The Tragedy of (Most) Modern Worship Music

August 26, 2007 · 57 Comments

I’ve been thinking a lot about “worship music” these days. I’m very suspicious of the term. I’ve been suspicious of it for a long time, so much so that at a point during my time at Wheaton College, whenever I’d get a “worship” CD in the mail (I was A&E editor of the newspaper; I got lots of free CDs), I’d rarely even open it.

Here are just some of the reasons why I’ve become so jaded with what modern evangelicals have come to call worship music:

It’s 90% crappy, knock-off Keane or secondhand U2 (i.e. it is usually very predictable and unoriginal)
It’s an industry. How bizarre and kind of disgusting that branding your music as “worship” and selling it as an “experience” earns the most money in CCM.
It’s a very fickle, trendy industry. Every month there’s a new “it” song that eventually filters down to every evangelical church across the world… only to be replaced by a new “it” song a month later. No more standards, no more canons.
It turns its nose up at good writing. Most worship music wallows in bad water imagery, fire metaphor, or pseudo-sexual verbiage (“Jesus your love is ravishing, intoxicating, orgasmic, etc).
It’s more about creating an emotional response than eliciting a profound spiritual reflection. The measure of a good worship leader is often how many in the audience stand up or raise their hands out of their own volition.
It’s much too happy and self-satisfied. “Make a joyful noise” does not mean “don’t worry, be happy.” Some of the most beautiful (and yes, joyful) hymns have come from places of sorrow and brokenness (e.g. “It is Well With My Soul”)
It’s much too focused on the words. Can’t the music be worshipful on its own? Could not an all-instrumental song be just as worshipful as one with lyrics?

So, as you can see, I have issues with modern worship music. It really pains me, because I want to like it; I want to think that God is pleased by it. But I can’t get over the fact that it is mostly just mediocre, conservative, and stuck in a box. Worship is so much broader than just a “genre” of music that can be “entered in to” as a corporate, religious activity. Worship is much bigger than that—so much so that perhaps the question we should be asking is what isn’t worship?

Here is my non-traditional definition of what we might call worship: Any music, art, or experience that moves us in a transcendent way.

This includes things made by Christians and things made by secular hedonists.
This includes wordless music, formless painting, and R rated movies.
This includes books, poetry, and just talking. Yes, just chatting with friends.
This includes silence—the simple, still, do-nothing, unmediated experience of God.

All that said, this article is about worship music, so to get back on track: Worship music should be first and foremost honest music, and excellent music (artistically). It should come from the same place any musician goes to when writing a song. If that place is dark and has only a glimmer of hope, then that is your worship, and God rejoices in it (see Pedro the Lion sing “Be Thou My Vision”). If that place is effervescent and giddy about life, and that is honestly where you’re at, sing about it. Don’t force your music into formulas. Let it come out organically, creatively. There is nothing more worshipful than using our creative minds and talents to create the best and most creative thing we possibly can. Not the most commercial—not what is easy listening or reductive. No, our worship music should not be made for the masses.

Even as I’ve been ranting and raving about worship music and how bad it is, there are signs that it is beginning to get better. Thankfully there are Christian musicians out there beginning to realize that God is also honored by music that doesn’t have His name in it! Music can be about so much and still, in the end, be about God.

Here is a sampling of artists who you might not have heard of, but who consistently make artful, forward-thinking music that is also rather worshipful. Some are more obviously “worship” artists, while others are just Christians making beautiful music. But most importantly, all are good.

Waterdeep
Derek Webb
This Holiday Life
Future of Forestry
Sandra McCracken
Jimmy Robeson
Thomas Torrey
Mark Mathis
Half-handed Cloud
Ben+Vesper
Liz Janes
Joshua Stamper
Jason Harrod
Jake Armerding
Edison Glass
Mars Hill Church music
Anathallo

Categories: Uncategorized

57 responses so far ↓

Zach Malm // August 26, 2007 at 10:24 pm

Hey, Brett. I’d been planning to e-mail you in the next few days, but just saw your recommendation of the musica at Mars Hill Church. I’ve been attending that church since 2000 (it was a LOT smaller back then), and the music, and their dedication to originality and excellence in it, is one of the most striking things about the church. I’m good friends with many of the musicians. I’m glad you like it, and I hope your readers check it out. I think Team Strike Force is the group there with the best music, and the new band Red Letter is doing some amazing work.
The Space Between // August 27, 2007 at 3:13 am

I was hoping to find Sufjan Stevens in your list. His “Seven Swans” album is like nothing else out there.
Becky Pruitt // August 27, 2007 at 4:02 am

I just returned from a conversation about this very issue. For a truly exemplary example of just how terrible the “Jesus as my boyfriend” genre can be, make sure to check out “Your Love is Extravagant.” Even though the pastor with whom I serve loves that song, I flatly refuse to use it. One additional frustration regarding current worship music: It seems to be a few steps behind when it comes to the shift (at least in certain circles) from inward piety to social justice. I plan services for students every week, and I’m hard-pressed to find any song that talks about how an encounter with God affects our engagement with the world.
Brett // August 27, 2007 at 5:47 am

To the comment re: Sufjan Stevens (from ‘The Space Between’): I didn’t include him in my list simply b/c I figure he’s well-known enough as it is (I hope!). But yeah, “Seven Swans” is exactly what I’m talking about as an example of truly beautiful and worshipful music. There are some Sufjan songs that should become the new staples on Sunday mornings.
besidethequeue // August 27, 2007 at 2:46 pm

That’s awesome to see Mark Mathis on here! I went to high school and played basketball with his little brother. And his sister was married to the brother of some friends of mine. Good musician.
Justin // August 28, 2007 at 3:34 pm

kudos on Webb, waterdeep, and Sufjan. I went to a concert in seattle to see Sufjan and it was a “worship experience”. Maybe it’s too worshipy for this article, but Enter The Worship Circle and 100 portraits are at the top of my list as well.

Is it alright to drop the f-bomb in a worshipful song… like Over The Rhine’s Changes Come?

