|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Yet more crappy choruses, wonky worship-songs and horrible hymns
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Jemima: do you attend a church with a large and exceptional music group? If not, how on earth is something like that clip handled by the average place ?
Haha! No. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) Our place is reasonably sized (80-130 at a morning service, perhaps? I don't count) and the group I murder, sorry, play that song with has: 2 singers, 1 guitarist, sometimes a bassist, sometimes a drummer and me playing the electronic piano. We are not exceptional. A couple of people who are in bands various & do open mic nights etc. The rest of us.......not.
How is it handled? Badly. I'm not convinced that it's easy for a congregation to sing, for all the same reasons that lots of other modern songs aren't easy for a congregation to sing. Certainly from where I'm sitting at the piano I can't hear people singing as well as if we did, I dunno, Crown him with many crowns or another well known hymn.
But there we are. Our congregation is a very mixed bunch, and apparently there are people who like to try to sing like Mumford & Sons really really needing their dinner. I once watched a documentary about a rock band* touring America. There were great rows about what to play in the tour bus, eventually resolved by only playing songs that everyone hated. So 20 trucking greats it was. Sometimes I think we do the church version of that...
*The Wonder Stuff, since you ask.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Well, we don't have even the potential for a music group, not if we're realistic.
On paper we have available (potentially): french horn, 'cello, violin, recorders (all), orchestral percussion, piano, harp, drum kit, in addition to a rather fine classical organ. In reality, one person covers 7 of those; 3 of the 4 pianists are over 85; the kit drummer is tetraplegic, the clarinetist is only grade 1.
On the other hand we have a good choir of 22 adults (max) and 7 children who can sing stuff from Dunstable, Dufay and Gregorian chant to Tavener, Messiaen and Pärt. And we don't limit ourselves to liturgical music - we do a mean version of The Teddy Bears' Picnic and our Chattanooga Choo-Choo is pretty good too, plus four of the men are word and note perfect on Coward's Stately Homes of England.
[ 17. September 2015, 22:04: Message edited by: L'organist ]
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Jemima: do you attend a church with a large and exceptional music group? If not, how on earth is something like that clip handled by the average place ?
You can do it with a single guitar, if you have to - we do at housegroup. All you have to do is edit the link instrumentals .
What Jolly Jape said. We have a lot of musicians, and can field a very good band when required, but generally are spread thinner and with more mixed ensembles. However, as long as you have a moderately competent rhythm guitarist you can pull off a perfectly acceptable "Build your kingdom here".
Drop the key and it's fine for congregational singing too - we generally play the capo chords without bothering with the actual capo.
The thing to remember with a lot of the modern songs is that for a congregation you're not trying to reproduce the CD version faithfully, you're taking the bones of it and often dropping the instrumental interludes etc. Or at least you are at our place.
I could (and have) led a church service in that particular song as a singer/guitarist with one other singer and one other instrument and it worked fine. And I'm no great shakes.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I watched that Build Your Kingdom video and was reminded of a Bellowhead set. Bellowhead sings (still are until April/May) basic folk songs with funky arrangements. Taking that song back down would end up with something less busy and more singable. Interestingly, during the instrumental interludes Bellowhead obviously work together to improvise. There was none of that on the video, just the leaping around, brass section and similar arrangement.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I find the Rend clip a bit alarming. The lead singer appears as though he has a serious neurological disorder(apologies to him if he actually does) as he sems unable to sing without jerking his head and legs. Maybe it is written into the score as essential to performance. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pine Marten
Shipmate
# 11068
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
On the other hand we have a good choir of 22 adults (max) and 7 children who can sing stuff from Dunstable, Dufay and Gregorian chant to Tavener, Messiaen and Pärt. And we don't limit ourselves to liturgical music - we do a mean version of The Teddy Bears' Picnic and our Chattanooga Choo-Choo is pretty good too, plus four of the men are word and note perfect on Coward's Stately Homes of England.
L'organist, that sounds fabulous - I'd pay money to hear your choir
Our organist is leaving, and for his last Sunday service (on Sunday ![[Frown]](frown.gif) ) he has chosen some of his favourites, among which are:
Praise, my soul, the King of heaven
Jesu, Lover of my soul
My song is love unknown
Great tunes, wonderful words all, full of (as Belle Ringer said) pain, loss, compassion, victory....
I looked at the Rent Collective clips but had to turn them off. I'm afraid I was a bit stunned.
