WorshipCentral

Hi Marc,
Firstly, I agree! I think that the sad truth is that a lot of "worship" music does not have the inspirational grab of its secular conterparts. However I feel you may have missed a big thing here...genre!

My opinion is that the vast diversity of people which could be at any single church meeting forces the "worship" music to be dulled down middle of the road "soft rock", this is further made worse by having to make songs "congregational" and singable by Joe Bloggs down the road. When you compare "Worship" music with secular music then its not like for like. Let me use an example.

Take a "Worship" song that you sing in church and try to find an equivelant "Style" in the secular world. It will most likely not be a big high energy chart topping band that is on your ipod. it will more likely be the style of middle of the road (dare I say it - "Bryan Adams-esq") style soft rock.

Now look at it the other way round. Take you favourite Secular band and music and find its equivelant in the Christian World. I can almost garantee it wont by the style or genre you see on an average sunday morning service. They are out there. There are plenty of bands playing christian music in the style you love, however it will not be what a worship leader would consider "congregational". As an example: I dont listen to a lot of christian singer song writer worship albums however when I was a teenager and loved New metal and rock I went to see P.O.D. play a gig. And in all honesty I met God far more in the adrenaline filled mosh pit being punch by big hair rockers than I did in the tamed down middle of the road methodist church I was growing up in.

Summary (since I've waffled)

Worship music is lacking...(through no fault of the musicians - compare an average church playing a Martin Smith worship song to the amazing experience of a Delirous gig...the difference is that the gig doesn't need to be Congregational...Martin may disagree I've never spoken to him)
So though Worship music may be lacking in compared to Secular music there is no way that "Christian" music with all its geners is lacking in compared to secular music, we just dont use it in church.

The dilema we face now as worship leaders/band members/music directors, is how we get the "Inspirational" christian music into sunday morning worship, some churches are doing it (look at some of "Lakewoods" "latin-tastic" 90's albums, again not everyons taste but it had more conviction and feel than alot of other stuff brought out!) The age old problem will always be that not everyone shares the same taste in music, the old trend was that everyone had to sing hymns, the current trend is that everyone has to sing middle of the road softrock...in ten years maybe we'll all be saying "why is worship music always rap - its so old".

---------------------------------------------------
Worsh-er,
---------------------------------------------------

I think it's because secular music (at least the stuff I like listening to) tends to be far more honest than worship music lyrically and musically. I think our modern worship lacks a truely human element which can limit its effectiveness in portraying particular ideas. I think a lot of the Psalms of lament have got it right and its interesting that this style is not so popular in church.

What I mean to say is the general trend of modern worship is major keys with inspiring lyrics (obviously I'm generalising here), something with which I have no problem. However I think we've all been in that situation in a service when you've had a bad week or something has particularly riled you and for whatever reason worshipping is the last thing you feel like doing.

I remember on one particular occasion like this feeling like the worship leader and everyone around just didn't care how bad I was feeling at that point and that every little thing they did in the worship was totally insensitive! Now obviously worship has nothing to do with how we are feeling but I think it would have been a great deal easier to worship in that situation if there were songs that expressed how I felt at that time, songs that I could be truely sincere about in that frame of mind and songs that felt like they were really moving me and everyone else. With the current style of worship music I think it's easy to go through the motions of singing and becoming bored of the amazing truths that are being sung when you've sung them however many times before.

Anyway I think I have slighly digressed at this point! What I was trying to say is i think our hearts are stirred by secular music when there is a personal connection with what is said or played and the expression feels original and true. Consequently if what is played or sung doesn't resonate as something human and is cliche then the spark that gets us going is lost.

How on earth we write songs that stir the soul like secular music can, I don't know!! I tend to find that whenever I try and write something personal that might stir people it turns into a narcissistic rant!

Thanks guys! Got me thinking again, great thoughts.

After growing up in the church and now being involved with secular music I think there are many reasons you feel the way you do. I have struggled with this thought probably more times then I should have for the main reason that if God created everything He should be the unlimited source of creativity, but then why are things that we create back for him substandard?

