homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Eccles: Keeping church music contemporary (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Eccles: Keeping church music contemporary
Carys

Ship's Celticist
# 78

 - Posted      Profile for Carys   Email Carys   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
For at least some of us who read music it's very nice to have the notes in our hymn books so that we can see what's going on. Projector screens in my experience don't have any notes.

It is possible to project the dots, but I've only ever seen one person do it (thanks seasick!).

I had an interesting one, 'Lord I lift your name on high' used with a schoolful of teenagers (well 11-16 year olds). I've just looked it up, and according to wikipedia it was realised in 1989, i.e. 8 years minimum before they were born. I was surprised that had survived* and would be thought relevant to the congregation. That said, "In Christ Alone" (the other one used) is older than some of them (2001) but that is more of a classic.**

Carys

*And it still bugs me that it goes from Holy Saturday to Ascension Day in one move (from the grave to the sky)

**It's a great hymn barring the disputed line...

--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise

Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
It is possible to project the dots, but I've only ever seen one person do it (thanks seasick!).

Most projectors don't have the resolution to satisfactorily project a four-part setting for a whole verse, and projecting less than a whole verse is horrible.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Being with a group doing Christian sing-a-longs in nursing homes, I have a new awareness about music but don't know where it leads.

Old folks who rarely utter a word, even people with significant Alzheimers, will sing the hymns/songs they deeply know from years of repetition. Sometimes they correct us about a wording!

I have wondered how people will do sing alongs like this in their feeble memory years if they never got to deeply know songs, because the songs changed every couple weeks instead of recurring through the years.

But I guess a church's function in choosing songs for a morning's worship is NOT to identify songs people could be learning to help them in twilight years. That's a byproduct. If we've lost a beneficial byproduct in the fragmentation of the music collection by the constant pursuit of "new", there are always losses in any change and that doesn't mean change should not be.

I suppose as society becomes more secular, nursing home sing alongs will become secular anyway. I'm wondering if I'll do more good learning "light jazz standards" because people in my old age will sing along with "Blue Skies Smiling At Me" but won't know whatever "here today obsolete tomorrow" song my church's praise band is doing next week?

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530

 - Posted      Profile for stonespring     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've wondered why contemporary church music isn't sexier. I would like it more if it made people shake their hips and do pelvic thrusts.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804

 - Posted      Profile for Olaf     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I suppose as society becomes more secular, nursing home sing alongs will become secular anyway. I'm wondering if I'll do more good learning "light jazz standards" because people in my old age will sing along with "Blue Skies Smiling At Me" but won't know whatever "here today obsolete tomorrow" song my church's praise band is doing next week?

One day nursing homes will be full of Alyssas, Ryans, Coltons, and Carries. I imagine they randomly will sing, "Applause, applause, I live for the applause..."

I think every generation of churchgoer has its golden, timeless musical favorites. A wise church works these in often. Hopefully they all become part of the musical repertoire of the whole congregation. This does require learning new music, but not to the detriment of old hits. Each church's tolerance for the percent of new/old is different, and must be discovered through trial and error. No individual should be in total charge of this, as it seems with the OP situation's pastor. (Especially in that case, as Methodist pastors tend to be itinerant.)

Food for thought.......In a short time, nursing home residents will be requesting, "Let there be peace on earth." (Or will they?)

Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The current crop of old people like Elvis and the Beatles.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
There's also way more chance of someone having heard a song before if it's 150 years old than if it's less than 1 year old.

I don't think this always follows. With my church specifically, I reckon a new song by some contemporary Christian rock band is likely to be known far better than most 150 year old hymns. But that's because of the practices and the demographic within my church; it'll be different in other churches, I'm sure.

With this thread, I was trying to avoid the argument about whether churches should use contemporary music. What I was interested in was the question of how to introduce new songs into the church service setting, for churches that wish to do this. (I know I can't control the way a thread I started goes, though!)
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Spike, I'm not sure what you're proposing, sorry. If a church service has songs / hymns at all then there might well be people attending who don't know the songs and will maybe 'stand around feeling uncomfortable' until they learn them. What's your solution?

Stick to the words on the sheet/book and to the order in which they are printed.
But people who don't know the song will still be standing around perhaps feeling uncomfortable. It's perfectly possible for a music leader to direct everyone to repeat the chorus, go back to the bridge, sing the last line a few times etc. I think this flexibility can really help people engage powerfully with God.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I can see what you're getting at, South Coast Kevin, and applaud your desire to see people welcomed and made as comfortable as possible in what is, for most people these days, a rather 'alien' setting - church.

And that applies to whatever style or 'stripe' or church we are talking about, be it Westminster Abbey or the Vineyard or a Gospel Hall on the corner of the street.

However - I sometimes get the impression that you're suggesting that unless we make absolutely everything water-tight in terms of user-friendliness/seeker friendliness or whatever the buzz words are, then we are somehow all shooting ourselves in the foot.

People stick around and persist despite very mediocre or even down right hopeless church experiences ... which isn't an excuse for giving them a hard time, of course.

On the music thing - and no, I don't want to get into a music-wars argument about which styles or which hymns and songs are 'better' than others - it strikes me that there is growing homogeneity among the kind of churches you are most familiar with.

