The Voice

I woke up to terrible new today.  My sister and a friend of mine both texted me to tell me that Chris Cornell had died.  I couldn't believe it.  I have been following Chris Cornell to one degree or another for the past 23 years.  I couldn't believe he was dead.  One of the greatest rock and roll voices of my generation was gone.  And in the hours that followed, it was discovered that his death was a a result suicide by hanging.  What a tragedy.  I'm still having trouble accepting it as I write this.

It's interesting how things affect you.  I've never met Chris Cornell personally.  I've seen him in person at four concerts over the past 10 years, but that's it.  It's not like we were close, or that he even knew I existed.  But following him and listening to his music for the past 20+ years makes me feel like I know him.  And as recently as just a couple weeks ago, I was listening to his most recent album and thinking to myself about how much I was looking forward to whatever it would be that he released next.  The man truly had a musical uniqueness that would be difficult or even impossible to duplicate.

That being said, I've tried to duplicate it.  There are several musical artists that I've tried to copy in my own musical pursuits - people that I have tried to emulate in my own singing and guitar playing.  Chris Cornell was number 2 on that list.  The way he sang was perfect.  I tried to sound like him when I sang (although, of course, I paled in comparison).

Equally tragic was that he seemed to have his life together in a way that many of his peers from that same era of music didn't.  Curt Cobain, Layne Staley, and Scott Weiland all died, mostly due to drug and alcohol problems.  Chris Cornell also went through a time of substance abuse, but came out of it.  He seemed to be doing well in his personal life.  He was married and had two children.  Apparently there was more going on than anyone realized.

23 years ago my seventh grade year was coming to a close, which coincided with the grunge music explosion of the early 90's.  Grunge music was all the rage, and anyone who was anyone at my junior high school was growing their hair out and wearing flannel shirts, and I was one of them.  I scooped up the very little money I had made mowing the lawns of neighbors and went to the local music store, intending to purchase my very own piece of grunge culture.  I had heard Pearl Jam and Nirvana before, and was a fan, but thought that purchasing one of their albums would be too risky, as my parents still kept a somewhat short leash on the music I listened to (although, as the third child the restrictions placed upon me weren't as tight as those placed on my sisters), and I thought they wouldn't approve of me owning an album by either of those bands - they were common enough that I think my parents had heard of them by that time, and didn't approve.  I decided to buy an album by a lesser-known band, and I hoped the music would be innocuous enough so as to not draw the criticism of my parents.  The album I choose was "Superunknown" by Soundgarden, on cassette.  It was the first album I had ever purchased with my own money, of my own accord.

I brought the tape home and showed it to my sister Susan, who was also into grunge music, although she was in high school at the time.  Her initial reaction was one of displeasure, as she thought it would be laden with foul language and immoral themes.  Before showing her the tape I had gone through the lyrics to scout them out for any cuss words.  I assured here that I only found two: "D*mn" and "P*ss" (I suppose the latter isn't technically a cuss word, but it was considered to be vulgar back then).  Believe it or not, that seemed to assuage her concerns, and we both listened to it.  A lot.  I would watch MTV at friends' houses (we didn't have cable at my house), just waiting for the video for "Black Hole Sun" to come on, or "Fell on Black Days."  And thus, my journey into grunge and rock and roll music had begun.  (Although, to be honest, I've never considered Soundgarden to be "grunge" music.  It's always had more of an "alternative" or "modern rock" sound to me.  And yes, I am that kind of music snob.)  But it wasn't just the fact that this was the first album I had ever purchased that made "Superunknown" special - it was also a fantastic album.  And the singer was amazing.  There was no one else in the music world like him.  Soundgarden became a regular part of my listening experience.

That tape led to others, which led to even deeper forays into the world of music.  My tastes expanded and deepened over time, as is common for most people.  But that was the start, and that album in particular held a special place for me because of its significance in the development of my musical tastes and expressions.

Soundgarden's next album, "Down on the Upside," came out when I was in high school.  I remember being blown away by their live performances on Saturday Night Live, which happened to be hosted by Jim Carrey, which spawned the "Night at the Roxbury" comedy bits that became so popular.  I remember it in particular for the performance of "Burden in My Hand."  By that time in my life, I don't think I had ever heard a song like that.  "Pretty Noose" was the other song they performed, and was equally mesmerizing to me.  I didn't buy this album, but my sister did, and I copied it onto a tape and listened to it like crazy.  (As an aside, I remember finding the liner notes from her copy of the CD lying around once, and I looked through them at the lyrics of the songs.  Susan had crossed out all the swear words from the liner notes!)  I remember that the drumming on "Burden In My Hand" was a revelation to me.  I had never heard anyone play the drums like that.  And again, that voice was unmatchable.

Not long after "Down on the Upside" was released, Soundgarden broke up.  I was a bit bummed, but certainly not too dismayed, as there was plenty of other music out there to be listened to, and listen I did.  Time went on, and Soundgarden faded from my mind as other music likewise came and went.

Not long after Soundgarden broke up, Chris Cornell started his solo career.  I'll be honest: I wasn't impressed.  I heard a song or two, and that was enough for me.  It seemed like it was too "easy listening" - too much of a departure from the Soundgarden sound.  I knew he was out there, but I wasn't really interested.

But then, in the early 2000's, Chris got together with the band members from Rage Against the Machine to form the band Audioslave.  I was not excited about this at all.  Rage Against the Machine was a band - also from my youth - that was known for its extremely leftist political positions and protest songs against anything with even a veneer of conservativism.  While this didn't surprise me, it bummed me out.  Chris Cornell had always been what I would call an "honest" entertainer.  I once read an interview with him in which he said that during Soundgarden's heyday, MTV had asked him to be a spokesman for their "Rock the Vote" campaign.  Cornell declined, however, and he said it was because MTV seemed to be clearly trying to get young people to vote for Democratic candidates.  He felt that MTV's efforts to get people to vote was actually a front for helping to elect Democrats.  He didn't state his own political leanings in this interview, but I appreciated his honesty and integrity in the matter.  Additionally, Cornell has gone on record that he prefers not to mix political messages in with his music (which makes this song stick out like a sore thumb to me, as though he was forced to record it).  He feels the two are best left separate, and I wholly agree.

And then, here he is teaming up with the guys from Rage Against the Machine - the most militantly leftist band in history (they were banned from Saturday Night Live for attempting to burn an American flag during a live performance on the show).  Hmmm.  I didn't know what to expect.

Then the first single dropped: "Cochise."  I was blown away.  Incredible song.  It has what is probably the second best scream in any song I've ever heard (Cornell owns the top space in this category as well, with the scream in "Drown Me" from "Superunknown.")  You may not think screaming is something to be admired, but believe me, there's an art to it, and Chris Cornell mastered that art.  To my surprise, the first Audiosoave album was a masterpiece.  Every song was great.  Every song was innovative and new.  Every song featured his unmistakable voice.  And none of the songs contained any leftist political commentary, which was an added bonus!

Audioslave produced two more albums, both good, but they didn't match the quality of the first.

Cornell then went on to do more solo stuff, and finally reunited with Soundgarden in 2010, producing the album "King Animal," which was classic Soundgarden.

There are a million other things to describe about Cornell's voice, and I'm certainly no expert, nor his biographer.  Time would fail to talk about Temple of the Dog, his covers of "Billie Jean" or "Nothing Compares 2 U," or his most recent and most brilliant solo work, and the other stuff he has done (like when I accidentally and pleasantly discovered his work on the "Machinegun Preacher" soundtrack). For example, show me another song written in the past 40 years like this one (not only does it sound like it comes from the soundtrack of a 1960's "spaghetti western," but I'd love to know what kind of guitar that opening progression is played on).  Or listen to the soulful, bluesy genius of "Bend in the Road."  Masterpiece.  Find out what I mean about his ability to scream in a way that is musical and adds depth to a song like "Murderer of Blue Skies."

That was another thing about him that was extraordinary: his ability to cross genres.  In the beginning he was mostly the grunge or hard rock guy, but that quickly branched into other genres of music, proving that he was capable of mastering the vocal style of any kind of music he put himself to.