To me it seems like we’ve moved from having too small a concept of worship to having too large a one… don’t call that which is clean, unclean… nor that which is defiled, sacred. Grace as truth, not as an excuse.
Brett // August 28, 2007 at 4:50 pm

Justin-
I do think that it’s valid to question whether the f-bomb is okay in “worship” settings. In know for me, that song (Changes Come) was an intense experience of worship for me, especially live. And I’d be remiss to not mention film too–in which several of the “holiest” experiences I’ve had have come through films that include more than one f-bomb. I suppose it’s a case-by-case basis.
But I hear you about the whole “too small” shift to “too large.” I think that’s true. In some ways the history of Christianity can be seen as one long series of pendulum swings… from one extreme to another… always reacting against what came before.
John // August 29, 2007 at 12:45 am

I was surprised to see you say that worship music is too focused on the words. Then, I realized the problem is not that it is focused on the words, but that it’s not focused on the right kind of words. It’s a lot of pseudo-romantic language and a lot of talk about us (we’re going to praise You, we’re going to blah blah blah), instead of words about God (who He is, what He has done, and what He will do). Give me a rich hymn with some modern music attached and I’ll be happy.
Specials: McCracken on worship music that sucks, westerns that rock, and Over the Rhine; U2 update; Interview with Bale « // August 29, 2007 at 7:36 pm

[...] “the tragedy of modern worship music” (PREACH IT, BROTHER!!) [...]
Paul J. // August 29, 2007 at 8:13 pm

Thanks for a very good post. I’m still chewing on it enough that I can’t respond with anything but “thanks”…but I wanted to at LEAST say that.
Kelly // August 30, 2007 at 12:55 pm

I agree and would also add Jill Phillips as well as Songs from The Voice. A number of artists you list are on that project.
Scoots // August 30, 2007 at 1:23 pm

Relient K has written SEVERAL songs that fit your definition. Written from where they are. Personal. Honest. True. AND good music to boot.

One of my most favorite worship moments was hearing the secular band Trans-Siberian Orchestra playing Christmas Hymns. There, in the middle of a secular rock concert, I was able to worship God for sending His Son. Awesome experience.

Scoots
tctruffin // August 30, 2007 at 2:23 pm

I think John is onto something.

I’m not sure that the focus is ON the words as much as the focus is NOT ON the music, for the words themselves tend to be insipid and dull. If there is a focus on the words it is in a censorious sense, but not a sensibility that examines the theology of the lyric.
Andy Whitman // August 30, 2007 at 3:59 pm

Interesting thoughts, Brett.

I’m a member of a “Modern Worship Music” church, and there are times when I wince in pain when I listen to what we’re being asked to sing. Is it too much to expect noun/verb agreement and something other than the most banal of cliches? I’m certainly sympathetic to your criticisms.

That said, there is a place for emotional responses in worship. Many people in my church are familiar with the classic hymns, and we sing them occasionally. But as Christians, we are, in theory, also in love with Christ. And love, although far more than an emotional response, is also not less than an emotional response. The classic hymns are surely superior from a theological standpoint, and probably from an aesthetic standpoint, but they are not necessarily conducive to a response of love. They are, if you will, all head and no heart.

I would submit that worship should involve far more than thinking orthodox thoughts about God. And, like it or not, many contemporary worship songs/choruses have got that part right. “I’m desperate for you/I’m lost without you” won’t win any prizes for poetic expression. But it’s an expression that happens to be true, and that captures the heart better than any six verses from Watts or Wesley.
Brett // August 30, 2007 at 4:35 pm

Andy-
Thanks for your thoughts. I hope it didn’t come across in my article that I am not in favor of emotion having a place in worship. It certainly should. But I’m not sure I agree that hymns are not as conducive to emotional response–that they are “all head and no heart,” as you say. For me, singing hymns is INTENSELY emotional, especially knowing that, in some cases (e.g. Gloria Patri or other Doxologies) they have been sung for hundreds, even thousands of years by saints of other days. That said, it is unfortunate that we even have to look towards older hymns for examples of theologically-rich, aesthetically superior church music. Why aren’t we making it today? Is it too much to ask that we make worship music that is BOTH emotionally “conducive” and thoughtful, and well-crafted artistically? I would hope it wouldn’t be.
Andy Whitman // August 30, 2007 at 5:50 pm

I agree with you, Brett. It ought to be possible to create worship music that is both emotionally conducive and well-crafted artistically. But I’ll note that the music that’s intensely emotional for you has negative connotations for others. That’s not to say that you’re wrong in either your taste or your desire for more substantive worship. But for people who grew up in the Church, left it for whatever reasons, and came back years later, drawn to a more “relevant” approach, the idea of singing the Gloria Patri or the Doxology smacks of what they ran away from, and what they want no part of. It reminds them of church services that were decent, orderly, deadly dull, and supremely irrelevant. And these are the people who are primarily drawn to “Modern Worship Music” churches. Are they correct? Not for you, and not for many others. But they may be correct in terms of their own experience.

For these people, the notion of “connecting with God” is paramount. God is not a series of theological propositions couched in flowery poetry. He is a living being who can be known, and experienced in worship, and the aesthetic expression has nothing to do with that experience.

This is a caricature, and let me emphasize that in no way do I think your worship experience with the Gloria Patri or the Doxology is in any way inferior. But I’m trying to explain what I suspect are some fairly dramatic differences in the way “Modern Worship Music” Christians approach church, and the worship experience. They’re not looking for aesthetic excellence. It’s not even on the radar. They’re looking for an experience of the reality of God, and they’re looking for music that is most conducive to that experience. It’s experiential vs. propositional church. We could debate endlessly about which of those should be emphasized, or whether they should be separated at all. But those are the dynamics. And as someone who is frequently caught in the middle — longing for an experience of the reality of God, and yet wincing when the grammatical errors of the swelling, hyperventilating choruses are flashed on the big overhead projection screen — I can assure you that most people care far more about the experience of the reality of God.

I’d welcome emotionally conducive and well-crafted music as well. I find it all the time when I’m not at church, and it bothers me that worship is the aesthetic nadir of my week. But I’m also surrounded by people who desire to know God, and serve Him. That still trumps aesthetic excellence, and what I and many others have experienced in more traditional, mainline churches.
Collide Magazine » Blog Archive » Links of the Week // August 30, 2007 at 7:39 pm

[...] Brett McCracken discusses his problems with modern worship music. [...]
Brett // August 30, 2007 at 7:52 pm

I definitely agree with the idea that worship and connecting with God is achieved in vastly different ways by different people. There’s no question about that. Within the broad spectrum of Christianity in America, and especially if you go to Christian churches in foreign countries around the world, there are beautifully diverse expressions of worship.

Still, there is a part of me (and perhaps this is archaic) that still believes in standards and some expectation of excellence, regardless of how diverse it is. Can God get glory out of trite chord progressions and insipid lyrics? Of course. I’m not sure the relative aesthetic merit of worship matters as much to God as does its ability to foster our experience of His holiness, peace, and joy. But I do think there is a correlation from OUR perspective in the extent to which aesthetics inspire an experience of God. It is fascinating to me that in some people’s concept of their experience of God in worship, aesthetic expression “has nothing to do with it,” “isn’t even on the radar” as you say… How can aesthetic expression NOT be on their radar? If aesthetics don’t matter, why do we have music at all in our services? I think that as much as we might not be conscious of aesthetics when we worship, we can’t really deny that they play a BIG part. The fact is, some songs are better than others, and subsequently deepen our worship.

It may not be a popular sentiment, but I do think that well-developed taste and aesthetic appreciation (which is learned) has a place in this discussion. Frank Burch Brown is terribly insightful about all this in his book “Good Taste, Bad Taste, and Christian Taste.” I don’t want to denigrate anyone for the way that they worship, or suggest that I have some superior taste or understanding of it. It’s all very mysterious and I hate to complicate it any more than I have.