--------------------
Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead. - Oscar Wilde
Posts: 1731 | From: Isle of Albion | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
Praise, my soul, the King of heaven
Jesu, Lover of my soul
My song is love unknown
I like those. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
I looked at the Rent Collective clips but had to turn them off. I'm afraid I was a bit stunned.
I find that particular Rend Collective song unexceptional, and also completely unsingable by even your most enthusiastic charismatic congregation. But the song itself, and the style, is inoffensive. Unremarkable, though.
(Sorry, Rend. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) I do quite like 'Alabaster' though.)
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
As a matter of, as it were, professional interest, why unsingable? You have to watch where you breathe a bit, but no more so than with say, "Come down, O love Divine", and it's not got a stupid range, as has, say, Tim Hughes "O happy day", or, more traditionally, any hymn using Londonderry Aire as a melody. You have to be a reasonable rhythym guitarist to keep the pace up throughout the song, but it shouldn't be a problem from a congregational pov.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I watched that Build Your Kingdom video and was reminded of a Bellowhead set. Bellowhead sings (still are until April/May) basic folk songs with funky arrangements. Taking that song back down would end up with something less busy and more singable. Interestingly, during the instrumental interludes Bellowhead obviously work together to improvise. There was none of that on the video, just the leaping around, brass section and similar arrangement.
Bellowhead are, of course, seriously competent musicians - although I find their live shows a bit too loud!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
Hahaha! I was just about to cry "sacrilege!" ![[Biased]](wink.gif) Bellowhead are amazing (declaration of interest, I've seen them live about a million times and was singing along with gusto to a recent album only this very morning). They also have a very well developed sense of fun.
RC are not, and do not. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
L'organist - I would love to come to your church & hear your choir. A previous rector did away with the choir perhaps 20 years ago now. So we have very few one who could sing Part or Durufle, and no one to marshall them.
We also don't have any sort of music director, and I think that would help with the music group stuff too. I'm a basically competent ivory thumper, nothing more. I wouldn't consider myself a musician. What we need is someone who can work with the songs - make them singable, transpose if needs be, help the rest of us work out how to make them go, rather than me making it up from youtube videos monthly, which is what I currently do.
We have an ad hoc choir at Christmas, and a small group of people take it in turns to take on the carol service. It is monumentally stressful - I've done it once in the last 10 years and have no wish to do so again. My friend has recently resurrected (hur hur) the notion of a choir, but is very very keen that it is "community choir" like. Most people can read music, but I don't think she expects them to. She teaches parts and chooses music which sounds impressive even though it's fairly simple. She is, frankly, a bit of a genius.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Ahh, poor Rend Collective! They are very very popular with all the ~yoof I know, particularly the Norn Iron ones. I'd rather listen to them than innumerable breathy American CCM artists (although I love Lauren Daigle and Hillsong United).
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Hillsong has Australian origins but I was under the impression that Hillsong United as a group includes members from elsewhere.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
....Hillsong United...
Terrible football team.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I don't find the Rend Collective thing 'alarming', just bloody boring ...
I'm fine with Bellowhead or folky/punky things in other contexts but not in substandard Christian chorus ones ...
It's confession time. I'm fed up of the whole kit and kaboodle of worship songs and choruses. Sure, they have their place - but I'd rather do without them.
An RC priest I met recently who is quite active in ecumenical dialogue - and in social action too, working with all sorts of agencies and people from all sorts of theological backgrounds or none - observed sorrowfully, 'I'd done with all this band-led worship. I go to these ecumenical gatherings and sooner or later, whoever is hosting it, you know what you're going to get - some band getting up and singing at you for half and hour ... There's not interaction, no real means of engaging or participating in it ... other than to sing the same trite words over and over and over ...'
As one might imagine, this chap found more Catholic forms of worship more 'tactile' and three-dimensional.
Sure, it's difficult to think what could be done in an ecumenical context where we aren't admitted to the eucharistic table other than to sing songs, pray prayers and make declarations of intent of some form or other ...
But even so, I found myself sympathising. I used to be into it back in the day but these days I find band-led worship a real turn off - irrespective of how well or badly it's done. Sorry. But there it is.
--------------------
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
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
...there shall be much joy in heaven over a sinner that repenteth...
Some of us have been saying this for years: still, better that people get there in the end than not at all.
IIRC London's two north bank cathedrals, St Paul's and Westminster, used to have an elegant solution to the potential pitfalls posed by the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity: their two choirs used to 'do a swap' so that Westminster sang Vespers at St Paul's and then Westminster's mosaic walls would resound to the sound of Anglican chant when St Paul's choir sang Evensong there.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
Context is everything. Bellowhead are to be enjoyed whilst jumping up and down, post a pint or two, singing along lustily to songs about whisky & prostitution, worshipping at the feet of the brass section, and swooning over other members of the band.