Cornell's voice has always been the signature of Soundgarden, or pretty much anything else he's done.  The guy could sing like no one else you've heard.  His Wikipedia page says that he had a four octave range, and I believe it.  He could sing exceptionally high, and the sound of his voice was so unique.  As time went on and he got older, his voice got better, taking on a more gravely tone and texture.  He lost a bit of his range, but the gravel added a ton of soul.  His voice simply can't be duplicated.  And now we'll never hear his voice again.


As I stated earlier, I was fortunate enough to see him in concert four times - thrice as a solo act, and once with Soundgarden.  I attended each of those concerts with my sister Susan.  See here for her account of the first time we saw him in concert.  We then saw him perform an acoustic set at St. Katherine's University, of all places.  Then we saw Soundgarden perform in support of the release of "King Animal."  The most recent time we saw him was in October of 2015.

The most tragic part of his death is, of course, the lack of any assurance that he knew God.  Most of his lyrics included a lot of deep spiritual finagling, but never anything consistently Christian (although he ironically and accurately and identified the hypocrisy of the so-called "prosperity gospel" in the song "Wooden Jesus").  But as with anyone who dies without any assurance of salvation, there is always hope that somehow, someway, God made himself known to Chris and he put his trust in him before his death.  That's what I hope anyway.

In conclusion, an associate of mine (and fellow Chris Cornell fan), Levi Secord, posted this very well-written and apt reflection on his Facebook page today, which accurately expresses my feelings as well:

I was saddened today when I woke up to the news one of my favorite artists had died, Chris Cornell, apparently from suicide. I enjoyed his hauntingly wonderful voice, but also his honesty in his lyrics. He openly struggled with the world as it was, a fallen and broken world. Much of his lyrics reflected a mourning of the brokenness of this life and the seemingly hopelessness of it all. This resonates with me, for I recognize the world is not as it should be.  

His band mates described his music as "poetic existentialism," and his struggle with finding meaning in the world ultimately lead to nothingness. Though Cornell often struggled with religious themes, especially Christianity in his lyrics, he still could not seem to find truth or hope in it. He was looking for meaning and purpose, but was unable to find it under the sun without God. This is why his lyrics often portrayed a dark outlook with little hope.  

This lack of hope, and his struggle with trying to find ultimate meaning are found in much of his work, especially his later work songs like Show Me How to Live, Like a Stone, Out of Exile, Doesn't Remind Me, Light My Way, No Such Thing as Nothing, Dead Wishes, Higher Truth, Circling, and so many more. Sometimes he even quoted from Scripture (I am the Highway). But in the end, everything remained meaningless and hopeless for him.  

Take these lines from "Before We Disappear" found in his latest album (video below):
"Time ain’t nothing if it ain’t fast
Taking everything that you ever had
And giving nothing in return
But a cold bed in a quiet earth" 

There is no hope in these lyrics and they reflect a man who looked at the world honestly through his worldview and thus stared into the abyss. You will get nothing out of life but a grave in the end. I just said the other week that this line sounds familiar to some in the book of Ecclesiastes. Chris was a tortured artist to the core. 

The loss of life in such a tragic way, especially leaving behind a wife and children, is terrible news. But let us reflect on this--there is no hope under the sun if there is no God. If Christianity is a myth, if there is no truth to God becoming man and dying to save man and redeem creation, then we are to be the most pitied people on earth. If Christianity is false, then the grave is all we get. Chris was more honest in his worldview than most are today, and this honesty in the face of hopelessness surely played a role in him taking his own life. So today I mourn his loss, I pray for his family, and I lament that the world is not as it should be. But I do not do so as one without hope, for God is there, he does exist, and he has revealed his love and mercy through Christ Jesus. In the end there is more than just a cold bed in the quiet earth--there is eternity.

Martin's Still Lost, but Taylor Came Home

A couple months ago my friend Martin was kidnapped.  Unfortunately, there has been no sign of him since the time of his disappearance.  I found a new friend yesterday, however, named Taylor.

Taylor was able to come and join our family because of the generosity of one of God's people who anonymously donated a significant chunk of money in order for me to be able to purchase a new guitar in the wake of my loss.  What a blessing!  Also, a friend kicked in an old gift card he had that was collecting dust that enabled me to get this particular guitar.

I knew I'd be getting a replacement for Martin, but I wasn't sure what it would be.  As I've said before, I have another Martin guitar, and I am very partial to the Martin brand.  They make great guitars, so my first choice was to get another Martin.  I went to ye olde guitar shoppe this weekend and tried out several that were in my price range.  I played a few Martins and a few Taylors.  Some sounded and played better than others.  Finally, I decided on a Martin that was made entirely out of mahogany, had a great tone, and had a very deep brown finish.  Then, the friend I took with me shopping told me to try the Taylor pictured above.  I had already played an almost identical guitar, but with a different finish, and decided against it.  The tone wasn't what I was looking for.  This Taylor, however, was different - it played and sounded almost exactly like what I wanted.  But there was a problem: it was a bit out of my price range.  That's when he pulled out his old gift card and insisted that I use it to purchase this guitar.  It was an incredibly kind gesture, and I'm grateful.  I told the salesman to wrap it up - I was getting that guitar.

While not a Martin, Taylor guitars are also very nice, sound great, and look great, as you can see.  I've never owned an acoustic guitar with a sunburst finish (one of my Strats has a sunburst, though), and the white binding on the edges makes it pop.  I got it home and did some more noodling on it.  I'm excited to play it more as time goes on.

Precious Sister Pat

In most people's lives, a person can probably count on one hand the people who have had an indelible influence on his life.  I have had those people involved in my life, and I am thankful for them.  Unfortunately, this past week, I have one less.  My childhood music and violin teacher, Sister Pat Binko, passed away last week.

When I was about 6 years old, I began taking piano lessons from a nun who was, shall we say, less than happy to be working with children.  I recall getting my hands slapped on the keyboard several times when I made mistakes, and just a general attitude of disgust toward me when I didn't excel as quickly as she had hoped.  Granted, I'm sure my remembrance of these times is a bit overblown due to my tender age and immaturity at the time, but even in my memories, it was a significantly negative experience.  As a result, I convinced my mom that I should not play piano, but should instead follow in the footsteps of my older sister and take up violin.  Soon thereafter, at the age of 8, I began taking violin lessons from another nun - Sister Pat.  Little did I know that I would remain under her instruction for the next 10 years, and that those 10 years would have a lasting impact on my life.

Each week (September through May) I went to Sister Pat's school of music for an hour-long lesson in the Suzuki method of violin.  Each lesson consisted of playing through the prescribed songs, working on music theory, and just general life-encouragement from Sister Pat.  Weekly lessons were complimented by monthly "Play-Ins" where all of Sister Pat's students would get together to perform an informal concert of sorts - mostly just for parents.  Students were sectioned out by their level in the Suzuki method and played songs from the book they were in.  Additionally, from time to time, Sister Pat scheduled other informal concerts at local nursing homes.  When you factored in at-home practice times (which, to be honest, there should have been more of), my life was full of violin and music.

As time went on, I began to realize that I had something of a natural talent for musical things.  In high school I went on to also play the string bass in the school orchestra, in the Greater Twin Cities Youth Symphony, and bass guitar in school productions, talent shows, and garage bands.  I also played first chair violin in the school orchestra, played with a touring high school musical group called "Fiddles & Friends" (along with all the cool kids) and took elective musical theory classes in my later high school years.  At church, I joined the worship team and played bass guitar.  In my freshman year of college I declared a minor in music, but later dropped out when I discovered the immense workload.  However, I also joined the college worship team, and played regularly there.  It was also in college that I took up guitar, teaching myself based on the musical knowledge I had gained throughout y childhood.  Guitar led to banjo, which led to the tin whistle, the harmonica, drums, and so on and so forth, which led to songwriting, arranging, playing in semi-serious bands, etc., etc.  Put simply, music had become perhaps the biggest thing in my life.

