getting beyond ‘jesus is my boyfriend’ worship
Yes, at last! A worship leader who is recognizing the dangers of the over-romaticization (or is it the eroticization?) of worship. A very candid interview with Matt Redman…
Comments
51 Responses to “getting beyond ‘jesus is my boyfriend’ worship”
I am surprised that there were no comments on this. Controversial topic this.
Alan…this post just NOW appeared in my Google Reader — and I’ve checked it a couple of times a day even today! I don’t know if there was just a delay in posting or what… So I hope you get some more comments — this just makes me think of your presentation in Long Beach last year with Neil’s gang.
Alan, help me with this one on what you are trying to say.
Alan,
I thought it was a great interview. I really appreciated Matt’s main point that we are all learning and growing in our revelation and understanding of the nature of God. I also appreciated his honesty in saying that sometimes the words we use to express our love and devotion may be a hindrance to others and may not actually reflect the ideas we are attempting to express. We are likely more culturally trained in the language of romance to express love and devotion and lack the linguistic skill, purposeful intent, and perhaps theological depth to express ourselves more accurately.
Another factor that contributes to this is a screwed up understanding of the nature of God in regard to gender. I read an interesting post this week that suggested not always using male pronouns in reference to God. The reactions were most interesting. Many people are completely unwilling to let go of a completely male-gendered understanding of God. Yes, Jesus is a Jewish male. However, in worship, we should also be able to express devotion to God - Father, Son, and Spirit - in a way that is unrelated to gender, that is unrestricted by the concept of “blokeness.”
Also, sometimes (not always) the real issue is a discomfort with expressing love and devotion. My hope is that we would become more skillful in our expression without losing the depths of intimacy that come with knowing God.
I have long felt this way about the church in general, and music in particular. We have so feminized the church that it doesn’t even pretend to be a place for men. Just a cursory glance at the western church and you don’t find a lot of John Wayne sort of men involved. Instead you tend to find men look weak, whipped, and possibly even gay to the outside world. These men in many cases are great godly guys, but my point is the church is not attracting the manly men. Most men look at the church as something for their grandmas. I think the music is just the tip of the iceberg.
I think if you saw the church on the frontlines fighting poverty, hunger, and other social justice issues men would be drawn to it. Men by nature need to be working and deep down inside want to be a rough and tumble hero. The church instead has told them to sit down, shut up, wear a emasculating set of dress clothes, sing love songs to Jesus, and go to Sunday School, and listen to a preacher who you think looks and sounds weak. Not an exciting picture for most men.
As for the comment above by grace - I think you have to be careful in what you call God. He refers to Himself in scripture as a male, never as a female. I think that Matt Redman’s said it very well we have to make sure our language is water tight scripturally. If you don’t rely on scripture as revealing the name and character of God you find yourself trying to think of new clever names for the trinity like the Episcopalians a year or so ago. They came up with great things like “Rainbow, Ark and Dove,” “Compassionate Mother, Beloved Child and Life-Giving Womb,” “Sun, Light and Burning Ray,” and “Sword that Divides and Storm that Melts Mountains.” All these are great names, but just not names for the God who revealed himself in scripture.
I must be brief but, I am so with you Micah! Not that I appeal to Eldrige’s principles at all (actually I really could not stand his book!) I do think that as Christ’s followers we must face the “call of battle”!
On the other side of things, I think Grace has an excellent point too! The feminist pronoun often can take a definition which is limited to a “softer”, “gentler”, and “romanticized” nature without consideration to God’s intended creative and holistic picture. Perhaps, most often in a masculine dominated society. What do we do with the “Joan of Arcs” in our midst? The “Mother Teresa’s”?
If we consider scripture… how do we reconcile God’s unity with the feminist pronoun of “Sophia” throughout the Proverbs and the OT? Can God find balance between both the masculine and feminine natures of creation? A sort of Yin and Yang if you will? Just a thought!
Hey, if this isn’t making me think of the book The Shack.
Alan, have you read it yet? Sophia, indeed! And there are many images God associates with himself that are maternal in the Bible.
Personally, I think we have a lot of work to do in our English-speaking cultures to redeem the breadth of the meaning of the word “love.” It is not primarily a “gushy” word, put one of great power and intentionality in faithful relationships. The task is a big one….
Alan, I started to write a response, but it became too long, so I posted it on my blog instead:
http://jonreid.blogs.com/oneanother/2008/03/worship-porn.html
(Short version: Intimacy is not the problem. In fact, I am afraid the “I’m a bloke, I don’t worship like that” critique only makes matters worse. The problem is removing worship from its context and making it one-dimensional — which I call “worship porn”.)
Jonathan, we in the West tend to see love in primarily romantic types of ways. We are tending away from the much more covenantal notions of love that come from Scripture. When we think in these categories already and then come to talk about the love of God, it is hard not to project romantic understandings of love on our relationship with God. Now, there certainly is a place for “Jesus as my lover” in mystical experience of God, but we so overdose on it. The net effect is to weaken our discipleship.
i remember seeing this video not too long ago
and i think it is a sentiment that its becomeing quiet common in worship leaders/song writers
in mainstream church (at least over here in the UK) the problem tho i feel is there’s often a
emperours clothes nature to this critiscim
you can read so many interviews or reviews of worship leaders like chris tomlin or matt redman or tim hughes or such that will go something like this oh yes there’s a worrying trend in modern worship for this and that or such (as if they aren’t part of the problem) or in Cd realeses “unlike so much modern worship music that is so and so, blah.s latest songs/album are so (insert word of your choice here manly/authentic/relevant/of the times/biblical/deeper/less jesus is my girl freind/blah blah blah
its like theres some unknown dark monster creating bad worship music out there somewhere but you know this or that worship leader is leading the way to something better or not
I think the whole masculin femenine thing can be miss leading as well, for instance the church i’m a part of is young church plant and the leader is a very sporty competivite masculine man, and there are lots of similar men around the church as well, unfortunatly there are also men who aren’t high testosterone sports beer and burps kinda guys who kinda feel uncomfortable being on the edges, and often outsiders negativly percive the church to be a lad’s club only which isn’t true especially seing as manly as the pastor is he’s continually open to the fact that he will break down in tears when preaching on things that touch his heart.
there’s a lot of chat that goes round about particularly around books like “why men hate church” and wild at heart, yet often it can just be a opening for lots of church isn’t how i like it grumbling.
and all the while we complain that church has been feminised yet who as feminised its not like the women took power and control of churches ages ago and turned them, its mostly men who hold the power in church, and i often wonder whether women actually feel like the church is especially geared towards them or not or whether the church isn’t genuinly feminine at all.
I think we also need to be very aware that when we use the idea of masculine spirituality, it is not with the beer swilling idea of ‘masculinity’ that we have in mind. This is a perversion of masculinity…a stunted thing.
I am with you Marty, why is it that although the church is dominated by men, our worship is so ‘feminine’ (receptive) in nature?
I think what ya’ll are saying is very helpful to me as a worship leader. Yeah I love the lover side of the Lord - He is the Bridegroom “we” are the bride - so there is a time for “us” to take the “feminine” role if you will, but….
The Lord is a Warrior, the Lord is His Name
Pharaoh’s chariots and His Army He has hurled into the Sea
The best of Pharaoh’s officers are drowned in the Red Sea
The water covers over them and they sank
To the depths just like a stone.
When evil advances to destroy me, my enemy will stumble and fall.
All the nations surrounded me, but in the name of the Lord, I cut them off….
Onward Christian Soldiers marching as to war with the cross of Jesus going on before….
Matt Redmon, Chris Tomlin, David Crowder, etc. None of them sing war songs. The Charismatic church used to be full of war songs - I can’t think of any that people use now….
Victory is the Lord’s, we’ve just begun to fight…
I think it’s the language of beauty coupled with the mysticism inherent in many songs that produces the erotic effect. Too many worship songs seem like the aural version of an early Sophia Coppola movie. The Jesus presented in them is ahistorical - very little is sung about what he actually did and too much is sung about some sort of otherwordly experience I will get by singing the song with all the sincerity I can muster. But then again when you read worship conference flyers that state heresy such as “Our worship is our access to the very throne room of God” then perhaps homo-erotic Jesus is the least of our worries.
Great interview. I completely agree with Redman…the danger of using words within a context where the definition sounds more like a love song to a wife, than awe and worship of our God is a problem in our thinking and practice in the church.
I don’t want to overstate this. God has used all types of writers and songs to teach me about Himself, but the trend from worship toward romance is not a biblical one. I think those who are not following Christ often have greater clarity on the oddity of the way the church approaches God.
The reality is it is easier to romantically love than worship in awe and submission. It almost seems to mimic the difference between dating and marriage…dating is about the romance and the pursuit, when we enter into marriage our romance is an addition to our mutual submission and service of one another. It seems like the church is stuck in “dating” mode with our worship. Our words expose the difficulty of our worship journey. I really appreciated the candor from Redman, and emailed the link to my worship leader. Thanks for the food for thought and conversation.
