Worship albums

[Vlad!]

I wish artists wouldn't release a worship CD but change up all the songs. Yes, it's great that you have some bold new artistic vision for how to sing a traditional worship hymn, but I don't buy the CD to hear you rock out with your bad self, I want to sing along. And if you change the timing or the notes, I just get frustrated. Bah.

[murlough23]

I wish artists wouldn't release a worship CD but change up all the songs. Yes, it's great that you have some bold new artistic vision for how to sing a traditional worship hymn, but I don't buy the CD to hear you rock out with your bad self, I want to sing along. And if you change the timing or the notes, I just get frustrated. Bah.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If they just sing it the traditional way then it often seems to me like the only point in making a new recording was to fleece us for more money. Which is why I generally prefer that artists not do that sort of thing unless they've got a good enough artistic vision to make it both creative and participatory, which is a tough task.

My personal pet peeve is the egregiously out-of-place modern refrains that get tacked on to so many of these hymns nowadays. I just don't know know how someone gets an ego big enough to think they can add to a classic like that. I blame Chris Tomlin's version of "The Wonderful Cross" (which admittedly is an arrangement that I enjoy) for getting the trend going.

[Vlad!]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If they just sing it the traditional way then it often seems to me like the only point in making a new recording was to fleece us for more money.

Maybe because often that is the only point.

If you're a big-name CCM artist and you want to create a worship album, that's one thing. But I have this CD that's billed as worship songs. It's from various artists, most of them smaller-name acts on big CCM labels, and yet pretty much all of them are changed up in some annoying way. It makes no sense to me that someone would do this.

[murlough23]

Those things are made simply because they know cluelcess consumers will see the word "worship" and a bunch of familiar song titles and buy it on the spot. Quality is an afterthought. Whether the consumer who has to stick to the familiar worship songs they know even enjoys the arrangements is an afterthought. This niche of the market tends to not sample before they buy.

[Vlad!]

Those things are made simply because they know cluelcess consumers will see the word "worship" and a bunch of familiar song titles and buy it on the spot. Quality is an afterthought. Whether the consumer who has to stick to the familiar worship songs they know even enjoys the arrangements is an afterthought. This niche of the market tends to not sample before they buy.

That niche of the market bought me the CD as a gift :/

I realize this is delving into music board territory, but are there any worship CDs you would recommend for being easy to sing along to and having generally high production values?

[murlough23]

I realize this is delving into music board territory, but are there any worship CDs you would recommend for being easy to sing along to and having generally high production values?

Honestly, I'm the wrong guy to ask. I learn songs easily, and I don't tend to realize they're not easy to sing along to until I attempt to play them for small group and observe everyone else's befuddled expressions.

[Vlad!]

By "easy to sing along to" I mean "doesn't try to reinvent traditional hymns". A CD which either has nice original worship or which plays traditional worship straight would be fine.

[murlough23]

By "easy to sing along to" I mean "doesn't try to reinvent traditional hymns". A CD which either has nice original worship or which plays traditional worship straight would be fine.

I see. So it doesn't matter if songs that are new to you are easy to sing along to, because nobody's messing up a previous version of the song that you once knew.

I'd recommend almost anything by David Crowder Band. They seem to manage a good balance between easily memorable, singable choruses and intelligently thought-out arrangements. Their Church Music album is stellar, so long as you're not allergic to overly electronic arrangements. They do tend to have one hymn remake per album (as well as one oddball cover song choice), but sometimes those are such obscure hymns that I didn't know 'em anyway (and in the cases where they did more widely known hymns - "All Creatures of Our God and King" and "O, For a Thousand Tongues to Sing", they only tried to add a chorus to the latter, while the only major change to the former was smoothing out the time signature to 4/4. Both are good arrangements that aren't too difficult to get used to).

