BaptistLife.Com Forums.

Good reading.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/ponderanew ... igure-out/

Very interesting. They (the millennials) have detected pandering with contemporary worship services etc. and want a place where “nitty-gritty” theological questions are accepted and discussed. Liturgy is OK. But perhaps this guy is just one millennial.

I will biring this up at our church since we might just be such a place quite naturally. Trouble is we do not advertise ourselves that way and our young adults that grew up in this church probably do not see us as dealing openly with the theological questions or have moved away.

A study I read a couple of years ago suggested that churches that offered more than one kind of worship were doing better than churches with just one style (either contemporary or traditional.)

We have both contemporary and traditional worship at my church. But our traditional service is our big service.

We were once part of a church doing 3 styles: traditional, contemporary, and country and western. I believe those are still offered and still run like this: most well attended is traditional. Next is country. Last is contemporary, which is mostly the thin gray ponytail older boomers. Go figure.

I do know the younger members of my family (40's on down) detest contemporary services. Probably because they also know how to use tempo, volume, pain and release, long standing, closing eyes, lighting, etc to "move a crowd."

Seems no matter how we justify it or point out the "means" behind other forms of church they find contemporary blatantly and over the top manipulative.

And yeah, I've come to agree although back in the day I was one helping or promoting contemporary.

Really Linda, you going to condemn an entire worship style and everyone who leads worship in that style as manipulative, etc.? <sigh>

I lead a contemporary service every week. There is nothing manipulative about it. It is experienced by people across the age spectrum. Its a small group worship experience in which we sing some praises to God, study the Bible and share at the Lord's table. I have some people worshiping God in that service who weren't going to church anywhere along with a number of life long committed Christians. BTW, it just so happens none of us have pony tails (unless our female praise band vocalist puts up her hair.) I do have a beard. But then so did that hippy guy Jesus.

All styles of worship are both useful as a path to approach the mystery of God, and all styles are subject to corruptions. My preference is traditional, even liturgical, but I have found God in many different styles of worship from contemporary, folk rock, gospel quartet style, and contemplative. I have seen manipulation used in numerous ways by leaders and speakers. I am more and more convinced that God is not impressed by the style in which we worship. God is impressed by the differences our worship makes in our daily living.

Hmm--I didn't condemn any form of worship. I explained how I have helped several churches transition to contemporary. I explained what is going on now at one of those churches. I agreed with the younger folks in my family that I won't attend those sorts of services now.

That isn't condemning contemporary worship per se. And if the young ones are asked why they won't attend certain services, and they tell us, and yet they attend other services, isn't it hubris on our parts if we disagree with them regarding their motive?

HOWEVER--young people today DO know the science behind many of the things being taught about how to move a crowd. It doesn't matter if I remind them that D L Moody and company were doing that with gospel songs the kids consider hymns. Or Luther. Or Wesley. Because the seminars they can attend as lay members, the music "schooling" they get from the music leadership at church, and the magazines and on line sites they can visit detailing minutely what tempo will release which endorphin makes them feel used, abused and manipulated.

Has the church been guilty of this in the past? Of course. Europe's grand cathedrals were designed to, in part, arouse awe and a sense of "other" by the building, thus controlling the peasants. The manipulating is not new. What is new is that the folks in the pew are on to it now, and fed up.

For years we were told we were wrong not to do contemporary because we were putting the desires and tastes of the old geezerettes and geezers ahead of the young people. For crying out loud, don't we care if they die and go to hell. Now those same young people want hymns. Not just contemporary songs. Hymns. Maybe even not gospel songs, but hymns. Old hymns, old music, or old hymns, new music, or new hymns.

And now we of the contemporary service fad are the geezers and geezerettes. Shouldn't we care more about seeing them in heaven than arguing about music styles with them:)?

I don't for one minute believe every service of any kind is manipulative. BUT we need to be honest and do some house cleaning. Unless, of course, we really are what the kids say--more concerned with selling the new music than with souls.

There are a few places in the scripture where there's a hint that clues us in as to what takes place during worship. Psalm 22:3 uses words that talk about God "inhabiting" or being present in the praise of Israel. In Acts 4:31, there's a description that indicates worship may have resulted in the actual "shaking" of a physical location where the church was meeting. I Corinthians 14 speaks of the order in worship, because of the presence of God, and that he is not a God of disorder, but of peace. There's a fine line between offering various styles of music in worship because of their appeal to the worshippers, and offering several styles of worship to assist people in getting to the presence of God, where He becomes the object and focus of their worship, and it's not about them.

