Contemporary Worship Music

[Fusioninspace]

I noticed a recent post from a couple that were looking for a small combo amp to use in church... From some of the comments, I found it interesting that so many people are unaware of contemporary worship music.

For the un-initiated, it's basically every music style you listen to today (metal, rap, country, etc.) but the message is obviously for the the glory of God. Most of it is not self-righteous or judgemental, but basic songs of praise. Like any other music style, some songs are better than others.

So in old school church they might start the service with a choir singing hymns from an old book, and each song having 10 verses of thy, thou, thee, etc.

The contemporary style might have a modern band setup (drums, bass, e-guitars, acoustic, etc.) and a lead singer/backups. The words will be projected on a screen (like PowerPoint) and the songs tend to be very to the point and may only have one verse and chorus that's repeated.

Either way, the purpose of the music is to get you focus and open your heart.

As with all music there's room for improv, solos, etc. For me, it was the reason I got back into playing guitar seriously again. It's one of the few areas of music today that actually does have a deeper meaning (not that others never do).

If you're into music and haven't been to church in awhile or ever, go check one out - Some of the mega-churches have evening services if you don't want to get up early. I would generally look for non-donominational Christain - but that's because I'm a non-donominational Christain

On the big new contemporary churches, they have sound systems that will simply blow you out of the water.

With the right sound, the right songs, the right musicians, and, of course, the right message - it changed my life...

 

[mshilarious]

Mass in B Minor changed my life. The first song, has, like, only two words

 

[faderbug]

... On the big new contemporary churches, they have sound systems that will simply blow you out of the water.

With the right sound, the right songs, the right musicians, and, of course, the right message - it changed my life...

over here we'd call that indoctrination.

 

[cephus]

Yeah, but it's so icky.

I like the message, but it just doesn't seem like Contemporary Christian Music is up to snuff. It's not as well-written as mainstream music, rock, rap, pop country or otherwise.

 

[rory]

I believe that the term is actually emergent church. Contemporary is so passe'.

This is actually what I'm doing my thesis on, how emergent churches use something so profane and secular and also how they justify its use.

 

[Codmate]

I'm writing a song in praise of the good ol' Flying Spaghetti Monster
http://www.venganza.org/

 

[true-eurt]

I believe that the term is actually emergent church. Contemporary is so passe'.

This is actually what I'm doing my thesis on, how emergent churches use something so profane and secular and also how they justify its use.

Why do you think the premises of music, is profane and secular?

 

[mshilarious]

I believe that the term is actually emergent church. Contemporary is so passe'.

This is actually what I'm doing my thesis on, how emergent churches use something so profane and secular and also how they justify its use.

Sounds interesting. What degree/course of study?

It seems to me that this sort of tension will always exist, as the church will always want to appeal to its target audience, which sadly these days does not mainly consist of Bach fans

I think the difference in the instant case is the unfortunate trend of slavishly adopting the latest musical fashion, while watering it down to the lowest common denominator, yielding music with little better intrinsic value than the latest K-Fed hit single. At the same time, it's especially tragic to denigrate the fine history of sacred music with ignorant derision.

Sacred music was once unquestionably the best efforts of the best composers, performed on the finest instruments accompanied by highly trained choirs. No sound system required

The megachurches have the resources to commission contemporary works in modern idioms by actual talented composers. I am not going to hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

 

[rory]

I am specifically looking at rock music. If you look historically at rock, it has always been a part of the profane, or secular life. It was the "devil's music", it corrupted children's minds, etc. I am by no means saying that all music is secular, we know that isn't the case. But its interesting how religion, or churches, are incorporating things into their services and messages that were once looked down upon and in some cases prohibited from even indulging in. Thats all. I've talked with some people about this and their responses vary quite a bit. I remember an older man who told me about his "saved" experience and how he prayed for his grandchild because not only did he not believe he had been saved, but he also went to one of those new churches where they played rock music! The experience of being saved is another fascinating thing to me, but I'll leave it alone for now.

 

[macmoondoggie]

I believe that the term is actually emergent church. Contemporary is so passe'.

This is actually what I'm doing my thesis on, how emergent churches use something so profane and secular and also how they justify its use.

Being the leader of a contemporary worship band, I find nothing profane about it. Secular possibly, but only in the context of using modern music
structure as opposed to hymn based structure.

 

[rory]

Sounds interesting. What degree/course of study?

It seems to me that this sort of tension will always exist, as the church will always want to appeal to its target audience, which sadly these days does not mainly consist of Bach fans

I think the difference in the instant case is the unfortunate trend of slavishly adopting the latest musical fashion, while watering it down to the lowest common denominator, yielding music with little better intrinsic value than the latest K-Fed hit single. At the same time, it's especially tragic to denigrate the fine history of sacred music with ignorant derision.

Sacred music was once unquestionably the best efforts of the best composers, performed on the finest instruments accompanied by highly trained choirs. No sound system required

The megachurches have the resources to commission contemporary works in modern idioms by actual talented composers. I am not going to hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

Its a master's in Sociology. What I've found through the readings I've done so far is a few things.

First, our society as a whole is turning away from secularness (that isn't to say we're moving towards religion). With secularization, relativity is the key so that your experience is yours alone and there are no ultimate truths that can or should be imposed upon anybody else. "we shouldn't 'fix' other countries because they have their own culture/religion/society/etc.". The argument is that humans NEED ultimate truths to base their existence upon. Religion can give us these, but traditional and even contemporary religion no longer works.

Postmodernity leads us into the next phase of religion where we start longing for the past and rejecting grand narratives. We also want a strongly personalized meaning and understanding of who we are, and what we stand for. The emergent worship actually started out like the apostles after Jesus died. They meet at people's homes and discuss their own ways of understanding whatever message it is they think. Churches are trying to adapt and find ways to mimic this type of all inclusive meeting. Thats the tip of the iceburg in a nutshell.