Something Like Silas's lone major-label album Divine Invitation is also one of my all-time favorites. All original except for one Matt Redman cover that I think is a good balance between a creative arrangement and an "easily followable" arrangement. They morphed into Future of Forestry, who also has some striking worship songs, though that isn't all FoF tackles in terms of subject matter.

I just got into Gungor. They're not bad. Overly simplistic at times, but at other times, the arrangements and choice of instrumentation are a beautiful surprise.

This is a good discussion - I figured folks here were getting so phobic about worship music that it wasn't worth much discussion, so I'm glad to be proven wrong. We probably need some thread splittage, though.

[Vlad!]

Thanks for the suggestions. I'm not sure if worship albums tend to make it onto Grooveshark/Spotify or not, but I'll check them out.

This is a good discussion - I figured folks here were getting so phobic about worship music that it wasn't worth much discussion, so I'm glad to be proven wrong. We probably need some thread splittage, though.

Done and done. I don't know if anyone other than me cares about this topic, but I'm certainly not phobic.

[murlough23]

Thanks for the suggestions. I'm not sure if worship albums tend to make it onto Grooveshark/Spotify or not, but I'll check them out.

I can hook you up if needed. Anything to help save someone from the glut of thoughtless worship music out there.

Done and done. I don't know if anyone other than me cares about this topic, but I'm certainly not phobic.

I used to get excited about stuff like Delirious? and SonicFlood because I perceived it as a rarity. Now I'm realizing some of that stuff was a bit gimmicky, truth be told. Still, as my tastes have morphed over the years and I've found it harded to find straight-up "worship bands" who don't insult the intelligence of the discerning listener, I've come to really respect the stark few who seem to put genuine thought into the music they make, both on a theological level and on a musical level. That doesn't mean they necessarily need to be overly "indie" or difficult for the mainstream to get into, necessarily. I just get tired of the same old, same old. When we repeat stuff by rote it can threaten to lose its meaning. At least that's the effect it tends to have on me, so I look for new expressions, even though the truths being expressed are obviously never gonna change.

And I've become less easily fooled by the polishing off of old songs with new youth-groupy appeal. There's a time and a place for reinventing the classics, but it takes great care, and the potential for unfavorable comparison to the way the audience is used to singing it can be quite great.

[Aaron]

the new Gungor album is wonderful.

also recommend:

John Mark McMillan
Robbie Seay Band
Brothers McClurg (formerly Relevant Worship from Buffalo, NY)
Ascend The Hill (a few songs)

[murlough23]

the new Gungor album is wonderful.

Better than Beautiful Things? That one's pretty good aside from its obvious youth-groupy anthems and one misguided attempt at waspel.

[Aaron]

the Gungor album isn't really a corporate worship style album.  It's more of something Future of Forestry would have put out.

[murlough23]

the Gungor album isn't really a corporate worship style album.  It's more of something Future of Forestry would have put out.

I got that impression from the better tracks on Beautiful Things, such as "You Have Me". That's very good news and I'm looking forward to seeing them open for Crowder next month.

[Aaron]

I was totally expecting some standard fare you'd hear at many contemporary churches so it was a surprise to hear them in a different direction.

[bloop]

Off topic, but "worship albums" made me think of it. We actually sang "Shout to the Lord" at our last church service, and repeated it THREE TIMES! I thought I went to Lutheran Church to get past such mindless repetition. 2x at most!

[murlough23]

Off topic, but "worship albums" made me think of it. We actually sang "Shout to the Lord" at our last church service, and repeated it THREE TIMES! I thought I went to Lutheran Church to get past such mindless repetition. 2x at most!

Yeah, that's just way too repetitive when a song only has one verse to begin with. (I did learn a second verse at one point, but I never heard it anywhere outside of the person who taught it to me, including any and all recordings of the song.)

I hope they at least pulled the truck driver's gear change to keep things from getting 100% boring. Sure, it's a cliche, but that song is one of my favorite examples of it due to how it's often done in the middle of the chorus. (See also: "Do You Realize??")

