The Organ Forum

I see much to agree with here.  My church has 4 Sunday morning services each week, 3 traditional and 1 contemporary.  At the moment the traditional services are held in the Sanctuary and the contemporary service is held in the big space of the Family Life Center (its time frame is coincident with the last traditional service and thus cannot be done in the Sanctuary--otherwise it would be).  The early traditional service is served by the Youth Choir and the special music is a little more up-beat and hip than that of the other 2 later services; all 3 use the same organ Prelude, Postlude, and hymns.  The later 2 traditional services have the adult choir and the special music at those is mostly classical with a few more lively numbers from time to time; adaptations of ethnic music are not unusual, either.  Some of the music probably would not "sell" at Anglican, Catholic, or high Lutheran services, but we more or less take it in stride.

The contemporary service, on the other hand, is Praise Band all the way.  My church has a B3 that could be made available to them but they don't seem to want it.  (We do use it once or twice a year in the sanctuary when we invite a Black choir as guests.)

Once in a while our Senior Pastor decides he wants a "blended" service.  He thinks we in the traditional service need to be exposed to the marvels of the contemporary worship experience; I haven't told him to stuff it but that's how I feel about it.  As just a choir member I have no say, anyway.  My feeling is that, if I wanted to experience the wonderful contemporary environment, I'd go to that service.  As I do not, I attend the traditional services and I like them to stay different.

And then there is "Senior Sunday".  (No, not Senior Citizen Sunday--high school Senior Sunday.)  On that day the entire worship service is led by high school students.  Mind you, I have no problem with letting the youth become involved in leading the worship--I think it's a wonderful idea.  And if they wanted to furnish a youth organist to lead the worship music I'd be ecstatic.  What we get instead is a couple of guitar players playing "Pass It On" and maybe another similar senseless piece of trash and expecting a congregation of 500-800 to sing along to that accompaniment.  Guitars are lovely instruments and they can make very beautiful music, but they are NOT designed to accompany a congregation in singing hymns, even the watered-down ones chosen for that service.  (If I have to sing "Pass It On" one more time I think I'll be sick!)  Since the adult choir is not singing that Sunday, anyway, I often choose to visit a neighboring Anglican church that day.

As you can tell, I am a stuck-in-a-rut traditional curmudgeon, set in my ways and happy about it.  And I intend to stay that way.

David

As you can tell, I am a stuck-in-a-rut traditional curmudgeon, set in my ways and happy about it.  And I intend to stay that way.

David

Amen and Hallelujah . . . and more power to you!

and if they wanted to furnish a youth organist to lead the worship music I'd be ecstatic.  What we get instead is a couple of guitar players playing "Pass It On" and maybe another similar senseless piece of trash and expecting a congregation of 500-800 to sing along to that accompaniment.

 That might be a lot to ask.  Why not train up a young organist then you will ensure that at least some of the music will be recognisable to a congregation if these services take place.

 When I was a parish organist, I used to train up young organists and even if they could only play the simpler music it provided a useful bridge between the instrument and the young people in the church.  If it was a family service I sometimes let them play their own choice of music as a final voluntary.  One young organist chose to do the Tetris Theme, another played a song from a Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, various TV themes got played...as long as it was properly rehearsed and had at least some vague connection with the theme of the service.

Getting young people to play their orchestral instruments is a better alternative to guitar twanging.  Adding say a descant for the final verse of a hymn for a trumpet player or providing a gentle flute piece during a reflective moment can involve them in a more useful way rather than resorting to choruses, if that is what you want them to move away from.

---

2m Viscount Opera Organ

I must confess, I've been told on more than one occasion, that the reason they come to church is for the music.

This used to bother me, because I want people to go to church for God. I still feel this way, but I have tempered this feeling with the realization that even if they are coming to church for the music, they are still hearing God's Word, they are still getting the message, and are still engaged in fellowship nonetheless. If the music gets them in, then so be it, I suppose.

I tire of the so called Worship Wars. I remember reading an article published way before my time about the very same thing in the 1960's. So this is nothing new, it's been an issue for some time. Personally, I feel the world changed drastically with the advent of the 60's. Whether for good or for bad, is another topic altogether.

