i have a feeling i'll regret asking this BUT

[cassie121]

Why exactly do sooooo many people object to contemporary services? I really fail to see the problem AS LONG AS all things required in a service according to BOC and bible are there. I've heard alot of ppl very upset about things like contemporary music and dramas in church services. I honestly fail to see the problem. I mean the bible never says to use "church music". Nor, does it say you must say this, this , and this, exactly like that, that , and that.

 

[Aibrean]

Too many times it's "feel good" music without any real substance. I like liturgy. Plain, simple, and satisfying. I'd rather be in a humble spirit.

 

[Korah]

Too many times it's "feel good" music without any real substance. I like liturgy. Plain, simple, and satisfying. I'd rather be in a humble spirit.

Yes, but which liturgy? Whichever is nearest to what the Church has always practiced everywhere for 2000 years. And it's important. In the Gospel of John, Jesus three times emphasized its importance. He told us He would send us the Spirit of Truth who would glorify Jesus (John 16:13-14). He told the woman at the well that people would now worship in Spirit and Truth (John 4:23-24). He said He would drive out Satan and then draw all people to Himself (John 12:31-32). (For this third, I don't see Satan has been driven out other than his absence when Christians worship together.)
Korah

 

[Aibrean]

We have the divine liturgy.

 

[selfintercession]

Sorry to butt in on your thread, but I used to see this in my United church before I was Catholic (and it goes on in Catholic churches too), and I think that similar to what Aibrean said, a lot of people see it as more of an entertainment thing geared at making church more "fun" in order to fill the pews. Personally, I think filling the pews is great... but you shouldn't have to put on a show complete with pyrotechnics to do it.

That's not to say that the people who put these things on don't have really good intentions, but it's the result that people are questioning I think. Of course there are also people who think that having a keyboard or something up with the choir is "irreverent" etc. but that's a whole different story

 

[Archaenfel]

Part of it has to do with what many of us have encountered in the past regarding 'contemporary services'. It's more than just being more entertaining; in many situations these services become all flash and no substance.

Before I returned to LCMS, I attended a Presbyterian church which operated with 'contemporary liturgy'. It was weak, without substance, and was more focused with the way I felt than keeping me mindful of my sinful state - my need for forgiveness - and keeping me close to God. The confession in that church fell under the category of "Oh God, forgive me for not seeing the beauty of your sunrise." In the face of real sins which sent our Lord to the Cross for my redemption, somehow I don't think God is troubled with the fact that I'm not a morning person.

A church service is about bringing you closer to God. The traditional service is structured to bring you close to God: we go through confession to clear unfinished business, we open with Divine Worship to our Creator in gratitude for all the good things He has done for us, we hear His word and we meditate on it, we present our offerings to God, and then we look to our own needs for prayer, comunion, and blessing through the benediction.

If a Contemporary service was structured in a way that was still mindful of what people are supposed to be doing in ( i.e. Worshiping God rather than entertaining the congregation or giving them a warm hour of 'fuzzy feel good' ) then it is doubtful that anyone would object to it. The problem that I ( and many others ) have with Contemporary worship is that it claims to give the parishoners some kind of uplifting experience.

Truth be told, I ride the same emotional rollercoaster listening to Lacuna Coil and classic Lush that other people get singing "Yes Lord - Yes Lord - Yes Yes Lord".


PS: At the very least - could somebody please come up with better lyrics? My own answer to that song felt twice as inspired ... "Please No - Please No - Dear God No!" I can't stand another hearing of that stupid song.


PPS: My dear son sends you kisses ...

 

[LilLamb219]

Take a listen to both the music of traditional and contemporary services...listen to the words very carefully to hear who the focus is. Is it on Jesus or me? Who is mentioned more...is it what Jesus has done for me or what I'm doing for Jesus and more of me, me, me? I can get me anywhere else...I'd prefer to get more of Jesus in the Divine Service so I can be fed and my faith strengthened

 

[faithrestored]

I enjoy contempary music and all of the hymns. I am in choir and prefer singing the hymsn but i like the other music for prayer services and i was part of a 6 plays we had at church during lent. Our plays are seperate from liturgy time and the other music would be better during the week. I like to be uplifted as well and i enjoy both styles of music but during liturgy i do like to focus on the hymns that bring me closer to the cross of Jesus. If contempary music makes you feel closer to the Lord then listen to it. The Lord speaks to us in many different ways and through music is another way he can speak to us. As long as their is a liturgy then it shouldnt matter. I agree listen to what the words are saying in the song. I think sometimes that kind of music draws younger people and the youth to church. They could be out with friends or doing something else and if uplifting music gets them to go to church i say have 2 different services, one for teens and another for adults with just hymns and the liturgy . I only sing the hymns and i og to a traditional service , but when i was a teen i enjoyed that kind of service. Anyway Happy Easter to all , i really enjoyed singing today at my service , i loved singing the Gloria from Vivaldi today

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Our Pastor says that by using liturgical worship forms, we hear God's word even if he has a bad sermon (I have yet to hear a bad one from him).