[bloop]

Well, at least they avoided the charismatic trap of singing "nothing compares to the promise..." by itself about 50 times. If there's a way to make church seem like hell to me, that's it.

[NewDimension]

Excessive repetition in worship songs - or any song for that matter - is quite off-putting to me as well. If I attend a church service and the worship leaders repeat the same words or phrases 50 times in a row, it starts to feel like I'm listening to a nauseating chant given by a bunch of cheerleaders. This can have a reverse effect on my ability to engage with the content of the song sometimes, as I'll tend to focus more on the repetition then on the significance of the lyrics, and I assume the significance of the lyrics is what the worship leaders / choir is trying to more strongly convey through the repetition. So a lot of times the intended effect - to focus the mind on the significance of the lyrics - will backfire for me. However, I can see how other people could find the repetition beneficial for that intended goal. So basically it all comes down to how you individually perceive and respond to the repetition.

[bloop]

Well, there's the other thing, too - that I just don't find what's being repeated to be all that complex or deep in the first place . . .

[murlough23]

I am also a person who gets annoyed by excessive repetition. I think I'm more sensitive than most. To me, heavy repetition raises suspicion that someone just didn't want to think and they're trying to evoke emotion by way of brute force. It feels manipulative in most cases, especially in a 'religious" setting.

The difficulty is that some of us are much more "musical", in the sense that we have more aptitude when it comes to learning/performing/understanding music than your typical churchgoer might. Your average Joe is probably not very musical, but I think most people do respond to music on some basic gut level. Music gets the attention, and it's easier to learn/memorize something that is set to music than something that isn't. I strongly suspect that this is how the modern notion of a "worship service" came into being. It's the quickest conceivable way to get a lot of people to pick up on what's going on, and to get them to participate. I'm not saying that makes it the best way, of course - but it's certainly one of the easiest.

The challenge for me is to not read a lack of intelligence of theological soundness into it just because I see a lot of repetition. it's easy to fall into a trap of thinking, "That's for the dumb Christians; I'm going to be a conscientious objector and not participate because it will taint the way I worship and make it less genuine if I do." I've tried to push myself, rather than just rolling my eyes and tune out when it's that song being played again for the umpteenth time or when a chorus repeats for way too long, and instead think of what tone they're trying to set and how I can participate in worship even if I'm not singing the words 20 times along with everyone else. Time for reflection, I guess - tune out the music itself but don't tune out the worshipful atmosphere they're trying to create. Of course, this isn't easy once my inner music critic kicks in.

Hearing it on a CD is a different matter, of course. I paid money for that 9or am considering paying money for it), and if it doesn't set the tone than I need it to for personal worship, I have no bones about throwing it out and/or recommending against it for others. many of the things that draw me into worship on more of a personal level are not "worship albums" in the strictest sense - they just have lyrics/compositions that help me to reflect on beautiful things and interesting people God has made, or ways that God has been good in the life of the writer, or challenged that writer in some way that helped them, grow, etc., and pondering how that might apply in my own life. What moves me might seem overbearing, obtuse, or manipulative to many others in my congregation, I'd imagine.

[NewDimension]

Given the few lyrics that comprise extremely repetitive songs, there is usually not much depth or complexity which can be developed in the song through the lyrics. So it all depends on just how much depth someone ascribes to the few words that are available in the song. I think it takes more imagination to project any depth into a song that just repeats a few lines. In most cases, the song won’t do much to convey the significance of the lyrics present, so I think people try to ascribe more meaning to the song than what is present in the actual lyrics – which explains why only some people would “grasp” what they think is the significance of the song. This is one reason why I pretty much don’t listen to a lot of Christian music anymore - or music with any lyrics for that matter - as the quality of the lyrics expressed can be very limited due to musical time constraints, the blending of lyrics with music, along with excessive repetition which further limits the development of the lyrics ; not to mention the quality of the music itself is also compromised, and whether or not someone has a “worship” experience is usually due to subjective perception of the song at the time instead of just the quality of the song itself - so the significance of the significance of a song in the role of a worship experience would be lessened to some extent.