Some 20 to 30 years ago in the burgeoning house-churches/restoration fellowships of that time the emphasis was pretty much on 'new' songs and choruses ... but we did have 'golden oldies' including some of those that Jengie Jon has mentioned. It might be my memory playing tricks but the musical offering was rather more varied than it appears to be in 'contemporary' fellowships today.

Through the success of conventions like Spring Harvest, Soul Survivor and New Wine (after the demise of earlier charismatic knees-ups such as the Dales, Downs, Wales and Stoneleigh etc) the musical diet has largely become the kind of quasi-Cold Play soft-rock that you've mentioned.

That's all very well and good as far as it goes, provided one doesn't lay claims to it being 'Spirit-led' and so on ... most charismatic churches these days have a diet and format that is just as predictable as anything one might encounter anywhere else - be it Divine Liturgy with the Orthodox, an RC folk Mass or a non-conformist 'hymn sandwich'.

It strikes me that people will either acclimatise or otherwise in whatever setting we offer them. We are all 'socialised' into the Kingdom. If people are exposed to these things they'll either accept or reject them. The musical style may play a part in that - in terms of its appeal and so on - but it's not the be-all and end-all. There are other factors.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Professor Hollenweger, the late, great historian of Pentecostalism, once observed to Andrew Walker the sociologist that, 'if you take away the music [from Pentecostalism] there's not a great deal left ...'

This may sound a bit harsh but I think there's some truth in it. Inasmuch - as South Coast Kevin himself has indicated in his modified, 'neo-pentecostal' fashion that the singing of worship songs and choruses is taken to be the main 'locus' for a 'powerful encounter with God' with the corollary that there are things that the worship leader can do to facilitate that and encourage it to happen.

This idea makes me feel increasingly uncomfortable as it's a fine line between that and manipulation ... just as, at the opposite end of the spectrum, there is a fine line between formalism and performance.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I agree entirely ... and, for some people, the encounter with God (albeit possibly less visceral) takes place through the sung liturgies of Tallis and Byrd.

PS I agree about Hollenweger's "greatness" - but is he actually "late"?

[ 25. April 2014, 08:48: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
busyknitter
Shipmate
# 2501

 - Posted      Profile for busyknitter     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
With this thread, I was trying to avoid the argument about whether churches should use contemporary music. What I was interested in was the question of how to introduce new songs into the church service setting, for churches that wish to do this. (I know I can't control the way a thread I started goes, though!)

What we generally do is have the band perform the new song before the start of the service for a couple of Sundays to familiarise the congregation with its sound. We might also, depending on the song, play it during communion. Then, when we bring it into the main service we typically announce it as a new song, say the band will sing the first verse (or sing it once through depending on the structure) and invite the congregation to join in when they feel ready.

That seems to work and we introduce a new song roughly once every six weeks. But we are definitely a congregation which likes a good sing. And we do keep a broad repertoire; from the old hymnbook standards right through the "contemporary" songs that are actually 30 years old to the really modern stuff.

Posts: 903 | From: The Wool Basket | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In our (rather traditional) church, the organist surreptitiously plays the tune during the offering; and/or we get the choir to sing a verse and then get everyone to join in "from the top".

We occasionally have a music group at family services, in which case they'll play the song through first.

[ 25. April 2014, 10:01: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[Hot and Hormonal]

It seems that Mark Twain's dictum about a premature obituary he read in the paper one day applies to Hollenweger too ... 'reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.'

Apologies, I'd assumed he was no longer with us for some reason ... [Hot and Hormonal]

On the music thing - yes, Byrd and Tallis 'do it' for some people - and they do it for me, as indeed does Bach, plainchant, some Orthodox chant and indeed some forms of Gospel music - and no doubt Matt Redman, Tim Hughes and so on 'do it' for other people.

I'd suggest though, that it's not just music ... various liturgical actions can also take people somewhere else as it were - and I'm not simply thinking of the more obvious 'High Church' symbolism such as ritual gestures, vestments (let's not start debating that one again! [Biased] ), iconography, church architecture (whether elaborate or plain) or particular forms and patterns of words - be it Cranmer, the 1662, RC Missal or whatever else ...

I think that there are parallel/similar examples within some of the 'lower' church traditions too that often aren't recognised as being part and parcel of the same kind of thing.

I'd suggest, though, that it is 'God's job' and not the leader (whether minister/clergy or 'worship leader') to use and take these things in order to provide what South Coast Kevin calls a 'powerful encounter'.

It's our job to get on with the business of offering acceptable praise and worship. It's God's 'job' whether we derive any particular 'buzz' or powerful encounter or whatever else out of it.

I'm always wary of any set-up or system that tries to do God the Holy Spirit's 'job' for Him - and that can apply right across the board. Don't get me wrong, I completely agree that there are worship-leaders and so on within the charismatic evangelical tradition who 'lead' worship sensitively and without seeking to manipulate people through 'mood music' to achieve a particular 'high' or a particular response ...

But the very nature of the modus operandi does draw attention to the worship leader and worship band in a way that can detract and distract. Sure, some people level the same charge at vested clergy and robed choirs but I'd argue that these represent an attempt to sublimate the personality and ego and not bring it to the fore.