In worship, I get the young people involved by having them use their instruments. I have a trumpeter, flutist and pianists who I call upon regularly. I've also introduced the trumpeter to the role of Cantor in worship, and he's now open to doing it again. I've also convinced the pianists to play some of their pieces on the organ, with me helping with registration. It works well with some of the Baroque piano repertoire.

One of the many reasons why I feel that contemporary music is making headway in churches is because attendance is dropping in many places. When people have to deal with the concept of scarcity, it often puts them in crisis mode. When this happens, people don't always think things through, and so they make decisions which in the short term may seem attractive but in the long term can be disastrous. So we have to decide who it is we are truly worshipping. God Himself, or the god of numbers. True, you need membership to be viable, but how far is too far?

I recall reading an article in the newspaper about the Inuit. The elders are scared that they are losing their culture, hertiage, and identity as a people. The problem is that the youth are not interested in the ways of their culture. They have been assimilated by our popular culture. As a result, no one is passing on to the next generation their traditions, culture, language, or heritage. Anyone who knows Inuit culture knows that it is a very precious, valuable, and beautiful culture, as are all other cultures. If churches are willing to amputate their rich traditions, heritage, and culture in favor of the contemporary, then what do they have to build on? If you abandon your past you have nothing to build on. If things continue in that way, churches stand to lose their identities and who they are. Perhaps a proper compromise would be balanced worship, or if nothing else, a traditional service and a contemporary one.

I prefer balanced worship because it shows that the two can co-exist and part of being a Christian means bringing people together into the Body of Christ.

I also prefer balanced worship because if you really believe in being inclusive, in diversity, in respecting others, then you have to include the traditional in your worship because traditional is part of that diversity just as much as the contemporary is. If you exclude it, then you are no longer an inclusive church which respects the diversity of others.

 

 

I like your idea of "balanced worship" with two services as opposed to the idea of "blended worship" because in blended worship you get some of the good of traditional worship, but a lot of bad from the "contemporary," especially the happy-slappy stuff ( YUCK!!)

I know this will bother you a bit ReedGuy, but I like to go into churches to hear the music, and in some cases their organists (especially if they have someone well known, and who performs regularly, I know of a couple examples in the Cleveland area, but I'll let those alone for now). I am something of a traditionalist. I proudly say that the contemporary worship appeals to me not, I am a member of thatr 18-24 target audience, but AI won't fall for the happy clappy $h!* that churches expect to lure people my age with.

David, that Pass It on makes me think of Bong Hits For Jesus, I'm not entirely sure what the stupid guitar twanging children are supposed to be passing on, but I'm sure it isn't what the church wants them to be passing on.

---

Once you can tie your arms into a pretzel and your legs into a knot, you've got it under control

Austin:  I personally know young adults in your age bracket who are offended when church powers-that-be and/or older folks (I am almost 55) assume that music needs to be "dumbed down" and/or tasteless (so to speak) for the young folks.  This includes members of our youth choir (age range 15-30).  They do relatively contemporary music with synthesizer and guitar; but they enjoy and respect hearing our pipe organ.

We did a wedding together wherein the youth choir provided most of the music, but I was asked to play the processional and recessional (both different trumpet tunes) on our Schantz III/72.  Everyone was very happy with the results and thought that the organ was awsome.

We are very blessed to have these young people with us.  Some of their predecessors in past years were total a**hol*s.

 Austin, no worries, I'm not bothered at all. In fact, when I'm on holidays I still worship (I don't take a vacation from God), but I must confesss, I also like to use this as an opportunity to check out other churches and see what they're doing musically.

I, too, am I traditionalist. I've been stereotyped sometimes when I've walked into a church. Some folks assume that because of my age bracket, I automatically like contemporary. They get surprised when they find out I like traditional. One time my wife told them that I was an organist, and the reply was, "Oh, well no wonder. That's why. He's an organist." So I get heaped on with another stereotype. Oh, I'm an organist, so I guess that makes me an anomaly - most people my age are allegedly supposed to be big fans of contemporary except for the few who are organists.

A question comes to mind. Why is it that in many instances, the people I meet who are pushing for contemporary so much in churches are in their 50's? Hmmmm.....So they think they know what we (my generation) and younger want. I wish the generalizations would stop - but then I guess they'd have to use central thinking instead of peripheral thinking. It's much easier to generalize a complicated issue.