So I don’t think a lot of modern worship songs do justice to any (or at least all, simultaneously) of the three things which they do - the theology contained in the lyrics, the person’s experience of worship (which of course isn’t dictated by the song but can be strongly influenced by it), and the quality of the music itself. Of course some people may perceive that all three of these aspects have been sufficiently met in a song, this just rarely happens for me, so I don’t expect these three factors to coalesce if I listen to a song.

But I agree, it’s important not to let repetitive songs diminish from the quality of a worshipful focus that you can have when the song is being sung, though of course that can be hard, as the song can serve more as a distraction than an a concentration aid.

[bloop]

I can try, but I'm not optimistic in my ability to boot out a part of myself, and not a bad part at that, to join the masses. I'm more likely put up with it, sing along for a bit, then stop when the lyric's worn out and wait to get on with the liturgy.

[NewDimension]

I take a similar approach to the situation, but generally I don’ t sing along much. It all depends on my reason for singing along. If I sing along in order to worship God and not to just sing because the rest of the crowd is singing, then I’ll sing. But if at the moment I hear the repetitive song and my heart is not currently attuned to worship God through singing of that song, then I’ll question whether or not to continue and sing along or not. It kind of feels insincere to just sing along if my heart isn’t actively seeking to worship God through the expression of that singing. But then I’ll question whether or not it would be more worshipful to sing along despite not feeling actively engaged in worship, as singing along could still qualify as genuine worship even if for the moment I didn’t feel particularly engaged with the worship. And I’ll think, “Well, perhaps, it’s better if I just abandon myself in this endless singing and try to worship God despite how I feel about this song right now, since worship isn’t just about what you feel.” Then I’ll question whether this is just a useless “work” or “ritual” that I would be doing , just to go along with the masses and obey God through attempting to worship with everyone else but not with a heart engaged in any of it. Often, I’ll have a mental debate about whether to continue singing or not,  and many times it just feels too insincere, so I’ll stop singing, assuming I ever started. But I’ll usually still try to worship God in another manner, disregarding the actual song for the most part, but trying to worship God in a way that genuinely shifts my focus more toward worshiping him. Otherwise, I’ll have to create another reason to sing along, mostly for social reasons, such as, “Perhaps singing even if your heart isn’t engaged in worship during this song could benefit someone else who is around you, as you’d still be setting an example of worship to them”. Another option would be to just mouth the words while your mind is elsewhere focusing on worship in another manner - perhaps through meditation or prayer, that way you have the pro of singing the song with the corporate community and the pro of genuinely engaging in worship, while lessening the con of not experiencing much connection to worshiping God through just singing a particular song.

[murlough23]

One thing my church did about a month ago that surprised me was to have a service with no music whatsoever. We were quite surprised to come into the sanctuary and see the usual grand piano and drum kit missing from the stage, as well as a conspicuous lack of mics, music stands, etc. The worship director came out and sat on a stool up front all by her lonesome, and instructed us that we would be doing a communal reading of Scripture instead, with mics set up at the front of either aisle for folks to come up and share a brief passage from one of the Psalms, following by a short silence to reflect. It was a bit awkward at first and I think it caught people off-guard (especially because we're not one of those audience-participation-heavy congregations - people don't shout "Amen!" and stuff during sermons, for example). But I respected it for being an exercise in thinking outside the box and worshiping without music needing to be a part of it, even while the part of me that actually likes music and likes to sing struggled a bit with it. I guess it was a reminder that music is a useful tool for worship but not a necessary one.