But there can be dangers in both approaches.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Good ideas, busyknitter and Baptist Trainfan. And nice to 'see' you, Gamaliel! I agree with you on the dangers of manipulation, hence my keenness on multi-participative meetings where the emphasis is on enabling many to contribute, rather than on the level of technical excellence in the music, speaking, liturgy etc. (But that's another discussion.)

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sure - but without wishing to go off on a tangent - I can see what you are getting at but don't believe that it necessarily follows that a multi-participatory approach in the way you sometimes describe it on these Boards would do away with the dangers of manipulation.

What can happen in an apparent 'free for all' is that those with the loudest voices and most dominant personalities come to the fore.

I often used to 'contribute' back in the day - little homilies and spontaneous exhortations, scripture readings, 'prophecies' and 'words' and so on.

Sometimes these could have been helpful and appropriate. On other occasions I'm sure it was because I liked the sound of my own voice.

As I've said before, I think it's interesting that my level of vocal contribution in church meetings (other than when I'm on the roster to lead prayers or whatever) declined as my involvement in open-mic and creative writing groups developed.

Whether that's good, bad or indifferent is another issue.

Anyway, that's a bit of a tangent to the music issue.

All I would say is that in more formal liturgical settings it isn't necessarily the case that people aren't participating - they are simply participating in a different way to how they might be in a less formally liturgical context.

Whatever the case, it's not for me to determine whether people are truly participating or not. That's God's job, not mine.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
At least in places where traditional music is used the words and music are available in hymnals. Even granting that fewer people read music today than did 50 years ago, there's still a better chance for participation than with the words flashing by on an LCD screen.

OK, I'll bite.

Providing the words displayed on a screen are legible and are displayed in a timely manner, in what way does having them on a screen rather than printed on paper make participation harder?

I said "words and music," meaning that words and musical notation could both be read from a paper hymnal. But even having the words printed on a sheet of paper might allow a newbie to read ahead and back rather than feeling as though they have only the one chance to catch the words as they scroll across the screen.

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Spike, I'm not sure what you're proposing, sorry. If a church service has songs / hymns at all then there might well be people attending who don't know the songs and will maybe 'stand around feeling uncomfortable' until they learn them. What's your solution?

At least in places where traditional music is used the words and music are available in hymnals. Even granting that fewer people read music today than did 50 years ago, there's still a better chance for participation than with the words flashing by on an LCD screen.
There's also way more chance of someone having heard a song before if it's 150 years old than if it's less than 1 year old.
Agreed. And it seems to me that the older hymns have more actual theological content than newer productions, on the average. Comparing a solid Charles Wesley lyric with repeated utterances of "I jus' wanna glorify-hy-hy yew-hew," I know which I'd prefer my parish to use in worship.

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
Stick to the words on the sheet/book and to the order in which they are printed.

But people who don't know the song will still be standing around perhaps feeling uncomfortable.
Because they can't read?

Yes, I understand that not everyone reads music, but with almost every song suitable for congregational singing, people can sing along given the words, a sensible musical accompaniment, and a light salting of people who do know the tune in the congregation.

quote:

It's perfectly possible for a music leader to direct everyone to repeat the chorus, go back to the bridge, sing the last line a few times etc. I think this flexibility can really help people engage powerfully with God.

I'm struggling to see how being randomly ordered about by a "music leader" gives me flexibility.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I thought this thread was about maintaining a particular status quo - ie. contemporaneity in musical style - should one wish to do so - rather than a thread with Dead Horse style comments on horrendous hymns and crappy choruses ...

Although I am inclined to agree ... [Biased]

It seems to me that the desirability of apparent contemporaneity is a 'given' within the kind of fellowships that South Coast Kevin is most familiar with so what the issue is here is how to maintain that rather than questioning whether it's desirable in the first place.

I can understand the appeal - heck, I was involved for 18 years in a church that was always changing its songs and repertoire every 15 seconds ... and I'm familiar with the current diet of choruses and songs that do the rounds - and things are much more homogeneous now than they were back in the day ...

I like a good sing-song as much as anyone else but I'm increasingly uncomfortable with this view that congregational singing is somehow the pinnacle of locus of our 'encounter with God'. I'm not saying that congregational singing isn't important ... but somehow it's become a defining feature.

Our local parish has 2 morning services - a more 'traditional' (but still snake-belly low) 9am service and a so-called 'contemporary' one at 11am. In the church magazine there is a description of these alongside the list of services and whilst I can see this as beneficial for newcomers and visitors I do notice that the only distinguishing features it draws attention to is the style of the songs.

It says nothing about the eucharist or any other aspect.

I'm uncomfortable with the idea of the 'worship time' as something that consists of a medley of back-to-back worship songs/choruses - and, in fairness, so is the local vicar - he does stress that the whole thing is worship and not simply the two or three choruses in the middle sung through twice ...

I do wonder what is achieved by constantly adding new songs for the sake of adding new songs or keeping up with the charismatic evangelical 'hit-parade' ...

In more traditional liturgical churches I've seen changes rung in terms of new settings for the Gloria or the Sanctus and so on ... which is fair enough as at least you know what you're getting whatever the tune or setting that is used ...


[Biased]

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
I'm struggling to see how being randomly ordered about by a "music leader" gives me flexibility.

What South Coast Kevin suggested, Leorning Cnicht, was that it gives the worship leader 'flexibility' to lead and order the material in such a way that the people can have a 'powerful encounter with God.'