By this time, my regular violin playing diminished significantly.  I had completed the Suzuki method (all 10 books!) before graduating high school, and was no longer taking lessons from Sister Pat.  I still played violin at church once in a while, but not too often.  My musical studies began to move more toward sacred music and music for worship, and worship theory.  Most, if not all of this study was independent, but I have learned a ton since having graduated high school.

As I reflect on my musical growth and experiences throughout my life, it is crystal clear to me that the foundation for everything that I have done or accomplished, musically speaking, was the teaching I received at the hand of Sister Pat.  She saw my natural ability and nurtured it through the violin and through theory in ways that no public school teacher would have been able to.  Sister Pat had a no-nonsense approach to learning and practicing violin, but was also easy-going enough to teach her students that the main purpose of creating music was fun and joy and using the gifts that God has given us for good things.  She also emphasized the spiritual component of creating music, which was something unique about her, although now that I'm an adult I would probably differ from her teachings in a few ways.  Sister Pat also emphasized the "why" of music.  In other words, she knew that teaching theory was just as important as teaching technique.  From what I know of most music teachers today, this distinction no longer exists, which I think is a shame.

After graduating from high school, I mostly lost contact with Sister Pat.  I would see her once every few years, just coincidentally.  She always stayed in contact with our family however, through Christmas cards and whatnot.  A few years ago I was at Menards buying something - I can't recall what - when I heard a familiar voice behind me, and it was none other than Sister Pat.  We made small talk, but I was able to thank her one last time for the monumental influence she had in my life over the majority of my childhood.  That was the last time I saw her in person.  Although we lost touch pretty much after I graduated from high school, the impact she had on my life cannot be overstated.  I am grateful to God for how he used her to influence me.

Sister Pat also had several mannerisms that set her apart.  She was always upbeat and outgoing, and always seemed to be genuinely concerned about what was going on in our lives.  One of her catch phrases was to say, "Well isn't that precious!"  It was more of an exclamation than a question.  She would say that whenever she heard or saw something funny or unique.

Her frequent use of the word "precious," and her recent passing, makes me think of Psalm 116.15: "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints."  From her obituary, I learned that Sister Pat became a nun at the age of 18.  We never got into any significantly deep theological conversations during my relationship with her (and at the time, I was neither knowledgeable nor mature enough to have one), so I'm not sure of her spiritual state.  She certainly professed faith within the Roman Catholic tradition, but I don't know what her personal spiritual beliefs were.  It is my hope that it can be truly said of her: "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints."  I hope that she is in heaven at this moment, doing what she loved before the Lord Jesus.  That would be precious.

Martin Has Been Kidnapped

About a month ago, on a Sunday morning, a member of our worship team at Riverview showed up at the church around 8:00 AM for rehearsal.  In the parking lot of the church, laying uncased and unprotected in the parking lot, was a worn down, beat up guitar.  The worship team member collected the guitar and brought it in the church for further examination.  It was in rough shape.  The back of the guitar was separated from the ribbing in places, and someone had put two large pieces of plastic in place where the saddle and the nut should be (the saddle and nut elevate the strings off the fretboard to make the guitar playable).  Put simply, this guitar had seen much better days.  We all marveled at the DIY repairs that had been done, and then one of the team members put it in his car to use it for spare parts.

Cut to nine days later - the following Monday.  A member of our church showed up in the late afternoon to do some painting in one of the rooms at the church that needed to be done.  As he arrived at the church, he noticed a man sitting on the steps in front of the church.  When he asked if there was anything the man needed help with, he replied that he needed entry into the church in order to get his guitar.  Not knowing the man or the validity of his story, the Riverview member denied him access and went about his business of painting.

The following day, Tuesday, the same Riverview member arrived back at the church to complete the painting job that he had started on Monday.  When he arrived in the parking lot, he noticed the same man he had seen the day before, walking through a wooded area across the street from the church with a guitar case in hand.  Thinking nothing of it, he went back to his task of painting.

The day after that, Wednesday, I went to prepare for leading our Family Night Worship Service at Riverview.  In doing so, I set up a lectern, put out the bulletins for the service, and get my guitar ready to lead the singing.  As I went to retrieve my guitar from the back room, I couldn't find it.  This, however, did not alarm me, as it is not uncommon for my guitar to be moved to a different room or to be used by someone else without my knowledge.  Also, a crew of guys from the church had been working in the room where my guitar was stored, tearing out and replacing carpeting, so it seemed natural that one of them had moved it in the process.  Again, without much alarm, I retrieved a backup guitar that I store on the premises and used it during the service.

Once the service had concluded I began to ask around to see if anyone might know where my missing guitar had ended up, but nobody had any idea where it might be.  The guys who had been working in the room denied that they had moved the guitar in the course of their work, and even denied seeing it in the back room.  After some more asking around, I learned about the man who had been to the church on Monday and Tuesday of that week, and how he had been spotted carrying a guitar case early Tuesday evening through the woods across the street, and the pieces began to fall into place.

About a week later, due to some technical difficulties, I was finally able to access the security camera footage at Riverview.  We have security cameras placed at each of the entrances to the church, and in some of the hallways.  What I saw on the video was the man pictured at left.  On Tuesday, April 26, he and a female accomplice entered the building during business hours (so the church was unlocked). They spent about 20 minutes exploring the church, walking down the hallways, perusing the food shelf and library, and ultimately winding their way back to the music room where my guitar was stored.  After taking the guitar, he departed on foot and went directly to the wooded area across the street where he was observed by the volunteer painter described earlier.

After seeing this all unfold on our security camera footage, and considering the crystal clear images we had of his face, I contacted the West St. Paul police and filed a report.  I was happy to see that one of the reporting officers was one that I had met previously through my involvement in the police chaplaincy program.  The officers were very pleased that we had visual evidence of the crime, and they assured me that they would hand the case over to their investigators.  So far, I'm not sure how much progress has been made on apprehending the thief or retrieving my property, but I remain optimistic.

But it doesn't end there.

On Tuesday afternoon of this week I began to feel ill.  Stomach cramps on Tuesday made way to diarrhea on Wednesday, which knocked me out of leading the Family Night Worship Service this week (which I am bummed about, considering it was our last service of the year).  About 7:00 that evening I received a call from someone who was at the church and who had seen the above photo of the burglar.  He told me that the burglar had returned to the scene of the crime and was at the church at that very moment.  I quickly slipped out of my bathrobe (remember, I was sick) and into some clothes and went over to the church.  By the time I had arrived, I was told that the man left on foot.  I went out into the parking lot and saw someone duck into the same woods across the street that the man had been reported in previously.  I called the police and told them about the incident.

But the interesting thing is how the man interacted with others when he returned to the church last Wednesday evening.  As he came into the building, he immediately began to shake hands of all he came into contact with, and introduced himself to each one as Jesus Christ.  That's right: he claimed to be God in the flesh.  Clearly this man is not in his right mind, which makes this even more sad.

The guitar that was stolen was a Martin (I can't remember the model number).  I bought it second-hand from a friend, who was offloading his gear to help cover the costs of one of his kids' weddings (the sacrifices we guitarists make!).  The guitar is unique in that the body is made of an entirely composite material.  In other words, it's not made of wood.  The only wood on the whole guitar is the neck and fretboard.  The rest is essentially plastic.  Regardless of this fact, the guitar plays like a dream.  In fact, it was easily my best playing guitar.  I have another Martin (DCX1E) that is my best sounding guitar, but it doesn't match the playability of the one that was stolen.  To be sure, Martin guitars are very nice, and most players aspire to own one.  I owned two, and I still have one.  I am a very blessed, fortunate person - even in light of having been robbed.

If possible, I hope I can get my guitar back, as it was my "go-to" guitar - the one that I played in most circumstances as it was accessible, easy to play, and pretty much the right instrument for any occasion.  I have no desire to press charges or see the man who stole it prosecuted for the offense - I'd just like my guitar back!  I even have the one that he left in the parking lot - the old beat up junker.  I'd be happy to make the trade.

