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.

I Love Funerals

I like funerals.  No, I love funerals.  Yeah, I admit that's a bit morbid, but I think I have a good reason.

Certainly funerals are times of mourning, after all, a loved one has died and moved on.  For some this is a time of rejoicing, as their loved one has gone on to their eternal reward.  For others this is a time of uncertainty or even fear.

So on the one hand, funerals for believers are joyous occasions because they celebrate a person who has gone to a much better place.

I particularly like funerals, however, because they are incredible opportunities for the gospel to go forth.  Let's face it: people are in an emotionally beat up state during funerals.  They are looking for answers.  More than that, they are looking for the truth.  The truth about what life is about, why things happen to people, what happens when we die, and so on and so forth.  I'm not saying that times of mourning are good for taking advantage of people emotionally, but it is an incredible opportunity to guide people toward truth and point them in the right direction.

The best part about funerals, in my opinion, is that the gospel is proclaimed to people who need to hear it.  And at the funeral I attended this afternoon, this task was accomplished masterfully by my friend, boss, and pastor, Dave Wick.  The message he delivered was quite simply the best, most clearly communicated, most engaging, and culturally relevant presentation of the gospel I think I've ever heard.

Lu Mendez (the deceased) was soundly saved saint of God, of Latino heritage, and many of her relatives were of the Roman Catholic persuasion.  This is quite a bit different from the Baptist persuasion, to say the least.  Wick, knowing that a lot of Lu's friends and family were Catholic, acknowledged this fact openly during his message.  I have to confess that when he did so, I immediately became nervous.  I had thoughts of people walking out or becoming angry during the message because the minister was badmouthing the Catholic faith.  But Wick, knowing his audience perfectly, did not do that.  Instead, he masterfully wove a story about nominal Christians of all persuasions.  He explained that there are many Baptists who are not Christians, and there are many Catholics, who although they might be religious, are not Christians.  He then went on to explain that Lu wasn't in heaven because she was a Baptist, but because she had trusted in Christ for salvation.  He closed by saying something to the effect of, "There are a lot of Baptists here; there are a lot of Catholics here.  But there aren't as many Christians as there are Baptists and Catholics."  I'm certainly not doing the sermon justice here by describing it.  It has to be heard, I imagine, to get the full effect.  I'm going to try and figure out how to post the file on the site here.

All that to say that the service this afternoon was a magnificent testament to the glory of God in the gospel, and in the life of Lu Mendez.  It was a privilege to be a part of it.

Theology of Worship

After having developed a biblical set of guidelines for how Christians should regard dressing for church, the Worship Music and Arts Committee worked on developing a theology of worship that will help guide the church in planning and thinking about worship.  I'm very glad the church has gone this direction - that of finding out what the Bible says about particular topics and then conducting ourselves accordingly.  As I did with the dress code, I'd like to publish the Worship Music and Arts Committee's theology of worship here:

A Theology of Worship for Riverview Baptist Church
1. We believe our worship is reserved solely for God, and God alone (Psalm 29.2, 148.1-13, Romans 11.36, Revelation 19.10, 22.9,).  God is the subject and object of worship – it is about him and for him.  God is the only one worthy of our praise.  As the Creator God, he alone is deserving of the worship of his creation (Psalm 29.3-10, Revelation 4.11).  Therefore, we will focus on praising only the Lord in our worship and will offer up a suitable and appropriate sacrifice of praise to his name.  Our motivation for worship will be his pleasure, resulting in our own fulfillment and enjoyment. 

2. We believe that God’s glory and our celebration of it in worship should be the focus and goal of all life and ministry.  Worship is the primary purpose for which God created human beings and is therefore our highest endeavor and greatest fulfillment (1 Corinthians 10.31, Isaiah 43.6-7, Matthew 22.37, 1 Peter 4.11).  Therefore we will give worship careful focus and attention in the life of this church.  We will relate all of our activities to it and to the goal of magnifying the glory of God.