This begs a few questions.

I presupposes, for instance, that everyone is on the same page spiritually, emotionally and terms of their spiritual maturity.

Also that the worship leader is some how pneumatically in tune with the Holy Spirit and can guide people accordingly ... although I fail to see how improvising around the structure of a song - from bridge to chorus and back and so on - in any way indicates the direction or guidance of the Holy Spirit.

One may as well claim such a thing for improvised jazz.

It might have a pleasing effect but does that necessarily equate with 'a powerful encounter with God'?

What does a powerful encounter with God look like?

People being caught up in the moment and in the euphoria of a catchy or haunting tune isn't necessarily a 'powerful encounter with God.'

All this sounds to me to be a short-hand way to achieve particular effects according to a set menu of expectations.

[code]

[ 25. April 2014, 19:41: Message edited by: John Holding ]

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I like a good sing-song as much as anyone else but I'm increasingly uncomfortable with this view that congregational singing is somehow the pinnacle of locus of our 'encounter with God'.

A book our Bible study bunch did a few years ago really relaxed me about people who worship differently, who "encounter God" through different vehicles, than I do.

Sacred Pathways describes different ways people feel most connected to God, different things work for different personalities. For some it's an ornate cathedral, others a small plain room for meeting - or a walk in the woods instead of any formal planned program. Some connect with God most easily thru aesthetics, others through intellectual discovery, others through social action on behalf of the sick or poor.

So yes I expect for some people the music is the primary vehicle, while for others it's prayer or the sermon - or even the coffee hour!

The kind of person why most readily "feels God's presence" or "enters an attitude of reverence" when surrounded by stained glass won't much like the small plain wooden church, and those for whom music is the primary reason for going to church don't belong in a quiet contemplative program.

Nothing wrong with any of the different ways.

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
Stick to the words on the sheet/book and to the order in which they are printed.

But people who don't know the song will still be standing around perhaps feeling uncomfortable.
Because they can't read?

Yes, I understand that not everyone reads music, but with almost every song suitable for congregational singing, people can sing along given the words, a sensible musical accompaniment, and a light salting of people who do know the tune in the congregation...

Dead right. Key words here are 'suitable for congregational singing'. If under these circumstances people can't sing along- and this applies to anything from your latest contemporary worship song to a Tallis 40-part piece- it's a strong suggestion that you shouldn't be using it congregationally.

[ 25. April 2014, 21:46: Message edited by: Albertus ]

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
I said "words and music," meaning that words and musical notation could both be read from a paper hymnal.

How many people can read musical notation? For the majority of people they're just dots. If all that matters is the words, then it makes little difference where those words are.

quote:
But even having the words printed on a sheet of paper might allow a newbie to read ahead and back rather than feeling as though they have only the one chance to catch the words as they scroll across the screen.
I admit it's been a while since I was at a church regularly projecting the words of songs. But, IME, the projection was of fairly large chunks of text (entire songs for a chorus or 2-3 verse song) rather than words scrolling across the screen. So, still time to read ahead a bit.

I will admit having the words in a book does provide the chance to read and reflect on them in advance or after the service. But, not many people will actually do that - and, if asked, I'm sure the music group could supply words for people to re-read after the service (they may need to send them in an email though).

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Sacred Pathways describes different ways people feel most connected to God, different things work for different personalities. For some it's an ornate cathedral, others a small plain room for meeting - or a walk in the woods instead of any formal planned program. Some connect with God most easily thru aesthetics, others through intellectual discovery, others through social action on behalf of the sick or poor.

Absolutely, Belle Ringer. I love that book!

I don't for a moment mean to imply that singing songs is the main way or the best way in which we connect and engage with God. But I was hoping we could have a chat about ways to introduce new songs into a church's musical 'repertoire', without getting too sidetracked by those broader questions. Is that a forlorn hope? Oh well.
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
And it seems to me that the older hymns have more actual theological content than newer productions, on the average. Comparing a solid Charles Wesley lyric with repeated utterances of "I jus' wanna glorify-hy-hy yew-hew,"

Oh yes, a typical older hymn will contain more theological content than a typical contemporary worship song. But the point is that in most contemporary-style church services, several songs will be put together to create something that is theologically complete, or at least rounded (like a complete piece of liturgy). Whereas older hymns tended to be used on their own (right?) so they were deliberately written with a self-contained theological 'message'.

Given the way contemporary worship songs are typically used, it doesn't make much sense to pick one and analyse it in isolation; just like you wouldn't take a single line and response of a liturgical piece and criticise it for being theologically simplistic or incomplete.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

I was hoping we could have a chat about ways to introduce new songs into a church's musical 'repertoire', without getting too sidetracked by those broader questions. Is that a forlorn hope? Oh well.

I think many of the folk here prefer to sing older music, or else simply have few examples of particularly good practice when it comes to the introduction of contemporary worship songs.

As for me, I once attended an interesting singing workshop run by two ladies from the Iona Community. (Are their songs are still considered 'contemporary'? Perhaps not, as they don't seem to be sung very often now.) Their goal was to model how new songs should be taught to congregations. One other person from my church also attended, but neither of us passed on the information to our organist, because she really wasn't a woman who had much interest in expanding the repertoire of contemporary songs, sadly.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379

 - Posted      Profile for Belle Ringer   Email Belle Ringer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I was hoping we could have a chat about ways to introduce new songs into a church's musical 'repertoire'...