But I do know that just as there are people who fled the “mainline” churches of their youth (b/c of stodgy and dispirited traditions like “Gloria Patri”), there are many people I’ve witnessed who’ve left the church b/c of the trite and “relevant” praise music of today-because of our apparent disregard for aesthetic excellence. But people are always finding excuses not to like church, and not to like worship. At the end of the day, worship is not that difficult. If we want to experience God, we will. He’s a generous God.

My perspective is simply this: if we are going to worship God (and we should be… constantly), we might as well give it our best, right? We might as well make it as good as we possible can.
Andy Whitman // August 30, 2007 at 8:17 pm

Brett wrote:

“How can aesthetic expression NOT be on their radar? If aesthetics don’t matter, why do we have music at all in our services? I think that as much as we might not be conscious of aesthetics when we worship, we can’t really deny that they play a BIG part. The fact is, some songs are better than others, and subsequently deepen our worship.”

I agree that some songs ARE better than others. But it’s a profound mystery to me why everybody doesn’t agree with me, and simply accept my definitions of good and bad. :-) I know many people who genuinely prefer “I love you, Jesus” and three chords to “Crown him the Lord of Lords, the potentate of time/Creator of the rolling spheres, ineffably sublime.” Strange, but true. They find the latter to be pretentious and stuffy, and they find the former to be simple, direct and more “heartfelt.”

I’m not one of those people. But there’s no accounting for taste. And as much as I would like to argue for objective standards here, I’m not really sure that they exist, at least in terms of clear rules that could be followed to more or less ensure aesthetic excellence and an encounter with God in worship. For now, I’d settle for adherence to grammatical standards.

By the way, I appreciate the discussion. Thanks for your comments.
Dave - The Cubicle Reverend // August 31, 2007 at 11:34 am

Though I don’t think most rated R movies are worshipful, I do agree that most worship music is more like a pep song. A feel good crunchy lightness that gives an immediate response with little substance. The book of Psalms has beautiful poetry, words of encouragement, uplifting, as well as sadness and doubt focussed towards God because they want to know Him more.
Seth // August 31, 2007 at 3:26 pm

I’m surprised Sovereign Grace music didn’t make your list.

Seth
http://www.whatum.com
theological satire
Michael // August 31, 2007 at 7:32 pm

I just discovered this site last night, and will be a regular reader! I’m a full-time Minister of Worship who loves not only music but film, thinking, and writing, and so I will be keeping an eye out here for inspiration.

This post grabbed me for a couple reasons; my primary work is in worship and music, and I feel the same tensions that you describe. Your point #2 is one that I have been dealing with for years - worship as an industry is something that constantly gives me tension. Though I read through “trade” magazines like Worship Leader, Church Production, and the like, I always feel uneasy when I do. I know that there’s valuable information, yet when I see things like “worship artists” endorsing brands of mics or manufacturers talking about the “exploding church market”, I get queasy. We have CCLI license for legal reasons, but every time I visit the site and see “featured” music or the top-25 lists, I get queasy. I have a lot of queasiness sometimes…

Much of my unease stems from the fact that “worship music” is “sold” to the local church context for use in regular worship services. Yet the same music also is then “performed” by artists on tour, chosen for awards, etc.. Prominent worship artists are made to be like rock stars, and the local church ends up competing with its own industry, because most churches don’t have world-class sound systems, light shows, full-time musicians, “award-winning” songwriters, etc..

Lately, I think I’ve been able to get a better handle on my own thoughts, and I want to bounce this off of you and your readers. My “solution” (if I may be so bold) would be to define “worship music” in two different contexts, because we so often define “worship” in two ways: 1. that which happens in a local congregation on Sunday morning, with preaching, Holy Communion, etc. (I would label this “1 Corinthians 14 worship” or “regular corporate worship”), and 2. lives lived in response to God’s grace (I would label this “Romans 12 worship” or “vocational worship”). So then “worship music” becomes one of two varieties: music written for the local church, and music written by an artist for the glory of God. Ideally, all songs in the former category are also in the latter, but there are many more songs that would only fall in the latter (which I think would match more with your non-traditional definition above, Brett).

I think that writing music for the local church is truly one of the most demanding types of songwriting. It must be theologically sound, musically and lyrically interesting, and yet able to be sung by mostly non-singers. Yet very little of what I see and hear meets these criteria. As you imply, much of it is packaged in top-40 formats to be “relevant” and to sell records, which rarely translates to appropriate congregational song. I don’t have a problem with record companies and artists doing that as a business, but my wish is we would let the industry be the industry (ie. vocational worship music), and let the local church use music that is fit for the regular corporate worship context. If some songs happen to fit both contexts, fine. But my sense is that not much would (or even does currently).

It’s my own opinion, of course, but this would solve much of my tension. It deals not only with musical quality, but also licensing (why should churches need to pay royalties for worship music? More queasiness…), recovering a “folk” understanding of church music and singing (we could learn a lot from African culture and church…), and much more.

I hope some of this makes sense. I know it’s a lot, but it’s an area I’m very passionate about, and it’s my hope that, through some dialogue on this, we can be the proverbial irons being sharpened.
Bill Richart // September 1, 2007 at 2:06 am

I have really appreciated this article and discussion thread. We in the Catholic worship dept. are a bit behind in the praise music area; most Catholic churches do not use this music week-in and week-out like a “Vinyard” or Community church with a full time “minister of worship” paid a living wage to develop excellence — besides, the mass does not offer a large block of uninterrupted time for deeper worship. Those of us that praise the Name of Jesus in this way, with rockin’ joy and heartfelt worship are operating mostly in youth ministry and/or the Charismatic (Spirit-filled) Renewal.

One advantage of this, however, is that I am not under pressure to use “this week’s hottest praise ditty” — after listening to new stuff and praying through it, I have more time to discern if it truly glorifies the Lord and not my range/praise band/instrumental skills/sound guy. Also, it gives me time to further break down songs within classifications: I love Draw Me Close (although it is about “me” a lot) but only use Breathe in a ministry setting, since it doesn’t really worship the Lord, it talks about what I need. It also gives me time to lower many worship songs a step or so so folks don’t have to work so hard to enter into His Presence.