I like how contemporary music is often referred to as praise or worship songs, because after all, traditional hymns are not about praising God and worship, at all. (Sorry, can't help but be a tad sarcastic here).

I find that generally traditonal hymns are better written, and more theologically sound. I find that in general most of the "praise songs" are more pop oriented, and they are consequently vapid, shallow and populist. The best "praise song" I've ever heard is the Rev. Gary Davis (he was a blind street preacher) tune "Oh Glory How Happy I Am" but, Rev. Davis had actual skill, and he was a fantastic player of the guitar (12-string no less), but his music carried a sincerity that most of the Haugen-Haas type stuff seriously lacks. I know this discussion has gone on before.

But why is it that the old folks (50's ish) assume that we the younger generation like the contemporary services and what not. I think the most moving church service I've ever been to was a High Episcopal service at St. James Cathedral in Chicago (o.k. it helped that they have an amazing organ, which is about half Austin and half Skinner it is also the church where Sowerby worked for many years), but I remember that it was a very powerful service, the thurifer seemed like he was going to whack someone in the head the way he was swinging the thurible. This could hardly be called a "contemporary" service, it was almost Anglo-Catholic.

To all the fat, balding middle aged powers-that-be who assume that because they themselves like the happy-slappy service that the younger folk will too, you are so wrong that you don't even know it. Your heads are so far up your kiesters that you're looking at sunshine. Some of the young people do like the contemporary service, but there are also many many of us who do not, and in fact hate it with a passion (like me). The traditional service is based on centuries of tradition, and I think that some important figures might be rolling in their graves right now with the happy slappy schlock. Some of the newfangled stuff is well written but only some, most of it should never have been published in the first place.

How on earth did this happy clappy stuff make its way into our churches?

---

Once you can tie your arms into a pretzel and your legs into a knot, you've got it under control

I avoid contemporary services like I do the tax man.  I've been to a few and felt like a complete outsider.  Between the drums, the bells the rock and roll beats, two huge screens running the lyrics in front of the congregation I could hardly hold my breakfast.  I say to each their own.  If you like contemporary then by all means search that out.  If your Church turns contemporary and you don't like it....find another Church.

---

"The Organ is in truth the grandest, the most daring,
the most magnificent of all instruments invented by human genius."

Why do the 50-somethings seem to be the main ones pushing contemporary music and preaching that it's the way to reach young people and save the church? Several of us have pointed that out in this discussion and others, and it seems to me a valid observation.

I'm 50-something myself and have butted heads more than once with other people my age who were determined to re-model the worship in my church for the reasons given. These folks have been sincere, I suppose, in that they truly wanted to reach new people and see the church prosper. But I still think they're wrong.

These pushers in my experience have been people with some, but limited, musical talent and training. One guy was a fantastic guitar player, a credible singer of pop-ish P&W-type Christian songs. He couldn't read music or play a keyboard instrument, but was obviously gifted with a musical ear and appreciation. Certainly not a classical or trained musician, but a top-notch amateur.

If he'd had his way I think we'd have done away with hymns altogether eventually and would have been singing choruses with a praise band by now. What happened was that he and a small group left our church and started another one where that type of music reigns supreme. They have been somewhat successful in that their startup church is probably larger (four years later) than the one they broke away from. But I still don't see the young people of this town breaking down the doors to get into church.

My theory is that we 50-something Boomers are actually reverting to our teens, longing for the particular type of secular music we enjoyed back then. Some of us were into folk music, some into rock and roll, etc. And those are the musical styles that some of us Boomers are trying to impose on the churches we attend.

But this does NOT necessarily appeal to young people or to people outside the church who need the Gospel and are estranged from Christianity. As has been said, they know when they are being pandered to, and why would anyone want to come to church just to get more of what you already get on TV and at the mall?

John

 

---

Rodgers 890 at church.
Baldwin D422 at home.
Scads of old organs in the shop! H E L P !!!

ReedGuy:

I like how contemporary music is often referred to as praise or worship songs, because after all, traditional hymns are not about praising God and worship, at all. (Sorry, can't help but be a tad sarcastic here).