I’m not so sure that actual “war” songs should be used for worship tunes, although there might be time for it, however, in our culture, I think it will probably give a negative view of Christianity, the documentary “Jesus Camp” comes to mind…
“Onward Christian Soldiers marching as to war with the cross of Jesus going on before”-As a Jew this song reminds me of something else…
However the church does need a balance in their lyrics songs and agree with everyone else. I especially like the ‘emo’ type psalms…you never hear a worship song like this either.
There is a great Simpson quote of a ‘Christian’ singer who when asked by Ned Flanders where the rest of her band went said: “They moved from Christian pop to regular pop, it pretty easy, you just change the words Jesus to Baby”.
Hi, I’m new to this thread, and I’ve appreciated the comments by the participants. It’s great for Christians to be able to ‘think’ as well as ‘feel’ and ‘do’ in relation to the praxis of the Faith.
I’ve been exploring the concept of gender in my theological journey for approx 18 years. I’m a heterosexual female who has known the Lord since my first conscious recollections and over my half-century lifetime have participated in the Faith through a range of Christian denominations at various times and places. Over the past 25 years, especially, I have been involved in Christian creative movement arts on an interdenominational and international level, so I am familiar with a wide variety of music and song and/or soundscape, having used them myself in creating ‘works’ and also having observed many other people and their use of audio and visual resources in the practice of their art, life and faith. Sometimes I think I major in minority… a woman in a largely patriarchal world; an extravagant worshipper in a largely inhibited devotional world; even at home I’m a female in a domestic world of three males (my husband and his two boys), but then I really ‘did” it on Easter Sunday… a white woman preacher (well, dancer/speaker) facilitating the Resurrection Sunday Service in an Australian Aboriginal Church sponsored by a mainline denomination! So a blog topic which covers worship (well, at least some elements), gender, and culture is right up my alley, so to speak…
In answer to the question: “why is it that although the church is dominated by men, our worship is so ‘feminine’ (receptive) in nature?”
I think that the feminisation of aspects of ‘church’ life is a consequential result of the over-emphasis of masculinity in other aspects. Consequential, in the sense of a balancing act… perhaps a bit Newtonian in concept… for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction… but despite the limitations of the allegory, a conceptual picture that can be used to illustrate the idea of addressing imbalance. Too much boy here, let’s add some girl there. Not that it’s a conscious thing that people do. It’s more on a sub-conscious/psycho-spiritual level). In discipleship to Christ and his teachings (yes, the Jewish male that gave the privilege of bearing the world-shaking news of the Resurrection to a woman), my hope is that we become more balanced in our expression of worship, our understanding and appreciation of gender issues and our understanding and appreciation of the nature of God. And I will add, that I mean a balance of moving parts… not the still death of equilibrium as Alan has so wonderfully brought to our attention in other writings about organic system theory.
Grace and Peace
Lucy
We played the flute for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not cry. So what are we suppose to play?
Does this verse more fit the discussion?
“Behold, you are to them like a sensual song by one who has a beautiful voice and plays well on an instrument; for they hear your words but they do not practice them.”
Defending worship leaders - they are after intimacy with God. I’m not defending “our” ability to take people there or the vehicle that we may use to take people there. But I will “defend” the need for intimacy.
Here’s what Wolfgang Simson says about “intimacy with God” - and how it relates to “inspiration”. (Taken from Starfish Manifesto)
Intimacy (with God) is the spiritual place, the source of inspiration. When you draw near to God, who is Spirit, he promises he will draw near to you. This is where God reveals secrets, plans, agendas, in the place where you and he whisper together like friends. And in this place of intimacy, when he whispers, “I love you,” you faint.
Inspiration is a fresh droplet of revelation, supernatural knowledge from God in the form of visions, insights, pictures, etc. When the revelation “I love you!” hits you, you cry.
Information is empirical data; sound bytes. You read or hear: “God loves you.” And all you do in response is nod. “Good to know!”
Traditions are frozen information, the collective memory of a people. When you recite John 3:16
, you frown. “Yeah, that’s what they say.”
Faded memories occur when you have moved so far away from the source of inspiration, God-stuff appears to you like disconnected puzzle pieces that may make you feel warm, but will have no effect on you. You hear: “God loves you,” and you smile and reply: “How sweet!” and order another ice
cream. An actual bombshell of inspiration has become an irrelevant piece of hearsay.
The current crop of Jesus is my boyfriend songs (those developed in the past 30 years or so) are things I just don’t sing in public worship.
I’m a heterosexual male– but that’s not the reason I don’t like them and won’t sing them. For me it’s because a) the tunes aren’t really good for congregational singing (ranges are either really narrow and boring or obviously designed for vocal gymnast soloists); b) the words don’t really fit a public setting (fine for devotional use, in some cases) or c) the words are rather insipid, and there are better words supplied by scripture or other songs that offer public devotion many times better.
That said, I think the blokiness argument is a dead end. It actually keeps us stuck in personal preferences and demongraphic speculations/stereotypes rather than helping us as a worshiping body do what we can do individually and collectively best.
That’s the key criterion here– what can this congregation or gathering of worshipers (if not in a congregational format) offer best to worship our Triune God as well as THEY in particular possibly can. I’m not suggesting we all have to invent our own repertoires– there’s a lot of good stuff out there in all kinds of musical genres. Rather, I’m suggesting that a key criterion to be used in determining which of the genres, and then which of the pieces in them, may be offered by a particular congregation/gathering is what THEY can do, what they love to offer, what they can offer with passion and excellence.
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Director of Worship Resources
GBOD | The United Methodist Church
“Equipping world-changing disciples”
I appreciate Redman’s honesty here. Personally, while I find a lot of the old hymns remind me of funerals, a lot of the contemporary worship songs leave me feeling like a homosexual. As a consequence I don’t find Christian music to be a particularly helpful worship aid at all. Bit sad really, but that’s the truth. I would like some third or fourth options. But in the absense of that it raises questions for me as to how Biblical the contemporary (over?)emphasis on music based worship really is.
Back to the thread though, I think it is important to distinguish between linguistic gender and biological gender. A hidden danger in this debate is that if you are not careful to differentiate between the two you can inadvertantly fall into supporting a Wiccan / goddess devote agenda. I have seen it happen many times in emerging church conversations. The english language does not contain a gender neutral personal pronoun so there are certain limitations we just have to live with and overcome through careful explaination. I am vary wary of torturing the text into saying something it never said, far better to explain the context carefully. We need to be clear that the divinity of Jesus is not measured by the size of his penis but I think we do violence to the tradition if we pretend he never called God abba.
Thanx, Jerry, you’ve really got me thinking now! I’ve led group worship (sometimes in the smallness of a home group meeting, sometimes in a much larger conference or local church meeting setting, but never in a particularly sophisticated high tech environment or on a day-in day-out or weekly basis). I’ve facilitated workshops and seminars on the topic of worship, and I’ve been invited to dance before others preached as an act of worship. I’ve generally taken the approach of worship being a holistic, lifestyle practice, and never questioned the need for an experience of intimacy with the living God, so I love the way you expressed the sense of ‘disconnect’ that is so possible if there is no emotional/transformative encounter in the experience.
I take on board the previous comments of others about how there is definitely a genre of contemporary “worship” songs that are inappropriately feminised or religious imitation of pop culture love songs.
All of that makes me ask about the appropriateness of intimacy and ecstasy in our experience and practice of the Christian faith in the context of a public gathering…
In my experience of gatherings of Christian creative movement artists, some pretty amazing spontaneous stuff happens in sessions that are dedicated to public worship,in ways that regular gatherings of believers rarely accommodate. It is usually a mixture of individual participation in a way that is personally directed toward God (and experienced personally with God) and a community participation where parts of the group or the entire group (even 500 or more people) participate in movement that either spontaneously erupts or choreographed movement is demonstrated and taught (maybe simple gestures of action songs, not necessarily complicated dance routines!). Intimacy with God could be experienced either way… individually initiated or group participated and sometimes in a happy uplifting expression but at other times in a mode of lament/intercession or even of a expository/prophetic quality.
My experience of what we would refer to as worship in a gathering such as a church service where we have a leader who directs musicians and singers generally encourages people to come to an ‘intimate’ place with God individually. More often than not, they are artistically assisted by the leader of singers and musicians, but there is little sense of true appreciation of how intimacy, ecstasy, intercession, and prophecy can be facilitated by leaders under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in a community expression in which individuals actually acknowledge who of their fellow worshippers are present and how they can move as a community… whether they sit, stand, kneel, prostrate themselves, jump up and down, from side to side, sway reverently, or whatever! And if course, the architecture of the gathering site would somewhat determine what was possible… basilica style, stage up the front, rows of immovable chairs set out in classroom style etc etc. It’s all a bit intimidating really, isn’t it. Sorry if I got carried away… but Jerry’s “bombshell of inspiration” had an explosive effect on me.