Yes, we’re behind a bit (some new music is coming out of the Catholic worship movement), but that’s not such a bad thing. I figure that folks have been worshipping the name of Jesus for about 2,000 years, so some of the stuff that has stood the test of time HAD to have been anointed, and can still stir my heart to cry out to my Savior. THAT’S what I want to use to minister to my brothers and sisters.
Dave Gawron / ServantSong // September 2, 2007 at 3:01 am

Wow, great post and comments. Unfortunately, I don’t think I can coherently say everything I want to, so I’ll just share a couple of thoughts. Quick background… I was not religious at all for most of my life, but I’ve always been a musician. I’m 36 and lead the band ServantSong. We released our debut album last year and are set to tour New England Christian Coffeehouses while also ministering events at Catholic churches. We all have lives that give us a certain point of view, so you can now see where I’m coming from. I really just want to sare a few thoughts from the point of view of the songwriter/artist. I’m not really disagreeing with anything, just shedding some light, hopefully. Songwriting is hard. Really hard. Just about every chord progression, melody, and lyric has already ben written. It might sound cliche, but I don’t write songs, but rather, God uses me as an instrument to write them. Basically, they just come to me. Some are really overt praise (Glory Be) and some are more personal stories about my faith journey (Black Crow on a Wire). I think a point to be made here is that most Christian songwriters would say the same thing. And we’re pretty much going through the same journey, that of a sinner struggling to live the righteous life, failing over and over, but perservering, keeping our eyes fixed on heaven. Personally, I’m not satisfied with the general status quo out there. For the new songs that I’m writing, I have a bunch of ideas flowing through me. Once I get the inspiration, then I try to find new and different ways to express them through song - interesting chord progressions, melodies, harmonies, and new lyrical twists and turns. I don’t know, I’m sorry, ths isn’t elegant writing at all. I guess from my post, you can just take the point that I’m one Christian songwriter that’s trying to create worshipful experiences through music that are so personally true and real to me, that I hope my listeners share the experience and take th faith journey with me. And surely, there are thousands more songwriters like me out there. So maybe the future is not so dim. God bless you.
John Zak // September 2, 2007 at 3:58 am

1. Interestingly I think worship, however understood, must always be seen in context with contemplation.

2. All prayer and specifically worship must begin by “being present” to God.

3. We can and must worship God with our entire selves.

4. Each human person has an emotional part and a rational part.

5. Thus, each part must be present to God to worship.

Moreover, our emotional and rational parts must be made present to God.

6. This “being present” may entail something different for each part, but should be complementary. That is, the “being present” of each ought not eclipse the other from “being present.”

7. In fact, our worship is incomplete if some part of ourselves does not become present.

8. The emotional part of ourselves delights in the object of love. Emotional worship is perfected in the experience of loving and desiring God.

9. The rational part of ourselves properly delights in the truth. That is, apprehending truth is the manner in which reason worships.

10. Actually, each part should lead the other be present as well.

That is, one’s personal love of God ought to call him or her to understand who God is. Likewise, one’s knowledge of God ought to call him or her to love God.

11. Of course, at times, due to our own weakness, limitations, sinfulness, etc. our ability to be present is compromised. Perhaps I know that I should desire God above all because nothing is more worthy; nevertheless, my emotions have not been trained or habituated to follow my knowledge. Thus, my worship may be dry or even distasteful, though authentic. Here knowledge must begin the task of reforming the emotions to follow the truth.

For many just coming into faith, the love of God is already present. But this love of God ought to lead the person to know God. As above, this can be arduous especially at first, perhaps even distasteful, and must be formed through practice and patience.

12. Finally, the worship of each part of ourselves is perfected through the worship of the other.

For example, my love of God is perfected as I better understand God’s unsurpassed worthiness for my love. Likewise, my understanding of God as Good is perfected by my well-formed emotional response — that knowledge elicits love of God.

13. [The following claim will go largely undefended for now. I expect some may take issue with it depending on their perspective.]

Our rational worship is superior to our emotional worship because it makes us present to God in a superior way.

Even though our intellect cannot exhaust the mystery of God, it more fully make God present to us.

At the very least because it directs us to love God by showing the “why” — reason presents God as lovable to the emotions and the emotions respond with love.

One might say, “I know God is awesome because I feel awe when I worship.” But this does not satisfactorily answer the question, “Why is God awesome.” God is not awesome because I feel awe, i.e. my feeling does not make God so. Rather, something about God is what stirs the awe in my heart.

Reason can apprehend the “why” God is awesome while emotions can at best apprehend “that” God is awesome.

Having the “why” reveals God more than just the “that.”

14. I offer this reflection as pointing to the foundations of the present discussion. We need more meat on the bones of our worship in order to be satisfied. Our worship must fully engage our reason and our emotions. Even trite songs can lead us to become present to God, but a praise song hardly is sufficient for making one entirely present to God. At best it is a step, an invitation.

If we want to continue to love God and give our entire selves to him, we must engage every aspect of ourselves to the fullest extent. Thus, we need more rational worship that leads to contemplation, i.e. being present to God with my entire self.
Seth // September 2, 2007 at 10:33 pm

Aaron Stumpel, Kate Hurley, and others associated with Origin in Boulder and Enter the Worship Circle have some really great worship music. Aaron’s album is amazing…

Modern worship has it’s place, but I do find the idea that one must only sing the modern worship songs or original songs rather troubling. There is an entire spectrum of worship music written the past 500 years, not to mention songs written in other languages and from other cultures. Why not draw from all of it?

I do see power in worship, but it’s ultimately whether we put our hearts into it or not. For the worship leader, one could argue that one aspect of putting your heart into writing worship songs and leading worship would be to develop your craft.

It seems like a lot of worship music falls in line with the music industry’s focus on youth-oriented pop music. Again, it has it’s place, but as I get older, I’m thankful there is more than just popular worship songs.
Andy Whitman // September 3, 2007 at 12:03 am

John Zak wrote:

“14. I offer this reflection as pointing to the foundations of the present discussion. We need more meat on the bones of our worship in order to be satisfied. Our worship must fully engage our reason and our emotions. Even trite songs can lead us to become present to God, but a praise song hardly is sufficient for making one entirely present to God. At best it is a step, an invitation.”

Worship songs are only part of a church service. I would think that the teaching/sermon would be an appropriate place to focus on reason. “Trite,” of course, is subject to personal interpretation, but my experience is that a praise song is entirely sufficient for making one present to God. And since numerous psalms focus entirely on praise (e.g., Psalm 150) it seems dangerous to argue otherwise, or to denigrate them because they don’t fully engage our reason.

My experience of worship/praise music is that it also expresses the full gamut of experiences found in the psalms — lament, unbridled praise, confessions of doubt and uncertainty, etc. The only psalm-like sentiment I haven’t heard in contemporary worship music is a desire to dash the babes of one’s enemies against the rocks. I would probably struggle to sing that anyway.
Amy // September 3, 2007 at 1:07 am

Brett,
I grew up with both hymns and liturgy, and modern worship music in both liturgical and charistmatic settings. I have an appreciation for all good music. More importantly, I take the idea of worship very seriously.

That’s why I’d like to make two comments– first on your “non-traditional definition” of what we call worship: “Any music, art, or experience that moves us in a transcendent way. ”

It pains me to realize that most people think that worship is about us and the benefits we receive from it. Yes, we do attend worship services to be fed. And yes, when we worship God for who he is, we do benefit. But the point is, we worship God for who he is, not for what we hope to get out of it. We cannot continue to view our worship services from a consumeristic standpoint. Worship is not a song, liturgy or hymn. Those are tools that we use to give honor to God. What’s important is that our hearts are focused on serving Christ.