Church singing less so.
L'organist makes an interesting point though about repentance and returning to the One True Way What do you do once you have no music director, no one to conduct the Durufle, and no one who knows how to sing it?
I don't like modern worship songs and never really have. I'd always assumed that was largely down to musical snobbery on my part. But other members of my congregation really enjoy them. They won't be repenting any time soon.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
Enjoyed isn't the word I wanted, on reflection. Experienced, perhaps. Participated in.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Context is everything. Singing worship songs with a bunch of gay evangelical young people who have been banned from serving coffee in their church let alone leading worship, yet treasure their worship sessions as a group together - that's special, and it's a different atmosphere to your average Sunday evo service. It's not my own preference for 'usual' Sunday worship, but then I have many friends who would be really put off by my preferences (plainchant in monastic chapels, and then sung Mass).
The words or even the music style are totally secondary to the atmosphere and/or individual context of worship.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
These discussions remind me that living in an urban area has many advantages. One of them is that it's fairly easy to find a church that focuses on traditional hymns with traditional accompaniment. There are plenty of alternatives to churches with a taste for (bad or badly sung) worship songs!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
The fact is though, that it's often the churches with the crappy choruses who are doing the most evangelism and - increasingly - social action these days.
I agree that context can cover a multitude of sins ...
I put up with crappy choruses and so on for a lot longer than I would have done otherwise because the rest of what was going on compensated 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
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
I keep having to delete posts here lest they become too Hellish, as whilst I thoroughly understand this thread, at the same time it does rankle with me as being more "profound snobby attitude problem" rather than "unrest" at times. And I look at myself in the mirror as much as any other participant.
That said, I do think there are a number of factors that come into play that are easily overlooked, beyond mere personal preference. In part I think music/songs can perform very different functions and roles within a service. The more I'm involved, and the more I think about it, the more I'm coming to the conclusion that a lot of modern worship songs aren't actually for the same thing that a lot of hymns are.
Thus, if you have a particular expectation of the shape a service should have, what it is "for", and what makes it "work", you can't just swap a Wesley for a Redman or a Kendrick etc., in either direction. They engage one in different ways, for different reasons, and to some extent with different intentions and outcomes.
None of which is to say that there isn't a wealth of both ancient and modern dross at which to point and laugh, but that the tendency to consider all modern-ish output dross shows a weakness or narrowness of understanding; sometimes it's just that one doesn't grock the context for appropriate use. (And of course, very often it's used inappropriately).
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
..the more I'm coming to the conclusion that a lot of modern worship songs aren't actually for the same thing that a lot of hymns are.
This is really intriguing. Could you expand on it a bit, please?
[Guilty as charged to music snobbery. I'm a recovering music snob. I lapse. A lot. ]
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
I know I'm not the person who said that, but generally hymns are for teaching and worship songs are for straight-up emotional worship. In my experience. They're light on theology because they're supposed to be - those who prefer them wouldn't expect a song to have perfect theology, it's about emotion.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
Largely what Pomona said, but with a bit more nuance and range. The good old hymns that form the classic hymn prayer sandwich are designed to contain a lot of teaching because for many it would be all three teaching they got bar a short not necessarily great sermon or homily.
In the contexts I'm most familiar with on modern songs there's often good, quite extensive, but still accessible preaching and songs can form part of something else. Not just as crude as creating atmosphere (or emotional manipulation), not as cynical as giving an emotional jolly or"experience", but kind of related in a positive way. For me they are more suited to being used in either blocks, or quite deliberately as part of a broader narrative or flow through a service, expressing a prayerful response, or answering a thread raised in a talk or other part of the service.
To some extent hymns are often like section markers in a service; they break up the other components and also stand in their own right. Songs (for me) work best when they are a deliberate and intrinsic component of a flowing narrative from start to end, both lyrically and musically.