Worship at the Altar of Relevancy

I read an article today in the most recent version of the WorshipIdeas newsletter that lists several bad reasons to worship, or better put, to worship in a particular way.  The article did not set out to give bad reasons to worship, but that's what it ended up doing, nonetheless.

The article reports that a survey by Faith Communities Today indicates that churches who make a switch to contemporary worship receive an almost immediate and consistent growth rate of 2%.  Also, churches with more contemporary worship styles are more likely to see continued growth than their more stylistically traditional counterparts.  This is not necessarily a bad thing per say, but it sounds to me like a terrible reason to "switch" worship styles.

One worship pastor says that the style of music in the church affects how "people see the church as relevant," and so, because the church is seen as relevant, people will supposedly come.

Is that really how we want to be determining how we do worship in the church - by what the masses consider to be "relevant?"  Really?  The church's relevancy is determined by what people think of the worship style?  Are we missing something here?  Seems to me like we're more concerned about what people think is relevant than what God thinks is relevant, which is the opposite of the way it should be.

The underlying tone of the report implies that churches who want to grow should switch to a contemporary worship format.  I couldn't disagree with that implication more.  Don't get me wrong: I realize that we are cultural beings who have cultural persuasions and preferences, and it would be foolish to dismiss the impact of these persuasions on our people, and even on worship leaders and pastors.  But to focus on the desires of the people at the expense of focusing on the desires of God is dangerous ground to tread.

What the statistics promote is a pragmatic way of conducting worship services.  In other words, church leaders have an idea of what they want to accomplish when they conduct a worship service, and they then ask themselves what they need to do to accomplish that goal.  If and when your goal is to attract X number of people to your worship service, than you will do what you can to cater to their whims and desires: you will play the music they want to hear, you will preach sermons they want to hear, and you will create an atmosphere that is comfortable for them.  

The opposite (and more biblical approach, in my opinion) is to ask "What does God want from this worship service?" and then to work toward accomplishing whatever the church has determined that to be.  In this way of seeing worship, the reaction or opinion of the masses doesn't matter.  When our goal is pleasing God with our worship instead of people, whether or not people like what we're doing or how we're doing it is a question that never even blips on the radar screen.  When we are working to please God with our worship, our goal is obedience to what we believe he would have us do in leading and conducting worship.  Our goal is obedience to God - not numbers; it is working to honor him - not to please people.

What is the most relevant thing the church does?  Is it not to maintain faithfulness in the proclamation of the gospel?  If the most relevant thing about the church is its music, then we have serious, serious issues.  May it never be at my church.  Another question to consider is this: can the church be focused on the gospel and still utilize culturally relevant music and modes of communicating the message?  I think it can, and does.

The question is not, "What do we need to do to get more people?" but is instead, "What should we do, because that's what God tells us to do?"  There is a significant difference between the two questions, and the answers you will get from each are vitally important in the life and ministry of the local church.

Choosing Worship Songs Well

As a volunteer worship leader at my church, it’s my job to pick new songs for our worship team to play and for our congregation to learn.  In the past we have set somewhat of a precedent of trying to learn and introduce one song to the congregation per month.  If all goes well, this of course means that we learn and introduce 12 new songs each year.  It doesn’t always go that way, however.  There are some months when the worship schedule is just too busy to be introducing a new song.  There are other months when we do introduce a new song, but it quickly becomes evident that the song will not work with our congregation for whatever reason.

Our worship team is having its usual meeting tonight to look at the schedule for the upcoming summer season, and this is the time when I usually roll out new songs for the team members to be thinking about and listening to, as we will gradually be introducing these songs into our repertoire.  It’s been more of a struggle this season than most for me to find good, quality worship songs for our team to sing/play.  I'm not a huge fan of contemporary Christian radio, so I don't get many ideas from there.  So when I go looking for new worship songs for our church, I usually frequent the CCLI list, songs that are trending on iTunes, and my old stand byes like Sovereign Grace Music.  Usually from these sources I can piece together some songs for us to do.  It's actually quite an involved process and I spend a lot of time on it.  

From time to time people have recommended songs to me that they suggest we sing in the worship service, but when I check them out it seems to me that they would not be conducive for corporate worship at our church.  How do I determine that?  In order for us to introduce a song to our congregation, a worship song has to meet four different standards.  Here they are, in brief:

1. Content.  Is the content of the song good?  Is it biblical?  Does it use the words of scripture as lyrics?  Are the lyrics God-centered?  This is the most important criteria, in my opinion.  If a song has good, theologically solid lyrics, I'm willing to give on the style of it for the sake of communicating the message of the song.  Plus the other elements of the song can be tweaked and changed to fit our congregation more, such as style, rhythm, speed, etc.  If I find a song with good lyrical content, chances are I'm going to try to use it in some way.  Unfortunately, these days in contemporary Christian music, songs with home run quality content are few and far between.  But there are some good exceptions, like this song we recently introduced. and groups like Sovereign Grace Music always make a point of ensuring that their songs have good, biblical, God-focused content.  Kudos to them.  The best words to use in order to sing about God, are God's own words.  The closer we can stick to the message of scripture in our singing, the better.

2. Corporate Appeal.  Does the song lend itself to being sung by 250 people at the same time?  This is important, because in my opinion it's not right for a group of people to be singing songs that were meant to be sung by an individual.  Moreover, there are many worship songs that talk about an individual's (the songwriter's) experiences.  Well, his experiences are not necessarily mine, or that of the other 250 people who attend my church.  I try to look for songs that can be sung meaningfully by the whole body of Christ, not just one member.  Furthermore, there are some songs with intricate melodies that a person could sing by himself or herself, but it would could not be done by a larger group.  I try to avoid these types of songs in corporate settings.  There are some songs with fantastic content, but because of the intricate melody, simply can't be sung by a congregation.  But beyond these reasons, there is a theological reason for choosing songs that can be sung by a congregation, and that is that we are the church.  We join together to sing praise to God and offer him our worship.  Worship leaders should be choosing songs that make singing in large groups as easy as possible so as to accommodate this reality.  

3. Staying Power.  Does the song have the potential to be sung by the church in a hundred years from now?  Think of your most-loved hymn.  Chances are it's at least 100 years old.  We should be looking for songs that we can sing today and a hundred years from now.  This doesn't mean that we never include songs that are more particular to a time or setting, but those are rarities.  Some songs are written in such a way that the time it was written in is very evident.  There's nothing necessarily wrong with this, but when you sing that song it's going to take you back to the time when it was written, such as this song, or this song.  Just something to be aware of.  We want to shoot for songs that we can always be singing and using in worship, no matter the time or setting.  And why do some songs last longer than others?  I would argue it is because the truth they communicate is more clear, biblical, and timeless.  So we should not only be looking for songs that have stylistic staying power, but also songs with content that can stand the test of time (see point 1).

4. Quality.  What is the quality of the songwriting that went into the song?  This criteria is probably the most subjective of the four.  It's quite simple, really: there are some songs that are products of bad, unimaginative, and un-creative songwriting.  How do I know which songs those are?  Well, I guess I'm the judge of that, at least for my church.  I probably have a different standard than you do.  But for instance, I tend to think of songs that are made up of just one verse and one chorus as being bad quality.  Is it too much to ask to put in another verse?  Or if the chorus of a song is the same phrase or words just repeated over and over.  These are what's known as "7-11 Songs."  You sing the same seven words eleven times in a row.  For example, I know two year old children who could write a better chorus than the one in this song.  We can do better.  We can write good and deep songs, and lots of them, because God gave us brains and talents to use in this process.  We do him and ourselves a disservice when we don't engage our God-given talents, abilities, and brains in the process of creating worship music.  

So there you have it, in brief.  Those are the four things I'm looking for when I look at new songs.  And to be fair, songs will meet these criteria to varying degrees.  Some songs are home runs, and some songs are stand-up doubles.