Actually, there is a reason for that. Contemporary music - "praise songs" - is (generally speaking) directed from mankind upwards to God, and is filled with themes like "my God is an awesome God". Whereas traditional music - hymns, etc. - is (generally speaking) a musical form of teaching, the word of God, directed from God downward to mankind.  Traditional music reinforces the lessons and gospel for the day.

---

Bob Collins
Zion Organ
http://zionorgan.com

jbird604:

Why do the 50-somethings seem to be the main ones pushing contemporary music and preaching that it's the way to reach young people and save the church? Several of us have pointed that out in this discussion and others, and it seems to me a valid observation.

I'm 50-something myself and have butted heads more than once with other people my age who were determined to re-model the worship in my church for the reasons given. These folks have been sincere, I suppose, in that they truly wanted to reach new people and see the church prosper. But I still think they're wrong.

These pushers in my experience have been people with some, but limited, musical talent and training. One guy was a fantastic guitar player, a credible singer of pop-ish P&W-type Christian songs. He couldn't read music or play a keyboard instrument, but was obviously gifted with a musical ear and appreciation. Certainly not a classical or trained musician, but a top-notch amateur.

If he'd had his way I think we'd have done away with hymns altogether eventually and would have been singing choruses with a praise band by now. What happened was that he and a small group left our church and started another one where that type of music reigns supreme. They have been somewhat successful in that their startup church is probably larger (four years later) than the one they broke away from. But I still don't see the young people of this town breaking down the doors to get into church.

My theory is that we 50-something Boomers are actually reverting to our teens, longing for the particular type of secular music we enjoyed back then. Some of us were into folk music, some into rock and roll, etc. And those are the musical styles that some of us Boomers are trying to impose on the churches we attend.

But this does NOT necessarily appeal to young people or to people outside the church who need the Gospel and are estranged from Christianity. As has been said, they know when they are being pandered to, and why would anyone want to come to church just to get more of what you already get on TV and at the mall?

John

 

Excellent observations, Jbird !

What is interesting about this is that the Catholics went throught this phase more like 20 years ago with the folks who were in their 50's back then.  My theory (which segues from your theory) is that they were parents (and grown-up hippies, to some degree) who were desperate to keep their young-adult children attending Mass at any cost, including the wholesale removal of the more traditional elements of Catholic liturgy, especially classical music and organs.  This extended to removing altar rails, moving tabernacles to hide Jesus in a tiny, obscure side chapel like some crazy relative that you kept out of sight.  The sad irony is that I doubt that this had anything to do with why their children chose to not attend Mass regularly.  And of course, this was all done in the name of Vatican II; or rather, the mis-interpretation and mis-implementation of Vatican II.  Thank God our RC pendulum is now swinging the other way and thank God even more for Benedict XVI and his attitudes toward classical music and pipe organs.

Well said.

One of the churches I visited during my project to document pipe organs in Cleveland (which by the way still isn't up on the Cleveland AGO's site after the entire summer) was a smaller catholic church with a rather modernistic design to their obviously new sanctuary, but, honestly it seemed rather strange, there were really none of the things that you would traditionally associate with the Catholics, sure, there was a cross, but that was about it, that and a very, very, very small Wicks it had maybe two or three ranks and the rest (what little else there was) was digital. It was o.k. but more on the crappy side of O.K. Certainly not like the other Catholic church I visite which was very traditional, and if it weren't for the obvioously eclesiatical decorations could have been mistaken for a bank (many of its interior pieces actually did come from banks...) but this more traditional church was also obviously much older and had more money (mostly in the past, though). I've posted pictures of the organ at this church before, it is in rough shape, but it has lots of good parts to it.

The most ironic thing to me is that the happy-slappy stuff is more likely to drive people away than it is to attract them.

---

Once you can tie your arms into a pretzel and your legs into a knot, you've got it under control

Overall I say people for the most part have the wrong philosophy about church music today. Whereas our music should be used to praise, honor, and glorify God, it seems most churches with the contemporary mindset use the music to draw a big crowd. But when it's all said and done, a contemporary churches worship service ends up as little more than a glorified rock concert. Hmmm.