I have pondered this some, which doesn't mean I have any useful answers. And I see two factors to consider.

1. The congregation that comes regularly, how to introduce them to new songs.
2. Newcomers, visitors, people trying out the church, how (or if) to include them in the singing.

The old hymnal approach - especially the ones with notation - gave any visitor a fighting chance to participate. With the elimination of hymnals, helping stranger get into the music becomes a problem.

(BTW, I know "not everyone reads music" but it's not hard to see when the dots go up your voice goes up in pitch, the reverse on going down. I've known lifelong chorus singers who knew no more than that about reading music, but find the music helpful.)

My childhood church played the hymn through completely, verse and chorus, before singing the first verse. Every time, not just the first time a hymn was used. This was intentional both to remind people of the tune and to introduce the hymn to any who didn't know it.

Most churches I've been in play just the last line of a hymn as introduction, and contemporary bands often give just one chord. If you don't already knows the song, that's not help. Not playing it through before singing keeps the pace of the program faster, but playing it through helps the congregation participate, maybe the question is which do you value more.

If I don't know a song, I appreciate the approach of playing the song's verse/chorus multiple times. By the third time (or in a tricky old hymn I don't know by the third verse) I can start to sing along, the 4th time I am comfortable with the song and can fully switch my focus from "what are the notes and how do the words fit them?" to God. Maybe others catch on a lot sooner? In various threads some have objected to that repetition.

Another way I have seen is to introduce a song one week knowing no one but the band will be singing along, use it four weeks in a row so the congregation learn it, then move it into normal rotation. This leaves out the visitor, but gives the regulars a chance.

One church I was in scheduled an evening meeting to introduce new songs, but people are busy and only a few came. But it got a few in the pews somewhat familiar with some of the songs.

A friend's church believes everyone should listen to Christian radio and know the current songs, so they see no reason to try to help the congregation learn the songs.

Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Trying to think about churches I've been in. They all sang mostly traditional hymns, from a hymn book, the most recent all with organ accompaniment though the two before moving here also had music groups who regularly played (some services displacing the organ entirely, often doing one or two songs with the rest on the organ). In all cases the introduction was almost always the entire verse played before anyone sang anything (exceptions included the occasional hymn with a long verse, especially where the tune was well known).

When we have new songs we'll often just do the same. But it depends on the song/hymn. If its set to a well known tune there is little value in doing more than our normal practice. Where the tune is less well known we often sing the first verse or two in practice before the service starts.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I think one of the attractions of modern worship songs is how easy they are for the average untrained congregation member to sing - that's not something that should be dismissed. Congregational singing is important.

I feel bad at disagreeing with you (again) - please don't take it personally.

But as a leader of worship and as a musician (I play in our Salvation Army brass band as well), I can say that an awful lot of 'contemporary' worship songs are very difficult to play and sing.

there are gaps in the music where the congregation are not sure where to come in, the chorus might be repeated after a verse and then a bridge section comes in. The syncopation can be hard to play. It's evident that most of these songs are written by middle-aged wannabe rock musicians who wear flat caps and brown t shorts and have a real need to channel Coldplay or U2 when they sing. Butr congregational worship it isn't. The modern evangelical fellowships where the worship looks like a rock concert and the crowd sing along to their favourite frontman/worship leader is really, really to replicate or adapt in a church where there is nothing like that kind of musical talent.

A congregational song, I reckon, is one that you could sing acappella without getting lost or having to rely on the music to keep you right. The best modern songs are the ones that have traditional style metres and regular rhythms.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I agree with Mudfrog. There's been a 'shift' in the contemporary worship scene and format that I would date from around the mid to late '90s - with some hints and antecedents before that ...

In the '70s and '80s the popularity of the guitar accompanied worship song or chorus grew - helped by events like 'Come Together', various popular Christian 'musicals' and the emergence of the various Bible Weeks and conventions like Spring Harvest. The latter drew on a wider evangelical constituency and so this style of music was imported from there into many congregations - both charismatic and conservative.

Many of the earlier choruses could indeed have been sung acapella in the way that Mudfrog describes.

Then, however, there was a move towards a more singer-songwriter approach or rock-band style delivery - and that's what we largely see today on the charismatic evangelical scene. The sort of thing that works fine in performance but which is difficult to sing congregationally.

Conversely, Salvation Army songs and earlier 'revivalist' songs such as those found across traditional Pentecostalism - were intended and DESIGNED to be sung congregationally. They work in that context. Indeed, they don't sound quite 'right' when isolated from the context for which they were intended. That's not to say that it's not profitable to listen to them on CDs or as part of a performance of some kind - but they 'work' best in their intended context - that of congregational worship.

The same applies, of course, to a performance of Rachmaninov's Vespers etc. It sounds great, but if you heard one of the settings used in a worship context in a church or cathedral then it would work better ... in theory at least.

Anyway ... in respect to the OP. I'm rather puzzled as to how the introduction of new songs and new material can be such an 'issue' in the kind of 'newer' churches which are essentially geared up for innovation ...

