Praise or Worship? Or can we have both?

I liked John Mortensen’s addition to McLaren’s article.  It is a lot harder to write worship songs than people think and I loved the tips that he was giving.  However, I would have to say that the way that he addressed his tips made it seem as if there’s only one way to go about writing worship music (and I know he didn’t mean that but that’s how it felt).  He tells us to use more imagery in our worship, which I totally agree!  Imagery is important because then you can close your eyes and actually picture things; like the sunset, the colors in the leaves during fall or even the snow as it’s freshly sprinkling down to hit the ground.  But that isn’t what I think all of our songs should be about.  I actually love singing songs like ‘from the inside out’ where I’m expressing in words what my soul is really feeling and that’s praising God whole heartedly!  And when these types of songs are played it kind of allows me to do a heart check during the song in making sure that what I am saying is truly from the heart.  And when Mortensen said that ‘Good poets, like the psalmists…do not write about Intimacy, Love, Sacrifice, or Blessings but rather of trees, mountains, horses, lips, hands, blood and wine.’ (Mortensen; page 3, lines 18-20).  It kind of frustrated me.  I mean I do LOVE singing praise songs towards God; He deserves every one of them!  But, at the same time I think that we need to still have songs where we can really check ourselves and give ourselves a chance to surrender in our worship. A variety of songs are needed, especially more of the songs that McLaren was mentioning with future, lament and God’s character, etc… (McLaren; page 16, lines 2-4).  But, I think that we need to have a balance between those songs and the songs that we seem to use in this present time.  What do you guys think?  Should we change our services to where it is all about praising God (which is not bad at all so don’t think that I am downsizing that because I am really trying not to!) or should there be some sort of a balance between the two types; praise & worship?

mortenson and podcast

In paragraph 10, mortenson links rhyming to theology with the Above All song saying that the lyricist needed a rhyme for “you took the fall” and so wrote, “thought of me above all”.  First, it was probably the other way around, and second, do we need to throw out music because of line which can be overinterpreted and theologized?  I had the same issue with the podcast – pulling out entire songs because of a line.  Will Easter forever be tainted for me because Dr. Layman and the podcast guy (sorry, didn’t catch his name) have pointed out the fallacy of “You ask me how I know He lives, He lives within my heart.”  I know its bad, I know.  But the fact is, the church is going to play it every Easter and now it pulls me out of worshipping.  Getting educated is not always fun.    What is good though, is that I can make better choices when I am putting a worship service together.

In Response to Capps

Capps said that rock music “…historically celebrated rebellion and sensual impulses” (p.42 para 4).  This implies that the music itself celebrates these values.  While I do not assert that music divorced from lyrics cannot promote an idea or attitude, it appears that the author is making a blanket statement about rock music that is simply wrong.  Typically, it has been the words of rock music that celebrate rebellion and sensuality.  While the music itself may also do this in some cases, this cannot be applied to the whole genre.  My point is that I believe some of the artistic elements in rock music show the mark and design of a creative God.  Creative and new rhythms, for example, are a wonderful relief from the “boxy” rhythms typical to hymn tunes (remember this is coming from a staunch advocate of four-part hymn singing).  Rock music, on the other hand, often lacks care and structure in how harmonies fit together, where hymns tend to be stronger.  I think composers in the church should be constantly striving to be creative and artistic, yet as structured as possible.  We should be willing to incorporate elements of created beauty into the music we use to praise God, no matter where each element comes from.  A great example of this is my roommate and resident composer, Samuel Vereen.  His symphony rivals Beethoven and Brahms in the intricacy and tapestry of the way the notes, motifs and harmonic structures fit together, but his music incorporates new and exciting rhythms and harmonies that appeal to the modern ear.  I do think there are some elements of secular music that should not be adopted, because of poor artistic quality, or because they express an idea, attitude or sentiment that is not in keeping with the character of God.  Two examples of this would be vocal lines where the voice is distorted and is lacking any tonal quality (scream-o [sp?]), and modern classical music which is atonal (the music is derived by chance processes and sounds chaotic to the ear).  What are some elements that you think are wrong to incorporate into worship music, and why?  If you think there should be no filter for what we incorporate, why do you feel this way?

letter to worsip songwriters mclaren

So I agree with most of what Mclaren said about making worship about me.  At the same time though I don’t think that every time I sing a song about how Jesus forgives me or rescued me that I am being selfish in my worship. “It really feels like worship and Christianity in general has become about me, me, me” (2). Usually when I sing songs like that it reminds me of how great God is and how small and undeserving of his grace I am. Worship songs that talk about how Jesus embraced me or cleansed me actually humble me. When I sing those songs I’m singing them in away that thank God for forgiving, rescuing and embracing me. I never intend for it to be about me. So my question is….. Is it selfish to sing songs that involve what Jesus did for me? Isn’t he still getting the glory? Isn’t his name still being lifted up?