3. We believe that our worship is acceptable to God in and through Christ our High Priest.  We come to God clothed in his righteousness and by his worthiness (Hebrews 8.1-2, 10.19-22).  Therefore we will exalt Christ in our worship.  Moreover, we will not assume that our worship is made acceptable to God by any other means (such as excellence in worship or style of worship). 

4. We believe our worship is enabled, motivated, and empowered by the Holy Spirit.  As God, the Holy Spirit deserves our adoration and praise as much as the Father and Son, yet he chooses to glorify not himself but rather point us to Christ and thus lead us to the Father in worship.  The Holy Spirit motivates us for worship in assuring us of our standing by grace and filling us for the work of praise (Philippians 3.3, John 16.14, Romans 8.14-17, 1 Corinthians 12.3, Ephesians 5.18-19).  Therefore, we will exalt Christ in our worship by the power of the Holy Spirit, and address our weaknesses by enlisting the Spirit’s help in enabling us to desire, pray to, and worship God.

5. We believe that worship is the privilege of all of God’s people.  Every individual plays a vital role in the corporate worship of the church (Psalm 79.13, 107.32, Romans 12.1, 15.5-6).  Therefore, we will encourage a whole-hearted participation in every way possible: by seeking to enhance the physical environment for worship through the use of artistic, seasonal, and orderly decorations; by carefully selecting music for worship so as to encourage participation while maintaining biblical and theological integrity; by encouraging participation in corporate prayer; by encouraging participation in the Lord’s Supper on a regular basis, etc.

6. We believe that the heart attitude of the worshiper in response to and participation in worship is of more importance than an external response and participation in worship (1 Samuel 16.7, Hosea 6.6, Mark 12.33).  Therefore the elements of our worship will aim at encouraging a response in the heart of the worshiper rather than being concerned with external responses to the form, style, or structure of worship.

7. We believe that worship should promote the unity and edification of the church.  The church is, by divine design, a diverse group of disparate, saved sinners who can be unified in the Spirit (Romans 15.5-6, Ephesians 4.1-6).  Therefore, we will exult in our diversity and seek to learn from one another various expressions of worship.  We will strive to keep the health of the whole body in mind when it comes to innovation or change in worship.  We will not seek to promote personal agendas or preferences in worship, but prayerfully and deliberately seek the good of the body as a whole.  We commit to considering one another’s needs before our own and to look beyond self to our corporate identity in Christ (Romans 12.10, Ephesians 5.19-21, Philippians 2.2-3, Colossians 3.12-17, Hebrews 10.23-25).

8. We believe that the word of God is the best means of knowing and being able to declare truths about God in worship (Psalm 138.2, 2 Peter 1.21).  God has revealed himself and his glorious deeds through inspired scripture (Psalm 56.4).  We respond to God’s self-revelation in his word in worship (Psalm 56.4, 138.2 150.2).  Therefore, we will hold the word of God as central in our worship.  That is, we will read the word publically, pray according to the word, hear the word preached, sing songs according to God’s revelation in scripture, be obedient to the word in the administration of the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper as acts of worship, be obedient to the word in receiving financial gifts as an act of worship, and allow the word of God to provide the context and motivation for our worship and to enrich and inform our worship.

9. We believe that there is freedom in style in worship.  We believe this for the following reasons: 1) God exists in a triune community – the ultimate expression of unity in diversity (Genesis 1.26, Mark 1.9-11).  2) The church is itself blended – it is composed of people from all races, nationalities, ages, backgrounds and temperaments (Galatians 3.28).  3) God loves diversity – this is seen in his works of creation and in the world of people he has made (Ephesians 5.18-19, Revelation 5.9-10, 7.9-10).  4) The New Testament does not prescribe a particular form or style for worship in the church.  This absence of detailed guidelines suggests that God allows for considerable freedom in worship style (John 4.23).  We further believe, however, that Christians are not to do that which God forbids in the name of worship or freedom (Deuteronomy 12.4, Exodus 20.4-6, 1 Corinthians 10.14-22).  Therefore, we commit to draw from a diversity of stylistic influences from within and outside the church while maintaining obedience to scripture.

