Worship Wars?

Charles Colson is one of my favorite writers and speakers. I have read several of his books and have always appreciated his cultural and political Breakpoint commentary. There’s one exception: Colson’s commentary titled, “Worship Wars,” in which he relies heavily on comments of Dr. David T. Williams about the right kind of music for worship. Here, Colson quotes from the article “Durable Hymns,” published in the July/August 2009 issue of Touchstone Magazine. While I see the value in some of Williams’ points (and Colson’s) regarding worship music, I disagree with several of them. However, I’ll limit my response to the following.

First, according to Colson, Williams claims that composers of “praise choruses seem to ignore all the rules of good composition…” This opinion would seem to be invalidated by the numerous college courses, seminars, and books on the subject of contemporary worship composition. In truth, there are many valid styles of worship music. We should appreciate the unique contribution of them all to the worship repertoire. For that reason, I occasionally include a contemporary arrangement of a traditional hymn in the contemporary worship service. Also, this year, as in years past, we planned an all-hymn worship service in solidarity with the Hymn Festival celebrated in the traditional worship service.

Second, I find the following comment puzzling:

“Now, some songwriters are creating excellent music today. But, warns Williams, only those musicians who are musically gifted, and historically, biblically, and theologically trained are qualified to help churches choose the best new music ‘as a supplement to the church’s rich musical heritage.’”

Presumably, Williams is of the opinion that contemporary worship composers, musicians, and worship leaders are not “musically gifted.” I strongly disagree and could point to several worship musicians whose gifts on their instrument are as impressive as what I have heard from classically trained musicians. In fact, some of them have received classical training and have chosen contemporary music as an effective vehicle for reaching younger listeners and enabling their worship. I could also name worship composers who are as gifted in writing songs for worship as any hymn composer, and I could name worship leaders whose skill enables congregations to experience the presence of God in every worship service.

Furthermore, according to Williams, contemporary worship leaders who are not “historically, biblically, and theologically trained” are not qualified to select songs for worship. This comment assumes that contemporary worship leaders have not received such training, which is a false assumption. If his point about worship leaders not being qualified to select songs for worship were true, there would then be tens of thousands of churches throughout our country and around the world worshiping in a style that is presumably inauthentic (from his viewpoint). This would beg an observation about God’s apparent blessing on these churches, as evidenced by their numerical growth and spiritual maturity, despite God’s disapproval of their worship style. Of course, God’s favor on those churches is a consequence of His approval.

Speaking personally, I hold two earned degrees, a Bachelor of Arts in Music (classical, traditional) and a Master of Divinity. These degrees have, in my opinion, provided me with considerable training in music, Bible, history, and theology, and, I might add, qualify me to choose music for worship—according to Williams’ standard. Admittedly, my musical preference was also formed by popular culture, as is the musical preference of many new people who are attracted to worship services with popular (contemporary) music.

If I could respond to Williams directly, I would suggest that he becomes more knowledgeable of how God has used music throughout church history and that he broadens his exposure to what God is doing through music today.

Colson and Williams support the theme that there is a “right and wrong kind” of worship music. I wholeheartedly agree! However, not as they have defined it. In my view, the right type of worship music enables people to worship God with a cultural style that is familiar and meaningful to them. Using this definition, the “right” style of worship music for a classically trained person might be different from that of someone who was not exposed to classical and traditional music in a church. Many people in our country had no exposure to a church prior to becoming Christians as adults. The music of their heart is very different from that of someone who grew up in a traditional church. For that reason, there are churches that use music with a popular style, country style, jazz style, classical style, and more. And as we leave our borders, we find that there are many other worship styles around the world. I have worshiped with deeply devoted Christians in Mexico, Jamaica and the Philippines whose preferred worship style reflects their culture more than American culture. I submit that their music is equally valid as a vehicle for worship.

In another essay, “Why Evangelicals Can’t Write,” Williams is equally prejudicial in favor of evangelical authors from a “liturgical tradition” whose writings have “literary value,” and against all other evangelical authors. Using his definition, Max Lucado, Andy Stanley, Phillip Yancy, and others simply don’t make the cut. Such authors have, in my opinion, performed an invaluable service to the Body of Christ by making Christian doctrine practical and accessible to the average Christian. Williams fails to recognize their contribution.