When I was involved with the restorationist/house-church scene, the introduction of new songs and new material happened all the time and it was simply a case of the worship group singing it through a few times then everyone else would pick it up.

This is dead easy.

I'd suggest it is easier with the kind of material that Mudfrog has described - material designed for congregational singing.

It isn't so easy when it's one of the new breed of modern worship song or chorus (post late-90s say) because these don't lend themselves so readily to congregational singing.

The solution, I'd suggest, is for the people who write contemporary hymns and worship songs to ignore the trends and take a pragmatic approach - writing material that people can actually sing.

I'd also add that there is a strong commercial pressure at work here. I've met several people who have written very good contemporary hymns and songs (I won't name drop) which you'll see in various hymnals and anthologies - but which are rarely, rarely sung.

Why not? Because for some inexplicable reason the people who organise the show think that they have to copy the big conventions or have sub-Cold Play material that people can all zone-out to instead of engaging their brains ...

To an extent I'm with South Coast Kevin on the idea that contemporary worship songs aren't meant to work in isolation but in contribution to a whole or overall effect. Granted. And yes, I believe this can 'work' with each of these songs/themes interacting and working together to create something greater than the sum of its parts.

That can happen.

More typically, I'd suggest, it doesn't. All that happens is that a medley of 'favourites' are strung together because people are familiar with them or like the tunes.

It's not my style these days, but I'm not 'against' the kind of non-conformist hymn-prayer-sandwich ... done well it takes skill and imagination to pull off - and it can be done.

The same thing applies to the contemporary worship medley format but all too often all it does is to drift and fade out leaving very little behind for people to chew on ...

There's no easy answer to any of this as all styles and traditions have their strengths and weaknesses.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
The modern evangelical fellowships where the worship looks like a rock concert and the crowd sing along to their favourite frontman/worship leader is really, really to replicate or adapt in a church where there is nothing like that kind of musical talent.

To be clear, I'm no fan of this style of church music - both because of the 'performance' mentality and because it sets the bar unhelpfully high in terms of the musical skill required to lead.

What I'm in favour of is the use of music that reflects contemporary cultural styles, as long as such music can be tailored so it is (a) pretty easy for everyone to learn and join in with, and (b) pretty easy for people with a modicum of skill on guitar, piano etc. to lead.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Leave out whether or not the congregation would appreciate, let alone join in with, the soft-rock genre of modern worship music; leave out whether it would be possible to reproduce effectively at parish level, the big question is would it really work on a congregation age ranges c3-95 numbering 50-60 in a 12th century church?

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Leave out whether or not the congregation would appreciate, let alone join in with, the soft-rock genre of modern worship music; leave out whether it would be possible to reproduce effectively at parish level, the big question is would it really work on a congregation age ranges c3-95 numbering 50-60 in a 12th century church?

Yeah, I don't see why not. What problems do you envisage, in terms of the congregation age range and size, and the nature of the building?

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Leave out whether or not the congregation would appreciate, let alone join in with, the soft-rock genre of modern worship music; leave out whether it would be possible to reproduce effectively at parish level, the big question is would it really work on a congregation age ranges c3-95 numbering 50-60 in a 12th century church?

This comment suggests that the CofE is eager to start using contemporary worship music in all churches, regardless of context. Is this the case? Surely there must be quite a few successful CofE congregations that never touch contemporary music?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It might help, Kevin, if you defined what you understand by contemporary music styles.

It seems to me that you are presupposing that there is one catch-all, culturally appropriate style for everybody.

There isn't. Quite aside from the vast range of music from different cultural and ethnic groups there's also the issue of whether it's 'pop', 'rock' or classical etc. The kind of music found in the Vineyard churches, for instance, derives from Californian soft-rock ... is that contemporary? I'd suggest it's at least 10 to 15 years out of date.

What would be considered contemporary in style to some people wouldn't seem at all contemporary to others.

My eldest daughter (18) listens to the kind of music I was listening to when I was in my early 20s - the Clash, the Cure etc ... her friends don't. She listens to music by 'contemporary' bands too but she's got music downloaded on her gizmos that run from the 1960s through to the present. Is that 'contemporary'?

I tend to think that to many people the term 'contemporary' is short-hand for 'music that I like'.

Just as the term 'relevant' is short-hand for 'relevant for me and not necessarily anyone else.'

What is this contemporary music of which you speak and how might it work with a congregation aged between 3 and 95 in a 12th century church?

Show us some examples and explain how it might do so.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As an aside, I had an interesting discussion with someone who is involved with visiting/helping with old people's homes.

He observed that when a group of well-meaning volunteers come in to lead some kind of musical evening for the oldies they invariably play early 1900s or 1920s Music Hall songs - 'My Old Man said follow the van ...'

... Or else WW2 favourites such as Vera Lynn or Glen Miller etc.

However, many people in OAP homes today would have left school in 1961, say, and may have listened to The Beatles, Beach Boys and the Stones.

Does any of that fit 'contemporary styles'?

It seems to me that people expect musical styles that suit a particular context. Rightly or wrongly, people involved with OAP homes imagine that this must be Marie Lloyd or George Formby ...

I s'pose the musical style in any church is going to derive/emanate from whatever the cultural norms are within that particular group - and, of course, the theological tradition and churchmanship.

