATE what the historical Church did? You think the layperson has done that?
BTW, “Laudio” is Dean Lusk. Sorry for the confusion there. I think I was logged in when I made the second post.