I’d be really interested to hear other people’s comments
Lucy
while calling it ‘panty-praise’ may be getting carried away (different blog) there is something to be said about making
praise more ‘manly’ BUT lets make sure that we define ‘manly’
from the bible, not from society. I don’t have a problem
with picking things that are more ‘comfortable’ for the
‘audience’ as long as it does not affect the core message
which is the gospel. I have been in many churches lately
where the gospel is not being delivered because it is not
comfortable. while the words to a song might make a person
uncomfortable, this can be overcome by connecting with them
in other ways also. the interviewer pointed out that our
churches are over-mothered and under-fathered. what we really need is men to stand up and be men for Christ, not
for themselves. sorry this is a book in the making, a lifetime of ministry trying to sort itself out. change
must happen if the world is to be reached. not change
because truth has changed, but change because we have.
-dav
It is interesting when you look at women like Miriam, Deborah, Hannah, or Mary, these are songs of awesomeness, strength, and many times battle.
As a woman, maybe I love the concept of battle and strength to much. One of my favorite books are Judith, I just love how this devoted woman remains faithful when the men want to give up. Many of the stories that make women squimish and even some men, are the ones that give me courage. I just love the smell of blood in the air, because it reminds me of Christ and His mercy!
So even as a woman some of the songs are to romantic for me. It took along time for me even to begin understanding songs of songs. Bobby(my former pastor) is very big on reading Hebrew prayers and songs. He teaches on the awesomeness of Yahweeh, and yet, on the former post I shared a song, “Cry Out To Jesus”, which he in turn had shared with me. It is a love song, yet, not something I think would be worship material. Knowing Bobby’s character and my own, passion is different than lust, yet, perception by others is important. Especially, today when consumption of desires is about filling our own lust.
Worship as I’m coming to understand it, at least one aspect, is about conversion, emptying oneself of our own deity, and than filling ourselves with His. It may also prove to be that more time needs to be spent on order of service/worship where these songs have a proper place. You wouldn’t put a passionate filling song, before a leading of confession or death through baptism.
The other interesting part of it though, is shouldn’t we be teaching people how to worship? I’m really getting tired of the “Can’t we all just do what we want, I want to get fed, mentatlity?” I’m going through this now trying to teach/learn myself because some of the women are looking for worship, yet it’s about performance and what makes them feel good.
What I’ve noticed at least in my self, that the awesomeness of those ancient songs, have actually made me much softer and more passionate about God. Thinking about the book of Ruth, draws me to passion for the love of my Kinsman Redeemer. With that said, many do not even know the book of Ruth. So it definetly can be confusing for some. It seems we need to be aware of the social context in which we interact and worship. Where are we and the others at? I’m in a Lutheran Church right now, just writting the way I am here is not something I can do when interacting with the conservative/traditonal side of the church. When I’m not careful than I’m pegged with being a lost new ager that knows nothing of scripture. The perception and reception of a language barrior.
The interview did get me thinking though. I listen to christian music all the time. I’ve been taking a deeper look at even that.
I look at worship as the thing that happens “when you find Him”. Where is He who is born King of the Jews? We have seen his star in the east and have come to worship Him.
There is a seeking and there is a finding. Worship is the thing that occurs after having found Him. The object of worship is the Lord.
Have you seen the one my heart loves? (SS 3:3)
This is the heart of the worshipper. Where is He? Have you seen Him? Tell me - so I can go there too! If the seeking doesn’t culminate in finding - then the experience is one of frustration.
Jerry,
I agree that worship in the context of corporate(whatever that means in terms of numbers, style, ect.)will also be expressed through it’s own theological context. However, it should also remain biblical within that expression.
Worship is a rhythm from Him to us, and from us back to Him. The core of the church is worship a sort of evangelism which moves outward, so yes, I agree it occurs after or along with discipleship. Another words, worship as you stated would be a form of evangelism having to do with conversion, not recruitment. This requires new seeds to be tested with the old. The old beginning with an acknowledgemnt of our baptismal death or however it is communicated, there is a sense of emptying and acknowledging that Jesus is with us as one who serves. He can not however, serve those who are already full and just seeking to consume more.
I’m not prescribing a set form of worship or songs, just suggesting that many services are about making me feel good, I’ve got Jesus, now lets get jiggy.
It denies the power and awesomeness of Yahweeh the Father. I do feel that the church is in many ways over mothered. Within our own culture context we will emerge and transform our communities. However, transformation is linked with our relationship to Christ, and through that faithfulnees obedience should begin to occurr. The core of where this happens is I’m coming to believe also the core of worship.
It’s wonderful to have passionate worship, yet, passion must be kept in check with obedience/discipline or it becomes a form of spiritual masturbation. I want more, more, more, of Jesus, our witness becomes so heaven bound we are not releasing it here on earth. This is a horrible cycle which only brings about guilt which when not satisfied we begin to fill with other things or try go further out into other spiritual off shoots which are not Christ centered.
Anyways, this is probablly getting off topic. My only point is because Jesus is Yahweeh, both Father and Son, He is the Liturgist in worship. Seperating the concepts is like seperating Yahweeh as God of Torah, and God of New Creation, they are embodied in One Awesome, Magificient God.
Penney:
Let me rephrase: I see worship as my reaction to an encounter with Christ - not just the initial encounter (conversion) - but subsequent encounters. Mt 2:11, Mt 8:2, Mt 9:18, Mt 14:33, Mt 15:25, Mt 18:9, Mt 28:9, Mr 5:6, Mr 15:19, Lk 24:52
, John 9:38
, Rev 5:14
These are all scriptures about what people did when they experienced the Lord. I’m not sure I even know what Liturgy is.
You can praise God from a thousand miles away - but you worship AT HIS FEET.
Now, our groups do use praise in evangelism - when we have evangelistic gatherings - we usually praise and worship (with prayer mixed) for a couple of hours - then hit the streets and evangelize - often times leaving a praise/prayer team interceding for the evangelists while they are out on the front lines. We really aren’t there to make us feel good- we consider it essential warfare for the ground troops.
We see the street workers as ‘the Marines’ and the praise/prayer workers as the ‘Air Force’. We try to position the ‘Air Force’ as close to the action as we possibly can. To send workers out into the harvest without prayer support - is like the Americans landing on Omaha beach in WWII. It was a real mess. The enemy mowed them down like grass.
Both interesting and encouraging from the guy who wrote…
Intimacy
O Jesus, intimacy
My treasure will be, O Jesus
Your intimacy
To look upon Your beauty, Lord
Your glory and Your heart
To know You close, and closer still
Wach day upon this earth
Lord, since the day I saw You first
My soul was satisfied
And yet because I see in part
I’m searching, more to find
Its’ not the feminization of worship I have a problem with; it’s the quasi-eroticization of it that I have issues with. There is more to being feminine than swooning over guys. I have no problems with aromatherapy in alternative worship, I have no problems with female song writers and worship leaders bringing all whom they are into contemporary worship. What I have a problem with is people turning Jesus into an object of romance, into an astral lover. It is double problematic for guys given the homoerotic implications but its still quasi-adultery for women.
Hullo-o-o…
First - a disclaimer:
)
This discussion is engaging a perspective of “worship” which is but an aspect of “worship”. It relates to what we “do” as the people of God gathered… it’s a small aspect of Paul’s call for the believer’s whole life to be offered as an act of worship… (Rom 12
Second - another disclaimer:
and wondering how truly worshipful the belittling, berating proponent truly is…
When I connect with a discussion about “worship” that berates, belittles or deliberately denigrates someone else’s “attempts to worship” I find myself reminded of 1 John 4:20-21
Third - yet another disclaimer:
Recognising weakness in others has not yet helped me to avoid displaying the same weakness in my own life - my apologies in advance for those areas where my plank has obscured my vision of anyone else’s splinter!
And so…
Coming from my personal perspective and experience (tongue firmly in cheek!) I reckon one of the major challenges in discussing “worship” (or any other issue of church life) is the influence of “cultus individualis” - the elevation of the right of the individual (and devaluation/dismissal of individual responsibility) over the rights of the community. This is the cult of “humanism” that we live within, in our westernised context, and which we bring along with us into our “Christianity” (I engage the corporate “we” in this circumstance, by virtue of the fact that “we” are in the privileged position of engaging in discussion on a blog.)
We may have the capability of comprehending to some extent that, in the context of the church gathered, “worship” is BOTH communal AND personal, but our discussion focus is normally dominated from the perspective of personal experience and preference. We each engage in whatever way we presently do, from a position of thinking it’s the right thing to do, but then (because of the pervasive influence of cultus individualis) we seek to impose our personal experience on others… we do so competitively and aggressively… and we bolster our own bluster by speaking on behalf of others, assuming that everyone already agrees with ME! It seems to me that Jesus gets lost in the midst!
If our discussion of the “worship” of God is operating in a spirit contrary to the Spirit of God how accurate is our conception of what it is to truly “worship God” - are we really promoting a worship of God in spirit and in truth? The “manly” approach (there’s a whole discussion on the imposition of cultural gender stereotyping that I don’t have time to unearth here!) wants to focus on war songs that will make “manly” men feel more comfortable “in” the church and so objects to love songs to God - let’s toss out the excesses of some of the Psalms or Song of Songs etc… get rid of the bit about David dancing in his undies etc! Some want warfare praise when we gather, others want God to feel our responsive love in our worship… and ALL are right to some extent, some of the time.