[ajyouthguy]

i thought maybe this was a thread about the new Anthrax album...

http://www.amazon.com/Worship-Music/dp/B005KWL2IW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317409199&sr=8-1

[murlough23]

Otherwise, I’ll have to create another reason to sing along, mostly for social reasons, such as, “Perhaps singing even if your heart isn’t engaged in worship during this song could benefit someone else who is around you, as you’d still be setting an example of worship to them”.

I used to think that, but more recently I've decided this isn't a good idea. It can create the illusion of being complicit with something that you don't actually agree is a sound idea theologically. Then other people feel they need to follow along and then the worship team gets the apparent feedback that everyone loves that dull, trite song they keep dragging out, so they keep dragging out.

Which shouldn't be taken to imply that a worship team should design its service solely around the apparent responsiveness of the congregation. But I don't think a member of the congregation should ever have to fake anything for any reason. I think there are other ways to reflect a posture of worship and not have your non-participation in the song be a glaring distraction to anyone next to you.

Not that I'm an expert at this or anything. There was one worship team at my church for a while whose leader was heavily involved in youth ministry, and he had this terrible habit of teaching hand motions for way too many of the songs (something that I don't even think is age-appropriate for high school). It got so difficult to hide my displeasure that I had to physically leave the sanctuary during those songs. Thankfully we promoted him to full pastor so he doesn't have time to lead a worship team any more. (He's a much better preacher than a worship leader.)

[Vlad!]

There's also something to be said for remembering that worship is not about us.

I used to despise the song "I Could Sing of Your Love Forever", mostly because I felt like the worship leaders were attempting to demonstrate that they could sing of his love forever by actually doing so. However, the church I now go to (which hadn't sung that song before) sang it at a recent devotional. Apparently I've mellowed some over the years, because even though I started out pretty hard-hearted toward it, I was able to close my eyes and focus on worshiping the Lord.

I want my worship to be characterized by joy, and the joy should come from the Lord, not from those around me or the worship leaders or the artistic merit of the song or even from myself. I've started to realize this, hence my renewed interest in worship albums.

(I realize that I started this thread by complaining about worship albums, which doesn't exactly jive with what I just wrote. But I haven't yet achieved such a transcendental state of being that I don't get distracted and annoyed when the traditional rendition of a hymn holds a note for four beats and the CD artist holds it for two!)

[bloop]

It may not be about me, but I'm still left between fake sincerity and not participating honestly on the very rare event it comes up. Good thing we mostly do hymns. The music may be repetitive, but the words aren't nearly as much so as so many of the more modern worship songs, which I can only describe as commercial Jesus jingles.

[murlough23]

There's also something to be said for remembering that worship is not about us.

The act of worship isn't for me, obviously. But doing so enriches my relationship with God, so in some sense, I need to just get with the program and do it regardless of the circumstances, but in another sense, I need to do it in a way that is truly coming from my own heart, mind, soul, and strength. I don't want that expression of love, awe, etc. to be insincere, or just parroting what I see my neighbor doing. God knows the difference anyway. He knows whether it's genuine.

I figure congregational worship is generally geared towards what's gonna be most useful to get people into that space. I don't know that it can ever work for everyone. And I think there's a time and a place for just being content to be part of that big crowd worshiping God and not worry about your own individual expression. But then there are other times - particularly when you're away from a group setting - when I think it's absolutely critical for that expression to be yours, something you can honestly, sincerely relate to and that facilitates a response of praise within you that doesn't just echo someone else's thoughts, but that you can claim came from within you.