You might notice that none of my criteria include any notes about the style of worship songs.  That's because I don't really care too much about style.  The way I see it, if a song fits these criteria, then we can work with the style.  Plus style is such a fluid thing that changes all the time.  It would be foolish to judge a worship song on its musical style, and a song would never pass the test of having staying power if it were judged by itse musical style.  Plus the body is made up of all different kinds of people with all different kinds of taste.  A change in style is probably for the better most times.  That doesn't mean I'm insensitive to stylistic preferences, but to me it is of secondary importance.

It dawned on me that I don't think I've ever shared this process with anyone before, and there are undoubtedly people wondering how I make decisions about which songs to sing in worship, and even some who think that I'm terrible at selecting worship songs.  Well, for better or for worse, you can at least take comfort in the fact that I'm not just arbitrarily coming up with whatever strikes my fancy.  In fact, a lot of times we're doing songs that absolutely do not strike my fancy, but because I think they would be beneficial to the body of the church, we do them.  After all, it's not about me and what I like.  It's about what God likes.  And whatever I can do to lead the congregation toward pleasing God as a group on Sunday mornings is what I'm going to do.  

Aradhana

The title of this post refers to the Telugu word for "worship."  It's also the title of a song the worship band played this morning, accompanied by Samuel Mande on a set of Indian drums that I can't remember the name of, and David Yalla singing the melody.  "Aradhana" is a traditional Indian hymn sung by the Telugu people of India, and the lyrics are at left.  A translation of these lyrics can be found at the bottom of this post.

Samuel informed me that in India they don't have traditional hymnbooks.  Rather, they have printed lyrics, and the congregation is informed that they will sing the lyrics to a traditional tune that they are all familiar with.  Rather than use the traditional melody, however, Samuel composed his own melody for the lyrics, and an intricate set of melodies for accompaniment by drums, guitars, bass, violin, and keyboards.  Samuel said that he has always wanted to do a piece that combined Indian music, lyrics, and musical style with Western instruments.  He did it, and I think it worked out very nicely.

Personally, as one of the instrumentalists, I found the piece challenging and a lot of fun to play, which is a testament to Samuel's musical abilities.  David's voice matches perfectly what I perceive to be the style of Indian music.  Have a listen.



What's especially cool about this presentation is that it came on the last Sunday of our "Values" series at Riverview.  The series explored some of the main values that we as a community hold dear.  The value we looked at in worship today was that of "life together," focusing especially on the diversity that exists within the Body of Christ.  And with that diversity comes a diverse set of ways to express worship and praise to God.  This was a fantastic expression of worship, and I believe that God was glorified by it.  It was my pleasure to be a part of it.

"Aradhana"
Worship to you - abundant praises to you I offer, O Jesus
My Jesus, I offer you my everything

Even as the mighty army of the arch-angels worship you
With a thousand tongues I sing
Lo!  I am a sinner and I plead you 
To accept me and take me into your presence

Then your rays of love and compassion 
have touched me and flowed through me
And all of my sin has been cleansed
And now I dedicate my life to you and sing praises

The Decline of the Church Organ

I came across this article this morning, and found it incredibly interesting (then again, I'm a nerd).  Actually, it's not so much of an article as it is an outline for a lecture that was delivered at a recent doctoral colloquium.

The outline lists several bullet points about why the use of church organs has been, and is, in decline in churches across the country.  Some of the reasons listed are simply preferential, and some are significant.  For instance, there's not much to be done about a "lack of qualified organists."  Also, organs are expensive - tens of thousands of dollars at a minimum, and hundreds of thousands if you're talking pipe organs.  Some churches just can't afford an organ.

It's also interesting to note that the lecturer assumes that the decline of the use of the church organ is a detrimental thing to church culture, and to worship in general.  I am inclined to agree, albeit tentatively.  Allow me to explain.

For example, he asserts that use of the organ is in decline because of the influence of popular culture on churches and Christians, and he implies that this is a negative thing.  This is no doubt true, but to me, this is not something that the church should necessarily push back against.  After all, the inclusion of the church organ in Christian worship was undoubtedly a product of cultural influence.  That is, there was a time when no churches had organs, nor would they probably have considered including one.  But as culture developed, having an organ in church became a desirable thing, and so the church organ became a staple of American churches.  For that church culture, and at that point in time, organs served their purpose well.  An honest look at culture and the church today, however, might point us in a direction away from an organ, and I think that's OK.  Maybe not ultimately desirable to everyone, but it's OK.  So to say that it's bad that cultural influence is diminishing the use of the organ in worship is necessarily a bad thing is not totally without it's own set of cultural influences.  It's not as though the organ is a divine instrument that was handed down to the church by God.

Worship style is, in large part, informed by cultural trends.  We are all cultural beings who live inside of a set of cultural norms.  Over time, those norms change, and the church changes with them because the church is made up of people who live in culture.  As what we all like and appreciate changes, so will how we do things in the church change (at least in a temporal sense - there are obviously many things about the church that don't and can't change, regardless of cultural influence).  Nowadays we see a lot of guitars and drum sets in churches.  Why?  Because those instruments have become a more mainstreamed part of our culture.  It's natural and perfectly acceptable to have a band be a regular part of a worship service.

I, for one, grew up in a church that, for half my life, had no other instruments in worship aside from a baby grand piano and an organ.  I am not attached to the organ, though.  Why not?  Because other than church, the organ has played no part in my life (pun intended).  For better or for worse, I have been much more influenced by the popular music of the culture, and I am inclined to appreciate the musical style of drums and guitars.

But the author also makes some great points about why churches seldom use organ music.  He points out that a lot of churches these days are focused on seeker-sensitive worship, and are therefore obsessed with every cultural trend in order to draw new people through their doors.  In this respect, I agree with the author that this would be a terrible reason to get rid of your organ, and an even more terrible way to "do" church.  We don't conduct our worship based on what people want to hear or don't want to hear, and we similarly don't build our worship around what the unbelieving world wants to experience through it.  To do so would be to cater our worship to sinners rather than God - a horrible thought.  Churches want to be "cool" in how they do things, and the public perception of the church organ is rather square, so the organ is being eliminated.  What a shame that churches would operate so pragmatically.

The lecturer also makes some points about how to "restore" the use of the organ in churches.  His best point in this section is this: "Educate our congregations and worship leaders about the true nature of worship itself.  God is interested in our hearts much more than the "art" which we offer to him in worship."  Amen, and amen.  In this sense, it doesn't matter what instrument is playing, or what style of music a congregation uses to worship, as long as the attitude of the heart of the worshiper is right.  Somebody who says they just can't worship to organ music doesn't understand the true nature of worship.  To get rid of an organ because a portion of the congregation "can't" worship to it is wrong, and exposes a significant lack of understanding about the theology of worship.  God can and does accept the worship of those with nothing more than a slide whistle and some empty coffee cans to bang on, provided they are focused on his glory and praise.

But there's another reason not to abandon the organ that I'd like to add to the author's list if I might, and it comes from my own experience of 32 years of worshiping with a diverse group of people at Riverview.  I believe there is still a place for the organ in the church because it reflects the diversity that exists in the church (at least in my church).  There are several members of Riverview who grew up singing old, beloved hymns on the organ, and for them, it is still a rich part of their heritage and culture.  To take that away from them would be unwise and unloving.  Moreover, our use of the organ speaks to our diversity.  We love each other, even though we're very different, and we express our differences through worship.

Yet another reason is the simple difference of feel one gets between an organ and say, a worship band.  contemporary worship music, I think, communicates a feeling of closeness and intimacy, while an organ communicates a feeling of grandeur and transcendence.  Both are intricately part of God's character.  He is definitely near to us and intimate with us.  But he is also the God of the universe who sits as Lord and judge over all people.  I think the organ communicates the latter very well.

On the other hand, we also utilize more modern instruments and worship for a significant segment of our service through the use of a worship team that includes the usual guitars, drums, bass, piano, etc.  To me, it's a wonderful blend of the various preferences felt and expressed in our congregation.

So for me, I would like to keep the organ.  Is it my favorite thing?  Probably not.  Is it my "default setting" when it comes to worship style?  Definitely not.  But there's a lot of value to having it, and I hope we have it for a long time to come.

Have a Beer with Jesus?