In the Revelation of St. John, Heavenly worship is described for us. It is indeed liturgical; what better model to follow?

 

[filosofer]

There is still a major difference between Lutherans and others regarding worship. It isn't that worship is God-centered or Christ-centered for Lutherans, because many others faith communities claim the same thing.

What distinguishes Lutheran worship is that it is God-initiated to which people respond. That is, God speaks to us in Word and Sacrament and we respond with prayer and praise. This also then puts forth Law and Gospel distinctions as critical even in worship. Unless we understand this, discussion of traditional vs contemporary often is a matter of style.

The traditional liturgy as used over the centuries gives the framework for us to worship in line with this God-initiated worship, rightly Christ-centered, and Law-Gospel distinctions maintained; hence Lutherans often use the term divine service to denote worship -- God's service to us, and our responsive service to him.

When moving to "contemporary worship" format, these are essential elements, and require considerable work to maintain consistency in each of these. I know I have conducted both at the same congregation. If not done properly, it becomes nothing more than a Reformed/Evangelical service with lip service to Lutheran theology (which in the end loses out entirely). It takes 3-4 x as much time to do so effectively and with excellence.

So, can worship be done as "contemporary worship"? Yes, but can the pastor spend the time to ensure that it is truly Lutheran theology?

One other aspect of worship that is often overlooked is the common faith expression, within the local congregation, within the larger church today, and within the history of the Christian church. This includes evaluating translations that fit within the liturgical context. Thus, the NIV is not the best translation liturgically (and is not the best for other uses either); so also NLTse, TNIV, TEV, etc. Note that this more than whether the translation is read in the service - most churches have that. But rather, how does that translation match with the liturgical expressions in music (Latin names for various parts of the service: Kyrie Eleison, Agnus Dei, Nunc Dimittis, Offertory, etc.). BTW, that was why the text for those portions in LW were based on the NKJV, not NIV, even though NIV was used as the unofficial LCMS translation (another story in that itself).

This common faith expression also includes memory work for the congregation, not only catechism.

And finally, even hymn/song choices are important. Do the words reflect Scriptural/doctrinal truths (as was mentioned by someone above)? Does the music reflect the words appropriately? Is the style of the music "contemporary" or only contemporary relative to the worship leader's choices? What about the 2000 years of hymnody that has sustained the Church during the past 2000 years?

Perhaps better than traditional or contemporary, we should use the term trans-historical to reflect all 2000+ years of Christian songs, which includes also the Old Testament.




just food for thought from an old codger...

 

[cassie121]

I get the feeling what I WAS THINKING when ppl say contemporary worship and WHAT IS GOING ON in many contemporary worships is very different than I suppose. I don't know.

 

[filosofer]

I get the feeling what I WAS THINKING when ppl say contemporary worship and WHAT IS GOING ON in many contemporary worships is very different than I suppose. I don't know.

That is why it is good to ask questions. Yours is very appropriate and needs thoughtful interaction by everyone. None of us is the last word on anything of this. But we must see the consistency with our theology whenever we do examine a topic like this.

 

[Markus6]

It seems to me (from an outside perspective) that the responses in this forum have been along the lines of, "Theoretically contemporary worship is OK but many times in practice it is bad because of ...". Personally I think it is important to realise that "many times" is not the same as "all of the time" and I think it is important to defend the contemporary worship that is suitable. I think contemporary music should be an important part of Christian life. For so many centuries Christian music writers led the way when it came to contemporary music but now it seems they are content to stick with music written centuries ago. Christian music writers have the greatest inspiration there is and I would love to see them taking their place back at the lead of musical culture.

 

[filosofer]

Keep in mind that there is a distinction between "contemporary worship practice" and "contemporary music." That should help understand the concerns of this thread.

 

[Markus6]

Keep in mind that there is a distinction between "contemporary worship practice" and "contemporary music." That should help understand the concerns of this thread.

It might be useful to try to create a defintion of "contemporary worship practice" in that case.

 

[joyfulthanks]

Speaking of "contemporary" songs - what is contemporary, anyway? We were away from home this weekend, and visited another Lutheran church in the city we were in. It was a contemporary service. Like many of the other "contemporary" services I've seen in mainline denoms, most of the songs were 10-30 years old.

It seems that by the time we Lutherans get around to being "contemporary," the songs we are singing are already about 20-30 years old. How contemporary is that, anyway?

