Sorry I've been away for so long. I'll get right to my point:It's been bugging me lately that it seems the Church (in general) uses music in a very old fashioned way. By that I mean, 100 years ago we thought, "If we have good music, people will come and listen and then we can preach the gospel to them". In esssence, a church service looks structurally the same as it did 100 years ago. I call that the "attractional" model. I don't think this works any more because the church doesn't have the very best musicians in the community any more so we're not really attracting anybody. The bigger problem I think is that what we have in the church now is a place where there is no room for music as artistic expression. There are churches where this happens but mainly it's because the church consists of mostly artists or was founded by artists.
Now think abot the fact that other forms of art (dance, painting, sculpting, photography, etc...) are way less represented in the Church, and you see the challenge we have in being a place where artistic expression can happen.
Do you guys see this in your setting? If so, how do you think it can be changed? Or.... am I asking the wrong questions?
13 comments:
Possibly the problem lies in the fact that many churches are actually quit uninterested in attracting anyone. Church is for the believers. Also, many people "don't get artists". (If you're artistic you'll understand.) And as humans we don't really like things and people we don't understand. The same holds true about the lost. Christians, generally, don't understand, relate to, or like non-Christians. (for the record, many are trying to dispel this screw-up, including Paul and Wanda... and I'd like to think myself) If we have no connection with the lost, why would we fashion our services and the music to make them feel welcome? Regardless of what most church billboards read, everyone is not welcome.
Trying not to be cynical, but still honest,
kenny toews
IS there anything wrong with an 'attractional model' of church ministry?
Jer,
I think there is something inherently arrogant about always saying "Come and see". I'd rather be positioned with the lost rather than always trying to wave my hands at them while they speed by the church on their way to their teetime.
Kenny,
I'm not sure I'm interested in attracting anyone but would rather go where people are and start something there.
Here's my favorite quote of the week:
"Relevance is not a goal, but rather a byproduct of kingdome living" - Rich McKinley
it needs to be changed and it should be changed. The church should incorporate the gifts of those in it's community. Just as a family would. Check out Imago Dei (http://www.imagodeicommunity.com/), a church in Portland. They are doing it. It just needs to start happening. Those "artists" need to step up and say "I want this to change, I have this to offer". And I just noticed you have a Rick McKinley quote. So I am going to stop there :) Good job.
I'm not sure 'attractional' means 'come and see' though. 'Come and see' does have a certain ring of arrogance to it, I agree. However, I believe that attractional is a much larger idea then simple observing - many of my peers, myself included, are very attracted to events, other people, and places because the attraction is involvement...opportunity to engage. 'Come and See' seems a little one dimensional.
Paul - I'm not sure where you are going with the post; are you saying that we should trade one form of attractional ministry (music) for another form (other artistic expression) or, are you saying that allowing other forms of artistic expression will make us less attractional and more significant?
****
I love the Rick McKinley quote! I guess when relevance becomes a goal it is pretty inauthentic hey? Anyways, I'm glad these conversations are happening!
****
I figure I should also take a stab at the actual question you asked in your original post: "Do you guys see this in your setting? If so, how do you think it can be changed?"
Well, our demographic is mostly 19-25 year olds with a pretty even mix of guys to girls. A few more girls then guys. We are a good mix of young professionals, young business owners, and university students with about 40% representing artists, songwriters, theater, film makers, musicians, poets, and writers, etc.
Do we use the arts? No. Not at all actually - in fact, we have gone in a near opposite direction avoiding the arts. Not purposely (except that we don't do any worship music). However, what we have done has placed huge value on the artists themselves and facilitated person-to-person/artist-to-artist connection. Some of the great outcomes of this are the weekly shows, collaborative art projects, big-time record deals, and a culture of artists knowing each other and loving Jesus.
I think sometimes we place too large a significance on the expression and not enough significance on the person expressing.
What would I change? I'd try broaden people's view of what art is.
Jer,
I'm wondering why we sing on Sundays..... and why is music, which historically has been a vehicle for artisitc expression, is not so (for the most part) in our churches.
Yeah - I see what you're saying now...
That is exactly the reason why we are not doing music at our young adult gatherings. Somehow a lot of our church music has stolen the music out of music....
Music...well...unfortuneately, it would seem that the church is one of the least capable producers of excellent quality music (well, perhaps excluding our australian brothers and sisters)...especially with all that the entire planet has to offer. i think music is probably not an "attraction factor" in churches anymore, but it still has a very powerful emotive aspect and is probably more about the words. Much knowledge can be gained from the words written by Christians. Despite this good aspect of church music, the quality of the music is often below average, taking the focus away from the words' meaning and leaving a sour taste in the mouths of the congregation.
Not only is the music produced below average, but so many people argue about it! People argue to the point of church splitting about the age, style, volume, and people leading music. The point of church is clearly not the music, and shoudln't be something to fight over. If this is such a big ordeal, why are we not putting more emphasis on other forms of art that people won't quickly fight over? Like drama? Like people's own songs that they wrote? Like painting and sculpting, video presentations...
i dunno...i think if it's a constant struggle, there needs to be a change.
About Paul's comments on going to the lost, i think that perhaps church as we know it is more of a building-up-believers, growing in faith thing. However, there HAS TO BE outreach (which we don't emphasize enough). Outreach is going TO the people. Church is for the people to grow. Is this the wrong mindset?
Ok yes we should have more outreach,
instead of having concerts at a church where some may feel unconformatble why not play the music
at comunity cemtres or some festivals and not just Christian Festivals. I was at a church where the music was loud and no one realy could understand the words anyway however the music rocked.
Rick Florian's shirts always made me want to draw deeper into worship.
Paul...
I think it's time to bring in Petra- you know their latest album Petra Praise vol. 15..It rocks with the latest hits...songs like "I lift your name on high" and "we bring the sacrifices of Praise" Now that's were the attraction is...
Les and Jaz
A few things in my mind regarding this...
1. A new book I just heard a coworker raving about "Jim and Caspar Go To Church" on an atheist's true response to visiting a number of churches around the US and his feedback on the 'rock and lights show'. This is one I can't wait to read... have to grab a copy.
2. A friend once said to me that the unique thing about church is that it is the only place that people really sing together. Since I love singing, and music, I don't want to lose this uniqueness. Does it matter that we don't sing together in any other circumstance (well, other than happy birthday)? Is this part of our being different in a good way?
3. I find it fascinating that music was the tool used for Christian broadcasting to get its start in Canada. In a nutshell, all Christian broadcasting was banned by early 20th century politicians due to squabbling preachers. The only thing that could be broadcast was music... and we didn't even have Christian radio in Canada until 1999! 100 Huntley St. started off as a music variety show, with music as the message - since it was illegal to TALK about Jesus, but not to SING about Jesus on TV.
Anyhow, no answers, but more food for thought...
Ellen
The Vancouver Canucks regained their scoring touch in the nick of time, counting two power-play goals and two empty-netters to win Game 7 and avert a colossal collapse.
CBC Sports
Trevor Linden broke a 1-1 deadlock seven minutes into the third period as the Canucks downed the visiting Dallas Stars 4-1 in Game 7 of their NHL Western Conference quarter-final in front of 18,630 fans at General Motors Place on Monday.
Linden has scored six goals in Game 7s, the most among active NHL players.
Vancouver clinched the best-of-seven series 4-3, advancing beyond the first round for only the third time since losing the 1994 Stanley Cup final to the New York Rangers.
The Canucks enjoyed a seemingly comfortable 3-1 series lead, but Marty Turco posted back-to-back shutouts to force a decisive seventh meeting.
Post a Comment