This shouldn't be about musical preferences. Those are fickle and will change over time. There are musicians who speak my language a little better than others, but those aren't for everyone and that's OK. Even when the music isn't my preference, I care that it's theologically sound and not just filling them up with trite Jesus jingles (thanks for that, bloop), which often have the unfortunate side effect of oversimplifying to the point of making us believe lies about who God is, what God wants for us, and what worship is even all about. That's distracting. It's insidious because a lot of folks don't see it for what it is. That's when my response and my unwillingness to participate goes beyond a song that I might personally find a tad annoying, to thinking it's actually a serious problem. And this can even happen with songs or musicians I like if the material is being repeated thoughtlessly, just because folks seem to like it. Putting together a good worship service takes thought - not about what's cool or trendy or will get attention, but about what sets the proper stage for the service to follow. Personal times of worship could use that "stage setting" too, and music may or may not be helpful for that, depending on who you are. Just something to help you reflect and get out of your daily routine into that mode of praise which unfortunately doesn't come as naturally for many of us as it should. So I say, use what's helpful for you and don't expect it to work the same way for others. But also don't get too comfortable repeating the same ritual. If it stops making you think critically about the meaning and importance of it, maybe it's time to change up the ritual.

I used to despise the song "I Could Sing of Your Love Forever", mostly because I felt like the worship leaders were attempting to demonstrate that they could sing of his love forever by actually doing so. However, the church I now go to (which hadn't sung that song before) sang it at a recent devotional. Apparently I've mellowed some over the years, because even though I started out pretty hard-hearted toward it, I was able to close my eyes and focus on worshiping the Lord.

A college friend of mine had a running joke about that song. Something like, "Well, I could sing of your love forever. That doesn't mean I want to be doing it with just this one song."

I like that particular song well enough. It's not one of my favorites, and some of the lyrics don't even make logical sense if taken literally (rivers don't flow over mountains and seas, after all). I can't recall a time when it got repeated so much that I became sick of it, but I can see how I might slowly turn against it if it felt like it was getting overused compared to other songs that might hit the mark a little better in terms of subject matter. I think maybe you saw it in a new light after not hearing it for a while (probably because something else came into vogue and got repeated a ton instead), and then having it come back out at a point where someone chose it for reasons other than its apparent popularity. Just a guess.

I used to feel this way about "God of Wonders". I've actually always loved the original City on a Hill recording of that song. But then everybody re-recorded it, and it sort of became the all-purpose response song at the end of countless church services that I went to, and it just became a bit of a cliche. So I was in this weird position of being sick of a song that I still liked, simply because it seemed thoughtless and uninspired to keep dragging it out. Then we retired it for a while. It came back out during a service where we were talking about creation, and the sheer vastness of the universe that science has discovered so far (the pastor even invited a scientist who is part of our congregation to come up and help him explain the sheer scale of the cosmos as we know it), and offer thoughts on how that can be reconciled with the Genesis story. Fascinating stuff. "God of Wonders" was an absolutely appropriate response after that sermon. It was like seeing the song in a whole new light (pun possibly intended). Would I want to keep dragging it out again week after week? No. But the thought that presumably went into its inclusion helped the song to serve its intended function as a musical meditation on something fascinating about God we'd just heard the pastor expound on. Music can only do so much within the space of a hymn or a modern pop song, but context is everything.

[bloop]

some of the lyrics don't even make logical sense if taken literally (rivers don't flow over mountains and seas, after all)

Great, you've given me yet another reason to bristle at the song. What else shall I uncover by taking lyrical metaphors at face value? Can some of the sort of "this song is for dumb Christians" thinking be attributed to merely astute observation? 

[murlough23]

On the other hand, God's love flows everywhere including places you might not think it would, so that's something to consider.

Even the Bible doesn't make sense if you read it too literally. A tree growing on both sides of a river? What's that about? How drug-addled was the dude who wrote that?

[bloop]

Yes, there is a truth there, the metaphor doesn't really work. I can't call it a complete success as a lyric.

[bloop]

It's interesting to me that when it comes to worship, I'm almost opposite what I am with everything else. Lyrics suddenly become the #1 concern, and I don't really think many of the best artists on the planet would make it as worship leaders, so it's not like I don't make concessions for a more communal "bring everyone aboard" approach that is typical in the genre.

Still, I don't want to feel insulted, either.

[murlough23]

Yes, there is a truth there, the metaphor doesn't really work. I can't call it a complete success as a lyric.