In general terms, those responsible to lead other people in “worship” in our gathering, bring some biblical reference to justify the approach they are taking… few could be accused of deliberately perverting the course of worship. It seems to me an issue of major concern is the approach that seeks to define worship for the community, by MY personal preference and establish that as THE norm for OUR practice. Whenever I am involved in discussion on “worship,” people (myself included) consistently return to present their points almost solely from the basis of personal experience… The question is, “what makes me more right in my experience than the person to my right or my left - what makes me more right than the Anglican or Baptist or Pentecostal, what makes me more right than the person who seeks to engage in spiritual warfare, or the one who wants to sing love songs to God? The thing that makes me believe that I’m more right is simply my arrogant insistence (based mostly on my own imbibing of cultus individualis) that I am right… and that my personal experience represents what is “normal” for the rest of humanity!!
When the limitations of human language, cause someone to express the depth of their passion for God in terms of being “in love,” the fact that it’s not your understanding or mine, doesn’t disqualify that as a legitimate expression… It’s pride and arrogance that belittles and ridicules someone’s expression in that way, because it seeks to exalt its own opinion and cares nothing about where my brother or sister is coming from. Depreciating comments, like describing someone’s attempt at expression as “Jesus is my boyfriend worship,” might be cute to those who are not presently persuaded by that form of worship, but it alienates people who are there… there’s no education, edification or growth opportunity in that!
Here’s a thought…A belittling attitude tends mostly to exalt the belittler (the person doing the belittling) in their own mind (and that of their belittling colleagues), but it tends to result in the belittled (the person who is subject to being belittled) remaining in the place of belittlement (that place which the belittler purportedly wishes to assist them in moving from), so how legitimate is belittlement as a tool to help people who are already belittled to grow?
Communal worship provides the opportunity to create space for the community gathered to express their worship of God, in ways that suit that community, in the space and time they are in… To be part of my community, I choose to pay the price to engage in forms of worship that suit other members of my community, at times, more than they do me… At times others pay a price to be in community with me. There are times when I sense a desire to engage in “warfare” and others when I want to express my love to God in emotive terms. There are times when I’m strengthened and seek to “stand” with God and times I am overwhelmed and weep. My personal encounters don’t always coincide with the direction of the gathered community, but over time there is connection, in all sorts of ways that are not preconceived by the people leading in worship as we gather. That makes them all the more valuable, because there is a sense that God is interested in me, which all too often occurs AS I surrender my self-interest to the direction of the gathered community.
In short… none of us are right… we ALL are… and we all need each other to form authentic community. Authentic relationship creates a space for us to get to know one another and to learn what it means to express our worship together authentically. Excess in one direction for an excessive period of time is damaging and leads to remaining immature - the dead works of Heb 6
? How we help others to move from there is also vital too. Are we genuinely interested in paying the price for others to grow, or are we more concerned with proving we are right? Some of the time, engagement that is primarily emotive ought to be ok, but then so should psalms, hymns, spiritual songs, standing with God, warfare chants, acts of service, foot washing, serving the sick, impoverished, imprisoned, generosity to our community… Is it possible that it could be more productive to the church, if those who have a revelation of the true value of worship, applied their energy to developing an authentic worshipful lifestyle, as an example that others might follow, rather than applying energy to pulling down those methodologies and practices that suffer immaturity, in the hope that others might actually see the failures of their ways and choose to follow ME in MINE…
Authentic worship is an expression of the spirit and heart - the writer to the Hebrews at the end of chapter 12 encourages us to do so in expression of the grace God has given us, aware of being a servant of God, in a state of goodness and agreement, exalting and revering God, taking hold of the moment… it seems the writer is much more concerned about me connecting with God in full awareness, than my not engaging with God, so that I can remain aware of this realm to critique the ways of others…
Slainte
A Celtic Son
Lest it be misunderstood, I am not arguing for or against any specific style of worship.
My personal music preferences include metal, grunge rock, ambient and electronica and my worship preference is for silent contemplation without music. My personal music preferences do not include soft rock or easy listening by any stretch of the imagination. It leaves me cold. Yet I have resigned myself to the fact that my tastes will rarely be catered for in a contemporary church and it is not my intension to argue against the popularity of soft rock, the dominant style or contemporary worship, in this or any other forum. I concede that for the unity of the church I must suppress my own desires in my home church, and believe me, I do.
What I am arguing against here is inappropriate lyrical content, irrespective of worship style.
To the sort of lyrics I object to I would point you to my last post on this subject
http://mattstone.blogs.com/journeysinbetween/2008/03/jesus-im-not-in.html
I cannot sing such songs in good conscious. I am quite happy for people to invoke the “weaker brethren” argument against me, fine. What I would ask then is: how useful are such songs as a “corporate” worship aids when so many Christians within the body who cannot sing them in good conscious?
This is not a matter of stylistic disagreement. I do not raise such arguments against pop rock worship songs that do not contain pseudo-erotic overtones. This is a matter of lyrical content which would bring me into moral compromise. That is where I draw the line. If there are people who can sing such lyrics and completely miss the pseudo-eroticism, fine. But be sensitive to us “weaker brethren” who can’t and recognize that it’s not unifying. But to be honest I feel the problem goes deeper, when the only thing that makes a song Christian is the insertion of a name or title for Jesus I wonder about the theological and missiological grounding of it all.
Regards
Matt Stone
Matt, that post you did was great. Touche!
Yes, I do feel extremely privileged and grateful to own a computer and to be able to participate with interested others from around the globe in this kind of e-discussion. Yes, I am writing from my own experience of life and faith (which I do trust is informed and transformed by the WORD, both Logos and Rhema). Neither do I mind my motives being questioned, nor do I have any objection to being encouraged to practise preferential love towards my fellow Christians or to being reminded that diversity in community is important.
We quote Jesus when we talk about worshipping in spirit and in truth, so I think that is a key thought in what we are discussing. It’s good for us to imitate how Jesus related to God and people in all aspects of life including that of worship. This protects us from non-(or ante or anti)trinitarian views about God, and gives us a sinless human example to follow in living a life of relationship to God and others of the same or other persuasion, which is, in itself, a good overall model for what a life of worship is all about. Through the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives, we become more like Jesus in mercy, humility, self-sacrifice etc, BUT, when Jesus saw religious oppression, he did not shrink from confronting it!
Some might think that the over-feminization or ‘quasi-eroticization’ of worship song lyrics or pop-culture music does not fit into the category of religious oppression, but there are people of theological substance and missional authenticity who could be argued have a ‘calling’ or a discernment ‘gifting’ to assist us to ask intelligent questions and take a closer look… perhaps we could look at it in the way of ‘a question to be lived rather than a problem to be solved’?
What we are discussing is something that is a lot more subtle and a lot more sophisticated and a lot more ubiquitous than blatant religious oppression. I think it’s fair enough to be vigilant about the infiltration of popular ‘Hollywood’ ideas about love, romance and gratification into individual relational aspects of our lives as well as into the worship aspects, including the time we set aside for community gathering and expression of worship… because it is a symptom of something deeper and perhaps yet to be articulated…
It’s confronting to think of sugar-love songs as spiritually adulterous/idolatrous, but perhaps it’s for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear… to help us with the tearing down of a false construction so that we can be the church that Jesus is building. I don’t think it’s arrogant to confront something dangerous… sometimes confrontation is the most loving thing to do… it’s not a question of style and preference, it’s a question about God’s love, spirit and truth.
I have found this discussion inspiring and helpful for my relationships in and aspirations for the missional community in which I participate.
Lucy J
Lest it be misunderstood, I am not arguing against confronting religious oppression or inaccurate representations in “worship” songs… (it’s another discussion to question what place communal singing has in gatherings that are intended to be purely missional?)
I agree with Lucy that “sometimes confrontation is the most loving thing to do… it’s not a question of style and preference, it’s a question about God’s love, spirit and truth.” Which basically identifies the root of my concern – is this discussion being carried out in the spirit of God’s love, spirit and truth? Confrontation can be the most loving thing to do, when confrontation is carried out in love… when it is not, it comes across as arrogance…
The inadequacies of human language create real difficulties, in effectively communicating the intent of one human being to another. This conversation, like most conversations, is suffused with misunderstanding, clarification, reflection, review and need for further clarification – that is the nature of communication in the human condition. Hence this email trying to clarify what I have clearly failed to convey clearly previously.
The inadequacy and inaccuracy of language to convey our thoughts and feelings is a vital aspect of this discussion. Creative artists are often struggling with trying to compress the expression of incredible revelation, insight, feelings, emotions, thoughts into the limiting framework of their medium – in this case music and language… and they don’t always succeed. Geoff Bullock is highly regarded as a song writer in Australia, and was one of the originators of Hillsong, he has frequently expressed how he has grown as a song writer and lamented the theological inaccuracy of some of his earlier work. Did he write the initial songs as “Jesus is my boyfriend worship” or “sugar love songs”? His later comments would suggest not, it would appear more that he was simply working through some issues, and has matured in his understanding of what it means to express himself as a follower of Christ, and as an artist. I expect he was most helped by people who brought concerns to him lovingly.