Responding to Mortensen’s Unauthorized Postscript

I don’t understand Mortensen’s style of communication. His main point seems to be a critique of the shallowness of contemporary worship, both in music and lyrics. This is something that needs to be addressed. However, his article reads less like a thoughtful critique and more like a condescending lecture. His explanations of meter, rhyme, and imagery were rather embarrassing. It was as if he assumed that none of his readers had taken a college literature class, so he had to articulate and demonstrate types of each before challenging us to make better use of them. He could have made his point more delicately and concisely by assuming a broader knowledge base for his audience (which I think is reasonable to expect). My question is this – can we talk about these sensitive issues with humility and respect while still communicating our desire for change?

Response to McLaren(sp?)

Something in me just screams for creative quality. I can smell and recognize “cheeziness” at the drop of a pin, and it makes me cringe. I have sung more than one too many choral pieces to a soundcheck where the guys and girls sing the same mediocre melody one octave apart. I am forced to ask myself, “where is the wonder? Where is the beauty? Where is the mystery and awe and surprise?” I often experienced it while reading my high school literature book, but that was written mostly by people who do not believe in Jesus. It is said that one who wants to be a great orator must first find his great cause. Is this not true also of all who would be great composers, lyricists and songwriters. Is it not also true of those who would lead our Christian community in worship accompanied by other artistic expressions? Maybe this is why McLaren’s article rang so true with me. While I am continually overwhelmed by the unnoticed marvels of our everyday lives (blessings which have been showered on us day after day, such as intricate mazes of ant trails, the simple beauty of laughter and conversation between guyfriend and girlfriend, a masterwork movie plot, or the piece of classical music I am listening to right now), I also continually wonder why church is so boring. I simply refuse to believe that is what my infinitely creative creator intended for us. I am not satisfied with it. I am not OK with it. Thus, I heartily concur with McLaren’s challenge to incorporate deep theology into an artistic expression that captures “mind and heart, understanding and imagination, proposition and image, clarity and mystery, explanation and narrative, exposition and artistic expression” (para 5). Wow. The piece I am listening to reminds me that this is definitely possible. One comment that Morenson made that really stood out to me was that good lyrics are composed, not inspired (para 7). The assumption would be that good music likewise comes through sweat and tears, not for free by means of an untapped creative fountain. This has not been my experience. Good creative content comes to me when I experiment and play with notes and/or words until that critical inspiration happens to come along. But it cannot be forced. Sometimes it comes right away, while other times it may take an hour or more. It is incredibly affected by my mood, circumstances or state of mind. Ah, yes, then there’s the factor of raw talent. Let’s try to experiment until we’re blue in the face in the area that we are naturally good at. Ooh, and then Mortenson rubbed a raw spot for me when he said that singing need not be professionally polished (Vocal Style para 2). That comment seemed to contradict everything he had said up to that point. I want to do everything I do with the most quality that I have available to me. That’s not a burden. It’s a joy! Part of what we were created to do was to create beauty ourselves. Let’s not settle for less. Creativity is available to us, if we want it.  Of course, all of this talk means nothing if we cannot put it to practical use.  What is a way that I, Christopher Yoder, can contribute to the wonder and creativity of the body of Christ?  One I can think of would be to propose and organize a “hymn team” to supplement (not replace) the chapel team.  Several times a semester, to give the chapel team could be given a break, and the hymn team could lead the congregation in some of the lesser known hymns that have beautiful and intricate harmonies with wonderful and unusual tapestries of chords that catch the ear off guard, yet are striking in their sense of order and purpose.  Such a team will need to be able to perform those vocal lines with clarity and precision.  What are some practical ways that you in this music class could contribute creatively to the lives of the believers in our community? (It doesn’t have to involve music or even chapel services)

Writing Intelligent Music

At first, I was put off when McClaren called me “Egypt of modernity” (Para 1) as though all that my world has to offer to real thinkers is enslavement and oppression. I realize that he is coming from a position of revolution, however, and is attempting to throw off what is useless, not throw off me (hopefully). I must admit, that I agreed with much of what both writers had to say about writing music. I think they have illuminated what makes praise and worship music trite, especially the “me, me, me” problem. As I look at what songs are accepted for new hymnals, they are pieces that are singable and playable by all kinds of church musicians. Many new pieces only sound good when played by a praise band, and feel contrived when played in a church with only a pianist. I especially liked his suggestions for new lyrics, about eschatology, missions, God’s character, and human pain. Can Christians handle music with themes about real issues and problems? Can we “worship” in brokenness and humbleness?