I was listening to the Wretched Podcast today, and they did one of their entertaining and provocative "Iron Criticizing Iron" segments.  The topic for this installment was whether or not the song "Beer with Jesus" gets a thumbs up or a thumbs down.

This segment on Wretched consists of Todd, Tony, usually David (the Chocolate Knox), and sometimes either Joey or Joel, talking about the theology of an issue.  Sometimes, as is the case in this instance, they'll talk about a pop culture issue, and determine whether or not it's theologically sound, something Christians should participate in, etc.

Like I said, this time they analyzed the song "Beer with Jesus," and talked among themselves about whether the song was profitable (in a spiritual way) or not.  Here's the song, and you can read the lyrics here.



If you read the lyrics or listen to the song, you'll find that 95% of the lyrics are good and sound.  The singer talks about asking Jesus some good questions, admits he's a sinner, and expresses a desire to grow in holiness.  Nothing wrong with that.  The crux of the song is the fact that he's having "a beer with Jesus."  Is Jesus someone with whom one could have a beer?

Before we get into what the guys on the show thought about the song, and what I think about the song, I think we need to affirm that drinking alcohol is not a sinful activity.  Alcohol is a morally neutral substance.  It is neither right nor wrong, bad nor good.  It can be used sinfully, and it can be used rightly (more on that in a minute).  A biblical case against alcohol as a substance cannot be soundly made, at least in my opinion.  But certainly when it comes to the misuse of alcohol, the Bible is full of all kinds of warnings and wisdom that we should take heed of.  All that to say that I don't think the song can be tossed out simply because it connects Jesus to beer.  Now onto Wretched's analysis.

One of the guys immediately gave the idea of having a beer with Jesus a thumbs down.  Again, not because of the beer, necessarily, but because he believed Jesus to be too high and holy to have any kind of beverage with.  That is, is Jesus really a buddy that I could have a beer with, or is he a high and holy God who sits at the right hand of the Father, the one to whom angels bow and cry, "Holy, holy, holy!"?

I think this is a good thought.  The resurrected Lord is certainly the Lord of holiness and transcendence.  He is higher than we can ever imagine.  He demands the respect and worship of all peoples, and every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.  That doesn't sound like a drinking buddy to me.  On the other hand, however, there are ample scriptures that affirm Jesus' nearness.  That is, although he is indeed high and transcendent, he is also meek and lowly - able to come down to the lowest depth to rescue lost sinners.  After all, Jesus dined with tax collectors and sinners, and he called those who follow him his "friends."  No doubt he shared some wine with them and answered their questions.  Would he not do the same for me?  I think he would.  One of my favorite hymns is "No, Not One!" which states, "No friend like him is so high and holy; and yet no friend is so meek and lowly."  I think this is a good description, and presents the real dichotomy we face when thinking about how we relate to Jesus and vice versa.

Tony, the resident Lutheran on Wretched, gave the song a thumbs up.  He said the singer was asking genuine questions, was open and honest and humble, and that since beer is not inherently sinful, that Jesus would indeed have such a conversation and enjoy a beer with someone.

While I don't particularly find anything wrong with having a beer, and I think I can be persuaded from scripture that Jesus would come down to my level to "have a beer with me," I think I ultimately have to give the song a thumbs down.  The reason for this is the role that alcohol has come to play in our society.  As I said earlier, I don't think alcohol is inherently sinful in and of itself, but it must be recognized that the vast majority of alcohol use in our society is sinful.  That is, people in our country mostly abuse alcohol, or use it as an escape.  In fact, you could probably safely assert that alcohol has an overwhelmingly negative reputation in our society.  This is why I, although I don't think drinking is sinful, pretty much stay away from alcohol altogether.  I might imbibe once in a while, but my regular pattern of life is to leave it aside.

But why not partake if it's not sinful?  My reasoning is this: because of all the damage that alcohol has done to our society, and because of all the relationships it has played a part in ruining, and because of all the people in our society who continue to struggle with addiction to alcohol, I have chosen to not endorse it as a regular part of life.  Can you drink and not sin?  Of course!  But I would caution anyone who drinks to do so carefully.  Everything we do speaks to those around us.  I, for one, don't want to send a message that I either approve of or am indifferent to the massive detrimental effect alcohol has had on our society.  In my opinion, drinking alcohol can communicate that message, and that's something I don't want to be a part of.

That being said, I think I would not rule out the idea of Jesus having a beer with an unrepentant sinner who is under conviction and seeking truth.  In that case, alcohol might be a part of that person's context (maybe even sinfully), and so having a beer with Jesus might work.  But even then, if beer was a main part of a person's sinfulness and rebellion, would Jesus condescend to the level of participating with someone in something that is a sin issue for them?  I should think not.

This is why I ultimately give the idea of having "a beer with Jesus" a thumbs down.  In our context, I can't see Jesus having a beer simply because of all the damage beer has been responsible for.  In other contexts, however, where the damage of alcohol is less pervasive, and where the responsible use of it is more culturally acceptable, I think it would make sense.  That is, the idea of Jesus having a glass of wine with a French person singing is probably more acceptable than the idea of him having a beer with an American.  Why?  Because our cultures view alcohol differently.

Look at the lyrics again.  If you replaced "have a beer" with "take a walk" throughout the song, I'd have no problem with it, although the context of the song certainly wouldn't make sense (not too many jukeboxes out on nature paths).  But the concepts are the same: a humble sinner inquiring of the Lord.

Let's just leave the beer out of it.

Brace Yourself

I don't often post about pop culture stuff or popular music, so you know that when I do, it's something that has really got my attention.  I've said for a while now that some of the most theologically rich Christian music that's coming out these days is being put out in the medium of rap and hip hop.  A few years ago I discovered this song by Christian rappers Hazakim.  It's one of the most detailed musical accounts of the crucifixion that exists.

Today I discovered the song "Brace Yourself" by Hazakim, and it likewise blew my socks off.  While it's not necessarily new (2009) it is nonetheless profound and theologically rich.  It's basically a paraphrase of Job 38-41, one of the most humbling sections of scripture in the whole Bible.  The chapters consist of a dialogue between Job and God, as Job basically asks God "Why?" and God basically says, "because I AM WHO I AM."

Even if rap isn't your thing (like it isn't my thing) you should enjoy it.  I've transcribed the lyrics below.  There's even a goofy endorsement by Ken Ham at the end of the song, which seems a little out of place, but I guess I'll role with it.

Then the Lord answered out of the whirlwind and said, 

"Who is this who darkens council by words without knowledge?

Brace yourself like a man.  I will question you and you will answer me."

Who is this being that questions me?

I am the Lord God, who makes all things

I was there when the morning stars sang together

I spoke nothing and it all came together.

I dwell in unapproachable light

My mercy and grace - the only hope for your life

Brace yourself - everything you see, I created all that

And when I return again, I'm gonna take it all back

Who questions my wisdom with ignorant speech?

Brace yourself and listen as the Infinite speaks

Before who do I stand corrected, discredit my record?

To the man who things he can, this question's directed

Brace yourself!  For an answer, I'll be waiting

Where were you at the extravanganza of creation?

When I marked the earth's intricate measurments,

And I fiddled with dirt, minerals, sediment, chemical elements?

Should I have started with the core that burns, or the crust?

Tell me, that the Omniscient Lord might learn from the dust

I cause fire to fall, then I send rain to quench the flame

Then I quiet the storm

I'm the beginning and the end, the all in all

Who wrote the code of cosmic law

The very rules that govern your reality, time and space

Earthly formalities that I can break

I'm with Gideon as he fights the Midianites, while

At the same time, I'm in this millenium right now

Can you feed the cubs that crouch in the lion's den?

Or put a hook through the mouth of leviathan?

The skin on his back, I tightly sealed it

With bare hands try to pry the shields that his hid is filled with

Better yet, try to muzzle his face

If you survive you won't forget the struggle that takes place

Can you read from the constellations in their seasons?

Can you make legions of angelic beings?

Construct them with brilliant wings?