I’d also like to comment on your perception that modern worship songs are an industry. When some people are moved to worship God, they write songs. Often when they share the song with someone else, that person can be moved to worship God because of the song. Rather than view the songs as an industry, why not think of them as one believer sharing their realization of God with another believer? The “trickle down” effect of good worship songs today can be a beautiful gift from God.

Yes, some songs aren’t worth our voices. It’s important to be choosy and match them with Scripture and aesthetic wisdom. But it’s impossible to make a sweeping generalization and say that most worship songs fall into the “worthless” category.
John Zak // September 3, 2007 at 1:19 am

To briefly respond to Andy Whitman…

It seems you take my use of the word ” trite” too broadly. It of course means, “Lacking power to evoke interest through overuse or repetition.” I in no way refer to ALL praise songs in this way.

Perhaps I could refer to some of the same songs I have in ming as “silly.”

OF course we need to distinguish songs of praise from teaching, sermons, homilies, classes, etc. A praise song’s purpose and function certainly differs in the scope of its instructional and contemplative capacity.

But let me add this…

Mentioned above also is the notion of aesthetics. Appreciating and worshiping with much beautiful music differs in kind from praising in a praise song.

Often a praise song engages our emotions primarily — it is a way we form our emotions by allowing them freedom to praise God. Often the emotional act is outwardly physical beyond mere singing — dancing, cries of repentance and joy, etc.

True beauty engages our emotions, but also our reason more properly. It activates and perfects our reason in a way that an exclamation of praise does not. Ultimately, one is even more moved, even if not with the same outward expression, by an encounter with something more aesthetically perfect.

To close, a person once told me, “I love songs, but songs that lead to silence.”

I love even silly worship songs — they engage my emotions and direct me toward God. I find that the movement of worship usually begins with songs of praise, move to songs of worship (practically deeper, more intimate lyrically and slower tempos), and finally climax in SILENCE. In this silence our whole selves, emotion and reason can be present to God most fully I think. We can truly listen to God, we can contemplate his Truth.

Thank you everyone to your thoughts on these matters. I think they are of profound importance.

After silence, we conclude in songs of thanksgiving and praise, often of the “silly” variety.

[Of course, as I am Catholic, my spiritual experience draws most deeply from the liturgy which engages and feeds every type of prayer: adoration, repentance, petition, and thanksgiving. Moreover, I believe Jesus becomes present to me through the Eucharist in a manner much more profound than a song could express .]
John Zak // September 3, 2007 at 1:27 am

To Amy,

Yes. Jesus comes to us so that we would come to Him.

Even though my worship is beneficial insofar as it feeds me, it is only worthwhile when it is a gift. I give my worship to God and every moment, every thought, every action, because I want nothing more than to give to God. I give my worship because when it has all been said and done, that is all I have to give.
Andy Whitman // September 3, 2007 at 12:42 pm

John Zak wrote:

“Often a praise song engages our emotions primarily — it is a way we form our emotions by allowing them freedom to praise God. Often the emotional act is outwardly physical beyond mere singing — dancing, cries of repentance and joy, etc.

True beauty engages our emotions, but also our reason more properly. It activates and perfects our reason in a way that an exclamation of praise does not. Ultimately, one is even more moved, even if not with the same outward expression, by an encounter with something more aesthetically perfect.”

You’re going to have to define “aesthetically perfect” for me, John. I think I know what it means for me. But you’re throwing around these terms as if there is a general consensus about their meaning. And there is not. The truth is that I know many Christians involved in the arts, and who probably know something about aesthetics, who genuinely prefer praise songs to traditional hymns, or other forms of Christian music. In the context of worship, these praise songs simply help them to worship God more effectively, more wholeheartedly. They don’t listen to them on the radio, or compare them to the works of Mozart or Beethoven. They hear them only in the context of worship, and within that context they help to bring the worshipers into the presence of God. And that’s the point. God shows up. And when God shows up, nobody’s thinking about aesthetic perfection, at least in the sense that you are using the term.

As I’ve mentioned in this discussion, I struggle with the aesthetic expression of much of contemporary praise/worship music. The rational/reasonable part of my being rebels at much of what I hear. But what I can’t deny is that God shows up through this music — in my life, and in the lives of others in my church. And that’s at least partly why I’m there. I’ve been membered in other churches where the rational/reasonable was much more highly emphasized, and God didn’t show up. Guess where I’m going to go?

And that’s the bottom line for me, and for many people. There are issues that trump aesthetic excellence. An encounter with God is one.

For what it’s worth, I have an M.A. in theology, can discuss it in a reasonably nuanced way, and write about music for several national music publications. And I’m at the church with the praise choruses. And that’s because there are issues that trump aesthetic excellence. I’m surrounded by people who desire to love Jesus with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength, and who have formed a community with enough depth to encourage openness and transparency with one another. The fact that they string three chords together and sing “I love you, Jesus” is fairly far down the list of concerns.
Cara H. // September 3, 2007 at 10:06 pm

Brett,

I’m curious about your last bullet point in regard to the emphasis of words in modern evangelical worship music. If limiting the conversation only to a congregational setting, it is hard for me to reconcile how music can avoid creating false spiritual experiences by being emotion-driven, if there isn’t an intentional emphasis on the lyrics. I agree with you that instrumental selections are just as beautiful and worshipful as songs we sing, and this is not the type of music I am referring to in my argument for special attention to words in music. I’ve noticed a trend in “worship music” that is self-contained and fails to give praise to the Creator. I don’t think this form of music is bad or unholy, but perhaps it helps to contribute to a church culture that seeks to be therapeutic rather than worshipful.

I think I understand what you’re saying in terms of music focusing too much on words, but at the same time I think there’s a good argument for being very intentional about the words in music that is selected for a corporate church setting.

Just for the record, I dislike most Christian music that I’ve been exposed to since my pre-teen years, especially the modern worship music that is sold in 2-disc sets on daytime TV commercials. My argument for intentional selection of worship music stems from many years of witnessing the abusive effects of music when it isn’t carefully selected for a church.
John Zak // September 4, 2007 at 12:46 am

In reply to Andy Whitman,

I appreciate and enjoy our dialogue on these matters — as I mentioned before, I think these matters must be discussed.

1. On aesthetics, I certainly do not presume to be an expert in this arena, nor while I really try to define what I mean by aesthetic perfection. I do think there is an objective hierarchy in aesthetic quality; not everything is up to taste.

I no one takes offense when I make this claim, but I think that often we need to form our personal tastes with what is beautiful in itself. While some do not find what is more beautiful in itself more pleasing, this does not mean that there is no objectivity in such regards.

2. Different kinds of activities allow God to become present in different manner. That is, the way God becomes present through an act of alms giving is different than the way God is present in the singing of a song.