I can flow fairly happily between either mode, although am not great with extremes of either. And, bizarrely, am increasingly aware that whatever the service it's like I both need to attend them and simultaneously find them counter productive. Pity the people who have to suffer the services I lead with that messed up conflict
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
I think that's spot-on, Snags. I think one additional dynamic concerning contemporary worship styles is that of a shared understanding of musical language. It's more than an emotional connection, rather a case of singing in our mother tongue, so to speak. The tropes of contemporary music are a vital part of that communication process for those who have been raised in an environment where rock and pop have been the musical "common tongue". Indeed, a popular contemporary worship song will often have a structure which would allow the person singing a song for the first time to predict where the song is going melodically before it actually gets there. It's a question of people owning the music. This also works lyrically. Are some of the lyrics banal, sure, but then so is much of the conversation around the dinner table, and "dinner table" intimacy with God is something towards which I, at least, aspire.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I am really pleased that, at last, this debate is talking about the issues that matter, rather than focussing on what music is "good" and "bad" or on what is "worthy" and "unworthy". It is most refreshing! So ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) to the last few posters.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gill H
Shipmate
# 68
|
Posted
A hymn is a single course a a meal. A really meaty one is like a roast beef dinner. If you tried to sing hymns for half an hour solid, you'd probably have fun (particularly if accompanied by beer!) but there would be just too many ideas to engage with spiritually.
Worship songs are more like a tapas or mezze style meal. Each one has some ideas to grab onto, and if one isn't to your taste, there's another one coming along.
They are used in very different ways and for different purposes. And of course, there are good and bad examples of both!
--------------------
*sigh* We can’t all be Alan Cresswell.
- Lyda Rose
Posts: 9313 | From: London | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
Aside: apologies for the barely coherent previous post of mine. I really must make it a policy not to post from the phone, where editing/proofing is a pain!
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
Thanks ever so much Snags, Pomona, Jolly Jape & GillH. What you've written is really insightful and helpful to me. There's a great deal to think over, and I shall go away and do that.
Before I do, though, a couple of things that spring to mind..
1. From Snags earlier on:
quote:
Thus, if you have a particular expectation of the shape a service should have, what it is "for", and what makes it "work", you can't just swap a Wesley for a Redman or a Kendrick etc., in either direction. They engage one in different ways, for different reasons, and to some extent with different intentions and outcomes.
This may be one thing we do "wrong". We maintain a fairly traditional service structure (ish) - Welcome, opening hymn / song, confession & absolution, followed by a worship bit. This tends only to be 3 songs though, and I wonder if one is planning a meze (thanks, GillH!) it should be longer. Or the whole service should be rejigged.
2. From Jolly Jape
quote:
Indeed, a popular contemporary worship song will often have a structure which would allow the person singing a song for the first time to predict where the song is going melodically before it actually gets there.
Now, here I am not so sure. Or at any rate, this is where a skilled worship leader / musician corraller / whatever has their worth. Because the music we have to work with (when we do!) is transcribed accurately from live performance, there are idiosyncrasies that no congregation would spot, even if you're sure where the tune is going. Take for example, Bless the Lord o My Soul. Very decent tune as it goes - but there's a surprise 2 beats that no one expects in every verse, some verses have extra gaps, that's before you get to an instrumental bit. (This is all from my ageing memory and therefore unlikely to be 100% accurate). Whoever's in charge needs to fiddle with the song to make it the congregation's own.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
Amen to fiddling. We will often cut bridges, particularly if they're pointless, and drop instrumental interludes. Bless The Lord has no irregularities when we do it, although it does have the rests with the (3) kick drum beats; if you don't have a drummer you need someone to do something to carry through that.
We also regularly transpose to better keys for normal folk, and have no shame at all about changing the repeats or order from the ' official' one if need be. The leader will also tell the projectionist what the intended structure is too (we're quite uptight and a lot of folk don't like the free wheeling approach) so generally the congregation get good cues from leader and screen together. If you don't have a strong leader or known structure it can be awful.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that's all fair enough, Snags (and those who have agreed).
Again, it's a contextual thing.
The only caveat I'd make - and it's not meant as a criticism, more an observation - is that whatever the style of music or worship, whatever is the prevalent mode wherever we happen to be, all participants have to acclimatise to it somehow or other ... none of it is is 'natural'.
So the style and tempo of contemporary worship songs may prove easier for people to connect with than - say, an ancient liturgy or an 18th century anthem - but how far do we take these things?
In our parish they have separate 9am and 11am services - the first more traditional (but still snake-belly low) the second more 'contemporary'.
During the summer they combine the two for a 10am service which - generally successfully - fuses the two styles.
My wife plays the organ at the 9am every 3 weeks or so and this summer, during the 10am season as it were - she was asked NOT to play a voluntary at the end (which she does very well) just in case it 'put off the 11am crowd ...'
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
What the ...?!
Is anyone seriously telling me that a short but splendid bit of Bach or whatever is going to upset the 11am crowd (who've already had 2 or 3 of their favourite worship songs during the service as well as 2 traditional hymns) so much that they'll never darken the doors of the church again? ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Likewise, I used to lead the intercessions at times during the 11am services but was asked not to do so any longer (I tend to do them in a more traditional way but with some improvisation) but to do them at the 9am instead ...