A (Worshipful) Comedy of Errors

It's been a week since my most recent sermon at Riverview.  Whenever I fill the pulpit I try to write a post about the content of the sermon I preached.  For whatever reason I haven't gotten around to writing that post yet.  Well, I just downloaded the podcast of my sermon from last week, so I thought this would be an opportune time to say a few words.

I need to start off by saying that it's a good thing that God doesn't accept our worship based upon the level of technical perfection it is conducted in, nor does he give demerits for uncontrollable technical glitches.  Thank goodness that Jesus' blood and righteousness are what make our worship acceptable, because if God's standard for acceptable worship were functional microphones and technical perfection, then Riverview Baptist Church would have been up a creek last week!

First of all, it was a crazy service.  There were several technical snafus, not to mention that it was a very full and detail oriented service.  Several things had to go a certain way in order to "work."  To begin with, the Pioneer Girls group was presenting a black light puppet show during the service for the children's story.  This meant that we had to try and black out as much natural light from the sanctuary as possible, which meant quite a bit of work beforehand, plus all of the platform furniture was either moved or removed, and there were plenty of black light decorations all over the stage.

Things went crazy during the service too.  Rich, our multi-media guy, came down right as the service was about to begin and told me the computer had frozen, and it was going to be a solid five minutes before it was back up and running.  This was a bit concerning, considering that a lot of our announcements are fueled by visuals on the screen.  Moreover, we were showing an Operation Christmas Child video during the announcements.  Rich told me I needed to kill some time during the announcements to allow time for the computer to reboot.  I did, but apparently it wasn't enough.  The computer was still hiccuping by the time we were ready to show the video.

After all that, our sound guy, Craig, signaled to me from the sound booth that my microphone wasn't on.  I signaled back that, in fact, it was turned on.  He then signaled back that I had it on "mute mode."  I signaled back again that no, I didn't.  This wouldn't be too much of an issue, had I not been responsible for the corporate prayer that morning, which I was.  This means I had to pray corporately for the church, which is somewhat hard to do without any voice amplification.  During a silent prayer time, Craig snuck down and gave me a new wireless mic, and told me to plug my mic cord into the new receiver.  I couldn't get my cord to plug into the mic!  So, out of desperation, I picked up one of the hand-held mics, which unbeknownst to me, was wrapped around the music stand I was standing in front of.  The mic cord had no slack, and as I drew it to my face, the taut cord pulled the mic from my hand and it bounced loudly off the music stand (did I mention this was during the silent prayer time?).  The foam wind protector on the mic fell off and rolled onto the floor (four feet below the platform).  It turned out that this particular microphone was having problems too, so I ended up just shouting out the corporate prayer for the morning.

After the prayer, I invited the congregation to stand and sing the doxology in preparation for the offering.  As the piano and organ played the introduction to the doxology, out of the corner of my eye, I could see someone ascending the stairs to the platform.  I looked, and was more than surprised to see my three year old daughter coming to greet me on the platform.  She had left her seat, gone and picked up the foam wind protector from the handheld microphone, and brought it to me on the platform.  According to my wife, she was very distressed when I dropped the mic earlier and the foam wind cover fell off, and she felt it was very important to return it to me.  The Mrs. told her to go get it and hand it to me after the prayer.  In the mind of my three year old, this meant to bring it to me on the platform, which she did.  Needless to say, I was quite surprised to see her up there!

After the doxology, and during the offertory, I slipped into the back room (because there was nowhere to sit on the platform.  Craig, the sound guy, was waiting for me, with yet a third wireless mic.  He explained that the cord from my original wireless mic had shorted out, and that's why it wasn't working with any mic he gave me.  But here he was, with a fresh and working mic and cord, which I quickly clipped to my tie.

Then, after coming up with a makeshift children's story to introduce the black light puppet show, the kids came on and did a fantastic job.  Take a look.