I argue that the different kind or style of song also makes God present differently. This has to do with the nature of the activity itself.

As I think praise music centers on our emotions most directly, through the pulsating music and easily memorized lyrics, God becomes present in an particular fashion. As other forms of music in particular engage reason more properly and then may spill over into emotions (as our reason is or at least should rule in us), this form of worship makes God present in a different way.

3. To recognize this difference does not suggest that one should entirely replace the other.

As praise songs have their own proper way of allowing God to become manifest for us, we should foster this style of worship.

Likewise with what I would call more aesthetically perfect forms of worship.

(For any Catholics out there, I find the Rosary to be something like a mixture of contemplative silence and praise music. The repetitiveness and rhythm of the phrases and the meaning of the mysteries provides for a profound kind of worship.)

4. I think that certain styles of worship have greater potential for allowing God to become manifest through how the activity engages our being and personhood.

While validating all styles of worship as good insofar as they reveal God in their own proper manner, I think certain styles which better reveal God should be fostered.

I present this as a challenge because often those activities which better reveal God and are perhaps better forms of worship can be distasteful for those not practiced in them. Just as at times I find it undesirable travel to pour areas of the city and distribute clothes, it can be difficult for many to appreciate higher forms of worship before first changing themselves.

5. This is to say, ultimately, our desire to worship and give ourselves to God often is a call to reform ourselves, to change our tastes in order to allow God to become more present in our midst.

(This cannot be done by putting on airs — I hardly believe someone should pretend to find Gregorian chant more beautiful because he or she thinks it is expected of him or her. Rather, I think this person may just spend some time giving it a chance.)

6. Finally, I hesitate to mention a final concern, but it must be said. Sometimes I wonder what it means for a person to say that God was present. I say this because I fear many times people mistake an emotion for God’s presence. Sometimes one sees the same spontaneous bursts of emotion at everyday rock concerts that you see in times of praise. Sometimes I wonder what is from God and what is not. I think we need to be more discerning sometimes.

I say this will the full belief that grace perfects nature — that good aspects of a rock concert can be transformed by grace to make God present in a special form. God can use the same emotions that would be actuated at a concert and uses them to reveal Himself to us.

Nevertheless, sometimes I think people mistake their own natural emotions for the promptings of grace when they are not. I mention this also because I think there is a far greater potential for this in modern praise music as it taps most directly into our emotions. As someone who engages in this kind of prayer regularly, it is something I always keep in mind for myself.

To quote Brett: “It’s more about creating an emotional response than eliciting a profound spiritual reflection. The measure of a good worship leader is often how many in the audience stand up or raise their hands out of their own volition.”

The disenchantment we have at judging a worship leader in this fashion in part draws from this suspicion about the nature of such emotional responses. A fine rhetorician, like the Protagoras, can persuade and elicit emotions. A skilled worship leader can do the same thing — the hope is that this is from God and not just from the music.
John Zak // September 4, 2007 at 12:49 am

If you would like to have a more technical discussion on these matters, I would enjoy the exchange. I say this not to promote myself, but I am working on my dissertation to finish my Ph.D. in philosophy and am interested in the finer details and arguments in all these issues. A continued dialogue might be very fruitful.
Decompose » Further Thoughts on Worship // September 5, 2007 at 1:21 pm

[...] blog stops revealed more bits of the dialog. Brett McCracken had an interesting post entitled The Tragedy of (Most) Modern Worship Music. Then over at L’chaim, Heather Goodman contemplates similar themes in a piece entitled In the [...]
Tiffany // September 6, 2007 at 4:38 pm

I’ve skimmed most of this, so if what I say has already been touched on, forgive me.

I am a part-time worship leader and a seminary graduate. I’ve noticed that many of the posters here have been “professionals” or seminary educated, but the people I’m leading every week are not. The tension I experience with what Brett has written is that I agree with most of what he’s saying. The problem is how to deal with that practically.

While the songs that are coming out now aren’t great, they’re singable. I’m dealing with a generation of people who grew up singing along with the radio, have little or no musical training and a very limited vocal range. They’re used to repetitive refrains that they can pick up easily. If I go too musically “interesting” it end up being a performance with no participaton. I don’t want to pander, but I don’t want to go over their heads.

They also don’t think theologically, for the most part. I want to lead them in that direction, but I don’t want to come across as smug because I’ve put thought into this and I think some of the songs they love are trite, which I do.

I look for songs that are strong in both spirit and in truth, but also that work in the real world. Not easily done.
Jason // October 3, 2007 at 6:11 pm

To Becky Pruitt (if you’re still reading)

We just had Noel Richards from England at our little church, and he is one of the first I’m seeing that is writing worship songs with the horizontal aspect of justice in them. Some of these are brand new from him, so they may only be on his MP3 on his website. His website is http://www.noelrichards.com

Interesting thoughts in a very interesting debate.
Beverly Read // October 18, 2007 at 10:33 am

What an interesting Blog with many and varied responses. I just found it, and maybe no one will read my comments because I’m weeks behind.

I am the pianist (yes, pianist not keyboardist) at my church here in Pollock Pines. I’ve been a church musician from my teen years. At 16 I was the church organist. I’ve said that to lay the groundwork for my comments. And by the way, I’m old.

I am part of the “worship team” - practice every Wed and Sun for the Sunday AM service. I’m not going to make too many comments on the songs - it has already been mentioned that much of it is mediocre. I find it also awkward in the chord progressions, and quite boring for the most part. Instead, I’d like to focus on the results of the current music.

I remember when people really sang. They don’t any more. I also remember worship that was reached not as a “plan of action” but as a result of God’s word being preached and hearts being touched. I remember remaining after church was over to sing quietly and reverently, and then reluctantly leave to go home feeling like I’d been in the Presence of God.

I recently read an article about alters and invitations (which were common back then). The discussion centered around the dangers in the structured “invitation” and the resulting emotional response to “accept Christ” which rarely had a lasting effect. It was hard for me to read that, but I had to agree because I saw those results firsthand.

There is a parallel here that the structured “worship time” could give people a false sense of having done their worship duty for the week. And with the focus (as mentioned in previous comments) on the “me” and what “I” need, we become like children saying “gimme” to a parent with our list of what we want.

A small comment about the songs. No longer can you visit a church of your own denomination in another city and be able to sing. You won’t know the songs. And I know of at least two people in my small church who arrive late on purpose so they won’t have to listen to the loud drums and guitars and amplified voices of the performers (aka the worship team).

I believe the changes in the church music have far-reaching effects. I perceive that it has taken us to a somewhat dangerous place where we are trying to make the church fit the people. Emphasis is on making people feel comfortable and unthreatened, and they can feel good about themselves. The Message of the Gosple is diluted and sometimes directed at social issues rather than the human need of salvation. Thankfully in recent months my pastor has left the stock outlined sermons where they belong on the internet, and begun preaching from the Bible.

