Hi. There has been a conflict in me recently regarding the use of fine arts -- specifically classical music -- in the church.
In my thirty-two years of life, I have had the privilege of performing, writing, and enjoying many different styles of music. In my seventeen years of being a believer, my soul and spirit have been moved by many different worship languages, musical and otherwise. Five years ago, while being considered for the job I currently have, a woman approached me and asked that if I came to this church, would I facilitate the presentation/performance of classical music such as Bach and Mozart. My response was yes, but probably not much on Sunday morning. She wasn't crazy about my answer. My mindset was (and mostly still is) that our primary musical worship language should be what will engage most of the people most of the time. That has been and continues to be music that some have labeled "contemporary" -- which is a horribly out-moded term, so please stop using it. A more accurate description -- at the Bible Church, anyway -- would perhaps be "acoustic pop rock" (I'll take any genre-defining terms you wanna suggest...).
Admittedly, that is granting the musical part of our worship a rather utilitarian treatment without considering musical art as expression. One of my (many) criticisms of Contemporary Christian Music is that it seeks to make an impression rather than be an authentic expression of faith or worship or...anything. I sometimes feel a pressure about that on Sunday morning -- that the worship music needs to be a certain volume & energy level, tempo, instrumentation, and overall "tone" in order to usher people into the presence of God (even typing that sentence was ridiculous).
It's no secret that the Arts have been woefully marginalized in the contemporary church. Fine art allows an imponderable experience of the Divine that most 'pop art' does not. But our culture is one that speaks a more modern musical language, which I strongly believe in utilizing, allowing the church to be culturally incarnational in its approach, as Jesus was in His, to expressing the truth of God's love. Unfortunately, most churches have gone the "either-or" route. I'm glad our church has not fully done that (it's true, else why would I be writing this entry?).
I'm torn about this. Help me out here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Dear, dear Natty-
Singing Bach or Mozart with the same understanding and passion as when singing Twila or Nat (note casual first name basis)is still being in the same Presence, and feeling it. Many people prefer the classical presentation of His story. They are drawn to it and participate in it by His grace. I'm not so sure that most of the people most of the time do choose pop worship music. I'm guessing that traditional hymns still rule actually. Frankly, I think classical music is just plain more difficult. But, to me, speaking as a singer, it is waaaaay worth it. I happen to like pop, too. And I feel completely expressive in the middle of most of it-overcome by the Holy Spirit-just as I do when singing old Latin stuff :) But I am pretty much omnivorous when it comes to music. I know, we're not planning the service around Marilyn's preferences. My point of view, though, is simply in response to your request for help.
I'll fly away.
M
Very perceptive. I have never thought of our music as being utilitarian. I like the way of thinking...could lead to more diversity in the music...more range of expression. Thanks Nat
Andrew
Post a Comment