After each service, it's traditional for the preaching pastor to meet exiting worshipers at the door for a handshake, which I dutifully did (although I always get out of there as fast as possible - no offense to Riverview folks, but have you ever shook 200 hands in a row?  You tend to want to wash your hands as soon as you can).  This time, one person who was in the service and had heard my sermon simply came up to me and asked me where the book of 2nd Colossians was located in the Bible.  I didn't understand.  That's a strange question to ask.  After all, my sermon was from Colossians 2.

Uh oh.

He said that I had mentioned at the beginning of the sermon that we were "continuing our study of 2nd Colossians."  No.  Not possible, I thought.  I must've said something like, we're "continuing our study of the 2nd chapter of Colossians."  Surely I would never say something as stupid as referring to 2nd Colossians - a book that doesn't even exist.

Although, when I look back on it, it's not too surprising that I would say something like that in a sermon.  Whenever I preach, I tend to get in a zone where all I'm focusing on is the sermon, and what I am saying.  I find that if I don't pretty much know what I'm going to say during a sermon, then it's anybody's guess what is going to come out of my mouth.  Therefore, if you ever hear me preach, you can pretty much know that almost every word I say is prepared before hand.

This zone, however, can tend to tie me down and make me oblivious to what is happening around me, and even to what is coming out of my mouth.  Sometimes I think I can get so concerned about what I am going to say, that I don't realize what I've actually said.  It seemed possible to me  that something like this could have happened here, although I wasn't going to believe it until I heard the recording for myself.

Well, as I said earlier, I just downloaded the podcast.  Here's a transcript of the first 11 words of my sermon from this past week:

"We're continuing on, this morning, in our study of second Colossians..."

Oops.

Oh well.  Like I said: if nothing else, we can rejoice that the acceptable-ness of our worship is not dependent upon us doing it well.  Thank God for that!

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.

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.

Idolatry On Sunday Mornings

I just ran across this series of articles by Bob Kauflin. I can't recommend it highly enough, both for those involved in leading and conducting worship and for those sitting in the pews. Bob Kauflin is a songwriter and worship leader that works out of the Sovereign Grace network of churches. I have very much appreciated his work in songwriting, and we use several of Sovereign Grace Music's songs at our church.

Kauflin asserts that there are several idols that are being worshiped in American churches on Sunday morning - often ignorantly - along with the worship of the one true God. These idols aren't carved images or statues, but rather tend to be other elements of American worship. Kauflin identifies music, tradition, creativity, experience, liturgy, biblical knowledge, biblical ignorance, musical excellence, results, reputation, and relevance as potential idols that can draw our worship away from God. Kauflin confesses that he is guilty of worshiping each of these things before God at one point or another, and I must admit the same.

Attention: Theology / Church History / Music Nerds

Check out this site. It contains recordings of all 150 Psalms from the Genevan Psalter. If you're not familiar with the Genevan Psalter, allow me to explain. It's a collection of paraphrases of the Psalms, compiled by John Calvin and first published in 1543.

At the time Calvin only allowed the members of his congregation to sing the Psalms during corporate worship. And, for reasons that I won't get into here, did not allow the psalms to be accompanied by any instruments or vocal harmonies. In other words, the whole congregation sang the same melody line unaccompanied - something that's completely unheard of in modern church music.

The website listed above has mp3 recordings of each of the 150 Psalms, all re-arranged in English available for download. But the original melodies from the Genevan Psalter are used, which is kind of neat. Except melodies from the 1500's are pretty weird. They're extremely hard to follow. It seems almost impossible to predict where the melody is going. Also, the recordings on this site are done a capella, which Calvin surely would have appreciated.

Each Psalm begins with a single voice singing the melody for the first verse, and then other voices join in and harmonize the following verses, which Calvin would probably disapprove of. You can also download pdf files of the sheet music for each Psalm. I can't imagine singing these with a congregation, but it would be fun to try.

The recordings sound great. I'm going to download as many as I can. They're kind of neat when you get to listening to them, and they're very powerful. Even though the language is a tad weird, you can't beat God's word set to music.

