Contempory Music/blended Services

My good ole S Baptist church started this about a year or so ago. We are about 1200 members, with approx 400-500 reasonably active. Sunday AM is basically traditional, with some more modern hymns & occasionally a praise song or two.

Sunday PM is very un-traditional as the service starts with about 20 minutes of praise choruses. The Pastor then brings a message that is really just a "sermon dressed in blue jeans".

My wife & I (senior citizens) went for several sessions when it first started (PM services) but really became tired of the format! Specifically the choruses, which we both liked, began to be tiring after we had gone through each one no less than 5 rounds. In essence in the 20 or so minutes of singing, there were usually no more than maybe three that were sung.

Also, the lady leading the song portion (just a church member that really is good in music) always seemed to feel the need to give a mini testimony/sermon with each song. Then after the pastor was through, & one more song was to be sung as people departed, this lady had to give her comments on the pastor's talk.

Needless to say, we no longer attend evening worship, simply because to me it's no longer worship, but just a performance.

I think I can speak with some modicum of validity for the "over 60" group, in that changes are not necessarily bad. Just don't forget that there are a lot of people who still prefer the traditional, but if not forced to choose between traditional and contemporary will embrace both with delight.

In my church there was no hint of traditional in the evening service, but even at that we could have adapted if not for the needless(?) repetition and editorilizing.

Regardless, you will have to go as God leads you, and if you are following his will, don't fret people like me who don't get on board. You're NOT gonna please everybody, so don't even try.

Just hope I've given you some food for thought from my perspective. Good luck, and God bless your endeavors

 

We do a blended service.

It about wiped out our senior adult population, but they can come at our traditional 8:30.

But, it draws the young ones.

We also now make use of a praise band that is pretty versatile. I get to play percussion in the band.

[ February 06, 2002: Message edited by: SaggyWoman ]

 

A "blended" service is merely a compromise with the world.

 

No compromise at the church I attend.

 

We have a blended service as well. We do some contemporary praise choruses in addition to hymns.

I really don't see how it is a compromise to the world. First of all, the old hymns are not the Bible. They were only written a couple of hundred years ago. They were contemporary for their time. I have yet to understand why people fear bringing in something new into a church...churches have become museums...museums exhibiting what God used to do and singing songs that were written years ago.

 

But where does it end ? first you bring in new music, then you have the superbowl on tv in a service. And I'm a little scared about the comment where the adult seniors were driven out with the new music. Was that what you wanted ?

I dare you to come to my church & call it a museum. And God has not changed the things he used to do. The hymns we sing still bring tears to the believers eyes. I don't go to church to be entertained. I know I'm sounding off with a lot of hot air, but this thread is making glad for our music director.

 

The church has always shunned musical styles characteristic of taverns and theatres. It is only since the 60's and 70's that we have begun to erase the distinctions in the styles of music played in the church and those played and enjoyed by the world.

In fact it was the Catholic church, already polluted with heresy and superstition, that brought musical instruments into Christian worship.

God has not changed, and indeed, if His Spirit is involved, neither do the methods. It is not up to us to "bring people in." It is up to us to "lift up Christ" by obeying and serving Him and trusting Him to bring in such as should be saved. God's Spirit is the "cutting edge" of Christian ministry, not each fleshly "innovation" spawned in man's vain imagination.

Why the resistance? Because each concession has only resulted in a more worldly church. The altar could not make the flesh of pigs holy, but the swine could defile the altar.

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

There is a danger of making Music in the Church the New Transubstantiation. In other words Music = Worship. I have major problems when you have 45 minutes of CCM and then a mini relationship sermon that last about 15 minutes. I have no problem with some CCM and even a Praise and Worship song in worship but not to be the standard diet since the Classic Hymns are superior lyrically (Which leads to the question, Does anyone know how to write a song anymore ). Most Praise and Worship songs are extremely weak lyrically and nothing iritates me more than to hear a one verse song sang over, over, over, over, over, over, again (Yuck!).

Also motives should be checked. If a service is designed to reach people and not centered on the Trinity then I question the motives. I also have problems with segregation of ages in worship (Having contemporary, Traditional) in that this seems to be pampering Baby Boomers who haven't realized that their not in High school anymore (Oh, boy I might get flak for that statement )

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Kiffin ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kiffin:
(Oh, boy I might get flak for that statement )

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Kiffin ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not from me !!!!!!

 

&lt; The church has always shunned musical styles characteristic of taverns and theatres. It is only since the 60's and 70's that we have begun to erase the distinctions in the styles of music played in the church and those played and enjoyed by the world.&gt;

Nonsense. Melodies such as Greensleeves and Danny Boy qualify as "characteristic of taverns and theatres," but they have long been used with worship lyrics. Besides, if the melody is found to be pleasing, must the individual reject it as praiseworthy?

&lt; In fact it was the Catholic church, already polluted with heresy and superstition, that brought musical instruments into Christian worship. &gt;

We find that musical instruments are used and accepted in Psalms (e.g., 150) and Revelation (5:8; 14:2). This in-with-bacon---out-with-harps bit is a crock.

&lt; God's Spirit is the "cutting edge" of Christian ministry, not each fleshly "innovation" spawned in man's vain imagination. &gt;

Then throw out the microphones, electric lights, and air conditioning; and however you come to church, don't let it be on anything motorized.