worshipclass4810

So in the reading I agree with Capps when he says on p (42) that the biggest challenge facing liturgical music is the juggernaut of mass culture. The economy and the influence of the mass media play an important part in styles of liturgies. Now these days I have seen a little bit of heavy metal music being incorporated in a worship service before.  T.S. Eliot says that “We are liable to confuse religion with culture believing that we are being true to a holy faith when in fact we are defending a set of customs” (p39 line 35).  I’m just not sure what to make of this, because when I look around styles of worship are changing with the culture. It’s almost as if they both go hand in hand.” Worship is changing with the generations, “Regardless it’s hard to name a secular style of music in any era that hasn’t been pressed into service by some branch of the church or other” (p39 line 4).  So I guess my question is couldn’t religion and culture merge together in liturgical music making it effective, and couldn’t that bridge the gap between secular and sacred music?

Music As Entertainment

A few things popped out in my mind when I was reading this first article. The major thing that I want to address was when Capps said ‘Art can easily become decoration, and music can become mere entertainment’ (p.41 line 11). It’s true that one of the things that attract a person to a church is the worship music that is being played. I mean one of the questions that are usually asked is whether it is contemporary or a traditional style of worship at the church. And more recently I hear people leaning more towards a contemporary church because of the style of the music that is being played.

However, I understand what Capps’ is saying because honestly I a lot of times have difficulties picking out I guess you would call it ‘praise’ songs rather then ‘worship’ songs. One of the people I was interning under this summer separated the type of songs that you would pick in a set as ‘praise’ and then the ‘worship’. The praise was more of the beginning up beat set of the service where everyone is up and clapping their hands where as the worship is where people would be lifting there hands in worship. I am not saying that I agree with this separation but I am just using it to get to my point about the music becoming a form of entertainment. It seems that the upbeat beginning songs a lot of time reflect that entertainment side of things, because that is almost the first impression that a new person visiting a church get’s when they come in. But the reason why I have a hard time picking these songs is that it’s a lot harder to find up beat songs (that aren’t always being played) that actually have some sort of meaningful message in the song. It’s challenging for me personally to find up beat songs that will both please the standard order of service (where you start with a couple fast songs to get things rolling (entertainment almost) and then going on with the more worship set) and then also go along with the theme of what the whole service is about. How do we deal with that?

We are almost stuck in trying to accomplish the task of getting people to come to the church music-wise with I guess an entertainment type of music to start, but then having to totally change directions with the whole set to fit the actual message or theme of the service. Is this where we need to start bringing out some sort of a unity between secular and sacred songs? Like T.S Eliot was saying: ‘religion and culture are aspects of one unity, and also two different and contrasting things’ (p.40 line 2, 3). True this secular and sacred music have contrasting things dealt within the song but at the same time aren’t they also similar in the basic fact that it is music? ‘…beautiful music existed to remind us of the divine and perfect beauty’ (p.38 line 17). This doesn’t say that only beautiful sacred music reminded us of the divine and perfect beauty but just music in general. So with this said would it be the right idea to start incorporating secular music as well as sacred music within liturgy? Or would this be completely out of the question?

as we begin…

Please read this entire post CAREFULLY! It contains blog instructions and requirements and also, this week’s reading assignment.

Welcome to the beyond the classroom blog. Here is where you’ll find the germs of discussion born of our reading that will propel us in the classroom.
It is very important that you stay current in your reading and blogging, as a major portion of your grade will be based on this. Because so much of our grade will be subjective (even the content of your posts will require subjectivity on my part) so I will be completely objective and unmerciful regarding the actual reading and blogging.
And I won’t feel guilty!
Your ability to contribute even in the classroom, will depend on having read and thought through the texts and having formulated a response. What we get out of the class depends on how we let the discussions affect us. We will need to think and pray and respect one another immensely.
Remember that your blog posts will be a formulated as a question based on your response to the reading. Your post should be substantial enough to explain your thinking and give us an idea of how your question formed. IOW, “what was he thinking?”, or, “doesn’t the author really torque your headbolt?” won’t be adequate. For that matter, “does the author believe all worship music should express solely our thankfulness for salvation?”
You should cite page number and paragraph if you refer to a specific passage and set up your “problem” or “delight” with what is said.
In addition to your post, you MUST respond in the comment section to at least 3 (three)(III) other posts. This is where the discussions occur.

Ok- so here is the first week’s material.
This week’s two articles serve two purposes. First we are interested in the content and ideas, and they are presented loosely in interactive format. The second responds to the first.
Here are the links:
reading 1 - An Open Letter to Worship Song Writers
reading 2 - An Unauthorized Postscript to An Open Letter…
Listening - Podcast: Slicecast

Your original post must be posted and timestamped by Saturday evening at 9:00 o’clock each week so that adequate time will remain for comments.