What I'm Listening To Right Now

Literally. I'm listening to this as I type. I first saw this on Facebook about two weeks ago. It's a compilation of classic hymns done in modern ways, a production of several bands out of Mars Hill church in Seattle. To put it simply, it's a great album, and the songs are done respectfully and with a lot of talent and creativity, considering it's usually difficult to make something really good (hymns) better (the modern rendition of the hymns). But I think these arrangers and bands nailed this one.

I was able to get the album for free, because I told five people about the album. You can do likewise here.

I seriously recommend that you check this album out. The hymns are great, and the new renditions are great. Although I will admit that it did take some getting used to for a few of them. For example, I wasn't a huge fan of the renditions of "I Sing The Mighty Power of God" or "The Solid Rock" at first, but they have really grown on me. The arrangement of "What Wondrous Love Is This" is perhaps the best I've ever heard (although the key could've probably been raised a half step). In fact, I plan to tweak the Rain City version a bit and make it into a 12 bar blues song. I first heard this rendition during the Mars Hill live broadcast of their Good Friday service, and I was blown away by it. (UPDATE: The version of "What Wondrous Love is This" that is on the Rain City Hymnal is NOT the really cool one - although it is also very good. Check out the version by the band "Red Letter" here) "Softly And Tenderly" is also very well done, as well as "All Creatures Of Our God And King." It really rocks, which in my opinion, it should! "Alleluia! Alleluia! Praise, praise the Father, praise the Son. Praise, praise the Spirit, three in one." How appropriate to be shouting those lyrics alongside a screaming, overdriven guitar and banging drums.

If you do download the album, also check out Tim Smith's explanation for rearranging ancient music into more modern styles. I think he's right on.

Content Vs. Style

As I've gotten older, I find myself appreciating the rich, theological depth of the more "traditional" sacred music. You usually find these types of songs in hymnals, and most of them were written before the 20th century. When you compare new religious (worship) music to the old hymns, the new stuff just can't compare when it comes to content. In most cases, I detest the shallow, touchy-feely, "Jesus is my girlfriend" lyrics that tend to plague modern worship music. There's just no substantive content to most of it. Thus, my affinity for the older songs. I'm in a strange boat, however. While I love and appreciate the old school lyrics, I prefer a more modern musical style, and let me tell you, finding songs that are "old school" in content and "new school" in style are hard to come by.

I learned recently that my personal opinion on this issue is the minority. There are many within the church (including my church) who feel that older sacred songs should be sung with only the accompaniment of a piano or organ, or perhaps both. Their musical tastes are a little different from mine: they prefer the old content and the old musical style. Also I learned that many who feel this way also think that any deviance from the old musical style in some way negates or diminishes the content of the old song. In other words, they feel that when a modern musical style is combined with the lyrical content of an old hymn, the hymn becomes somehow "less" than what it is when accompanied by a piano or organ.

I disagree with that line of thinking, however. As I see it, the only "value" of a sacred song is in the content of the lyrics, and I don't think the content of a song is diminished by the musical style in which it is played. After all, what is the content or value of a song if not the theological truths it proclaims? The content certainly can't be in the music itself or the melody. The music is just an arrangements of specific notes and tones, arranged to form a coherent melody. Certainly the value or content of the music is in the words that are formed and arranged in order to bring glory to God. Here's a good example (click on the song "Nail My Glory" on the music player). If you didn't follow the link, you're missing out. It's a great song. Allow me to describe it to you: it's loud, fast, rock n' roll. The lyrics are as follows:

No more, my God, I boast no more
Of everything my hands have done
I quit the hopes I held before
To trust the merits of Your Son

Now for His love I bear His name
My former pride I call my shame
What was my gain I count my loss
And I nail my glory to His cross

And by Your grace I will esteem
All things but loss for Jesus’ sake
Oh may my soul be found in Him
And of His righteousness partake

All of the works of my own hands
I dare not bring before Your throne
My faith responds to Your demands
By pleading what my Lord has done

You may be surprised to know that this song was written by Isaac Watts in 1709, author of such hymns as "O God Our Help In Ages Past," "When I Survey The Wondrous Cross," and "Alas! And Did My Savior Bleed." Now, does the fact that Watts' words are set to a more modern musical style make them less true? I should think not. They have not changed. The rich, theological truths they proclaim remain unmolested.

