Loud is not a Melody
There was a beer commercial fairly recently which used the phrase "good as cold ever tasted". Critics pointed out that "cold is not a flavour." I think I could make a similar statement about why praise band style "contemporary" worship does not appeal to me: "loud" is not a melody.
We went to church at Racine with Rachel's family this morning. I feel bad because I could not "get into" the worship. It was pretty loud and I found myself worrying too much about how the volume was affecting my infant son. I know they had a nursery for infants, but I really believe in worshiping together as a family; "parenting in the pew" if you will. At one point, when I was standing out in the foyer where it was at least a little quieter (they had the service on loudspeakers out in the halls) I got to talking to an older woman who was also sitting out there. For her it was because the loud volume of the service made her hearing aides ring intolerably. It made me sad that the service was effectively discriminating against the very old and the very young.
On top of that, there is the simple fact that most contemporary worship choruses don't appeal to me. I don't think they are well written at all. They lack musical "hooks"; nothing that would make any of them an "earworm" for me during the week. They strike me as uninspired and uninspiring. On top of that, I can't sing most them; I find them unsingable. I know: it has been suggested to me that it is all in my attitude. That if I just decide to like them, I will. *Sigh* I can't. I'm in tears as I write this. I really don't want to be difficult. Still, there is so much good music out there. I don't understand what appears to me to be a slavish attachment to a limited style.
The sermon struck me as ironic after the song service. Really, I'm not sure when "radical" became such as talismanic word. Several times the minister refered to being "tired of doing church". I'm sure I heard this same sentiment nearly 20 years ago. Moving to the contemporary style I thought was supposed to be part of the "cure". However, if he is still tired of "doing" church, then something else is wrong. Of course, the sermon might have been stronger if three-quarters of the time hadn't been spent on preamble (and frequent tossing about of the word "radical") and only a few minutes on the actual meat of the text (from Ephesians).
I think I was also bothered by how perfunctory the service of communion was. I felt very little "remembrance" going on. Perhaps I've become overly accustomed to the focus turned on the Lord's Supper by the Lutherans. Again this probably my attitude that needs work.
On the other hand, if I simply adjust my attitude (or lower my expectations) do I then become guilty of simply "doing church"? Of course, I'm not exactly in a leadership position to do anything about it.
We went to church at Racine with Rachel's family this morning. I feel bad because I could not "get into" the worship. It was pretty loud and I found myself worrying too much about how the volume was affecting my infant son. I know they had a nursery for infants, but I really believe in worshiping together as a family; "parenting in the pew" if you will. At one point, when I was standing out in the foyer where it was at least a little quieter (they had the service on loudspeakers out in the halls) I got to talking to an older woman who was also sitting out there. For her it was because the loud volume of the service made her hearing aides ring intolerably. It made me sad that the service was effectively discriminating against the very old and the very young.
On top of that, there is the simple fact that most contemporary worship choruses don't appeal to me. I don't think they are well written at all. They lack musical "hooks"; nothing that would make any of them an "earworm" for me during the week. They strike me as uninspired and uninspiring. On top of that, I can't sing most them; I find them unsingable. I know: it has been suggested to me that it is all in my attitude. That if I just decide to like them, I will. *Sigh* I can't. I'm in tears as I write this. I really don't want to be difficult. Still, there is so much good music out there. I don't understand what appears to me to be a slavish attachment to a limited style.
The sermon struck me as ironic after the song service. Really, I'm not sure when "radical" became such as talismanic word. Several times the minister refered to being "tired of doing church". I'm sure I heard this same sentiment nearly 20 years ago. Moving to the contemporary style I thought was supposed to be part of the "cure". However, if he is still tired of "doing" church, then something else is wrong. Of course, the sermon might have been stronger if three-quarters of the time hadn't been spent on preamble (and frequent tossing about of the word "radical") and only a few minutes on the actual meat of the text (from Ephesians).
I think I was also bothered by how perfunctory the service of communion was. I felt very little "remembrance" going on. Perhaps I've become overly accustomed to the focus turned on the Lord's Supper by the Lutherans. Again this probably my attitude that needs work.
On the other hand, if I simply adjust my attitude (or lower my expectations) do I then become guilty of simply "doing church"? Of course, I'm not exactly in a leadership position to do anything about it.