One of the best lessons I ever had in focusing worship on God's presence, and not on what I "got out of it" occurred when I went to an unprogrammed Quaker meeting at the invitation of a friend. Silent reflection dominated the service, and there was little "visible" movement of the Holy Spirit. I went again, about two months later, and the whole character of the service was different. There was a lot of "movement," so to speak, as it seemed God's presence literally "moved on" people. It was really hard to explain, except that it was a group of people that were in the presence of the Holy Spirit who was there. There was no "style" to it. It was simply a transforming experience, not the kind of thing where you'd walk up to the pastor after the service, shake hands and give him your evaluation of the entertainment value of his sermon.

I think what's happening to many people, particularly younger people, with regard to their church experience is that the show is good, and the music entertains them, but there's no spiritual transformation taking place. That's why about 70% of those who are in the church leave during or after college, and the rest never even approach it.

Timothy--my apologies for not being back in the conversation sooner. An elbow injury is limiting my web time.

We are in agreement mostly (except I like cowboy worship!). Contemporary does NOT have to be manipulative. In the 90's when we were helping transition the church we attended it most definitely was not. And yes, I believe The Holy Spirit may bring emotion to any form of worship. The very most emotional service I was ever part of was in a highly liturgical church where Communion following a not so hot sermon had folks crying, literally crawling to the altar so broken hearted for sin and eager for grace that I doubt there was a dry eye in the building.

That is very different from what some "bad apples" are doing today, where tempo and tone and lighting and a whole host of manipulative techniques are taught to musicians (and some of us in our family are just exactly that.) We are doing the exact same crowd control methods some secular concerts use.

And the younger folks are wise to it. It is fake done that way, and they are correct. So TO THEM the style is now suspect and they want no part of it.

Since style doesn't matter, why not allow them to reject that particular style? Why insist on it?

Linda, I agree with and resonate with much of what you've said above.

My view is that you never force a particular worship style on a congregation. What you are doing in worship has to fit the needs of the church.

I was in Sioux City almost two years before starting our small contemporary service. Its purpose is for persons at my church and at the college next door to us who are interested in a small relaxed Sunday evening worship experience. We are far from glitzy or showy. We just run about 20-25 people in the service. It is more a coffee house style service. We meet in the church parlor and sit in chairs and couches. The band sets up every week with a screen for PowerPoint, amps etc. We play newer contemporary and some older favorite praise music.

I have the service because I think it fits a need and honestly it mostly is boomers who attend. I enjoy lots of kinds of worship though my first preference is liturgical/traditional worship. That is largely what we do in our Sunday morning service.

Another lover of liturgical here for sure! And I see nothing wrong with your offering a contemporary service of any form if there are those that find it meaningful.

I simply don't see the point in trying to force it on the younger folks if they don't want it, and wonder sometimes why it is so very forcefully "foisted" on people at times. By that I mean if a given congregation doesn't want it.

Here the younger folks are sort of in 4 groups. We have the very fundamentalist who want the hymns and gospel songs. We have the Neo Cals who want hymns only. We have the ones who want liturgical. And we have the ones, usually in to simple and sustainable living, who want folk. Not the folk of the 50's and 60's, no Peter Paul and Mary sound, but their own simple tunes with maybe an acoustical guitar only.

I just find it a bit silly that the same ones who fought for "their" (our) music years ago now won't let the young'uns have "theirs."

I think we have done, and are doing a great disservice to millennials, and to other generations as well, in simply offering music style preferences in worship, and not providing solid, foundational, Biblically supported instruction on the nature of true worship, what it is, and who it is about. It's become a way to attract people to attend, rather than a means of engaging with God. So those churches which have the resources to invest in the trappings wind up attracting people, mostly out of other churches which either don't have the resources, or won't get involved in the competition because they don't see it as something with which God is pleased.

And by separating out the young people, we've lost the inter-generational nature of the church, separating the youth from the wisdom and experience of the mature members. The expectation is that they don't have to participate in church the way others do, and if a church doesn't go out of its way to provide them with top flight entertainment, (I used to refer to it as "banana splits and balloons") then they don't have to come.