Here's a another example, except this time, here are the lyrics to a "modern" worship song:

Looks like tonight the sky is heavy
Feels like the winds are gonna change
Beneath my feet the earth is ready
I know it's time for heaven's rain
It's gonna rain...yeah

Cause living water we desire
To flood our hearts with holy fire
Rain down, all around the world we're singing
Rain down, can you hear the earth is singing?
Rain down, my heart is dry but still I'm singing
Rain down, rain it down

Back to the start, my heart is heavy
Feels like it's time to dream again
I see the clouds and yes, I'm ready
To dance upon this barren land
Hope in my hands...yeah

Do not shut, do not shut
Do not shut the heavens
Open up, open up
Open up our hearts

Give me strength to cross this water
Keep my heart upon your altar
Rain down, yeah
Give me strength to cross this water
Keep my feet, don't let me falter
Rain down, yeah

I have no idea what this song is about. It's merely a conglomeration of churchy sounding phrases (holy fire, heaven, heart, etc.). Some of the phrases don't even make sense ("Can you hear the earth is singing/feels like it's time to dream again" HUH?) I don't know what the song is trying to say. I don't know what it says, if anything, about God. I don't know what it says about my relationship to God. I don't see how it praises God, or leads one into worshiping him. This song has little or no theological value at all. Plus it just doesn't make sense. The theme of the song seems to be a request for rain, as if rain is needed and is good, but towards the end of the song the lyricist states, "Give me strength to cross this water." Wait a minute! I thought you wanted water!

If you followed the link and listened to the song as it was played, you'll note that it is likewise modern and of the rock n' roll variety. But here's an interesting question: would setting the lyrics of this song to a piano and organ tune make it any less goofy? Would its content somehow become more valuable and rich? Certainly not! The lyrics would still not make sense, and it would still fail at telling the worshiper anything about God, or why he deserves praise, honor, and glory.

So then, I conclude, that the only thing that matters in worship music is the content of the lyrics. The musical melody, style, or tune does not factor into the value of a worship song (it should be noted that there are plenty of old hymns that are just as big of stinkers as many modern worship songs - they would likewise be useless in any musical style).

I explained this line of thinking to a friend of mine, and he challenged me by asking if I would be OK with a rap worship set in the morning church service. My response was "Yes, as long as the content of the song glorifies God." Now, that is not to say that we should convert all of our worship to rap - our culture has not dictated to us that rap is the acceptable medium of the masses. In other words, our culture dictates the driving musical style to us. Who knows, maybe in 20 years rap will be the main musical style of our culture. At that point in time, an all-rap service will make sense. And if and when it does, churches should not hesitate to have rap worship - as long as the content is sound.

Old Truth, New Music

Since I'm somewhat the "worship leader" (whatever that means) at our early service (I tend to think of myself more as a "worship facilitator," - again, whatever that means), I have the responsibility of picking out what music we sing and use in the service. I'm always on the lookout for good, God-centered music that exalts Christ and not just how I feel about him. Unfortunately, this is usually a difficult task, considering the terrible state that most Christian music is in. I find most of the songs to be simple, uncreative, and full of me-centered lyrics that, most of the time, offer up unbiblical representations of God and our relationship with him (in fact, I refuse to listen to Christian radio, since I think most of it is useless, mindless blather).

But this past summer I was introduced to a song called "Jesus, Thank You" that completely blew me away (and my conception of what modern worship music had come to be). The lyrics for the song are as follows:

The mystery of the cross I cannot comprehend
The agonies of Calvary
You the perfect holy One crushed Your Son
Who drank the bitter cup reserved for me

Your blood has washed away my sin
Jesus, thank You
The Father’s wrath completely satisfied
Jesus, thank You
Once Your enemy now seated at Your table
Jesus, thank You

By Your perfect sacrifice I’ve been brought near
Your enemy You’ve made Your friend
Pouring out the riches of Your glorious grace
Your mercy and Your kindness know no end

Lover of my soul, I want to live for You

The lyrics of this song are completely Christ-centered, and praise him for his sacrifice as it is presented in scripture: the substitutionary atonement of the unrighteous through the just wrath of the Father poured out on his sinless Son. You don't hear about this kind of stuff in most modern worship songs. In fact, most songs with content like this don't exist outside of hymnals.