Sure - these things work both ways and I remember a former Baptist girl who was literally poked with an umbrella by one of the old ladies in the congregation because she had raised her hands charismatic style during a worship song ...
On balance, I think Snags and Pomana, Jolly Jape and others have struck a ... well, a more balanced note ... but I am increasingly wary of the way that contemporary worship songs are going. I don't object to them in principle, nor do I object to Taize and other repetitive forms of church music - but I dunno ... I dunno ... ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
I'm not a music snob - or at least, I don't think I am - and like to think I'm pretty eclectic - you'll find a range of genres on my CD rack - but ...
There's a balance somewhere of course.
--------------------
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
My problem, I think, GillH is that rather than being treated as tapas, people treat the worship song medleys as the 'main meal.'
As my elderly aunts used to say of certain meals, 'it doesn't stay by you.'
Yes, done well they can work together and build on a theme and so on - but more commonly, I think, they are simply strung together because people know them and are familiar with the tunes.
In some congregations they are used to make people think they're somehow lively and cutting-edge ... as if these things are of recent provenance rather than 30 or 40 years old in some instances.
Mind you, that IS recent as far as some are concerned ...
I've got to be honest, as much as I understand the reasoning and the purpose, I just can't be fussed at all with the worship song medley style these days. I find myself twiddling my thumbs and waiting for them to end so we can move onto the main course or something more substantial, something that will 'stay by you' - like the eucharist rather than a series of trite, zone-out, switch-off-your-brain choruses that are either frankly embarrassing or which don't actually lead anywhere ...
I'm sorry, but there it is.
--------------------
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
Re-reading my previous post, I'm conscious that it comes over somewhat curmugeonly - which isn't how I intended it.
The thing is, it's very difficult to explain exactly what it is that doesn't 'get' me with contemporary worship songs and choruses without it sounding like a value judgement or that I'm suggesting that the entire ethos is somehow deficient.
I do think it goes beyond issues of personal taste, though and issues of musical style. The kind of worship song medley and 'tapas' or 'meze' approach (nice analogy GillH) does make sense within its own frame of reference and within its own terms - but I suspect I'm no longer operating within that frame of reference or on those terms.
I've shifted.
That need not imply any 'lack' or 'immaturity' if you like with the worship song genre itself - although I think it does work better in a 20-somethings/30 somethings context than elsewhere.
To an extent, it's like anything else - you get out of it what you put in - but in recent years whenever I've attended a happy-clappy style service which subsists on a 'meze' or 'tapas' style diet I've come away feeling singularly unimpressed or 'unfulfilled' if I can put it that way - not that corporate worship is a matter of personal fulfillment of course.
Although I'm familiar with it, recognise all the 'cues' and 'move' and shifts and changes of mood etc (and I don't mean this in a manipulative way necessarily) I feel just as alien in that form of worship these days as I first did when I attended a full-on spikey, high up the candle chant-fest.
I don't feel 'got at' by it, I don't feel offended by it - I simply feel, 'been there, done that ...' or somewhat indifferent towards it. I no longer see the point. I don't want to manufacture some kind of 'buzz' by suspending my critical faculties and riding the wave of it - which is what I used to do. The whole style and approach leaves me cold.
That doesn't mean it can't be meaningful or helpful for anyone else but it wouldn't trouble me in the least if I never attended worship-band led worship ever again. It just doesn't 'stay by me.'
--------------------
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
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
I recall a colleague who went to a house church fellowship and who told me during a discussion of worship songs that each year they went to a conference where they were given a new set of songs, which completely replaced the previous set, regardless of quality. I found this odd.
I grew up looking at the dates of the authors of the wonderful hymns that had come down the centuries. The ephemeral nature of the songs seemed strange.
But I hadn't heard them.
[ 25. September 2015, 18:56: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, that used to happen but in practice the new songs from the Bible Weeks did tend to co-exist with earlier ones - but it wouldn't surprise me if some churches had a worship song clear-out once a year.
The house-churches tended to develop their own material and to be fair, they did suit the context and did express a particular 'line' and ecclesiology / theology. They used to catch-on more widely and it always struck me as incongruous to some extent when I heard the same songs sung in charismatic Anglican churches, for instance.
--------------------
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
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
Gamaliel, I don't think anyone's disputing (or seeking to invalidate) your experience or your response/reaction/current 'position'/feelings/whatever term one wishes to hang on these things. My comments certainly aren't intended as a spirited defence (of anything), more an observation, and an (unaccustomed) attempt to add some perspective and be positive.