 

[rory]

Being the leader of a contemporary worship band, I find nothing profane about it. Secular possibly, but only in the context of using modern music
structure as opposed to hymn based structure.

I use profane not like we normally think of it, but as a religious term that distinguishes between the sacred (things associated with our time physically in the church and symbols used within it as well) and the profane (anything secular in life, things done physically outside the church). Its not a negative term, it is a dichotomy between popular culture and the church, traditionally. Obviously things are changing and the lines are becoming blury if not disappearing completely.

 

[XLR]

I've seen first hand that there are many people tortured by things that academia and intellectualism can only see at a cold distance.

 

[macmoondoggie]

I use profane not like we normally think of it, but as a religious term that distinguishes between the sacred (things associated with our time physically in the church and symbols used within it as well) and the profane (anything secular in life, things done physically outside the church). Its not a negative term, it is a dichotomy between popular culture and the church, traditionally. Obviously things are changing and the lines are becoming blury if not disappearing completely.

Thank you for that explanation.

 

[notCardio]

Wasn't the 'traditional' church music we think of (by Bach, Beethoven, etc) simply the popular music of it's day with religious lyrics? So what's the difference? If Bach wrote something secular, then when he was commissioned to write something for the church, was that scandalous?

It's silly.

I can't remember the born-again singer/songwriter from the 70's name (our guitar player was really into him), but one of his songs said something like 'why should the devil have all the good music.'

 

[ggunn]

...Thats the tip of the iceburg in a nutshell.

Now, that's the best mixed metaphor I've seen in a while! ;^)

 

[dafduc]

It's a long standing debate. "Why should the devil have all the best tunes" is most often attributed to Martin Luther.

As a music director at a large (2000+ family) Catholic Church, it's an issue that puts itself before me all the time. Because my chops are strictly from the "profane" side of the street, we spend more time doing contemporary stuff than traditional, but I *DO* mix it up.

But the question isn't just sacred vs. profane, it's also participatory vs. non-participatory. Bach's chorales work fine in modern worship, but his larger pieces push the assembly into pure listening mode. Schubert's and Mozart's masses make great concert pieces, but the "full and active participation" that I'm called to engage my assembly in can't happen if nobody can sing along.

So it depends what you're comparing. Praise-n-worship songs may seem dumbed down compared to a Vivaldi Magnificat, but compared to "Amazing Grace" or "Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing", they're musically at about the same level. The text tends not to hold up - but there are times to sing theology, and there are times to sing praise.

I find, consistently, that my assembly appreciates the familiar, but will latch onto something new IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH. good enough in their opinion, not some conservatory-educated fussy little organist. And it's, I'm convinced, the reason that they're lifting the roof now, when my predecessor couldn't get them to sing even just a little bit. Like Charlie Tuna, he was more interested in "good taste" than "tastes good". That guy could play circles around me, but he couldn't get the assembly to sing.

Anyhow, I think it's really important to look at this not from the listening experience, but from the perspective of the pew choir - the folks in the congregation who, though they haven't joined the music ministry, are still called to lift their voices to God each week. Handel won't help them do that, though Wesley could. And Mullins might.

Daf (who understands that different churches have different paradigms)

 

[mshilarious]

Wasn't the 'traditional' church music we think of (by Bach, Beethoven, etc) simply the popular music of it's day with religious lyrics? So what's the difference? If Bach wrote something secular, then when he was commissioned to write something for the church, was that scandalous?

You'd have to handle Bach and Beethoven separately. They lived in different times; Bach was for a long extent of his career in the employ of the church, and wrote strictly for the church (a cantata a week for several years!), at least in terms of being paid. Bach was also a deeply religious man, so even his instrumental works were steeped in his spirituality.

Beethoven was a product of the Enlightenment and tended towards Deism. Ironically, his Ode to Joy set to music Goethe's poem about the brotherhood of man; churches have plundered it ever since for hymns Beethoven had a religious commission or two that I recall, but mostly he scraped by on secular commissions.

I can't remember the born-again singer/songwriter from the 70's name (our guitar player was really into him), but one of his songs said something like 'why should the devil have all the good music.'

I believe that was Keith Green; he had some decent tunes, I wouldn't include him in the category of modern dreck. There was an outpouring of contemporary folk/rock religious tunes in the late '60s through the '70s, spurred on by new Catholic liturgies being ushered in the wake of Vatican II, and popular hippie musicals like Godspell. There is a lot of good music to mine from that era; indeed, it still comprises the bulk of the contemporary Christian folk-group style repertoire.

 

[mshilarious]

As a music director at a large (2000+ family) Catholic Church, it's an issue that puts itself before me all the time. Because my chops are strictly from the "profane" side of the street, we spend more time doing contemporary stuff than traditional, but I *DO* mix it up.

It's a good thing to mix it up and quite easy in a large Catholic church, because you have multiple Masses to work with, so you can do the full adult choir with organ at 10:00, the youth group in the evening, the piano and cantor for the vigil Mass, etc.

We have a wonderful pipe organ in our parish which I sit close to every week but the hymnal is Glory & Praise. Somehow it works rather well. The other Masses are handled by a very talented solo guitarist/singer who generally draws applause

At my old parish, the organist had only a humble electric organ to work with, but often after the recessional, she'd play a Bach prelude. Generally I was the last to leave the sanctuary, excepting the ubiqitous ladies finishing up their rosaries And of course the organist

 

[metalhead28]

Can't you just take some pop tunes and change the words around? Like every time they say "you" or "baby", substitute "Jesus"?

Hey, it worked in South Park.