What are some opinions United Methodists have regarding contemporary worship?

I was wondering what some of the other United Methodists on here think of contemporary worship and contemporary worship services.

In the congregation that I am a member of, there seems to be a lot of hostility towards contemporary worship, and our senior pastor has made the comment that he does not do contemporary worship services.

We have a service that started out as a contemporary service, and is a lot less formal than the traditional service. We play contemporary worship music, with lyrics projected on the screen. There are people from the traditional service who don't think the contemporary service should exist.

It seems to me that a lot of United Methodist congregations have decided to move away from contemporary worship.

What do people on this forum think about contemporary worship and contemporary worship services?

tampasteve said:

It is literally one of the main reasons I left the Methodist Church. But I like a more traditional service, it is what drew me to the Catholic Church. I am no longer in the Catholic Church, but I still like a traditional style more liturgical service. FWIW I am 35 years old.

Click to expand...

Ok. So you prefer a more formal, liturgical service, and your UMC was getting too contemporary?

Our traditional service is pretty much just like a Catholic service.

That's why I'm glad that we have both services. Those who like the liturgical, traditional service can feel welcome. Those who like a more contemporary service can feel welcome. (our contemporary service is definitely not as contemporary as some, but our pastor is okay with the service as it is now, although he definitely was against it when he came).

tampasteve said:

Yes, but I totally see the value in offering both the contemporary and traditional service. The church I attended moved to 100% contemporary and now could be any other non-denominational church.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your response

I, too, fully support both styles of worship. I think they are both valid, and that God is truly worshiped in both types of services.

seeking.IAM said:

UMC PK here, and a former decades long UMC member. I walked away over worship style in search for a more liturgical and reverential worship experience. My UMC became more like theatrical entertainment than church. I called it "performance theology." I feel like I didn't leave it - it left me.

Click to expand...

So, like tampasteve, your UMC went to an all contemporary worship style?

What do you mean by theatrical entertainment? What did they do during the service that made it feel that way?

seeking.IAM said:

It was a slow drift into an abandonment of liturgy and usual worship structures. Also a slow drift into a casual approach to worship. The final straw for me was when worship consisted only of a variety of special musical numbers, an offering, and a sermon. Each "act" seemed bent on trying to out perform the prior one for personal glorification of the performers, not God. The only thing missing was an applause meter. A lot of energy went into a dazzling multi-media presentation for each act and the sermon. It seemed as if the worship committee saw its task as trying to out dazzle the Sunday before in an attempt to attract new, younger members -- what I call "the church chasing its tail." I also grew intolerant of a pastor that led services looking like he just came in from weeding the garden. When you are a 55-year-old pastor, ratty blue jeans and sneakers in church don't make you cool or hip. And tuck in your shirt tail, for crying out loud.

I needed a church where I participated in worship (i.e. liturgy). I needed a church where there was a sense of order in worship. I needed a church focused on the basics without dazzle or distractions. I needed a church that was more reverential and respectful in its approach to and worship of the King of Kings. I applaud any UMC that has been able to retain that. There are some, but not mine.

And, by the way, I left with great guilt over separating from this church I had loved for so many years.

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing.

I guess I didn't realize that some UMC congregations went to that great an extreme in contemporary worship, and I didn't realize that some had gotten rid of traditional worship services altogether. Maybe that's part of the fear that some people in the traditional service have at my church.

Even our contemporary service has liturgy, although not nearly as much as our traditional service, which is pretty much a Catholic service. (Some people have left our church because they think our current pastor has made the traditional service to Catholic. Catholics that visit our church say that there is no difference in our service and what they are used to in Catholic services.)

We have communion at both services every single Sunday.

I don't want our contemporary service to ever be too casual with worship. What do you think made the one at your church too casual?

When you say that worship only consisted of a few special musical numbers, an offering, and a sermon -- what do you mean by a few special musical numbers? Were those songs that only performers on stage sang, and you had to listen to them like special music? Or was the congregation encouraged to sing along, too? Were the lyrics projected so that people could sing along?

And what do you mean by "act?"

In my opinion, the multi-media should only be to assist people in worship. That's it. For our contemporary service, that means lyrics projected on the screen for the songs so that people can participate, and prayers and other things projected. Nothing fancy. Just to help people participate.

So what was the multimedia like at your church? You said that a lot of time went into it, and it seemed that people wanted to out dazzle the performance of the last week?

I agree that reverence is very important. That is part of my issue with some non-denominational churches and popular Christian pastors that people follow after.

I'm sure it was very hard for you to leave your former church. It sounds like you made the right decision. I'm glad you found a church that fit in with what you were looking for.

seeking.IAM said:

I meant serial performers were on stage. There was no congregational participation; the congregation was merely a spectator to the service. That happens in a church from time-to-time for some special occasion or program and I understand that, but it seemed we had gone beyond that where it had become more the norm than the exception. For a long time I sat in the pew feeling "blah" and I didn't know why. Then in the middle of one service it was like a light bulb turned on. I realized my "blah" feeling was because I hadn't felt like I was truly worshipping.