It's all too easy to point and laugh, to be derogatory, to belittle and tear down. And some things I think would benefit from being torn down. But ... if one isn't careful it becomes a positive feedback loop, and it doesn't take too long until one craps over anything and everything just from force of habit, and that's very destructive. "One" used very deliberately in that paragraph because I'm addressing it genuinely generally, in many ways to the whole concept of the thread, not to any individual (other than myself, as I find cynicism, sarcasm, and 'witty word play' with a negative or sardonic bent to be my natural metier, particularly conversationally. It can be amusing, but it's not edifying).
Funnily enough I actually have a lot of sympathy with what I think your personal position is, although my journey didn't start as far along the charismatic axis as yours, and isn't taking me up the candle in the same way now. Nevertheless, the things I used to think mattered I increasingly realise don't. Or at least, they don't matter for the reasons I thought they did. So on both an emotional and an intellectual level I find myself most comfortable, and most able to engage with a service that has more of a 'block' structure, but utterly alienated by the style of delivery and the underlying assumptions that often seem to be bundled with that in the settings where it's common.
Equally, I find myself engaging best (generally) with a contemporary style, including re-workings of old hymns, but am also deeply repelled by the whole CCM 'scene' and dismissive of the vast majority of the output. And I do love a good blast of organ from time to time (fnarr. Sorry.).
Corporate worship is a weird old business. Personally I've come to a point where I think that too often we approach it, both practically and conceptually, on an Old Testament "Temple" model - coming to 'meet with God', propitiation, duty etc. - when actually post-resurrection it should be about encouragement and community (in the broadest sense, so it can include celebration, mourning, exhortation, challenge etc.). I have a lot of sympathy for the basic position Vaughn Roberts outlines in "True Worship" whilst not sharing his snooty dislike of the modern
Songs, church, what we call 'worship' ... it's a lot like people really. People are great. People are bloody awful. Both these things are true, simultaneously. Argh, etc.!
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
For people from memorialist backgrounds, how does this affect the music being the emotional highpoint of the service rather than eg the Eucharist?
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
I'm coming to the conclusion that a lot of modern worship songs aren't actually for the same thing that a lot of hymns are.
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
generally hymns are for teaching and worship songs are for straight-up emotional worship.
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
one additional dynamic concerning contemporary worship styles is that of a shared understanding of musical language. It's more than an emotional connection, rather a case of singing in our mother tongue, so to speak.
And something else I'm trying to put my finger on, this conversation is helping. The "praise band" and I parted company not at the first or second band leader but the third, because something significant had changed. My named "sin" was tossing a descant on the recessional "I'll fly away", which I had done the three previous times (twice in rehearsal and once in a service), so it wasn't blindsiding. (Or was my "sin" that 4 people each individually came to the band area afterward and right in front of the leader told me how much better the group sounded with me back in it again).
I was told harmony is not worship, it's performance, and will not be tolerated.
If a cheerful peppy song at recessional time must not be done in anything but straight melody, then the concept of "what kinds of music convey worship" is not agreed.
This is sort of like the "language" comment I quote above, but a little different, and might explain why in some churches the music all sounds alike - whether it's all 4/4 hymns at a slow pace or all syncopated gospel music or all contemporary tunes with nondescript melodies that fade into one another -- it's because the song selector feels only one style or pace or sound of music conveys worship.
I grew up in "all slow 4/4 hymns" church, I called the music boring but they called it "stately" or "majestic," which suggests the music committee felt that was the one true music sound for worship. It's wasn't the "language" listened to at home, it was specifically the "language" considered appropriate for a church service.
[ 26. September 2015, 04:36: Message edited by: Belle Ringer ]
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Snags:
Corporate worship is a weird old business. Personally I've come to a point where I think that too often we approach it, both practically and conceptually, on an Old Testament "Temple" model - coming to 'meet with God', propitiation, duty etc. - when actually post-resurrection it should be about encouragement and community (in the broadest sense, so it can include celebration, mourning, exhortation, challenge etc.).
I'm going to break a long period of lurking to shout 'Amen!' to this. IMO the New Testament understanding, with the giving of the Holy Spirit, is that God is with us all the time*, so any talk of meeting with God in worship is potentially misleading.
