I normally don’t “react” to the plethora of stuff that I read … especially letters written to editors of newspapers. But after I stopped by the post office to pick up the church’s mail, I found this “Letter to the Editor” written by Joyce Paul of Louisville, Kentucky, on page 4 of the August 28 edition of the Kentucky Baptist newspaper, the Western Recorder. I have reproduced this armchair editorial in its entirety, and will offer my own editorial (of sorts).
A recent Sunday School quarterly in a lesson worship offers the advice to blend the different styles of worship, music and preaching to eliminate the need for two separate services. In this way the old, out-of-touch seniors and the younger, in-touch emerging church will both be happy.
When did worship develop a style? God gave specific instructions about how we should worship and harshly judged those who refused to comply.
Many beleive the problem with the contention in the church concerning worship is simply a matter of likes and dislikes, but the problem is we haven’t consulted the Scripture to see what God likes.
I once approached a leader in the church about a clearly unscriptural practice in our worship and was told, “This is how we like it and this is how we will do it. You aren’t in charge.” No, I wasn’t in charge and that’s why I appealed to the one who was. I misakenly believed that what God liked ought to prevail over what we like.
It’s one thing to be ignorant concerning what God said, but it’s far more serious to know what He said and not care.
This concept of blending is exactly how the world has crept through the front doors of our churches. In the beginning God separated the light from darkness and Satan has been trying to “blend” them together ever since. In the Garden of Eden, Satan didn’t approach Eve with brand new technology, but he mixed truth with error and the truth served as bait and she swallowed it. A spoonful of sugar facilitates swallowing that which is distasteful.
When gold is mixed with any other substance, its integrity, value and purity are compromised. When we mix what God said with what we like, the result is the same.
My Comments:
- Wow! I don’t know where to start…
- I would love to be pointed toward those specific Scripture references which tells us what “God likes” in worship. It has been my understanding that God inherits the praises of His people. I read that once David (the man after God’s own heart) danced naked before the Lord. Is that the biblical standard that we need to return to? I would submit to Joyce that we have, indeed, consulted the Scritpures. In fact, we’ve put music to many of them … we call them praise and worship songs. Somehow I think that God must “like” His Word put to music.
- I would really like to know what that innocuous “unscriptural practice” was that Joyce described in her church’s worship. I wonder why she didn’t mention it by name. Perhaps it was not so “unscriptural?”
- It never ceases to amaze me how Christians can so easily label their practices and preferences as “Scriptural,” no matter how little biblical support those practices and preferences may have.
- As Joyce commented on blending being the way the “world has crept through the front doors of our churches,” I wonder if she realizes that so many of the old hymns (that I’m sure she loves … as do I) were Christian verse “blended” with familiar tunes in the 19th century?
- I could go on … I find so much to critique in this letter … but let me finish with this affirmation of Joyce Paul’s recent “letter to the editor.” I stand with her in her “anti-blending” position when it comes to our worship. Blending styles does not bring different age groups and worldviews together … it just frustrates everyone. Just focus on the people group you are trying to reach with the Gospel, choose a style of music that will reach that people group, and go with it. Do not deviate from it. Do not try to become “homogenized” in your worship.
In the end, God is simply looking for our praises and our adoration … not the “right and proper” instruments in our “sanctuaries,” choir robes, pipe organs, or pews. He seeks hearts that are passionate for Him and broken for the lost. Enough of this childish, self-focused, idolatrous quibbling over how “we want” our worship to be.
September 7, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Bro Geoff,
just somethig with regard to your point 5 ..
MUSIC EXPERT DEBUNKS MYTH THAT WESLEYS USED DRINKING SONGS
- The following
is excerpted from the United Methodist News Service, Aug 13, 02: “An
oft-heard myth about the Methodist tradition is that founders John and
Charles Wesley used drinking and tavern songs as the melodies for hymns.
‘The Wesleys did no such thing,’ says Dean McIntyre, director of music
resources at the United Methodist Board of Discipleship in Nashville, Tenn.
‘Given their aesthetic and theological sense, it would (have been)
unthinkable for them to do so.’ … McIntyre decided to set the record
straight after returning from this summer’s jurisdictional and chapter
convocations of the Fellowship of United Methodists in Music and Worship
Arts. At each event, someone referred to the ‘long-held and oft-repeated
untruth that John and Charles Wesley made use of tavern or drinking songs as
tunes for their texts,’ he says. He adds that some people have used the myth
as an excuse for importing secular influences into worship. McIntyre says
the legend began when a seminary or music student became confused over the
musical term ‘bar tune’ or ‘bar form’–a medieval pattern for poetry
consisting of three or more stanzas–which became the pattern for
songwriting.
Someone with no knowledge of medieval poetry heard ‘bar form’ in connection
with John Wesley, and the songs became tavern songs, he says. … ‘In no
hymn book or other publication of the Wesleys can there be found any example
of or encouragement to use drinking songs to sing hymns,’ he says. …
‘Rather, the issue is why Wesley did not use them.’ Noting that Wesley found
drinking songs unacceptable, he asks if worshippers today should use music
from the local bar for worship. ‘If Wesley’s reasoning for the Methodists of
his time remains valid for our own, then the answer is no.’ He suggests that
those who ‘justify’ the use of secular culture and influences in United
Methodist worship by repeating the Wesley legend ’should be called to
account.’”
Steve
September 7, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Steve,
You mean you believe those Methodists?