As for the music, God probably thinks all of the music created by humans is horrible. After all, he listens to angels. My humble opinion is that what he really wants is for us to be conscious of Him and His absolute sovereignty, and for us to desire to belong to Him and “be in touch” with Him. “Worship” is a matter of the heart, not a program in the church.
Brett // October 18, 2007 at 5:11 pm

Beverly:
Thanks for your comments. It’s nice to have the perspective of someone like you, who’s been “living” and a part of the changes in worship music over the years. I especially resonate with your comment that “I remember worship that was reached not as a “plan of action” but as a result of God’s word being preached and hearts being touched.”
Today, worship music almost seems like a tool of utility–carefully crafted to attract more of the “type” of audience a church is after (nowadays that seems to skew younger, and more informal). Most of it seems preoccupied with our own small, petty notions of “what God is to me.” Very little of it seems to stem from a response to God’s majestic greatness. And yes, I also agree that the chord progressions are extremely boring!
Beverly Read // October 20, 2007 at 6:22 am

Brett,
Thank you for reading my comments. These days sometimes I feel like a voice lost in the noise. I have learned that many people don’t care that the music is poorly written, nor do they care that about the lyrics, and then they think it is wonderful to sing the same verse or chorus or bridge a number of times. They are uninterested in and uneducated about good music.
I remain part of the music program at my church, though I don’t care for it very much, because otherwise where would I be able to play. And because I choose to be a part of it, I do my very best. It “broadens my horizons” in that I learn more about other people.
But I worship God in the quietness of my car.
Thanks again,
Beverly
One lost, but known // November 20, 2007 at 8:45 pm

I do agree and I do think a lot of “worship” music today is made to make a profit or to promote an artist’s status…

However I’d say that if a person likes what they’re hearing (whether others consider is good or not), and it causes them to really open their hearts to the love of God, really causes THEM to know God’s majesty and ability then I’d say it is good for them…maybe only that person, but at least it’s touching someones heart… (therefore allowing them to “experience” God).

Music that is made from the depths of a person’s soul will have a much more profound effect on that person or others who have been in the same place…this usually is good music, but very few people might see it as such. Therefore, (from an evangelical standpoint I guess) a far less amount of people get “touched”…
But yes… music designed not necessarily to touch people, but to provide personal worship in any form, is the best. Even if, dare I say, its crappy music. -.-
One lost, but known // November 20, 2007 at 8:48 pm

*edit

Which it’s usually not…It often is quite profound. ^^
Matthew Smith // December 11, 2007 at 11:12 pm

see Brian and Jenn Johnson, Kim Walker, John Mark McMillan, and Misty Edwards (www.ihop.org).

these are all excellent PROPHETIC worship artists.

listen to http://www.PropheticWorshipRadio.net for the cutting edge in worship of Spirit and Truth.
Dave Powell // December 13, 2007 at 12:46 am

I’m a worship leader in college, still learning a lot. I agree with you that too many songs use somewhat hazy imagery and sluggish themes, but sometimes the simplest songs are the best. And whose to say that your personal view of what’s good music is different for other people? Personally, I get a lot out of acoustic worship…just a guitar and a djembe. Keeping it simple keeps people focused in on God, in my opinion. But as long as it doesn’t become a self-serving field, I think anything’s fair game. Some young people may not get a whole lot out of an old hymn, but if you play modern praise and worship music, they might be able to connect. Just a thought.
Dave Powell // December 13, 2007 at 12:49 am

Oh and by the way it was great to see Waterdeep up there. My band did “Those Who Trust” a few weeks ago…great music.
Kate Hurley // January 9, 2008 at 2:43 am

Hey thanks so much for this thoughtful article. I am a worship leader and song writer myself (I was a featured artist on Enter the Worship Circle: Third Circle which evidently you’ve heard those CDs) and I couldn’t agree with you more on some of these points. The vocabulary used in most worship songs is very limited, and often not very creative, and often the music is the same way. I have noticed lately that if I’m switching radio stations, I can often tell that it’s a Christian station before I even hear the WORDS! That’s how in a box a lot of the music is. That doesn’t seem right.

I know that I myself have to make sure I am not trying to write a song that will simply bring an emotional response. I want my songs to express people’s hearts, but not be formulaic. I know one of the guidelines of the Worship Circle CDs is that if it would sound weird coming out of a pre-believer’s mouth, don’t use it. In other words, don’t use the secret code words for our little club. All that does is make people feel like they don’t belong. I like that rule.

I know that I would love to hear and write more worship songs about the poor, about our role in loving the people in the world. I think it’s important to have some worship songs about our relationship with God, and that there is therefore language like “I” and “me,” but when that is all that there is, I think we are missing the point. Jesus did come to change us personally, but he talks so much about his love for those who have been abandoned and lonely. I wish there were more worship songs addressing this.

I am amongst a network of friends that are really trying to change some of this….to write some joyful songs but also songs about not understanding things, songs without an answer tacked on the end. Jesus sometimes wants us to search rather than swallow an easy answer. I hope that I can be a part of a worship movement that is organic and real, more concerned for the people singing the songs than the royalties I will get from them.
Kate Hurley // January 9, 2008 at 2:47 am

I can’t believe that you have Half Handed Cloud on there! They are so wild! I love them though….

“If your father’s getting naked in the pup
Walk in backwards and cover him up.” Nice. Very nice.
Duchess Aristobrata // February 16, 2008 at 5:07 pm

I’ve randomly stumbled upon this page and this article caught my eye. I feel you, man….man, I totally feel you, and I won’t go into a sermon on how our feelings are similar.

Sincerely,

Duchess
Russ // February 26, 2008 at 6:25 am

I just want to remind everyone that the “hymns” a lot of you speak of were written in the popular style of the day and often to the tune of “drinking songs”. I think it is important to stay relevant to the people you are ministering with/to.

While I agree that some Modern Worship is over the top, I truly believe that many of the popular worship artists today have genuine hearts.

So the music is popular - Big deal - is singing about God a bad thing now?

I love Derek Webb (one of the artists on the non-suck list) - his music has actually caused me to stop and re-evaluate my thinking on some social issues, but I also happen to really like Mercy Me as well. Does that make me an experience driven sell out who doesnt understand what worship is? I dont think so.
Bibles and Airports » The Tragedy of (Most) Modern Worship Music The Search // March 11, 2008 at 6:59 pm

[...] Did you like this brief introduction? Find out about it in full detail here. [...]
Kory // March 12, 2008 at 12:11 am

Wow, just to note I am in the process of writing a paper that will somewhat compare and contrast the music of Luthern hymns and modern day worship. These comments have really sparked my interest in my paper.

I have been leading worship for a few years but more importantly I have been a worshipper for much longer but as I started to read these posts and comments I felt a pain in my heart. The words that echoed in my head were “us, we, and I.” As a post earlier written by Amy, I am in total agreement that worship is NEVER NEVER about us, me or I”
We talk about asthtetics (i can’t even spell it) and what is pleasing to the ear, but what can we produce that God has not already heard? What can we sing that is good enough for the Creator of the Universe? All we can do is come to Him in humble adoration offering him a sacrifice of praise.