Deep in the sea there's creatures human eyes have never seen

Past your galaxy there's things your puny mind could never dream

Can you make waves behave

And direct all of their motions?

Who put gates up in the ocean 

To keep water from overflowing?

Far beyond, way past the Orient

I can make the morning come

By simply speaking to the scorching sun

Who keeps it shifting distance 

Merely by a few inches?

Further from it, you freeze,

Closer, you melt in an instant

But where were you when I measured the galaxy's dimensions?

Spoke planets into existence, positioned them in suspension?

Lightning won't flash unless it asks for my permission

Thunder won't crash unless it passes my inspection

In a lifetime you can't get out of your galaxy's section

Even if you traveled at 22 million miles per second

I hold the earth; can you school me on the universe?

I knew you from birth; one day I'll lead you back into the dirt

But way before you were born, I showed love in the truest form

Took upon myself the uniform of a human form

I am lofty and high, with an all seeing eye

So don't be haughty with pride against God the divine king!

I bring low all the proud

If you come to me humbly, I can call you my child

Who is this being that questions me?
I am the Lord God, who makes all things
I was there when the morning stars sang together
I spoke nothing and it all came together.

I dwell in unapproachable light
My mercy and grace - the only hope for your life
Brace yourself - everything you see, I created all that
And when I return again, I'm gonna take it all back

Is Worship About Reaching Out to the Lost?

Each week in my email I receive a newsletter from Don Chapman called "WorshipIdeas."  Don runs a couple of websites that have to do with issues around worship leading, providing new and creative ideas to worship leaders, and also providing new and fresh arrangements of hymns and instrumental numbers.  We've used a few of his arrangements in the past, and his original instrumental band medleys are fantastic.  I hope he writes more of them that we can use in our worship services.

In the WorshipIdeas newsletter, Don always links to several online articles that have to do with worship, and most of them are very interesting, even if they present a view of worship other than my own.  For example, this week's issue linked to articles like "Listening to Complainers is Bad for Your Brain," and "Beware of the Stage."  Very relevant stuff for those of us who participate in leading worship.

One particular article caught my eye today, however: "Rethinking Worship Wars."  The term "Worship Wars" refers to the seemingly never ending battle that churches fight between stylistic preferences in the congregation.  One segment of the congregation wants worship to be like this, and another segment wants it to be like that.  It's a serious issue that involves my own church as well.

The author begins by saying that we've blown the issue of stylistic preferences way out of proportion, which is probably true, as the New Testament is remarkably silent on the issue of how worship should be conducted in the Christian church.  As the author points out, there's 100 times more teaching in the NT (and OT for that matter) about the importance of a right attitude in the heart of the worshiper than the way worship is actually conducted.  In fact, the author rightly points out, two churches can have identical worship services and one can be not worshiping in truth while the other is.  Style is not the issue.  The heart of the worshiper is the issue.  He says, "The litmus test for a faithful church is not observing the worship leader to see if he wears a three-piece suit or if he wears skinny jeans and toms.  Worship has nothing to do with music, but everything to do with the posture of the human heart."

Amen.  Preach.

But then the article takes somewhat of a strange twist.  In the next paragraph the author states, "The correct question for church leaders to ask isn't, 'Which style do I like best?' but rather, 'Which style will help me engage non-believers with the truth of the gospel?'".

Cough!  What?

Since when did worship become reaching out to non-believers?  I thought worship was... well... worship.  Don't get me wrong: any non-believer should be able to enter a church and feel welcomed, and this should include our worship, and particularly our music.  That is, every person should feel welcomed into a church and to participate to whatever extent he or she is spiritually able.  But the purpose of worship, and particularly worship music is not to reach out to unbelievers - it is solely to exalt God and declare truth about him in a spirit of praise and thanksgiving.  Perhaps worship can be considered evangelistic in the sense that any unbelievers who are in a worship service will hear the truth of God and his gospel proclaimed in song, but the conversion of unbelievers is by absolutely no means the focus or point of worship.  Again, the point of worship through music is to give glory to God - that's it.

He begins to wrap up the article by saying that when it comes to worship styles, a lot of people in churches are concerned only with their own desires and preferences, rather than the desires and preferences of others.  To this I offer a hearty Amen once again.  The difference between my view and the view of the author of this article, however, is that the "others" he is speaking of is lost people, while the "others" I am referring to are brothers and sisters in Christ.  We should not alter our preferences or style of worship in order to appeal to those outside the church for the sake of making the Christian faith more attractive to them.  We should alter our preferences for the sake of unity within the church.

He concludes by saying, "...by God's grace His Spirit will change the focus of the congregation away from themselves and out to a lost and dying world in need of Jesus."  Again, Amen.  I don't think our worship music comes into this equation though, if we're talking about preaching the gospel to the lost.  Worship is for Christians - for Christians to worship God - not to evangelize the lost.  Let's pray that God, by his Spirit - when it comes to how we worship - will change the focus away from ourselves and onto him.

Josh Garrels

Alright, this post will be rather unlike most of the usual stuff you'll see on this site, but the more people that can get plugged in to Josh Garrels' music, the better.

Josh Garrels is a Christian folk-rock singer that I learned of several months ago (right before Thanksgiving of 2011) from Bob Kaufflin's fantastic blog.  Kaufflin linked to Josh's site by saying that it was some of the most unique Christian music he had ever heard.  That got me interested, so I checked it out.  Turns out Garrels' latest album, "Love, War, and the Sea In Between" was available for free, so I took advantage.  I'm glad I did.  I've been listening to him since then and have also downloaded one of his other albums and some additional singles.

The music is something like a mix of folk rock and hip hop, as weird as that may sound.  The lyrics are phenomenal, theologically rich and masterfully penned.  He writes things in ways that would never occur to me.  Here's a sample from "Farther Along."  You can listen to the whole song here.

Still I get hard pressed on every side
Between the rock and a compromise
Like the truth and a pack of lights, fighting for my soul
And I've got no place left to go
Cause I got changed by what I've been shown
More glory than the world has known
Keeps me ramblin' on


Skipping like a calf loosed from its stall
I'm free to love once and for all
And even when I fall I'll get back up
For the joy that overflows myc up
Heaven filled me with more than enough
Broke down my levee and my bluff
Let the flood wash me


And one day when the sky rolls back on us
Some rejoice and the others fuss
Cause every knee must bow and tongue confess
That the Son of God is forever blessed
His is the kingdom, and we're the guests
So put your voice up to the test,
Sing "Lord, come soon"


Here's another sample from his song, "Sweet River Roll."  The images in this song are amazing.  Listen to/watch it here.

It's like the water in the valley, submerged totally
Yet all the children rally around the safety of their shallow beliefs
Let's swim against the current out and into the deep
But first I pray the Lord for my soul to keep
That price payed was not cheap as I stand knee deep in his blood
We're knee deep in his blood


See, I choose to refuse the regulated rhetoric of someone else's rehearsed ideals
In place of a real living commitment, hell no
We put the rock in the water and it made cement
We put the water with the wheat and then we made it ferment
Shine light through the rain and a spectrum represent
We're pumping water through the veins and the brain's content
Went down to the river following providence
Old man, under water gonna die when he repents
Old man, under water gonna die when he repents

One final example, and then I'll shut up about the musical genius of Josh Garrels.  My favorite song of his is called "Rise."  Listen to it here.

Take courage, sons, for we must go under
The heart of darkness and set them free
But don't lose heart when you see the numbers
There's no measure for the faith we bring
It's given us to overcome
If we run where the Spirit calls us on
The greatest things have yet to come
With the dawn we will rise


Though they may surround us like lions
And crush us on all sides
We may fall, but we will rise
Not by my might or my power
Or by the strength of swords
Only through your love, my Lord
All we've lost will be restored


Another thing that drew me to Garrels' music was that he was giving away his most recent album.  It was downloaded more than 125,000 times and he was subsequently named Christianity Today's best artist for 2011.  How does the guy make a living when he gives away a phenomenally successful record?  Garrels tells the story like this: he was finishing the album but had yet to lay any of the vocal tracks, due to an illness that caused him to lose his voice for an extended period of time.  He recalls crying out to God to restore his voice as money was getting tight and he didn't have an album to sell.  He says that he felt God lead him to trust him - both for the completion of the album and to provide for him in the wake of a lack of funds.  Garrels said God led him to give away the album for free for one year and to trust him with everything - a year of jubilee, so to speak.  So that's what he did.  Turns out God provided by boosting Josh's notoriety, thereby increasing sales of previous albums and attendance at concerts.  Money was not an issue.