My handwave probably wasn't the intended meaning when he wrote it. It's not one of Martin Smith's better lyrics.

[Vlad!]

It can be hard to get past goofy lyrics. You try to really think about the words you're singing, but then you get distracted because the lyrics are insipid or silly or just plain wrong. But sometimes I think of Romans 8:26, where the Spirit intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. It's more about the attitude of worship than about specific words, and if the words are so distractingly dumb that you just can't worship, maybe hum (or even groan!) along instead.

I think this discussion has helped me see that I need to work on my own heart, since if my ability to worship my creator in a way that's even close to the way he deserves to be worshiped depends on someone singing the right words or playing the right music, that's a pretty shallow love and desire to worship.

[murlough23]

I figure my habit of nitpicking song lyrics, while one could argue it's inconsequential in other genres because the lyrics may be impressionistic or open to interpretation or it's just a silly love song, etc., becomes more of an important thing when it comes to worship songs. I honestly don't mean to walk into a church service with a critical attitude, especially because I love my church and often many of the people leading worship are personal friends of mine. But it's one of those filters that I find I can't turn off.

I do really try to discern whether it's one of those things that just sounds awkward to my overly analytical mind, or whether it's a genre preference issue, or whether there's something in there that's actually bothersome on a theological level. It's one thing if a song just has an annoying melody, or we're dragging it out for what feels like the tenth time so far this year and it's only February. It's quite another if the song doesn't square with the things I believe about God or even that our pastor is teaching us about God that day. That means one of us is wrong. And I have to sit and think about which is the truer representation of who God is and how God behaves and whether our songs are just sugarcoating it to emphasize the nicey-nice parts or to draw awkward metaphors that make God sound a little too human and a little too dependent on us. Because a problem on that level isn't just a problem for me - it's reinforcing incorrect attitudes within all of the people blissfully singing along, who on the surface can't see anything wrong with the song. Usually if I bring it up they just act like I'm being a killjoy. I think most people who are used to "church culture" just accept anything with the "Christian" label on it, particularly in the realm of music, and especially worship music, at face value without questioning it. I'm the guy who asks the hard questions so in these sorts of situations where something doesn't look right when analyzed more deeply, I get to be "the bad guy".

Even if a song is theologically sound, I still think there might be some logical reasons to caution against repeating it ad nauseum. Again, on the surface it looks like there's nothing wrong with it - God seems to "move" when we play the song, so let's just play the song all the time so people can have that experience. But if it becomes habit, it runs the risk of becoming a rigid tradition. The irony for me is that a lot of "contemporary" church culture actually runs the risk of setting up their own list of sacred rules that they don't want to deviate from, which is the very same reason they split off from churches that just wanted to sit and sing the same hymns in the same somber tone week after week.

Meanwhile, we're taking actual traditional material like hymns, and rather than drawing on the past with a respectful attitude toward where we've been, we sometimes act like they're not good enough unless we awkwardly drag the musical arrangements into the 21st century. if the song's worth playing, you shouldn't have to force an awkward chorus into it or anything. Then again, tradition shouldn't be so rigid that there isn't room for creative expression, because I think that helps to take something ages old and use it as an expression of worship that people here and now can take ownership of. I go back and forth on this one.

[Vlad!]

The other question is, why does God "move" for some songs and not others? If you can only feel like you had an authentic religious experience when singing something you heard on CCM radio earlier this week, is the experience really rooted in the divine?

My church usually does really really well at worship; the worship leader tries to tie the songs into the sermon whenever possible and does a great job of keeping things fresh. It doesn't hurt that our choir is a good mix of black, white, and latino, and we blend all those traditions into our worship. Last month we sang a slightly tweaked version of the Bob Marley song One Love right after singing a hymn straight out of the Psalms, if that gives any indication of how eclectic we can be. I'm glad that I'm not going to a megachurch with branded coffee mugs and a televised service, but I often wish that we would put out a worship CD. Most of the stuff I can buy at the store just seems kind of flat after our Sunday mornings

[murlough23]

The other question is, why does God "move" for some songs and not others? If you can only feel like you had an authentic religious experience when singing something you heard on CCM radio earlier this week, is the experience really rooted in the divine?