It would no more make sense for a Vineyard church to sing an elaborate baroque setting of the Gloria than it would for people in a 12th century rural parish to sing some kind of dumbed-down soft-rock offering that would be more appropriate in Surftown USA ...

[Razz]

I can see what SCK is getting at and would argue that the kind of situation he is visually did apply to a certain extent in the early days of the so-called 'new churches'.

Or even, going further back, to the village 'wakes' and bands of the early 19th century before the CofE tidied it all up. Then you had a small band with shawms and 'serpents' and someone who would 'line-out' the hymns and psalms. It's all there in Hardy's 'Under The Greenwood Tree'.

I don't really see a great deal of difference in what he describes to the situation in rural parishes hereabouts where there is a kind of scratch-choir of mixed ability and people try to join is as best they can.

The only difference would be that the choir are in robes - shock, horror - and the music would not be as contemporary as SCK would like it to be.

I'm sure if we were to visit various Brethren assemblies and other independent evangelical churches we'd find some genuinely 'home-made' offerings ... someone plunking away on a piano or strumming a guitar whilst not pretending to be on the Pyramid Stage at Glastonbury ...

I'm sure if we attended Mudfrog's Citadel we'd find a mix of traditional and contemporary songs and musical styles that 'fit' that particular context. What would there be 'not to like' unless we took exception to the use of uniforms, brass instruments, the lack of holy communion or something ...

If we left all that aside and judged it purely on musical terms - if there is such a thing as 'purely' - or the appropriateness for the congregation/setting concerned then we might come away thinking that it was all fine and dandy.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It might help, Kevin, if you defined what you understand by contemporary music styles.

It seems to me that you are presupposing that there is one catch-all, culturally appropriate style for everybody.

Unintended implication, sorry! I guess I just mean the styles of music that are most ubiquitous in contemporary culture - so, the music played on the most popular radio stations or used in the background on popular TV shows like soaps. The kinds of music most people will be familiar with...

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
South Coast Kevin

Do you believe that all churches should try to use contemporary music in worship, or is it a question of culture and context?

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
South Coast Kevin

Do you believe that all churches should try to use contemporary music in worship, or is it a question of culture and context?

Good question... I guess, for me, it's about which people any given church is primarily trying to 'reach'. That could be in terms of a particular age range, socio-economic group, interest group, or whatever really.

And if a church sees its mission in general geographical terms (as most do, I suppose) then it makes sense to use musical styles that will be accessible and familiar to most people. But then, a church might feel there's a place for having a focus on, say, classical music fans, in which case they might want to deliberately use classical music in their services.

Let's just be deliberate about it, I suppose is what I'm saying. Let's use music that is accessible to the people we're trying to 'reach' (and that fits the existing culture of our church; that's important too). It's no good for a church to use music that alienates its existing members, but I think it's also no good to use music that is alien to the people that the church is hoping to share the gospel with.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hmmm ... so you would recommend setting hymns to the Eastenders theme tune and so on?

There's nothing new in this. The Salvation Army were doing that 130 years ago - 'Champagne Charlie' and all the rest of it.

Heck, some Slavic liturgical music is based on folk tunes ...

There are several examples of hymns being set to 'contemporary' tunes - like those set to the Dambuster's March and so on. Then there were all the Wild Geese songs set to folk tunes and so on. Some of these worked, others didn't work so well.

Plus the contemporary reworkings of 'Be Thou My Vision' and so on.

You seem to be suggesting that people can only relate to the kind of music found on TV programmes and MoR radio stations.

I really can't see what is so off-putting about Victorian hymn tunes or mid-20th century hymn tunes ... heck, a lot of these are sung on the terraces every Saturday at sporting fixtures.

I would suggest that there are deeper reasons why people aren't darkening the doors of our churches rather than that they don't like the music.

Give us some examples. Cite a tune that has almost universal appeal in your opinion and that we should be adopting in our churches ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've heard arguments for 'niche' targeting of evangelism many times, but targetting services specifically for classical music fans is a new one on me ...

[Ultra confused]

Forgive me, but you seem to have this idea that church services are - or should be - the main form of evangelism. Sure, they can have an evangelistic impact but I'd suggest that this isn't the prime or sole focus of public worship, however it is conducted.

As society becomes more atomised there is a case for targeted approaches but I still feel wary of such things ...

It's a tricky one. Our parish church - for all that I don't feel particularly comfortable with it - is at least trying to 'cater' to various groups. It does a lot of things aimed at young families with children but at the other end of the spectrum does a lot of work with old people too - coffee and communion, an elderly persons' house group etc.

It has effectively ended up with two congregations - a 9am and an 11am one - but it is at least keeping the two together rather than it all hiving off into separate little cliques.

Some people do bob between the 9am and 11am slots but by and large they are quite separate.

I don't know what the answer is.

I'm not sure to what extent music either alienates or engages people within congregations - but it is a major focus for bust-ups. There are small numbers of people travelling from our town out to tiny parish churches in the countryside to escape from contemporary styles in the various churches here.

Conversely, we've had people from more rural areas travelling in because they want something with a bit more 'buzz' as they see it.

I can understand some young people, say, being alienated by traditional music styles in churches - and vice-versa, older people being put off by the soft-rock approach.

But how about those 'in the middle'? How do things work for them?