I agree that it is vital to the health of the church that we are all confronted with our inaccuracies, especially when they become misrepresentations - I need that and I welcome that (not always with immediate pleasure) in my own life. However I find that correction is a dish best served in love… My concern with arrogance is not with reference to confronting something dangerous, but precisely whether the “most loving thing to do…” is done in a loving way… The “tearing down of a false construction,” is important but it is also vital that we are not simply tearing down people too… the church is people! Paul expressed that his authority was granted for the purpose of building up not tearing down…
I have chosen at times to withdraw from a number of discussions in the emerging/ missional/ incarnational conversation – mostly taking place in Blogs – because, despite the accuracy of some statements, I am convinced that the delight some people express in tearing down others, in different parts of the church, is not a matter of delight to God.
Paul writes to the Ephesians (and to the wider church) of the importance of unity as a basis for growing into maturity. That is a root, he writes, for recognising correct doctrine and the consequence of that unity is that we approach issues maturely, “speaking the truth in love.” My concern with this discussion is the lack of love and respect for people whose expression of worship may well be unhealthily influenced by pop-culture. In the emerging/ missional/incarnational conversation there is sadly much that comes across as arrogant, judgemental and exclusive - not at all loving. Frequently there is a far greater emphasis on “proving I’m right” than there is on “helping others’ change,” even though it is expressed under the banner of helping the church change. I’ve withdrawn where I recognise that I don’t have sufficient relationship to have adequate credibility in love, to present truth in ways that might be effective. Truth spoken outside of a loving relationship is generally far more harmful than resorting to prayer and God’s intervention.
I agree that “it’s fair enough to be vigilant about the infiltration of popular ‘Hollywood’ ideas about love, romance and gratification,” however I don’t agree that it’s loving to sit in judgement on others, simply because we have a revelation of where they may not be accurate in their presentation of God or to God. Where did the revelation come from – who has the right to be proud, in their own right, of an insight received from God? I’m also concerned that the response, in much of this particular conversation, to the influence of pop-culture in songs of worship, is also influenced strongly by pop-culture notions of gender differentiation, concepts of romance, definitions of love and the limitations of language - hence my concern about planks and splinters.
I recognise some of the points being made about extremes, but I am not as strongly moved by concerns of “over-feminization” or ‘quasi-eroticization’ as others have expressed. I clearly don’t perceive these “overtones” in quite the same way, might just be I’m naïve – along with many of those who write and sing these songs. That doesn’t mean that all songs are right and we should not choose not to sing certain things that we disagree with theologically… there are extremes. But emotionalism is not best dealt with by distrusting the expression of emotion per se.
Jesus himself was criticized for the intimacy of calling God “Pater,” and in his most pressured moments in Gethsemane he resorts to a deeper level of intimacy, expressing his love for God in the intimacy of the term “Abba.” Paul picks up on this intimacy in his letters to the church in Rome and Galatia – this level of intimacy is contrary to their religious culture. If we appreciate that the Bible was not created as an individual text for individual consumption, as we in the west are privileged to have it, but was created for reading in community, and if images of romantic love are inappropriate , then what place does the Song of Songs have? I’m not arguing that anything goes… I am suggesting that love has a vital place in the core of this – both in our content and in our conversation.
Truth in and of itself, without love, can be unhelpful and has consistently been one of the most divisive elements in church history. Splits in churches are generally supported by elements of truth on both sides of the difference, and often characterised by judgement and also fundamentally by a lack of love on both sides of difference - it has been the root of new denominations (abominations?) rising up etc. Speaking the truth, without love, is the tactic employed by the devil in his temptation of Jesus… the devil quotes the Scriptures, but his attitude is clearly not one of love for Jesus. Having access to the truth does not guarantee love or humility…
My concern is that I fail to see a loving critique in approaching someone else’s expression of worship with the description “Jesus is my boyfriend worship,” or “sugar love songs.” In what way does that “lovingly” seek to edify, encourage or correct others? The act of creativity, in which an artist exposes their heart in trying their best to create, is something worthy of respect – whether we agree with the resulting work of art or not.
I unapologetically love the church of Jesus Christ. I struggle with its failings, its inadequacies, its humanity – all of which begin with ME… It’s easy to be critical of others, however you tend to become more sensitive when you begin from a place of reviewing your own inadequacies, faults and failings. I have discovered – maybe it is not as true of others – when the temperature of a discussion I am engaged in rises, my capacity for genuine self-reflection and self-control falls in corresponding measure. I have discovered that there is a relationship between how much people perceive I am concerned FOR them and love them, with how much “truth” they feel able to receive from me. Without love, truth has no framework to be constructed on… do those people writing songs that lack depth and maturity, have any foundation to believe that their critics love them enough for them to choose to receive a level of truth…? Or are we just concerned with being right?
Food for thought…
Slainte
A Celtic Son
Hey…Alan, CS, Matt…where’s Brad? It would be old home night, otherwise.
The Abbess, sadly, is on her way out to a missional learning group meeting, and so cannot weigh in on this discussion except to say that I have to agree with CS that the concern must be for how we disagree and whether all our thoughts and deeds are steeped in Abba’s love.
I’m all for the worship lifestyle angle, personally. That seems to be the only way that all of my story stays consistent….
Blessings, all!
Celtic, what would you consider a more acceptable way to refer to the genre of “eroticized” contemporary worship songs in contrast to the “non-eroticized” contemporary worship songs? I was actually trying to use technical language in contrast to the more emotive “Jesus is my boyfriend songs” lable, but obviously that is too emotive too. How would you label the genre so that we can talk about it easy? I am open to suggestions.
Yes, thanks. I’m happy to refer to it in another way, too. It’s worth exploring if it helps us in this discussion. I’m not judging the people, that’s God’s job… mine is to to love God with my all and to love others… my motivation and intention it not to unlovingly tear anybody down, as we are all at different stages on the faith journey, and come from different backgrounds and influences which determine our preferences and style. I appreciate the painstaking work of the Holy spirit to lead us into whole lives of “worship style”. However, I do take seriously the battle against “the Devil, the world, and our flesh” as Martin Luther put it, and will join the Lord, as given revelation and strategy, against the “stoicheia” of which Paul wrote (and much later, Wolfgang Simson in his Houses that Change the World publication). People will participate in these kinds of blogs for many different reasons, and it is good to be reminded where our loyalties and obligations as Christians lie. I participate because, apart from seriously praying about it, I think it’s a good thing to be able to talk/e-talk to other Christians about the revelations and the strategies particular to areas that it’s quite possible the Lord is bringing to our attention for worthwhile reasons.
Am ‘good to go’ further in the conversation if people want to continue…
Lucy J
A couple of thoughts…
earlier Matt concluded his post with a question regarding “the theological and missiological grounding” of the songs that he has concern about… Well let’s take that thought a level deeper… what is the theological and missiological grounding that justifies us blogging about differences on issues like this that are central to the life of the church, in the framework of a forum that’s beyond the church!
Are there doctrinal issues that should be discussed “in camera” rather than in public? Do discussions like this, in an open forum cause more harm to the mission of God than they do good? What’s the theological basis for taking the issues that offend us within the church, outside of the church framework for discussion? My reflections are that there is much more theological and missiological grounding for engaging in doctrinal discussion, within the framework of the church - whatever that framework looks like - than there is for Christians attacking one another in the marketplace.
Matt asks “How would you label the genre so that we can talk about it easy?” If we are actually “talking” about the issues, face to face, person to person, in a space that renders us accountable to one another that’s one thing, blogging is another! Like I’ve tried to express I’m not against critique - I need it and benefit from it - but I am concerned with the attitude, the forum and the relationship within which we voice our critique. I reckon a lot of the extreme criticisms would not be voiced in the same vituperative tones, if we were talking face to face with the creative artists who wrote the songs, on the basis of being brothers and sisters in Christ. So… I wouldn’t label songs that concern me as a “genre,” I’d discuss each song on its merits or demerits as it arose, with the people it directly concerned… over a beer at a barbie, or a wine over dinner, or a Guinness with good food and friendship
Slainte
A Celtic Son
Celtic,
what is the theological and missiological grounding that justifies us blogging about differences on issues like this that are central to the life of the church, in the framework of a forum that’s beyond the church!
Very well stated in your posts! Very well timed as I am studying Luthers pretext to Romans!
Our missional God is awesome as He is moment by moment converting us which is KEY, because while we are being converted in ourselves, we do not know when or how this will happen, the Spirit just continues to search and reveal our own inadequacy! Jesus used logic and reason to teach and correct, but He used it in LOVE!
Thank you for the reminder and the balance! I will not say I am in love with you, or I love you, or you make me feel like loving you, or I think I love you, or the body loves you, hmm can’t imagine what you or Him look like?????????
How about simply…..Peace be with you!
Love,
ME
Conversion Time-Self Correction needed!