&lt; The altar could not make the flesh of pigs holy, but the swine could defile the altar. &gt;

When God told Peter to "kill and eat" and Peter said "Not so, Lord," it's a good thing Pete relented and saw the truth-- "Again a voice came to him a second time, 'What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy'" (Acts 10:15).

 

Cynic,

Yes, yes, yes. And Martin Luther used bar tunes in his chorales too. We have heard all such rot before and it has been soundly debunked.

Listen. Any boob can do a hatchet job on a post, but we have become accustomed to more reasoned approaches here.

In that spirit I now challenge you to present your evidence that the early church used musical instruments.

Here is my evidence that they did not:

Did the Early Church Use Musical Instruments?

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

Kiffin.

 

&lt; Yes, yes, yes. And Martin Luther used bar tunes in his chorales too. &gt;

It seems a point of interest that you hold that view.

&lt; In that spirit I now challenge you to present your evidence that the early church used musical instruments. &gt;

I don't really care a rat's tail about it. I pointed out 2 tunes that have been known in both entertainment and church, and that is what you refused to address.

 

If you don't care, then why clutter our forums with your ranting?

Both the tunes you listed first appeared at the turn of the 16th Century and were not used in the church until much later. Hardly evidence that the church was quick to snap up any contemporary tune, and no evidence at all of the practice of the early church.

[ February 08, 2002: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

Ollie said,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And just because you are a senior adult doesn't mean you have to have everything in the church your way. Nothing brings joy to my heart or tears to my eyes as when seeing young adults worshipping God, tears running down their faces, and see them living for Christ. Instead of pounding them into conforming with "our baptist ways", we should be encouraging them to live the life God wants from them and us. If we don't we are going to end up with a dying church and one that is not reaching out to the lost. We will be reaching out to ourselves! What good are the old hymns if no one is there to hear them??????

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do hope you don't take offense in that this is not personal but I think the question should be what is the purpose of worship? Is is worship of the Triune God or outreach to reach people? Worship is for God's people and lost people will or should feel uncomfortable in the House of God. That is because of their sins. Methodology does not bring people to Christ. The Holy Spirit through the Word of God does. It has nothing to do with Baptist ways. The Word of God must hold a more prominent place over even singing. My Church is liturgical in it's worship yet also Free and yes we'll have a Praise and Worship, CCM or Southern Gospel song in the worship but they do not dominate the song service. They are not high quality enough.


I am not anti CCM or Praise and Worship choruses. They have their places. Unfortunately most Praise and Worship choruses (with maybe a few exceptions) are not strong Theological songs. Sacred Hymns such as "Crown Him with Many Crowns" "Holy, Holy, Holy" "And Can it Be?" "Amazing Grace" "O Sacred Head Now Wounded" "Rock of Ages" provide doctrine teaching that is sadly lacking in Praise and Worship. Music should feed and instruct us.

That does not mean that CCM doesn't have a place in worship just as Fritos, Dorritos, Snickers bars can have a place in our physical diet. We just would not want to eat a bag of Lays chips for all our meals but desire to have something more nutrious. CCM is much like Fritos, Dorritos, Snickers bars. It has a place. Most CCM songs though lack the doctrinal depth to be the main chorus.

My problem with the Seeker Friendly churches is that they borrow much from Youth Ministry. I know I served 5 years as a Youth pastor. What is good for a Wedneday or Friday night Youth meeting however is not always good for Sunday Morning worship.

[ February 08, 2002: Message edited by: Kiffin ]

 

I may be reading the ideas of some wrong, so please forgive as you correct me if such is the case.
1 Contemporary does NOT equal "under 30 only!"
2 Contemporary does not equal "Better than the 'other' way!"
3 Traditional does not equal "over 50 only!"
4 Traditional does not equal "Better than the 'other' way!"

To target a particular group, teens for instance, it makes sense to go strictly contemporary! (usually )

For a main worship service, with all from 9-90 a little of each is called for.

But now what I think is the MOST, IN FACT ONLY, criteria; what does it do for showing Christ, drawing people to Jesus, making the Christian see some small way he can improve his walk with God!!!

In other words, are you entertaining, or worshiping? There are times for entertainment (what are socials for?) and ther are times for focusing on the Word. It can be simultaneous occasionally, but not normally!

There ain't no "one size fits all" program; If the Spirit is leading, & you are following, things will work out!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Here is my evidence that they did not:

Did the Early Church Use Musical Instruments?

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Aaron ] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Welcome back, Aaron.
Check out my response at the bottom of that thread. It's funny because Dr. Bob, who's usually on your side, disagreed this time, but you apparently had left by the time people responded. Then rlvaughn, who's usually on our side, posted a link to a Primitive Baptist site listing various arguments against instruments. Instead of going the history route as I did with you before, I dealt with the claims head on. I was waiting to repost it when you returned, but since you posted the link to that thread...

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron:

In that spirit I now challenge you to present your evidence that the early church used musical instruments.

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Aaron ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In my opinion, whether the early church used musical instruments or not is of no consequence. It is obvious from two of the quotes that you used (specifically Justin Martyr and Aquinas) that they were not Biblically based reasons. Their anti-Jewish comments cannot be held as representative of sound Bible based reasoning.

Steve