I mean, we could transfer this conversation to any form of Christian media like movies or television.

Luckily I have had the chance to work with some amazing musicians and here are just some things I have noticed that I see lacking with the music I've been involved with in the church.

1.) Successful musicians unhealthily commit themselves to playing and practicing and lifestyle of personal sacrifice and even sometime to the point of depravation. I mean we all know the stories of starving musicians, I've never met a worship band with the same type of dedication to the music itself whether good or bad. Now this could be because of our Christian worldview that says we have a responsibility to pay attentions to those around us and not be as selfish as these musician types can be. In fact I don't think any good Pastor would let a worshiper be so consumed. Something to think about - but definitely not an answer.

2.) Secular musicians have the freedom to make whatever they want to hear about whatever they want to talk about. The church throughout history has rejected things which are different, while at the same time producing some of the greatest artists of our time. Examples that come to mind are U2's Bono who grew up in church but rejected it and left it at one time, Chris Martin from Coldplay was a choir boy. If I was in a worship band and I wanted to take time to write a song about how beautiful God created my wife to be I don't think they would let me - because that is not the point, but in a secular band I would have that freedom. Here is a thought provoking question, could Salvdor Dali have painted Christ of Saint John of the Cross in 1951 without first painting his Female Nude in 1925? The limits we put on things... how do we determine their good and bad consequences at the point where we have to instill them?

It's late so I may be rambling but these are questions I struggle with a lot mainly because of what I feel God has called me to be a part of. I think this is a valid discussion and it would be interesting if someone could pull a biblical story about art that went to far, or art that was fantastic and routed in the church. Maybe art itself is the problem because it can so easily become an idol itself? Questions, lots of questions but no finite answers.

I think worsh-er is on a good lead with the Congregational aspect.

Just practical things like song keys, take the key up it sounds a lot bigger but is harder to sing. In a church setting we have a duty to facilitate the singing not perform to people. This can mean taking the keys down which sounds dull and less inspiring but enables the church to sing out as a unit. And are we relying on the sound to inspire people or the Spirit? I agree it's important that we play skilfully (psalm 33:3) and with God given creativity but how much when people are responding are responding to the great music rather than to the great truth they are singing? We all know how emotive music is.

Again as worsh-er said, rightly or wrongly this also affects the melodies as they are simplified so anyone can pick them up quickly rather than in the secular relm you can make them as diverse and disjointed as you like as the main focus is not will everyone be able to sing it. This obviously means that it can sound and seem lacking compared to other stuff around.

Maybe another factor is that the bands you seem to be looking at are full time. Quite often in local church settings there is not just one core band, certainly in our church we stay away from Team A and B kind of thing and choose from one big team and rotate. This is great in the sense of community and using people's giftings but maybe makes the overall tightness and togetherness suffer a little?

I suppose on all of it it's getting the right balance of creative interest and accessibility but I would argue both are important but the second one is the highest priority in a congregational setting. (non age specific)

hope that kind of makes some sense! Right back to planning "be my everything" in "C" for small group ;)

Well put Chris. Musical worship is truly defined as a tool for corporate use. I agree that the music is not the final goal, but is only a vehicle we use to communicate with God. Even if it is not as “amazing” as secular music, God is in the equation of worship music, which changes everything.

With worship, if the results seem inadequate surely God will use them; and then His involvement becomes all the more blatant. You have to acknowledge practical limits like available talent, band schedules, church expectations, traditions etc. too.

I think you said some really insightful stuff about finding a balance between creativity and accessibility.

With all of that in focus, I’d still push the question, as far as it can be rational and practical. If nothing else, considering if there is room for more creativity is worth honestly considering, right?

I remember reading a stray interview with David Crowder, just after the A Collision CD came out. He was asked if he was concerned about people’s ability to engage/sing/reproduce the songs. His response was, essentially, if people are inspired by it they’ll engage it. He mentioned an experience he had at a Pearl Jam concert, how everyone was singing along at the top of their lungs despite the difficult lyrics/melody… he felt the same concept translated to worship. I’m not really sure, but I see the validity in what he’s getting at.

