These are thoughtful, helpful words on an often contentious issue for churches. I agree with most of what Bob says here. God can be glorified through many genres of music. I love classical music, indie rock, hip-hop, blues, jazz, country, and so on, and I believe that God is glorified when each of these musical forms is done well (although the lyrics may or may not glorify Him, depending on the artist and song). I'm not sure that each of these genres of music is equally appropriate for a morning worship service, but that's another subject for another time.
As I said, I agree with most of Bob's observations here. I am slightly concerned that he doesn't offer any qualification to his statement that each church must decide for itself about which style(s) of music to use. This question becomes very problematic when a church decides to have all or most of its music in a particular genre or style.
One example would "hip-hop churches." Another would be the many American evangelical churches who use an almost exclusively pop/rock style of music. I think the issue comes down to trying to cater to one group's tastes, above all others, and making that the marker for what is done musically at a church. About hip-hop churches, I *love* Reformed hip-hop, such as Shai Linne, but I also shudder to think of the many older saints, whom young Christian hip-hop fans could learn from, who would never go to a "hip-hop church."
The same goes for evangelical churches using only a pop/rock style of music (even with hymns). Some elderly people can handle this choice. Some even enjoy it. For those who find the music too loud and/or assaulting to their senses though, they often will not stay at such a church-- and I can't blame them. Why should they feel as if they are being assaulted every Sunday when they try to sing to God?
The problem, again, is that by focusing largely (or solely) on one (usually newer) style of music, churches can unintentionally alienate, and then they miss out on the wisdom that older saints bring. It saddens me that in the desire to be "contemporary" in musical style, so many churches have showed little thought and love for their older members. (I'm not sure that the best solution is to have "Traditional" and "Contemporary" services in the same church. That creates basically two churches in one.)
I'm not saying that I think the whole concept of contemporary music in churches is bad. I do like some of Indelible Grace and Sovereign Grace Music! :-)
However, I think that many churches have embraced contemporary styles of music (and very loud volume as a part of the equation) so completely that they have unwittingly chased off older followers of Christ-- and that is a serious tragedy. Younger Christians can learn so much from their older members in the family of God-- and vice versa. When older members are alienated and they leave, the whole church suffers.
1 comment:
These are thoughtful, helpful words on an often contentious issue for churches. I agree with most of what Bob says here. God can be glorified through many genres of music. I love classical music, indie rock, hip-hop, blues, jazz, country, and so on, and I believe that God is glorified when each of these musical forms is done well (although the lyrics may or may not glorify Him, depending on the artist and song). I'm not sure that each of these genres of music is equally appropriate for a morning worship service, but that's another subject for another time.
As I said, I agree with most of Bob's observations here. I am slightly concerned that he doesn't offer any qualification to his statement that each church must decide for itself about which style(s) of music to use. This question becomes very problematic when a church decides to have all or most of its music in a particular genre or style.
One example would "hip-hop churches." Another would be the many American evangelical churches who use an almost exclusively pop/rock style of music. I think the issue comes down to trying to cater to one group's tastes, above all others, and making that the marker for what is done musically at a church. About hip-hop churches, I *love* Reformed hip-hop, such as Shai Linne, but I also shudder to think of the many older saints, whom young Christian hip-hop fans could learn from, who would never go to a "hip-hop church."
The same goes for evangelical churches using only a pop/rock style of music (even with hymns). Some elderly people can handle this choice. Some even enjoy it. For those who find the music too loud and/or assaulting to their senses though, they often will not stay at such a church-- and I can't blame them. Why should they feel as if they are being assaulted every Sunday when they try to sing to God?
The problem, again, is that by focusing largely (or solely) on one (usually newer) style of music, churches can unintentionally alienate, and then they miss out on the wisdom that older saints bring. It saddens me that in the desire to be "contemporary" in musical style, so many churches have showed little thought and love for their older members. (I'm not sure that the best solution is to have "Traditional" and "Contemporary" services in the same church. That creates basically two churches in one.)
I'm not saying that I think the whole concept of contemporary music in churches is bad. I do like some of Indelible Grace and Sovereign Grace Music! :-)
However, I think that many churches have embraced contemporary styles of music (and very loud volume as a part of the equation) so completely that they have unwittingly chased off older followers of Christ-- and that is a serious tragedy. Younger Christians can learn so much from their older members in the family of God-- and vice versa. When older members are alienated and they leave, the whole church suffers.
Post a Comment