Jesus used logic and reason to teach and correct, but He used it in LOVE!
Newly formed simple edition of PW:
Jesus used logic and reason to teach and correct, but He it was Embodied by Love!
I am afraid I don’t understand. How are music lyrics more central to the life of the church than anything else we talk about here? Are they more central and potentially explosive than say, Christology, the focus of many of the more recent posts? Personally I regard music lyrics as way more peripheral and not nearly as central theme of scripture. Which is precisely my point, I am questioning the scriptural basis of some aspects of the practice. I am questioning how loving it is to expect conformity from me on an issue I find morally problematic for me.
Matt, Penney, Lucy et al…
I’m unclear about the best way to bring my thoughts to conclusion. My concern is to share my thoughts, concerns and critique in a spirit and attitude that is loving. To see us all set free to be who God created us to become in Christ. Where I get that wriong, where elements of my huan frailty and failings speak louder than the heartbeat of the Father I apologise…
I’ll get this off my chest as a conclusion to my contribution to this thread. I’d love to continue, but I have a number of things pressing in my local community. I’m sorry if what I’ve written is not yet clear, but the issue I’m concerned about is not just “music lyrics.” What’s at stake are deeper issues – the deeper stuff that’s at the root of some of this has a capacity at times to break my heart… I lose sleep over things like this! What’s at issue is the heart of worship that IS central to the church and IS an important focus of Scripture. What’s at issue is the spirit and attitude in which we approach other Brothers and Sisters in Christ. What’s at issue is how we can purport to question the content of songs intended as worshipful - no matter how questionable their content - in an attitude that betrays a lack of Christlikeness. Two wrongs don’t make a right…
I love the church. I have a passion to see the generation I serve and those who follow, become all that they were created to be in Christ. I question the root of some of our mistaken traditions, I am dissatisfied with my own inadequacies and at times I have a little inkling of the wrong thinking that I’m bound to, in my tradition and experience. I pray to God that I can grow free from those human religious traditions, so that I don’t bind those who follow to wrong thinking. It’s why I’m involved in discussion related to theology, missiology and ecclesiology, I so want to get it right for the sake of the future… BUT how I express my concerns is a vital part of the journey. I am not free to simply criticize, outside of a framework of love for others and accountability to others.
Being honest I have a major concern that much of the discussion currently around on blogs that are discussing issues of emerging/ emergent/ missional/ incarnational/ post-modern “Christianity,” betrays an underlying attitude and spirit that is in fact no different from the “traditional” or attractional mode of church that is frequently being questioned. Sure, it is presented in different terms – the theology and missiology may well be more accurate – and there is often more “sexy” methodology, but the heart and spirit appears often no different from what is being identified as wrong! At times it appears worse; there is an arrogance and pride that comes across. Rather than a genuine seeking to set the church on a right path, at times there’s more a sense of one part of the church justifying itself by exposing how weak another part is… yet none of us is perfect! Again, I’m not denying the place for deconstruction, but it needs to be carried out with a view to reconstruction, not simply be content with destruction.
One of the major factors in identifying underlying issues is a concern to express “truth” that comes at the expense of “love.” Paul writes in 2 Cor 2
of the significance of having an attitude of forgiveness, and how it is one way of making sure that Satan might not outwit Christ’s followers. We should not be unaware of his schemes – not focused on them, but not unaware either. One of the greatest tactics of the “accuser” is to present truth removed from love. I’ve written in the past of my conviction that as we mature we are called to “speak the truth in love;” that love builds a bridge for truth to walk across and that we are required to build a stronger bridge to carry a weightier truth. All too often we seek to walk the heaviest truth across a bridge when we have not built it strong enough yet to carry the weight - and then we accuse those who are unable to receive that truth of it being their fault.
The devil quotes Scripture to Jesus, but the presentation of truth is not from a perspective of love for Jesus, love for God, love for God’s plans – it is “truth” nonetheless, but devoid of love it is no longer “truthful”. How many church splits have been built upon two sides camping out on an aspect of truth, but without love? How many denominations have begun from having an aspect of the truth, and promoting it above love? How many blogs are promoting their aspect of truth, devoid of love? How many blogs that you read on these kinds of issues would you describe in these words:
“The blog/blogger is patient and kind, not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. The blog/blogger does not demand their own way, is not irritable, and keeps no record of when it has been wronged. They are never glad about injustice but rejoice whenever the truth wins out. The blog/blogger never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance.”
The possibility is that we’ve been wrong to blog about certain issues in the past, especially in the way that we have written – that’s not a rationale for continuing to be wrong into the future. In fact that kind of approach is partly what has got the church in the west into the mess we are in. My thinking has been challenged, in part at least by reflection on the question of theological and missiological grounding, raised in Matt’s writing. I’ve been challenged to reflect further on whether there is any theological and missiological grounding for discussing issues like this - forms of worship in the church of Jesus Christ - in an open forum. I believe there is a better Biblical rationale for choosing to exercise restraint in the public arena and limit certain issues to within the framework of the church. I’m happy to be presented with a clearer Biblical foundation for what has become current practice – I’m reminded of Col 2
particularly verses like verse 8 – as I’ve reflected I am convicted that many of my posts have been based upon ungodly motivation.
The question of whether conformity is “expected” is a different issue – conformity to a method or mode of practice is about more than just “music lyrics.” Plenty of people in this discussion – which you’ll be aware, has done the rounds of lots of blogging – have expressed how they choose not to sing certain lyrics or songs, clearly resisting conformity. If you are experiencing a pressure to conform, then it is something I believe needs to be addressed in the place where there is pressure brought to bear to conform. It’s something that should be addressed, but done so Biblically and personally, in relationship and accountability - concerns need to be raised, with those in leadership in a community, who have the responsibility, authority and opportunity to bring about change. Otherwise all we have is a whinging session, nothing changes except our hearts become less-loving and less tolerant…
In all honesty in recent times I have become increasingly saddened by the number of “Christian” blogs that have become all about finding a weakness in the church to expose, and have “delighted” in displaying it to the world. Check out the blogs that you connect with; consider how many of them have led with posts that are critical of other churches and leaders in the last few weeks. Consider the question of whether there is an underlying “theology” that we justify ourselves by comparison with others, who we consider are doing less well… Consider whether there is a “missiology” that is ingrained institutionally, that says I will build “my church” by writing off someone else’s… Consider whether the “post-modern” generation is simply reflecting the same attitude and spirit as is killing the institutional church, we may have a handle on an aspect of truth, but we’re no more loving, we’re just a little more “hip” because we do it in blogs, on youtube and in multi-media.
What blogs are out there that are devoted to constructing God’s kingdom, seeing His kingdom come on earth? What blogs are promoting God’s kingdom in vibrant healthy ways? What are people doing in their community, that connects a lost world with the heart cry of the Father to bring His prodigals home to Him? What is the good news?
“… since we are surrounded by such a huge crowd of witnesses to the life of faith, let us strip off every weight that slows us down, especially the sin that so easily hinders our progress. And let us run with endurance the race that God has set before us. We do this by keeping our eyes on Jesus, on whom our faith depends from start to finish…”
See you at the finish line…
In love, in Christ
A Celtic Son
Celtic Son, it is dissappointing that you see no way towards mutual resolution here. Actually, its more than that, it pains me deeply as I have suffered much from church insensitivity and seen many others suffer much. I received a heartbreaking letter only a few days ago that left me drained and depressed and sorrowful, which is one of the reasons I refrained from responding for a few days. For you to dismiss such suffering and moral anguish as irrelevant to the conversation, just because it is not your own experience, leaves me not knowing what to do. It is more than an individual issue and more than an individual church issue, it is a reflection of deeper systemic problems that have to do with cultural imperialism and repression of minority voices. Because of that I cannot be silent - precisely because I value love and truth so highly and see inclusive worship as so core to Christian community identity. And that is why I do not know what to do, because I know from this that it will continue to anger you and that pains me because I respect you as a fellow sojourner. Maybe mutual understanding is just something that needs time. I hope that, in the absense of mutual understanding in the meantime, that we can continue to be open to it and that this won’t hamper conversations in other areas.
Hi Everyone!
I’m back in Sydney after a great time in Melbourne at the Grassroots Festival where I and my husband had a worthwhile time connecting in with a very diverse ‘collection’ of God’s people. It’s very affirming and edifying to be amongst a crowd of enthusiastic God-loving, God-serving adventurers. I could sense God’s amazing and prevenient Grace in sessions where people shared about the agonies and ecstasies of the post-modern incarnational mission experience! And that brings me onto what I’d like to bring to this conversation now. No matter what we want to call “Jesus is my boyfriend” songs, I think we in this discussion, do actually know what we are talking about, and I don’t think anybody in the group is slamming fellow-Christians in an ungracious, ‘holier than thou’ manner. It appears to me that we are voicing valid concern about an issue that is causing problems in the edification and affirmation aspects of our worship life together apparent in particular sectors of the Christian community. Some of us are voicing valid pain or valid offence, and in being able to articulate such things in the company of fellow sojourners can open opportunity for ‘sharing the burden’ and gaining better discernment and understanding. Maybe we could come up with some action strategies and be prayerfully supportive of anybody who expressed need for it in regards to this issue?