Also, on a point mentioned a bit further upthread, I recently read this (in Selling Worship by Pete Ward, p198):
quote:
Charismatic worship songs function in worship in an altogether different manner to hymns or the older style of spiritual song. The charismatic worship song is not primarily a means to teach doctrine. Neither is it a way to create a flow or to punctuate worship. While singing in charismatic worship may generate a feeling of togetherness, the songs are not primarily meant as a means to generate this feeling. The contemporary worship song occupies a particular space in charismatic spirituality: it is the means to a personal encounter with God.
I think this is spot-on, though I'm far from 100% in favour of the move - like Snags said, I think our singing together should be far more about mutual encouragement than it usually is in practice.
*There are even foreshadowings of this idea in the Old Testament. 'Where can I go from your presence?' in Psalm 103 (or is it 139?) for example.
--------------------
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
|
|
Pine Marten
Shipmate
# 11068
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Also, on a point mentioned a bit further upthread, I recently read this (in Selling Worship by Pete Ward, p198):
quote:
The contemporary worship song occupies a particular space in charismatic spirituality: it is the means to a personal encounter with God.
I think this is spot-on...
To focus just on this bit, this is what I can't understand - when I've been in places that use worship songs all I think about is: hmm, I don't care for these words/this banal tune/the leader is singing in a key I can't reach/why is he doing a guitar riff there/etc.etc.
But when I'm singing something like I heard the voice of Jesus say; or I bind unto myself today; or Thine be the glory, then I feel able to experience a more 'personal encounter with God' as quoted above. The words, the music, the emotion built therein, all focus the heart and mind and spirit on God, and I'm afraid that (perhaps I'm still a music snob but) I don't get that with worship songs.
--------------------
Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead. - Oscar Wilde
Posts: 1731 | From: Isle of Albion | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
My discomfort with the worship song model of service is that there are never any pauses or silences. The whole thing is orchestrated to involve everyone continuously. When I attend these services I get more and more uncomfortable and frustrated and I sit wondering about space for anyone to hear the still small voice.
(And yes God is everywhere. But we, generally, are usually buzzing and busy, connected at all times. For me the traditional services, monastic offices and Taizé build space to enable God encounters, a time away from that busyness. Recreating that busyness in a service feels counterproductive.)
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Fair comments, Snags and believe you me, I do have a lot of sympathy with what you're saying - it's simply that online communication of this kind tends to 'foreground' the snarkier elements of what I'm trying to say ... to abuse a noun into a verb ... (which is an even greater sin than anything that goes on in CCM ... )
I think Curiosity Killed has raised a good point - and I think that holds irrespective of how far up or down the candle we find ourselves.
I think there's something very profound in the Quaker silence, for instance, and they can't be accused of being high up the candle - indeed, some would consider them so 'low' as to have dropped off the bottom end completely ...
I don't disagree in principal with South Coast Kevin's point about mutual encouragement either - and it's great to hear you break your silence, Kevin - we've had our disagreements but you're one of the Shipmates I've always held in high esteem.
However, I think there's a balance between something that is so 'Godward' in worship that the sense of mutuality is lost - and something so overly communal that it becomes all about 'us' ...
Striking that balance - in whatever setting - is always going to be difficult.
Again, I'm with Curiosity Killed on there being a sense of deliberate drawing aside in times of worship (however it's done) and yes, whilst it's true that God is 'everywhere present and fillest all things' (panentheism is where it's at for me, folks!) it is helpful to set time aside to deliberately remember that.
I remain married to my wife throughout the year, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't go out for a meal on our anniversary or mark the occasion in some way.
It's another of these both/and not either/or things.
I agree with Snags and GillH and others that the worship-song block model can be done well - and that on its own terms there can be as much skill, musicianship and thought going into it as there can be in other kinds of worship service ... whether Alt Worship, the traditional non-conformist hymn-sandwich or one of the historic liturgies ...
Conversely, some of the traditional liturgies can be run through 'off-pat' and I've known some that have been conducted as if they were a racing commentary - as if they're dashing through to get to the finishing line as quickly as possible ...
However, as counter-intuitive as it may sound - and I've certainly found it so as I've dabbled and dipped into various traditions - I now find a greater sense of 'liberty' and 'space' in a traditional liturgy than I do in a worship chorus block or apparently free-flow charismatic service.
YMMV.
--------------------
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
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
Hurrah for agreeing violently.
Although I don't get why flow can't include silence; that always bugs me. I use silence a lot when I lead, and I usually think it's the best part of the service. I'm building up the courage to say "Welcome! Now we're going to sit in silence for an hour"
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
They'd boot you into the Quaker Meeting House ...