Unfortunately, the album is no longer free (the year of jubilee has ended) but you can still get his latest album, "Love, War, and the Sea In Between" for a good price and support one of the most innovative Christian musicians on the scene right now.  Go get it.  You won't be disappointed.

Florida Trip: Day 3

Today marks our third day in the great state of Florida, and the second day of the Triennial Conference.  Lots of interesting stuff happened today.  Allow me to share a few things.

The day started out with the second session of the Triennial Conference, where Francis Chan once again brought the message.  You can read more about that here.  After his message there were some breakout sessions, and the one I attended was less than good.  Not that there was anything wrong with the topic or the speaker, though.  This has been the case at almost all the conferences I've attended.  The breakout sessions tend to be a little weak.  Usually the topic is something that is way more than one could ever address in the hour or hour and a half that is allotted.  It's just not possible.  Then the speaker spends 20 minutes giving his biographical information, and there's just not enough time to cover what needs to be covered.  You tend to leave a breakout session feeling like you've just scratched the scratch that's on the surface of the topic.  Today's breakout session was no different.

There was an NAB business meeting scheduled for 1:30 today, which I fully intended on attending.  This was not to be, however, as The Mrs. had to take The Hanburger in to urgent care.  On Monday night before we left, we noticed that Han had a loud, painful sounding, seal-like barking cough. She's had this kind of cough two other times in her life, and both instances were confirmed cases of croup.  But since she is a year older, and the cough wasn't that bad, we decided to just go with it.  She seemed fine Tuesday morning and on into Wednesday, still with a cough, however.  Today it got worse, though, and her breathing was starting to be affected.  Short, shallow, wheezy breaths.  So after a bit of looking online and a call back to our insurance provider in Minnesota, we brought her into a local Orlando clinic.  They confirmed an ear infection in her, and the possibility of either croup or pneumonia.  Either way, we caught it early so that it wasn't severe, and a good dose of antibiotics should clear it up, post haste.

Anyway, while The Mrs. and Han were figuring this out, Ferg and I stayed back at the hotel.  Since I couldn't bring him to the two and a half hour long business meeting with me, we decided to hit the pool (bummer!).  Check out the swimming picks here.  So after an afternoon of swimming, and five hours after they left, Han and The Mrs. returned to the hotel with a whole bunch of medicine and groceries (hotel food is crazy expensive!).  Soon after they returned I had to go to the next general session.  You can read more about that session here.


Also included in tonight's session was a brief performance by Mandy Harvey.  My mind was blown by this young lady and her incredible story.  I strongly encourage you to watch this video of Mandy's story, and then prepare to have your own mind blown when you listen to her sing.  She's having a concert tomorrow night that I will not miss.

Tomorrow brings a "free day" where conference attendees can do whatever they like.  This means, much to my chagrin, that we will be going to Disney World.  Why does the notion of my family going to Disney World not excite me?  That's another post for another time.

Psalm 127

Here's the latest installment of our Genevan Psalms at Riverview this summer. Actually it's not the latest installment, as we've used two others since my last "Psalms" post. But it's the latest one that I've had an influence on, anyway.

For this Psalm, the idea was to have a men's group sing it. Kerry Glewwe and I worked on some syncopation and parts that deviated a bit from the original, mostly just to jazz the arrangement up and give it some life. Kerry came up with most of the parts. Then we included Eric Moteberg in the mix, and this is how it came out.

Psalm 127 by fatsjoel

We toyed around with a bunch of different ways of singing the psalm: a round, phrase extensions, modulations, etc., but in the end, time constraints forced us to keep it relatively simple. We ended up taking turns with the melody on the first verse, breaking it up into parts for verses 2 and 3, and then going back to the first verse again in unison, but also raising the melody up a step. I'm beginning to get an appreciation for the language of the psalms (ever tried to sing the word "quiver"? It ain't easy!). As is usually the case with live recordings, I thought it sounded better when we sang it than the recording makes it sound, but oh well.

The lyrics are below, and you can compare our arrangement to the original here.

UPDATE: You can also see a video of the rendition here.

Unless the Lord will build the house
It's builders toil in useless pain
The city's keepers watch in vain
Unless the Lord, it's cause espouse
No enterprise shall have success
Unless the Lord decides to bless

'Tis vain to waken in the dark
To start one's daily enterprise
And slave till night to realize
One's sustenance by endless work
For God, his gifts on us, will heap
To his beloved he gives sleep

Lo, sons are precious gifts from him
The body's fruit is his reward
The sons of youth like arrows guard
The man whose quiver's full of them
He shall be mighty in the gate
No foes shall enter his estate

Psalm 124

Each summer at Riverview, Pastor Wick preaches on the psalms. This summer he'll be covering Psalms 124-134. After next summer he'll have preached through all 150 psalms. Pretty cool.

Anyway, for this summer's series, I proposed that we somehow integrate the Genevan Psalter into our worship. I found this website a couple years ago (which I've posted about before) which has a lot of info about the Genevan Psalter, and even free recordings of each psalm, as well as the sheet music for each psalm. I've even done some research on the psalter, as well as on Reformation era worship music, so being a nerd, this site was a treasure trove for me.

If you listen to any of the recordings of the psalms, you'll quickly realize that many of the tunes (composed in the 16th century) don't really lend themselves too well to corporate worship. They're actually more of a chant style than anything else. So I figured that if we were to have soloists sing the psalms in our worship services, we'd probably have to do a bit of rearranging.

This past Sunday was the first of our summer psalms series, so I figured I'd put myself out there and be the guinea pig to see if arranging these psalms for solo performances would work out. I think it went well. A recording of my arrangement is below, as well as a recording of the original arrangement from the psalter. I didn't alter any of the words, and I tried to incorporate as much of the original "melody" (if it can be called that) as I could. It's not the greatest recording, considering it was recorded live in church, and I'm not sure what that sound is in the beginning. See what you think.

My arrangement of Psalm 124
Psalm 124 - Credit by fatsjoel

And here's the original version from the Genevan Psalter.

The lyrics of Psalm 124:
Let Israel now say in thankfulness
That if the Lord had not our right maintained
And if the Lord had not with us remained
When cruel men against us rose to strive
We'd surely have been swallowed up alive

Yea when their wrath against us fiercely rose
Then would the tide o'er us have spread its wave
The raging stream would have become our grave
The surging flood, in proudly swelling roll,
Most surely would have overwhelmed us all

Blest be the Lord who made us not their prey
As fromt he fowler's net a bird may flee
So from their broken snare did we go free
Our only help is in God's holy name
He made the earth and all the heav'nly frame

Kerry Glewwe stepped in and added a harmony vocal. My sister Susan was on the violin. I played my acoustic and sang the melody. I don't usually get nervous before I sing/speak/preach anymore, but this time was different. This was the first time I had ever done any finger picking on the guitar while singing at the same time (at least for an audience). So I was a bit nervous. Thankfully the chords weren't too bad, and there weren't any barre chords, so I was able to get through it without too many goof-ups. But to make matters even more uncertain, when I came out onto the platform during Pastor Wick's closing prayer, i noticed that my tuning pedal wasn't on (and if the pedal isn't on, you don't get any sound). It automatically turns on if and when an instrument is plugged into it. A quick check of my cords confirmed that my guitar indeed was plugged in, so the battery must have failed at some point during the sermon. So, while Pastor Wick was closing the sermon in prayer, I quickly turned off my amp, unplugged my guitar from the pedal and went straight into the amp. Thankfully it worked.

Overall, I thought using the psalm added nicely to the worship service, and I look forward to arranging more of the psalms throughout the summer.