Exactly. What we think is God "moving" is often just a catchy beat or tune. And don't get me wrong - God can use a catchy beat or tune to get our attention if that's what it takes. But God can also use a talking donkey, and I wouldn't bring a donkey into service every week just to see if it talks. It's God's decision to move and we can't capture lightning in a bottle, so while it's understandable to recognize where a song strikes a chord with people, I think we should be careful not to ascribe human reactions to God, and double careful not to let that emotion override theological concerns or plain old common sense.

My church usually does really really well at worship; the worship leader tries to tie the songs into the sermon whenever possible and does a great job of keeping things fresh.

I think that helps greatly to contextualize it. the music chosen tends to have much greater weight if it's a thematic lead-in to the sermon. I think unfortunately a lot of modern church services are centered around the entertainment value; I think it's much wiser to center it around the message, and as I've gotten older, that's become the aspect of church services that I enjoy the most (at least, when there's someone competent in the pulpit, but then I chose to stay at the church I belong to now for a very good reason).

It doesn't hurt that our choir is a good mix of black, white, and latino, and we blend all those traditions into our worship. Last month we sang a slightly tweaked version of the Bob Marley song One Love right after singing a hymn straight out of the Psalms, if that gives any indication of how eclectic we can be.

That actually made me cringe a bit. I'm sure it made sense in context and all. Plus you know I'm not an anti-"secular music" kind of guy. Still, sometimes I worry about the unfortunate connotations of repurposing pop songs within a worship service. Maybe it's just because I've seen bad examples of it that stretch the meaning of the original song beyond logical limits (it's bad enough that our worship songs are vague love songs, now we're gonna take some vague love song not even written for the church and shoehorn and interpretation of God's love in there that wasn't intended by the artist)? using the song in more of a "presentational" context, where it's part of a multimedia thing, something the congregation watches rather than having the words up there to sing along to, can help contextualize this, but it's sort of arbitrary in terms of when this bothers me and when it doesn't. I tend to err on the side of caution with this one.

I like that you guys are electic and don't stick to a formula, though. I think being willing to think outside the box and not get stuck in a liturgical rut is an important part of growth as a congregation, though there's a degree to which it's healthy to respect the liturgy as well. It's complicated.

I'm glad that I'm not going to a megachurch with branded coffee mugs and a televised service, but I often wish that we would put out a worship CD. Most of the stuff I can buy at the store just seems kind of flat after our Sunday mornings

The store emphasizes the lowest common denominator because that's what will sell and keep traffic coming  into the store. People are mostly too lazy to look for something more original and thoughtful, or else just don't see why that should be a priority because they think all music labeled worship music 'is "holy" by default. Some folks will even demonstrate an actively anti-intellectual attitude about it when pressed on the subject, as if to say that any pursuit of creativity or thinking on a deeper level when it comes to worship is idolatry and puts the focus back on us. I can understand their convictions on a theoretical level, but the application of those convictions is clearly flawed, and it's usually a patch to hide their own comfort zone issues, honestly.

Anyway, to find worship music that doesn't insult the intelligence of the more discerning Christian, one has to go a ways off the beaten path. it's a sad reality, but one that I've learned to accept, and sometimes even embrace due to the intimacy it promotes within the group of those who seem to "get it".

[bloop]

I think being willing to think outside the box and not get stuck in a liturgical rut is an important part of growth as a congregation, though there's a degree to which it's healthy to respect the liturgy as well. It's complicated.

I have to stick up for the liturgy here. I find the songs to be generally much deeper than the sort of happy clappy ones I grew up with, and it forces me to treat it differently than I would, say, a concert.