I’ll close by mentioning something which was helpful to me in exploring the topic - Robert E Webber in his book, Ancient-Future Faith: Rethinking Evangelicalism for a Postmodern World, mentions the concept of a “fourfold pattern” of order in worship. When we have guests in our homes, we usually would greet them as we assemble in the foyer, “move to the living room for communicating with each other, gather around the table to eat and enjoy each other’s company, and return to the foyer, where we bid our guests farewell “, whether it be in a formal or informal setting… “These four concrete acts are lifted up into the mystery of a relationship with God and returned to us in such a way that the ordinary symbols of relationship become transformed and order and organize our divine relationship with God in worship”. It’s easy to see the parallels between house hospitality and God’s House hospitality in this description.
Without making rules set in concrete, my concerns are that the kind of music under discussion in this thread might sometimes have a place in terms of expressing intimacy, but I’m not sure that it is always appropriate, particularly hospitable, or that it organises our communal ‘divine relationship with God in worship’. And I also agree that it is an issue that is indicative of a much deeper and potentially dangerous problem about which maturing Christians should be prayerfully and practically vigilant.
Incidentally, while at the Grassroots Festival in Melbourne, one of the practical missional workshop sessions took us to a “Friends of the Earth” (not run by or for Christians) co-op shop where everything healthy, organic, and environmentally responsible in terms of clothes, food and literature was traded or sold. There were various petitions available to sign (e.g. against genetically modified food or against the Iraq War). There were books for organic farming and micro-finance enterprise in majority world countries. But what caught my eye was a stand with lots of lapel pins, badges etc., each with a trendy slogan. I had to laugh and buy the one that said “Jesus says he loves you but he’s just using you for sex”!!!! Not sure I’ll wear it to church next Sunday, though…
Matt…
I am sorry that you’ve suffered much from church insensitivity, I’m sure we could compare scars. I am sorry to have disappointed you, but there is mutuality in that area at least. I have asked question after question on this thread, in attempts to engage in discussion but generally my questions and concerns have been ignored and so it is disappointing that you post the accusation that I “see no way towards mutual resolution.” How do I develop this mutual journey, when there is little or no engagement with the questions or issues that I have raised in this thread?
Where others have raised questions directed to me, I have attempted to respond, but there has been little response to the concerns I’ve raised – other than emotive statements. I raised questions of the influence of “individualism” from our culture, on our “worship”, I pointed to the passion of the Psalms or love in the Song of Songs and asked how the comments on “Jesus is my boyfriend worship” relate in the context of those passionate and “romantic” passages of Scripture? The question of who can possibly be right, if the arguments are simply based on subjective, personal experience hasn’t been addressed, I asked “in what way does [this discussion] “lovingly” seek to edify, encourage or correct others? No response… You raised the issue of theological and missiological foundations and I asked “what is the theological and missiological grounding that justifies us blogging about differences on issues like this that are central to the life of the church, in the framework of a forum that’s beyond the church!” No response… In what ways do you think I’m not trying to work mutually? It takes dialogue to develop a mutual understanding.
I’d be interested in how you come to the conclusion that I’ve dismissed “suffering and moral anguish as irrelevant to the conversation, just because it is not [my]own experience”, I did suggest that some elements of the discussion needed to be actively raised in a more appropriate forum in the contyext of the hurt, that might lead to action. I certainly wasn’t aiming to be dismissive and it would be helpful if you can identify how you came to that conclusion from my writing. I’m not sure if you’re trying to suggest that I’m guilty of “cultural imperialism and repression of minority voices,” I’ve tried to engage in discussion, I’ve asked questions to encourage dialogue – there has been little response or engagement… I’m not sure whether than qualifies me as the cultural imperialist or the minority voice in your terms?
While I’m certainly passionate about what I believe, I haven’t at any stage been angry about this issue and I’m not sure how you’ve come to that conclusion either – perhaps you can enlighten me towards mutual understanding? In the meantime, I do recall once upon a time someone contributing to a blog the thought that Christians needed to learn the art of graceful disagreement… or words to that effect? Perhaps you might recall…
Lucy - we may well have passed in the great hall of “Life experience” at the grassroots festival… I have likewise returned to Sydney…
Perhaps I am guilty of over-reacting…
Perhaps it is okay to define the creative work of a fellow Christian with the term “Jesus is my boyfriend worship”
Perhaps it is okay to refer to someone’s creativity and efforts to worship God as “panty-praise”
Perhaps it’s ok to reference it in terms like “a lot of the contemporary worship songs leave me feeling like a homosexual”?
Perhaps that actually is not slamming fellow-Christians in an ungracious, ‘holier than thou’ manner.
Perhaps if people were referencing your personal creativity you might find the comments less than gracious
Perhaps not…
Perhaps I have just missed the whole point… and if I have I apologise.
In the end you are right, it would be a good thing to “come up with some action strategies and be prayerfully supportive of anybody who expressed need for it in regards to “sugar-love songs”"
Slainte
A Celtic Son
This conversation evokes for me the passage in II Samuel 6
:
12 David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obed-Edom to the City of David with gladness. 13 And so it was, when those bearing the ark of the LORD had gone six paces, that he sacrificed oxen and fatted sheep. 14 Then David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was wearing a linen ephod. 15 So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting and with the sound of the trumpet.
16 Now as the ark of the LORD came into the City of David, Michal, Saul’s daughter, looked through a window and saw King David leaping and whirling before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart. 17 So they brought the ark of the LORD, and set it in its place in the midst of the tabernacle that David had erected for it. Then David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD. 18 And when David had finished offering burnt offerings and peace offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD of hosts. 19 Then he distributed among all the people, among the whole multitude of Israel, both the women and the men, to everyone a loaf of bread, a piece of meat, and a cake of raisins. So all the people departed, everyone to his house.
20 Then David returned to bless his household. And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, “How glorious was the king of Israel today, uncovering himself today in the eyes of the maids of his servants, as one of the base fellows shamelessly uncovers himself!”
21 So David said to Michal, “It was before the LORD, who chose me instead of your father and all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the LORD, over Israel. Therefore I will play music before the LORD. 22 And I will be even more undignified than this, and will be humble in my own sight. But as for the maidservants of whom you have spoken, by them I will be held in honor.”
23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no children to the day of her death.”
David worshipped with absolute passion: Michal despised him for it. I think we do need to be really careful about judging the worship of others… in fact, judging other brothers and sisters in Christ in general.
I actually couldn’t hear the video… (Maybe I need a different sound card or something)… but I have heard other speakers making fun of “Jesus is my boyfriend” music in a manner that… personally… I think is a very cheap shot at an easy target. In that sense I strongly echo CS’s concerns… where is the maturity and grace in such an approach? Where is the gentleness toward a “weaker brother”… if indeed they are weaker?
I do think we need to be aware of the deeper issues behind this discussion.
I personally have a concern about “music franchising”, just as I have for other popular church fads… there seem to be way too many churches who feel suddenly obliged to have seeker friendly services, or Hillsong music, or Planetshakers music, or purpose driven programs, or (insert latest church fashion here) and adopt them UNCRITICALLY… regardless of the gifts of the local congregation, the needs of the local community, the cultural realities of the particular place, deeper theological reflection, or seeking God’s will.
Even in saying that… I am conscious that sounds awfully critical too! I am not trying to condemn this impulse… I’m sure it arises because church leaders truly do want to grow healthy churches, and they sincerely imagine that the apparent “success” of the latest church fashion may translate well into their own congregations.
But I feel we are called to something beyond “franchising” fashions… glorious diversity in the body of Christ, as unique church families in unique places with distinct gifts seek to faithfully express discipleship where we are… hopefully unleashing genuine creativity in worship and in local mission.
There might be a bit less “worship that leaves me cold” if we were able to unleash this kind of local creativity with thoughtful oversight… and it doesn’t have to involve music to be a meaningful communal worship experience.
I should add… I don’t have the sense at all that Matt is driven by anything other than a personal (and deeply felt) theological concern.
However, I too have read other blogs where I feel there is almost a superior gloating attitude over how badly other Christians are doing things… worship, theology or whatever. This should grieve us all, and I appreciate CS raising the issue.
It’s difficult isn’t it… expressing heartfelt concern can be read as condemnation or superiority… and sometimes deep seated pride and superiority can (in clever hands) SOUND like sincere, godly concern. I guess we all have to test our own hearts carefully in these discussions.
Matybigfro questioned back at post 10 (I’m in catch up mode here):
“all the while we complain that church has been feminised yet who as feminised its not like the women took power and control of churches ages ago and turned them, its mostly men who hold the power in church”
I’m having the rather naughty thought that some churches are run by “alpha men” who like to create a “receptive and submissive” (ie traditionally feminine) congregation… so people will receive what they say and do what they ask and admire the vision of the alpha male leader. It’s easier, it appeals to the ego, and it minimizes conflict.