Brett you wrote:
“It really pains me, because I want to like it; I want to think that God is pleased by it.”

God doesn’t need our worship, all creation worships him, I am referring to the rocks. He wants it! God can glorify himself through the worst song ever.

I do also believe that in everything we do we do it to the best of our God given ability. God has given us talents and we don’t want to squander them away, but before we over analyze how we make worship music we should first look at how we walk with God.

So many thoughts:

We talk about being filled. It is totally important to be filled, but firstly how can we be filled by God when we ourselves are not empty?

Final thought, worship is never about us.
Romans 12: Therefore I urge you brothers in view of God’s mercy to offer your bodies as living sacrifices holy and pleasing TO God…
Jerad // March 21, 2008 at 2:14 am

I’m sure this thread is too old for a response if even for a read but…..my 2 bits. I like the discussion in this thread, very refreshing. I actually assumed it was going in another direction as I have read so many Calvin/Luther blatherings on the “dangers” of modern worship. I also have my preferences/concerns with worship music. I think there is WAY to much emphasis on music and WAY less emphasis on a worship lifestyle. I am a worship “leader” (I like worship inviter better) and it is a huge part of my life but VERY unimportant compared to the everyday sacrifice, service, love, adoration we should be sending heavenward. I am also very tired (read more exhausted than angry) of the criticism surrounding worship music. Heck people, let’s get all ruffled up and anal about people doing their best to love God. I was really blessed by my 2 year old son singing a sweet yet technically awful worship song to God. I dare a Calvinist to blather away the value of that sweet, sweet moment between my son and God. Anyway, these comments in no way reflect anyone on this thread, it just sparked some thoughts. Blessings all.
Michelle Bythrow // March 28, 2008 at 4:03 am

Hey, I like what you have to say about “worship” today. I love Mars Hill. Right on.
Worship doesn’t seem worshipful so many times. I just want to sit and pray or kneel down and listen sometimes. It makes me sick that we have an industry revolving around Christian music. It should be free to everyone and there should still be plenty of time to work a paid position elsewhere but still find time to write, sing and play music to help people as a gift from God.
Ricardo de la Cruz // April 5, 2008 at 12:32 am

Hi. I’m from Cape Town, South Africa. I stumbled upon this thread by accident and read most of it and you know what? All of you are right. This is God’s way of making us all see what He intends for us to see. All of you should take from this what is important for you, because that is what God is revealing to you at this point of reading this. I especially want to echo what Amy and Kory said already, so no need to repeat that.

Let me add what I’ve experienced. As a guitarist and singer in our worship team, I’m also responsible for getting the new songs and teaching it to the team. I have a variety of cd’s with all types of and genres of praise & worship music. I’ve been following all the trends of the various styles of praise & worship for years now and have somehow been undergoing the changes as they came along, like: recently changing my hair colour and wearing it long and spikey(’cause that’s what the artists are doing all over the world). Created my own MySpace account (’cause you have to have friends in the same circles all over the world)… you probably get the point by now… it’s no longer about God, but about us… thank God I realized this in time… the line is so thin between gloryfying yourself when you become better and people say you are good, than gloryfying God.

To get back to this discussion, the modern worship (not all, but most) has gone “rock ‘n roll” - just listen to the latest albums from Integrity Music, Vertical Music, Vineyard - you name it… even our best loved christian artists are dressed like “Rock stars” with tattoos etc. Most of the songs are featuring screaming guitars and loud drums… For sure we should “make a joyful noise unto the Lord”, but since we’ve been playing these types of songs in our church, I’ve seen a decline of participation from the congregation - they’ve now become the “audience” (just staring at us with big eyes) and we became the featured artists or “Rock Stars”. See this website that discusses these type of problems: http://www.av1611.org/crock.html

The point I’m making is we should be careful how we lead people into God’s presence and not out of His presence. I once heard a pastor say that God accepts any type of music as long as He knows your heart is pure. So my call to all of you is to make sure you are honest with yourselves where you stand with God. And those artists that you admire: do a Google search on them and discern if they are doing the right thing, but be true to yourselves and inform as many people when you see something is wrong.

Michelle Bythrow: I can’t agree with you more - writing songs should be free because God gives you these gifts and talents (and it can so easily be taken away). Matthew 10v8b: “Freely you have received, freely give.” I’m in the process of delivering my songs on the web for free with no copyright and expecting no royalties - I’ve learned that is the thing that keeps our artists trapped in doing all weird kinds of stuff, because of contracts and copyright laws. It also prohibits christian listeners to download your songs when they see the copyright word. Don’t worry if someone steals the song - God will deal with them accordingly… this is exactly the reason why the Bible is not freely available anymore, because of copyrights.

Oh yes! And one last thing. Oneday, while flying in an airplane at about 30000 feet from the ground, I saw how small the houses were from up there. I was immediately reminded how great our God must be to even see us from heaven and still think of us. When I was a kid I always found an ant, walking by doing it’s thing, a nuisance. I would take my index finger in push deep into the sand to hide it and sometimes if there were no sand, just kill it. This airplane experience made me realize that God can do that to me at anytime. So don’t seek FAME - “seek ye first the kingdom of God… …and all these things will be added unto thee”.
Peter // May 3, 2008 at 6:22 am

God looks at the heart not the song. How are any of us to judge the heart of the songwriter when they wrote the song. It is sad to see Christians judging others musical worship by the content of the lyrics and their personal preference of musical style. Thankfully God doesn’t judge us by the offerings that we bring or we would never measure up. This article misses the heart and meaning of worship completly. If God’s name is glorified it doesn’t matter how it is done.
Fish // May 31, 2008 at 1:09 pm

In reading your article and the following comments I sense an over indulgence of personal taste, and comments about modern worship being boring.
The key for worship in these days is the progress of the Church, not whether our Ipod or CD collection is hip or not. The need for the Church to keep bringing forth new songs is essential in equipping us all for the future.
I appreciate the fact that we live in a day where the Church is writing songs for their congregations, and most of these songs are written by a younger generation, who traditionally in the past would have nothing to do with Church.
I believe in the ‘new song’ and thank God for it, because I personally have seen tens of thousands find Jesus because of and through these songs.

Let’s get over our personal tastes and opinions about whether we like a song or whether we think it’s boring or sounds like U2 or Keane - all that is irrelevant in regards to God’s purpose on the Earth, compared to whether or not the music or musical style is helping to build, increase and establish the Church.

Let’s focus on what the Church is doing in worship, and give praise for what is happening these days, because it’s awesome, and forget our personal small minded trips about this style or that style.
Let God be praised and let it fill the earth through the Church, not some cute, fashionable christian artist.
Kelly // June 30, 2008 at 4:05 am

You should check out John Mark McMillan.

The Search