Just a semi off-topic observation.

 

[DaRev]

One of the real problems that I have seen in CW is that about 90% (a conservative figure, BTW) of "contemporary Christian worship" music is theologically unsound. The majority of it comes from more Reformed and non-denom sources. The focus is not on what Christ has done, but rather on what we do, which is Law heavy. The Law does not save us in the least, it only condemns.

Much of what people refer to as "contemporary worship" basically refers to the worship style more than the music. There are even some that will take the classic hymnody and set it to drums and guitars rather than organ or piano. While that may be OK in and of itself, the way it's presented turns the worship service into a concert or a night club act. The real question to be addresses is 'what do we go to church for?' We gather together as God's children with broken and contrite hearts to receive His gifts of forgiveness and life through His means of grace of word and sacrament. We then respond to His work for us by our prayers and hymns. With contemporray worship, what is the reason people go to church? Mainly to be entertained. The style is more important than the substance. It becomes more about personal feelings than about what Christ has done and what God continues to do through word and sacrament. The whole meaning is lost.

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

Why exactly do sooooo many people object to contemporary services? I really fail to see the problem AS LONG AS all things required in a service according to BOC and bible are there. I've heard alot of ppl very upset about things like contemporary music and dramas in church services. I honestly fail to see the problem. I mean the bible never says to use "church music". Nor, does it say you must say this, this , and this, exactly like that, that , and that.

Contemporary Christian music on the radio is horrible, I mean seriously from an actual music stand point and Christian stand point. I'm not going to listen to horrible music just because it mentions loving Jesus. Putting that music in the Divine Service solves nothing.

 

[Archaenfel]

"With contemporray worship, what is the reason people go to church? Mainly to be entertained. "

Well, for my own part I would not exactly say this. I believe that many who go to contemporary services do so earnestly, believing in their hearts that while in such a service they feel the Holy Spirit rising up within them.

However, as I stated before this is the result of staging. Adolph Hitler did much the same thing with his Nazi rallies: people who are otherwise decent, moral folk suddenly begin signing on with a killer manifesto. Why? Because they were swept up in the moment.

No - I'm not calling Contemporary Worshipers Nazis. I'm saying it's the same emotional mechanism which in one person feels like the Holy Spirit and in another guides an otherwise decent person into a oneness of action with the 1938 Nazi party.

I do agree with 'Rev that the theology of Praise songs is often quite unsound. I wouldn't call it 'LAW' based because it does not accuse. I would call it Works Based, and yes - it tends to say what 'I' am doing for God rather than focusing on what God has done for me.

It should also be noted that no statement can be considered universal. If a contemporary service addressed the issues brought up here, the rest is just a matter of personal expression.

 

[Markus6]

One of the real problems that I have seen in CW is that about 90% (a conservative figure, BTW) of "contemporary Christian worship" music is theologically unsound. The majority of it comes from more Reformed and non-denom sources. The focus is not on what Christ has done, but rather on what we do, which is Law heavy. The Law does not save us in the least, it only condemns.

Which leaves us with two options, reject all contemporary worship music or write some music that is theologically sound.

Much of what people refer to as "contemporary worship" basically refers to the worship style more than the music. There are even some that will take the classic hymnody and set it to drums and guitars rather than organ or piano. While that may be OK in and of itself, the way it's presented turns the worship service into a concert or a night club act. The real question to be addresses is 'what do we go to church for?' We gather together as God's children with broken and contrite hearts to receive His gifts of forgiveness and life through His means of grace of word and sacrament. We then respond to His work for us by our prayers and hymns. With contemporray worship, what is the reason people go to church? Mainly to be entertained. The style is more important than the substance. It becomes more about personal feelings than about what Christ has done and what God continues to do through word and sacrament. The whole meaning is lost.

As someone who attends a church that has contemporary music I can tell you that your judgement of people's motives is wrong. Once upon a time organs were contemporary. Playing styles that people in the congregation might actually listen to in their own time or instruments that people in the congregation might own or try to learn to play instead of instruments and styles that were in style about 200 years ago has more purpose than just entertainment. For me a good analogy is to compare the style of music with language. To me a culture should principally worship in its own language not that of many generations ago.

However, as I stated before this is the result of staging. Adolph Hitler did much the same thing with his Nazi rallies: people who are otherwise decent, moral folk suddenly begin signing on with a killer manifesto. Why? Because they were swept up in the moment.

No - I'm not calling Contemporary Worshipers Nazis. I'm saying it's the same emotional mechanism which in one person feels like the Holy Spirit and in another guides an otherwise decent person into a oneness of action with the 1938 Nazi party.

I'm afraid whatever way you try to spin it that analogy is still insulting and also inaccurate.