Unsurprisingly perhaps, a few non-conformist ministers I know who've engaged in occasional 'pulpit-sharing' ecumenical initiatives have told me how 'liberating' they've found it when it was their turn to 'lead' in an Anglican setting when they realised that it was all nicely laid out and ready for them - they had the 'script' there and didn't need to do all the faff and preparation.
Tell it not in Gath, but I attended a URC service a while back where the minister had clearly spent ages preparing the service-plan and the liturgy - and it was still dire. I left wondering why he'd bothered. Why write your own communion service (with some dubious theology) when there are plenty of off-the-shelf ones you can use that do the job a whole lot better?
I'd have happily swapped an hour's silence for the service he'd concocted.
Similarly, at our parish church when they have the 'time of confession', instead of using the words on the service sheet (or from the service books) the vicar or whoever is leading - sometimes it's 'lay-led' - insists on going on and on and on and on using his own form of words and form of confession ...
Why? What's the point?
There's a perfectly good range of prayers of General Confession in the service books. Why does he think that whatever he comes up with is going to be any better? I simply switch off. It's counter-productive. Spontaneous prayers aren't worth the paper they're written on ...
Of course, it all depends on context. But if you've got a prayer book why not bloomin' well use it? That's what it's for.
I can see that having a 'leader' who leads things differently each week gives a semblance of variety - but I've long since given up on hearing anything new, different or even particularly inspiring in some of the more apparently fluid and spontaneous set-ups - all they seem to do is say the same sort of thing each week anyway ... or variations on a theme. That's fair enough, but all they end up doing is replacing a set liturgy with one that is equally as familiar and same-y yet with a passing semblance of spontaneity and apparent innovation.
--------------------
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
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
For people from memorialist backgrounds, how does this affect the music being the emotional highpoint of the service rather than eg the Eucharist?
I am not a memorialist.
For me, music is why I bother going to church (when I do). Music is how I "connect to God" in church or at home. The Eucharist is an emotional low, a long dead time just sitting around waiting your turn to get up and do a long slow walk and wait again for a token crumb that will probably leave a crumb in my throat and make me cough at the next song instead of being able to sing it to God.
Is your question based in a flawed assumption that the Eucharist is the high point for all believers in (some variation of) Real Presence?
For my Non-Denomination friends, the high point is the sermon. They want a church where they will feel "fed," by a long "deep" God-aware sermon that calls them to holier living and assures them of God's love. Music is enjoyed but it's not the high point.
Doing music is my Eucharist. Music is or can be Eucharistic for some other people, too -- if I sing a solo totally focused on God instead of on the notes, a few people will come after saying they heard God in the singing. They don't say that when my singing is just a pretty voice.
Some people find God's presence in Eucharist, some in other things, just as real and just as present.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
For people from memorialist backgrounds, how does this affect the music being the emotional highpoint of the service rather than eg the Eucharist?
I am not a memorialist.
For me, music is why I bother going to church (when I do). Music is how I "connect to God" in church or at home. The Eucharist is an emotional low, a long dead time just sitting around waiting your turn to get up and do a long slow walk and wait again for a token crumb that will probably leave a crumb in my throat and make me cough at the next song instead of being able to sing it to God.
Is your question based in a flawed assumption that the Eucharist is the high point for all believers in (some variation of) Real Presence?
For my Non-Denomination friends, the high point is the sermon. They want a church where they will feel "fed," by a long "deep" God-aware sermon that calls them to holier living and assures them of God's love. Music is enjoyed but it's not the high point.
Doing music is my Eucharist. Music is or can be Eucharistic for some other people, too -- if I sing a solo totally focused on God instead of on the notes, a few people will come after saying they heard God in the singing. They don't say that when my singing is just a pretty voice.
Some people find God's presence in Eucharist, some in other things, just as real and just as present.
Sorry, but I don't understand your response at all. If you believe in the Real Presence in whatever way, how can the Eucharist possibly be a low point? If meeting the Real Presence of God is a low point then that is rather worrying. That isn't to say that you can't also mmeet God in the music or elsewhere, but if you do believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist, it should be a high point by default - unless for whatever reason encountering God is a negative thing for you? It makes no sense to me, sorry.
Your latter point is rather what I meant - for people for whom there is no Real Presence in Holy Communion, naturally they encounter the Real Presence in other formats such as music. So your response would make perfect sense if you were a memorialist, but to me it makes no sense if you are not.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sounds like memorialism to me.
Thing is, the Eucharist is no different in its outward or tactile and experiential aspects for memorialists or Real Presence types. The bread can still stick in your throat or cause you to cough whatever your eucharistic theology.
That's not the point.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