Throughout my years of serving Christ, I have encountered a few high-brow Christians who ardently believe they are doing God a favor by inciting, through their criticism of other evangelicals, division in the Church. I don’t understand their motive, except that it cannot be born from a genuine love for the Body of Christ, which is the Church. So it would seem that the source of “worship wars”, wherever they may exist, is not to be found in music as much as in the attitude of the heart (Philippians 2:5—11).

How can a part of the Body wound another part of the Body and find joy in it? How can they feel justified by such maliciousness? There is a certain perversity in any willful activity that not only wounds other Christians but weakens the Body as a whole. Everyone suffers from that wound—even the protagonist. Rather than fueling the absurd notion of “worship wars,” perhaps Colson and Williams should acknowledge that those of us who worship God in “spirit and in truth” worship Him in various forms that are permissible by the Word of God, and that are received and enjoyed by the same God who welcomes our cultural diversity.

REFERENCES

“Worship Wars: How Do We Determine Musical Excellence?,” Charles Colson, Breakpoint Commentary, August 6, 2009: http://www.informz.net/pfm/archives/archive_823488.html

“Durable Hymns,” Dr. Donald T. Williams, Touchstone Magazine, July/August 2009: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/issue.php?id=151

• This article has been removed from the Touchstone Magazine website.

“Why Evangelicals Can’t Write,” Dr. Donald T. Williams, September 12, 2007: http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:98P9CdgrP0sJ:theuniversitychurch.info/oldWebsite/public_html/williamsessay1.doc+%22Donald+Williams%22+%22Walter+Wangerin%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

• In this essay, Williams’ comments about a theology of art are thought-provoking.

Wasting Away in Lay Speakerville

Seeing her didn’t raise my expectations. A gray-haired woman, who looked like she had been resuscitated from a mortuary, shuffled up to the pulpit, slowly unfolded several pieces of paper and started talking about her ministry in the church with a time-worn southern drawl. The idea was that she would tell us what her ministry does and why it’s important to the Kingdom of Heaven, and then the congregation would drop some extra cash in the offering plate to support it.

Everyone was attentive at the beginning, but then, three stories and ten minutes later, as she meandered all over God’s green earth, we were wondering if she was going to let the pastor preach his sermon. Maybe she was also going to give the altar call and benediction. I was just hoping she’d let us sing another song—but even that appeared unlikely.

Along the way, two of her awkward stories about ministry volunteers showed them to be wondrously inept. I wondered how the church could expect me to give anything to a ministry that had such buffoons as volunteers and such poor spokespeople. It became clear that her memory and sense of place weren’t as strong as they used to be. Why did the leaders of the church ever give her a microphone? The ministry and its volunteers were probably far better than she represented. Probably.

Now, I’ve been to this church before, and this is something they appear to do frequently, either to raise money for a ministry or simply to highlight a personal testimony. The outcome is usually better—but not by much.

So—all you lay speakers—listen to me. When speaking in a church service, if you haven’t said something to grab my attention within the first thirty seconds my mind starts looking for an exit. And if you pass two minutes, you’ll find me far away on a tropical island sipping fruit smoothies in a hammock under a grove of palm trees. Nearby, the gentle waves of a sapphire lagoon caress the virgin sand. Please don’t even try to steal me away from my imaginary paradise by regaining my attention. My little island is so much better.

Pastor, why would you do this to your audience? Do you know how this reflects on your ministry? Apparently, not. So I’d like to suggest that you adopt three non-negotiable rules for non-professional speakers—if you feel a need to give them a microphone:

• NEVER give a microphone to someone who hasn’t been thoroughly vetted and approved. In other words, a qualified staff member can attest to this person’s Christian character and to his speaking ability.

• NEVER permit a person to speak who has not submitted a manuscript for approval. Extemporaneous speakers aren’t allowed. Neither are outlines. Every word must be written on paper and read from the paper. Everything that is written must conform to Christian doctrine and to the mission and vision of the church.

• NEVER approve a manuscript that exceeds 500 words or 2 minutes when read. As a general rule, shorter is better. Use the KISS acronym: Keep It Short and Simple. Your speaker doesn’t have to tell everything about the ministry just the most compelling part. There’s a saying that should drive you, “Always leave them [your audience] wanting more.”

And if the lay speaker strays from the approved text, NEVER invite him back. Why not? Because he has made your ministry look unprofessional, he’s made you look weak as a leader, and he’s offended the congregational members that have placed their trust in you. A bad guest speaker reflects poorly on your ministry. If you do that too many times you’ll risk losing people’s confidence and loyalty. You might also lose them to another church—and I’ll join the exodus. Or maybe I’ll just return to my tropical island.