I may need to beg your forgiveness for using the term "act." I was being snarky. My use of the word is a reflection of how disgusted I was that worship was a segmented, non-cohesive experience where elements of a service didn't relate to each other and hang together around a common theme. I found it to be little different than watching America's Got Talent except for the sermon and offering part.

Again, I say this with apologies to my UMC sisters and brothers. I do not disparage the UMC, although obviously I am no fan of contemporary worship. I have great affection for Methodism, and have no doubt much is still good in many places. I still consider myself a Methodist, albeit one in exile back to the mother church.

Click to expand...

Thanks. Sorry for all my questions. I just want to understand this whole subject better in hopes to prevent something like this from happening in the contemporary service at my church.

When you say there was no congregational participation, and that the congregation was merely a spectator in the service -- was that because those singing just performed without lyrics made available to the congregation (like on a screen). Or were there words available, but the congregation found it difficult to sing the songs (because they didn't know the songs, or weren't used to that style of worship, or just had trouble singing along with the singers?)

If they were just performing as special music, then, yeah, I would have a major problem with that as well.

I wonder if this is what some contemporary services have become -- just entertainment for people.

Yeah, we have special music in the summer in our traditional service (where someone will sing one or a couple songs as a performance). We've also had special music a couple times in the contemporary service, but only a couple times.

No need to apologize for using the word "acts." I could tell you were frustrated by what happened in your church. I was just trying to understand what that was for you.

Hmm...it seems like the term "contemporary service" can be different types, and people might mean different things by it.

I wonder how many other churches have moved away from worship participation for their contemporary services. Might the "special music" style be a trend in some churches?

tampasteve said:

In my case the service went (over about 10 years) from traditional to both traditional and contemporary, then contemporary and lastly to seeker-service. You know the one:
Intro song (usually a popular tune, sometimes secular just musical)
Intro worship song (a fast, up beat song)
Second song (fast or medium)
Third song (slow "love song to Jesus")
Fourth Song (medium tempo)
Announcements and greeting by Pastor
Sermon
Slow song and Offering
Medium Song
Closing prayer (maybe)
Fast exit song

The name of the church was also changed from XYZ United Methodist Church to a generic "Bay Hope Church". You would have no idea it is a Methodist Church if you did not know already. Communion is maybe monthly, but it has been that way for a very long time. Worship songs have the words on a screen, but that is it for participation. No congregational prayers or responses whatsoever.

This was done to stem the tide of younger people leaving the church. It interestingly worked for a little while, but now they are declining again. Studies have shown that many younger people crave a traditional service over contemporary, they are craving stability and ritual in an otherwise un-ritualistic life.

Click to expand...

Interestingly, our contemporary service started out as a "seeker service" under a different pastor than we have now. It didn't really attract anyone, and when we got the next pastor, she turned it back into a worship service. I didn't care for the songs she and her husband picked, but it was an actual worship service.

Now, under our current pastor, things are pretty much the same as they were under our woman pastor, except he added in communion every week. We only ever had 3 songs in the service total, and we used to have a closing song, but that was eliminated so that people could get out of church faster. (People want the service to last about 50 minutes or less).

I actually wish we had more songs, but it is okay. We do have corporate prayer several times in the service.

I've heard of United Methodist churches changing their church name to leave out "United Methodist." It seems a little odd to do that.

seeking.IAM said:

Funny story. A UMC in my town took UMC out of its name, off it's yard sign, and from all written materials. They adopted a generic, non-descript name to appear like a non-denom as if that alone would garner them new recruits. I heard a co-worker attended and joined there after going through their membership classes. One day I said to him, "Hey, John, I didn't know you were United Methodist!" He said, "I'm not. I go to [non-descript name] Church." He had sat through membership classes and joined a UMC without knowing it. And, that's a true story.

Click to expand...

Wow. That's a very surprising. It's like that congregation was trying to hide that it was a UMC from everyone interested in joining. You would have at least thought they would have told him in the membership class that it was a United Methodist Church. I thought that when people joined the church they had to make a promise to support the United Methodist Church? I recall this sort of language anyone joins the church in either the traditional or contemporary service at my church.

Maybe that church is actually no longer a United Methodist Church? Or maybe they are pulling away from the denomination? Or maybe they don't use any of the United Methodist language when people join?

seeking.IAM said:

Exactly!

Click to expand...

Oh, wow. No wonder you felt like you weren't worshiping. There wasn't even any encouragement for people to join in and sing with the performers. Yeah, I think I would talk to the pastor about it, and then if the pastor was fine with that kind of "worship," I would leave.

circuitrider said:

We have three services at the church I pastor. One is an ecclectic service with choral music and contemporary music, one is a standard contemporary praise band service and one is a fully traditional liturgical service. I like all three and preach in all three.

Click to expand...

That sounds great. Do people generally view those who attend the other services in a positive way? Do they generally support the other two services? Have you ever dealt with any hostility?