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Those in the middle often seem to like modern music from the Cathedral tradition, eg. Rutter, Archer, Shepherd, Ogden. The RSCM is a good source of inspiration for music that has been published by living composers, working in and for cathedrals. Here is an example by David Ogden that is popular in our church.

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes - I think you're probably right about 'those int the middle' in a CofE context, Chorister.

But how about a Baptist one or a URC or Methodist one? Or an RC one come to that - there are variations in music style there too of course.

With the Orthodox the choice simply seems to be between more Byzantine styles or more Slavic styles ... they've not got around to introducing anything else yet - but give them time ...

[Biased]

I've seen videos of Orthodox services in Ghana where the tunes are recognisably Byzantine but the way in which they're sung is very, very African - with dancing and drumming etc.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hmmm ... are we saying that the BBC Songs of Praise diet should be the default one? It appears popular and lots more people watch it than one might think.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I would suggest that there are deeper reasons why people aren't darkening the doors of our churches rather than that they don't like the music.

Oh yes, so would I. But this discussion is about music styles. If you want to start a discussion about some of those other reasons then I may well join in.
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Give us some examples. Cite a tune that has almost universal appeal in your opinion and that we should be adopting in our churches ...

Well, I'm not sure there are tunes that have 'almost universal appeal'. Like I said above, it's about drawing from the culture(s) of the people you hope to draw in to the church community. I'm reluctant to post specific songs as I don't really want to get into that kind of discussion. Not on this thread anyway.
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Forgive me, but you seem to have this idea that church services are - or should be - the main form of evangelism. Sure, they can have an evangelistic impact but I'd suggest that this isn't the prime or sole focus of public worship, however it is conducted.

Ah Gamaliel, our history of miscommunication continues, I see! I absolutely 100% do not consider our church services to be the main way we share the gospel with people. I have very little faith in that 'come to us' approach. (Here's something I wrote earlier)

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:


But how about those 'in the middle'? How do things work for them?

I'd appreciate the kind of church service that can incorporate both traditional hymns and worship music, but it seems quite rare IME. One problem I've heard about is that worship songs don't work so well in the traditional hymn sandwich format. IMO this is true, but others will probably disagree.

As for building up two separate congregations in one church, a traditional one and a contemporary one, only well-heeled, well-resourced churches are going to be able to do this. The vast majority of congregations in very ordinary areas will have to develop a single worshipping identity with a single congregation. But creating a diverse worshipping culture is hard, because it means long-term (mostly elderly) members have to suppress their own preferences for the sake of developing the church. The clergy aren't always convincing about why it's necessary.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
SCK - I think it's my posting style rather than miscommunication. I am well aware that you see church services as the primary/sole means of evangelism ...

What I try to do with your good self is to take an aspect of what you've posted and either push it too far or put more weight on it in order to stimulate debate. I will try to make this clearer if I do it another time.

Meanwhile - yes, I can see why you are reluctant to cite particular musical styles and examples as that could derail the thread. A wise decision on your part, I think.

[Votive]

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[Hot and Hormonal] Garrghhh!!

What I meant to post was 'I am well aware that you DON'T see church services as ...'

[Hot and Hormonal]

I must preview my posts too.

[Biased]

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
@SvitlanaV2. Yes, I agree.

Way back in the day I quickly realised that the kind of worship-songs and choruses that were sung in the emerging 'new churches' didn't work quite so well when vectored into Anglican services or even traditional non-conformist services.

What's happened, though, is that some Anglican and Baptist/URC/Methodist churches have adapted their style to suit these sort of songs or else developed versions of their own ... the New Wine thing being a case in point.

A mixed-model doesn't work so well.

And yes - on the whole our parish is pretty well-heeled and has the resources to pull this sort of thing off. That isn't to say that the older people are wealthy - they're fairly working class on the whole - as indeed are some of the younger newcomers.

But the 'backbone' of the church in financial and leadership terms is provided by a coterie of well-heeled professionals.

I am very aware that a mixed-economy approach can only work where there are the resources and infrastructure to support it. Which is why is doesn't happen very often.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And BTW, what's happened to the trend of writing new, relevant words to old, familiar hymn tunes? Has it died out?

Some of the most versatile and congregation-friendly hymns tunes could find a new lease of life if given fresher and perhaps more honest words that take account of what Christians feel and believe today. And as I said above, some of these melodies work quite well in popular contemporary arrangements.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
One problem I've heard about is that worship songs don't work so well in the traditional hymn sandwich format. IMO this is true, but others will probably disagree.

As usually practised I'd agree. The problem is usually that churches with a traditional hymn sandwich format do not have the resources to use modern worship songs the way they are intended. You need a music group to play the songs, because they won't work on the organ. At the very least a piano or electric keyboard with an organist able to play it as well as they play organ.

Even with a music group you either need to stick with the multi-verse songs that look a bit like hymns (even if the style is different), or work with groups of songs linked together. Which means a) familiarity with enough songs to put together a balanced selection that creates a whole which plays the role of expressing theology in song of hymns, b) having printed sheets with the songs altogether (so no finish one, then wait for everyone to turn to song number xxx in the book before continuing ... which makes things feel like two or more hymns without anything between them).

Basically, it takes someone in the church familiar with modern worships who understands how to use them in worship. Rather than treating them as "new hymns"

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools