Oh wait, I take that back...they really really do.So I'll admit, I chickened out a bit when it came down to which congregation to choose to profile for my Congregations in the Ozarks class. I wanted to do the small Buddhist group that meets on Saturdays, or the Unitarian Universalists but I got a little worried that I wouldn't be able to observe enough to cover the requirements for the class.
I played it safe and picked the large Presbyterian church right off Missouri State's campus. Considering that the majority my classmates are observing more evangelical, Pentecostal and liberal churches, I thought it might be good to provide the more mainline conservative balance.
I was Presbyterian for about 3 years of my life, but I was young and I really only remember how cool it was to be one of the acolytes. We'd wear these big black robes that flapped as we charged down the aisles with the flames...but I digress. :-)
This past week we were to observe the music in the congregation, both choral and instrumental. I went to the traditional service, so as you can imagine the music was just that- traditional. Needless to say my report to the class was rather boring compared to one of my fellow students who is observing a church (James River Assembly) that has a huge worship team (guitars, drums, singers, horn section, strings...etc...).
I think in a way I've looked down on worship services that are too contemporary. They seem too...anti-intellectual? But I realize now just how much music affects my personal worship experience. Some of my most powerful and emotional spiritual experiences involve more contemporary songs (Doubting Thomas, Be Still, etc.) It's a little hard for me to find the Divine trudging through all 4 verses of "We Give Thee But Thine Own".
But maybe I'm just one of those young whipper snappers who can't appreciate tradition.
I'm going to try and attend the contemporary service next time to get a better perspective on the worship spectrum at the church. Should be interesting to compare and contrast the traditional and the contemporary. They have a pretty large youth program with a college section, so I'm also looking forward to interviewing some of the younger members on what it means to them to be Presbyterian.
This field experience thing sort of has me hooked...I might become a professional church tourist after this semester is over. :-)
5 comments:
I feel inadequate. I don't know any of the songs mentioned in this post.
I wonder if I could get fired for that.
Doubting Thomas is a nickel creek song, that i doubt hillsong will do anytime soon, so don't feel too bad.
I don't think that you have to feel bad that you don't get anything out of the traditional music. it really means that you connect in worship different than others have. I think that the current established church has been trying to lump everyone into the same category for too long. We all experience differences and need to find a way to connect, on our own or in a large group.
This being said I do feel that corporate worship still has a place. The people of God need to connect, the church needs to be united, and there is something about singing "Be thou my vision" (or other songs) with 150 or more people that can never be replaced. For me, experiencing God has become more and more about my encounters with others. Churches just need to learn that they are not all Hillsong (if contemporary) or that good ol' baptist church (if traditional). Each tradition has it's own unique offerings that people long for and each congregation has individual needs that should be met.
I will join you on that tourist thing again when i am done here in p-burg.
Travis
and way to go on the muppets!
Okay, so since I read this the first time I have been thinking about contemporary vs. traditional (if those titles even really work anymore) methods of leading praise and worship at my church (which is probably similar to James River Assembly, even though we are not affiliated with the Assemblies of God or any other denomination, etc.) and songs and styles and oh, you know and I hit a spark and I haven't been able to stop thinking.
Sideler: I "grew up" in a denominational church that sang mostly "traditional" hymns. I didn't start attending the interdenominational church I do now until 2002.
The "spark" is this: The one thing that seems to stand out the most to me in contrast is the way "traditional" (I'm gonna stop "quoting" these words now, because I think you know what I mean) hymn type of songs seem to focus on the... grandeur (?) of God and the... depravity (?) of mankind. The "Hillsong"y, contemporary songs that I know of seem to say "God is awesome, and so am I."
Does this strike you as a wonky observation, in your expert opinion? Or am I as right on as I think I am? Do you think this reflects the philosophy/perspective of these churches or the people who participate in each/either service? OR does it dictate their midset? Does one sound better to you than the other? Does it matter at all.
Discuss.
Sideler #2: Our church only has one Sunday morning service and if it had to fit under one of the two categories, I'd say we're mostly contemporary. But I do love the times when I feel like throwing an old Ira Stampley, Fanny Crosby, et. al. in there when the mood strikes me. Also, U2, when appropriate.
I think that the I vs. Us language is a very important marker. Look at the mega churches that are benefiting from the "I/ME" language and these are some of the same ones that ride the line on the Gospel Of Prosperity. And I feel that we (smaller churches) are trying to imitate by taking the music and inheriting the culture of Me first, my experience, God grant me my wishes. Ok, i may be getting hyperbolic, now.
Post a Comment