I then learned that the song was written, performed, recorded, and produced by a group called Sovereign Grace Music, an offshoot of Sovereign Grace Ministries. Sovereign Grace describes themselves as "...a family of churches passionate about the gospel of Jesus Christ. We are devoted to planting and supporting local churches, with a strong doctrinal basis that is evangelical, Reformed, and continuationist." Are you kidding me? Where have these guys been all my life?

It turns out that Sovereign Grace Music is a conglomeration of worship leaders and musicians from Sovereign Grace churches, and they are dedicated to writing traditional (in content, not style - in other words, you get the same firm theology and doctrine of the hymns in a more modern musical style) and reformed worship music.

I decided to investigate further, and I found their most recent album, "Psalms" to be an absolutely incredible piece of inspiring and worshipful song writing. In fact, every new song that our band worked into its repertoire this past fall was from Sovereign Grace Music. I've heard from several of the band members, and several people from the congregation who have loved the songs, and even asked for copies of the lyrics they could have for themselves, and where they could get copies of the music. In other words, the band and the congregation has eaten up the rich theology contained in the songs, as well as the modern musical format in which they are delivered.

As I have begun working to plan the next several months and the songs we will use in the service, the Sovereign Grace songs are dominating my preferences (we add a new song into the mix approximately every two weeks). As I have gone deeper into the Sovereign Grace library, I have been continually blessed and excited about the songs and lyrics that they have produced, and I can't wait to introduce and incorporate them in our service. Here's one of the newer songs (at least, new to me!) that I particularly appreciate. It's called "Let Your Kingdom Come":

Your glorious cause, O God, engages our hearts
May Jesus Christ be known wherever we are
We ask not for ourselves, but for Your renown
The cross has saved us so we
Pray Your kingdom come

Let Your kingdom come, let Your will be done
So that everyone might know Your Name
Let Your song be heard everywhere on earth
Till Your sovereign work on earth is done
Let Your kingdom come

Give us Your strength, O God, and courage to speak
Perform Your wondrous deeds
Through those who are weak
Lord use us as You want, whatever the test
By grace we’ll preach Your gospel
Till our dying breath

I love this song! Even if it weren't set to music, the lyrics alone present such rich biblical concepts, such as God performing wondrous deeds and using weak people to do his work so that HIS strength and glory might be the focus, all for the purpose of making his name known on this earth. What an amazing concept.

To top it all of, Nap Records - the label that produces Sovereign Grace Music (which is also an offshoot of Sovereign Grace Ministries, by the way) - describes their purpose in worship music thusly:

"The marriage of truth and creativity is what Nap Records is all about. Some of the lyrics on our albums might sound a little old-fashioned — we’re okay with that. The truth we sing has been around for a few thousand years, but hopefully in our music you’ll find the style a little more current. We want to use new music to bend the ears of our listeners to the old truth. Our goal is to get you to sing in your car because you like the song, but keep singing because you love remembering the cross of Jesus Christ even more than the style."

I can't think of a more noble goal in worship music. Kudos to Sovereign Grace for their desire to magnify Christ in their music, and kudos again. If you are in any way associated with the music or worship proceedings at your church (or know someone who is, or if you're like me and are fed up with the touchy-feely, "I want to hug Jesus" style of worship music that is so common nowadays, or if you just want to hear some good, quality, theologically sound worship music) I strongly recommend you check out Sovereign Grace Music. They provide free chord sheets and lead sheets for ALL of their songs (which I personally find to be a very humble gesture). All you need to do is download their music from iTunes or buy one of their CD's. Check it out!