Of course… this would be at a deeply unconscious level… if it was thought about at all it would be rejected… for we all know that “equipping the saints for the work of ministry” is SUPPOSED to be the job of Christian leaders. However, our primary “drivers” aren’t necessarily our conscious thoughts. This is why we all need to go much, much deeper into God… to become whole and holy from the inside out.
Thanks, Celtic Son and Janet. Very much appreciate your points.
As a dancer who is on the journey with thousands of dancers who are happy to be called Christian Dancers, I am very familiar with the “David Danced” passage of Scripture. It is probably the most popular one used to validate creative movement arts ministry and its worship expressions, but not necessarily the one I quote a lot. I have been criticised for works I have choreographed, despite my best God-submitted intentions. I don’t mind how ungracious the allegations (responding to some of your ‘perhaps’s, CS). I do always try to be open to having my heart tested (responding to Janet’s suggestion), and I have found the Lord to be very faithful in vindications department when necessary.
I also agree that there needs to be healthy critical analysis of any creative worship practices that an individual or group of Christian believers might want to adopt. It’s up to the analysts to choose their language of expression, and then it’s inevitable that they be open to counter-critical-analysis etc… a bit of back and forth similar to this blog discussion.
I also still think that there is more “at play” and “at stake” in the critical analysis of the genre of music under discussion (whether we call it “Jesus is my boyfriend” or something more acceptable for people offended by that term). As mentioned on a few previous posts, it’s hard not to sound condemnatory in some modes of communication. However, I do aim to find a healthy balance between practising vigilant discernment and being free to worship in passionate extravagance when the opportunity presents itself. I also encourage the creation of artworks (new songs, new music, new dances, new poetry etc) that are indigenous to a particular group of believers as well for groups to adopt what is of blessing from people outside their local scene.
Eph 2:10
“For we are God’s masterpiece. He has created us anew in Christ Jesus, so we can do the good things he planned for us long ago.”
The word “masterpiece” can also be translated “artwork” or “workmanship” from the Greek “poema”. There is a destiny and a quality about what we are created anew to do. We don’t have to condemn what is of a lesser quality, but we can see it for what it is, learn from it and move on. I trust in God’s process with us all, and hope that maturing Christians model a good example to newer or less discerning ones in many areas, worship principles and practice included.
Still learning
Lucy J
Hullo-o-o all…
thank you for your grace…
Janet raised the perspective of the difficulty of expressing heartfelt concerns, in this kind of arena. It’s not been my intention to point the finger at individual contributions; like Janet, I do not question Matt’s sincerity, nor the concerns Lucy has raised, or the motives of others. My overarching concern has been to question the very nature of the platform we use to bring our critique, and which has been taken for granted. I am also very much aware of the irony that my critique of others, in this discussion, is a critique expressed because I have expressed concern about the nature of others’ critiques of the creative work of other parties – so I’m a critic of criticism, and that’s ironic… at best. Perhaps at worst it is deep seated pride and superiority disguised to SOUND like sincere, godly concern.
I believe forward thinking followers of Jesus do need to deconstruct the environment we find Christianity in - but I believe that kind of work requires engagement within a Christian context. In Matthew 18
, Jesus speaks about a process of dealing with another believer who has missed the mark - the conclusion of the lesson is that having spoken face to face and with a small group of believers, the offence is taken to the assembled congregation for a decision; if the offending believer refuses to listen then they should be treated as if they were outside the community. In Jesus’ example, all of the critique takes place within the framework of the church - it is not a subject discussed outside of the church framework. Paul develops this idea, of not dealing with differences between believers before people who are not believers, in 1 Corinthians 6
. This is not a case of “covering up” but of preserving the ground for mission. All too often, the disputes believers revel in on blogs and in public arenas, simply add fuel to the fire of those who do not believe, and who already perceive the church as the domain of hypocrites and shysters.
I also feel that just to deconstruct is to leave a job undone… should we choose to engage in the mission of deconstruction, we must initiate it with a commitment to see the job through to its reconstruction… or at least make an attempt at it. If we are going to have a shot at the creative constructions of others, in the light of the demands of justice and mercy we ought to, at the least, present our own recreated reconstructions, attempting to point the way forward and allowing - even encouraging - those we critique to have a a right of reply addressing our constructs. We would contribute to the development of the answers, be more aware of the real issues and probably be more hesitant in our critique of others, as we processed the sting of the critique directed towards us personally.
Theodore Roosevelt is credited with this statement…
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”
It is easy from the safety of my armchair to deconstruct the work of others, it is a simple matter to wag my finger over my keyboard and tear down. It is another matter to bring a constructive critique that seeks to engage with the person in the arena, to assist them in developing more fully, the skills needed to succeed in their quest - which is in truth simply their small part in our communal quest. If we must point out failures - and at times no doubt we must - let us be followers of Jesus who lift the heads of those who have failed, who help to lift them up and point them in a new direction, with a renewed vision and appreciation of the truth. The bad news is not our domain, we are charged to bring good news…
At the risk of opening another can of worms, my perspective on the “masculine v feminine” aspects raised in this discussion - here and on other blogs - is that they seem all too frequently to be responses that are uncritical reflections and inconclusive. The short version of my thinking is that in Genesis 1
, when God speaks of creating humanity in God’s image, it is clear that both genders together reflect the image of God; God called male and female together to have dominion. Genesis 3
raises issues of “headship,” which is raised again by Paul in 1 Corinthians and Ephesians and is related to “mutual submission”. In discussion on the issue of women in leadership in church life, theses verses are often added to issues of women being silent, from 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy. Each of these passages needs to be examined in its own context, rather than grouped together to prove an agenda they were not written to address.
The concept of “headship” is also often equated to “leadership” - again out of context – they are not the same. Headship is a relational responsibility of service to those we have left our parental home (in idealised conditions) to join with; leadership is a gift given by God to individuals, with no concern to address gender, to exercise with diligence for the benefit of the church. At the end of Galatians 3
Paul reminds us of our restoration in Christ, that we are all one in Christ Jesus.
If the church is too feminine in its culture (and I’m not sure that is a fair charge) might that also, at least in part, be a masculine “excuse” for abandoning the responsibility to engage with the feminine aspects of life, in the image of God? If the church had prophetically played out our role in history, might we not have been leading our community in the right balance of gender relationships in all areas of life? Might “feminism” be the revolution the world didn’t need to have, if we the church had been leading our world, instead of following the trends? Is it not time the church led the world, based on the principles of God’s kingdom, rather than simply reflecting the prevailing culture of this material kingdom. Imagine a church that led by serving our world, led by loving people, led by generosity and blessing and healing… led by example… though I do recall that a call like that has been issued to us before.
Slainte
A Celtic Son
I have been thinking about your comments for a couple of days, C.S.
I do echo your concerns that the reputation of individuals, churches and Christianity in general can be undermined by the ability of anyone to post anything publicly on the net… regardless of their motives, whether they have their facts straight, etc. etc. It’s a totally public forum… and if you wanted to look for evidence of disunity among Christians… even bitterness in some places… it’s not hard to find it.(more on some other sites I’ve visited than this one)
On the other hand, I’m personally reluctant to throw out the baby with the bathwater and advocate that the internet should never be used in dialogue. It is a priviledge to dialogue with Alan and other fine minds here about issues of ministry that concern us. There is no doubt that Alan’s book inevitably becomes something of a critique of church as we have traditionally known it in the West. Where that is an invitation to reflect on how we do mission, and not an attack on those who are sincerley doing the best they can with what they know, I think it can do more good than harm. So much depends on the spirit with which insights are offered, and the grace with which challenges are received. We cannot pretend Christians do this perfectly… but I think it’s worth the attempt, so we can learn and grow from one another.
I’ve been reflecting too about “worship” and the reactions here… and thinking about how to “reconstruct”. I do think (adding to the comments in the final paragraphs of my post at 44) that “music fashion” in “contemporary” churches is in danger of a slight echo of some of the older fashioned missionary efforts of the 18th and 19th centuries, where converted tribal groups with glorious musical tradtions and customs of their own were obliged to wear suits, sit on pews in straight lines in buildings, and sing Wesleyan hymns on Sundays. There were clear limits set to what could be “incarnated” and redeemed culturally… all done with the best of intentions and the utmost sincerity… but it leaves one with the impression that the creativity of the people could have been fostered and released better.
It seems to me if a song, or a poem, or a dance, or a prayer, or a contemplative practice, or a piece of artwork, or a photographic display or video (etc. etc.) actually emerges from a local church congregation then that is “owned” by that church… can be a very meaningful and authentic expression of that local community. Exercising local creativity reduces the chance of the “cringe factor” that can happen when a piece of music that emerges from (say) a highly experiential, prosperity doctrine, “healing now… heaven now” style of church gets transplanted into an evangelical or a high liturgical expression of church. It doesn’t fit well.
Most churches probably need to move toward more “indigenous” expressions of worship in baby steps… sometimes people don’t value or recognise their own potential for creativity… but I’d like to see more movement in this direction.
As to what I’m doing about it… I’m in