(The keys of C, G, and E are truly the holiest of all keys!) :)

Hey guys! Man its been ages since i posted on here! Best get back into it! ha!

I completely see where your coming from man, if I'm honest the only worship album/songs that has truly inspired me in the past four or five months at least. has been Chris Tomlin's Hello Love and Phil Wickham when i discovered him. Not because i can sing along easy, but because they just reached straight to my heart and inspired me to glorify God's name. I completely agree that songs need to be congregational, but i think often writers try too hard to write congregational songs, and they turn out to be real dull non inspiring songs!

Simular to what Marc Proctor was saying in the last post about David Crowder, i must say i agree. I use the analogy of if you go into a disco, or a club or whatever, and a song like Bon Jovi's Living on a prayer comes on, you can pretty much guarantee that everyone will get up and sing it, regardless of the fact that only about 5% of the room can hit the notes!

I am not suggesting that we should write songs like this with big melodies that people want to sing but are meaningless and just stirring false emotions, but i think we need to be writing songs that simply inspire people to worship, and bring glory to God's name, and maybe in some cases, forget about trying to write them in a one octave range or whatever!

Gaz

I find this sort of discussion really interesting. Something that keeps occuring to me is whether we are using teh term "Worship Music" as the action of worship to God or actually as a Genre of music. I know that there is alot happening in the Christian Academic world about emerging Churches (Martyn Atkins, president of Cliff College, has just writen a book about it "Resourcing Renewal: Shaping Churches for the Emerging Future") Well what about emerging Worship....what should worship be? If there are quite a few people who find more (musically) in the "non-congregational" musical genres then maybe we should be bringing them into churches.

Anyoine remember the trend in the 90's for "soaking", just sitting still in a room with some soft worship music in the background? (you all know what I mean.) There was no desire for people to sing along then. So who made the decision that if music is upbeat it either has to be sung along to, or be a "presentation song". Well lets bring music for musics sake (as opposed to lyrics sake) into 2008. But who wants soft pansy music....lets do it again with "mosh pits for God", I know I used to love going to Drum and bass clubs because there was so much freedom ....you could dance like fool and everyongone thought is was normal....Maybe if King David was around now he would be bringing Drum and Bass clubs into church for "indignified Dance Sessions". When was the last time you saw someone walking away from a night club saying "I wouldn't go in there, the songs are in the wrong key and its too hard to sing along".

I personally love instrumental music...Contempary Jazz and funk, I would choose to listen to that any day compared to "Worship" soft rock....so who can tell me that church music has to have lyrics and be "singable". [stopped due to babbling]

The world is changing, when will we catch up?

---------------------------------------------------
Worsh-er,
---------------------------------------------------

Hope you all don't mind a newbie making a comment here - this is great discussion. I listened to a podcast this morning by Harold Best which touched on this issue brilliantly. It's free from itunes here:

http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.wo...

It's long and it hurt my brain a little bit but I'd recommend a listen.

Hey Jono! I had to honestly read your thoughts 3 times before it all settled in. Sounds like you've considered this a bit longer than I have! I'd love to hear more. You really got me thinking though, like your comment "could Salvdor Dali have painted Christ of Saint John of the Cross in 1951 without first painting his Female Nude in 1925." It is a really interesting thing to consider, I think art in and of itself is wonderful in all forms (theoretically). God originally created man and woman in the nude right? Yet, I think Romans 1:18-27 speaks to how mankind, though aware of a greater good, perverted what God created. Perhaps the same applies to art?

That is to say, art being good is misused. Like a man being filled with lust for the nude image Salvador painted. I would doubt Salvador intended erotica in his painting; but it can be perverted. If that is the case, I wonder if the church properly treats the arts? Perhaps instead of making people uncomfortable with writing a song about a "bad" topic, or evaluating a nude painting, the focus should be on the sin which perverts a innately good thing. Maybe that's it?

Now, how this particular thought applies to worship music is a connection I'm not making at the moment! I'll continue to consider these things and have really enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts on the matter!!

Turned_A_Corner, I'm excited to give the sermon a listen. Sounds really interesting!