"Contemporary" Worship and Music

I've grown up in the United Methodist Church. My parents were good little churchgoers, dragging me there every Sunday. When I was old enough, I even joined the United Methodist Youth Fellowship on my own volition. When I went to college, I was an active part of Wesley House, the UM campus fellowship. I have even had paid positions at a United Methodist camp (where I met my wife), and as a full-time youth director.

Growing up Methodist, I learned that music is the most absolutely essential element of the service. Dating back to the incredible talent of the Wesley brothers, Methodists have always been guided by music. Even UM churches with organs that died years ago have organists who can play the out-of-tune piano, skipping the missing keys, and even playing the A flat in the key of C because they know it sounds like an F. We have a hymnody that stretches from traditional Gregorian chants through the entirety of the 20th century. We love to sing. Whenever Methodists gather, be it for the Sunday service, or even a simple Ad-board meeting, somehow we slip music in. And we do it well. If you don't believe me, attend a service at Annual Conference. The sanctuary is full of Methodists who, in the words of John Wesley, "sing lustily." We show our love of God not by standing out, but by standing together. It is almost impossible for Methodists to sing a hymn while seated. Our bulletins are covered with little stars, denoting that "the congregation is invited to stand, if able." We don't need a miracle worker in the front raising people out of their wheelchairs in front of everyone, we only need an organist to play the first line of "O, For a Thousand Tongues to Sing!" The air moving through those pipes is enough to make the lame to walk.

I bring up the idea of music because it seems to stand at the forefront of worship committee conversations. United Methodists are an aging population. Our congregations are slowly dying - and by dying, I mean, literally, people in the congregations are dying of old age. The reaction in many churches has been to introduce "Contemporary" or "Blended" worship. Unfortunately, what these words actually mean, and what congregants think they mean are two different things. To most administrative councils, or worship committees, these words refer solely to the style of music used in the service. "Contemporary Worship," to many church councils, means replacing the organ with drums, guitar, and keyboard while eliminating the need for a printed bulletin by installing a projector and using PowerPoint. "Blended Worship" is understood to mean you replace half of the hymns with "Praise and Worship Music." The rest of the service stays pretty much the same in both cases, save for the idea, in theory, that worship will be more "relevant" (one of my favorite buzz words in ecclesiastica). In practice, most of the changes amount to the pastor strumming along to songs from "The Faith We Sing" on his classical guitar. In other words, Methodists have a hard time talking about our service in terms that don't revolve around changing the music.

In reality, "Contemporary Worship" has nothing to do with music. One of the most striking results from my research, both in what I've read, and in what I've learned from conversations with pastors, is the meaning of "Contemporary Worship." Although pastors have a hard time talking about their contemporary services without mentioning the musical style or the presence of a projector, their words have a broader connotation. The contemporary in Contemporary Worship does not refer to music, or to video. It doesn't refer to the pastor's casual dress or the latte you carry with you into the sanctuary. Underlying all of the comments, behind all of the literature is the idea that people have left the mainline denominations because our service hasn't changed in decades.

Currently, the Methodist service is based in a culture where communication only went one way. We had people at a lectern, then radio, followed by television. All of these media had something in common - There was no opportunity for reaction. True, if you heard something on the radio or saw something on TV you could mail a letter, or even make a phone call. Either of these media, however, were slow, and required significant investment to continue the conversation. Someone had to take the time to read your letter and respond by writing one of their own. A phone call required someone to be on the other end of the line to move the discussion forward. Moreover, in both cases, including multiple people in the discussion is difficult. The service is designed with this same paradigm. A pastor stands in front, and the rest of us listen. As we leave, we make sure to let the pastor know how much the message "spoke to us." We can then head home and wait until next Sunday. Perhaps we'll participate in the Wednesday night activities, but we take nothing, and have little opportunity to remember and apply the weekly message.

New forms of communication have changed us. Websites, streaming, and social media offer us the opportunity to respond immediately and respond to each other. What this new method of interaction has done is blur the lines between our different lives. Where once we had multiple personalities that never overlapped, smart phones, social networking, and a constantly-on perspective have removed many of those distinctions. One could lament the loss of that line, but one benefit of this change is the demand for more relevant and consistent faith. People who communicate without this line don't want to be a part of a church that preaches faithful living from 9-10am on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings, followed by a long time period until the next service. These individuals want a faith that blurs the line between church and not church. They want a lesson on Sunday that challenges them in concrete ways to grow and change for the rest of the week. They want to be engaged in faithful living in every aspect of their life.

That's where music comes in. Simply replacing organ music with contemporary music doesn't make your service contemporary. Contemporary services require engaging and empowering relationships. True, music, attire, and video are all vehicles for translating messages into more relevant terms, but these are a means to an end. It is possible to have a contemporary service using the hymnal and an organ. What makes the service contemporary is the recognition that connection with the faith community does not end when the light of Christ is carried from the sanctuary. Contemporary services last the entire week. They continue to engage the faithful in multiple ways throughout the week. Music is just dressing. It makes the service more comfortable to individuals engaged in popular culture. When people are shopping for a faith community, they are looking first for a place where they can feel a part of a family, second a place where they can grow, and last an opportunity for entertainment. Positive worship experiences help, but the worship service is a function of the faith community, no the other way around.

So here is my first thought connected directly with my research. Keep an eye on this site for further updates and findings. My intention is to post some of the findings that arise as I analyze hours of interview data. Take a look and leave a comment. Let me know if I'm barking up the right tree, or if I'm way out in left field. I'd love to hear your opinions.