Is blended worship possible?

By Debra Bendis

A comment that I overheard after worship Sunday made me wonder if my 350-member Midwestern small-town congregation is the last church still experiencing skirmishes over music styles. Have other churches broken through the contemporary/traditional impasse and come out of it with a music program of integrity characterized by a variety of styles? Or are most, like us, still floating in an unhappy purgatory between musical poles?

At our church, we offer a spare 8 a.m. service (spare in both attendance and in length), and a 10:30 a.m. “blended” service weekly, except for one Sunday a month, when that time slot is filled by a contemporary praise service. The 8 a.m. service has very little music. (That’s one solution to the music problems!) In my mind the blended service is, ideally, a mix of many genres, but in reality is strongly influenced by a music director who recycles a set of standard anthems, and tends towards old gospel hymns with lots of “cross references” and sentimental tunes. The contemporary group also likes salvific themes, but in their minds the tunes must come from Christian radio or cds.

As someone who helps lead music in both styles, I’ve been proud of laity-led efforts to add other types of music—musical numbers that don’t fit either stereotype. We have tried to introduce Taizé songs accompanied by guitar, global tunes sung a cappella, and John Bell-type refrains taught by a new girls’ choir.

There are signs that the congregation likes these additions, and that worshipers find the music balance satisfactory—many people attend both blended and contemporary services—and the contemporary worship too has been a compromise, trying duets without amps, or a women’s chorus on a hymn. Given these pluses, I’ve been glad for our new, if precarious, balance. So I was discouraged Sunday when two of the contemporary music singers turned to me and said: “Why do we call the 10:30 service blended? There’s no contemporary stuff in it at all—only traditional.”

Will a true “blend” ever succeed with worshipers? Can we develop a rich, participatory match of music and liturgy that engages us all? Can we jar those at the far extremes out of their bipolar view of church music and into a more eclectic but still worshipful mix of music? That’s been my goal, but on some days, I’m not sure we’ll succeed.

Comments

[teri]

The comment at my church last week was, "please don't make the service blended--then everyone will be unhappy." I think that is true, to a large extent. "Blended" worship, as traditionally conceived, is rarely done well, and when it is, no one gets what they want.

I would rather advocate for a musical diversity at all worship services--perhaps one leans more on Christian rock and one leans more on classical expressions, but both include music from around the world and around the time periods, a variety of instruments, and a variety of people with different gifts to offer. Sure, maybe we sing hymns in one service and praise choruses in another, but both offer diversity in their own way.

That's my dream...

[Bob Cornwall]

When we think about it clear headedly, all worship is blended. It is a combination of styles ancient and modern. The text is ancient, the sermon hopefully in tune with the modern. Taize, John Bell, Jim Strathdee, Vineyard, they are all styles that are modern to a degree. We are now 30 years or more into the worship wars. It's time to put the weapons down and see if we can't figure something out. My little congregation tries with a degree of success to bridge the styles. The issue shouldn't be what we like, but what creates community with one another and with God. Too often though its a turf war between pastor and musicians, or between musicians of different stripes.

Oh, well, I'm rambling, but I think it's time to redeploy!

[Richard Hershberger]

Is a blended service possible? Certainly. But the problem is that "contemporary" is a moving target, as the story of the contemporary singer asking about the blended service shows. To a twenty year old, the music from when he was ten is traditional. And he will be startled to learn when he is thirty that his taste in music is no longer contemporary: that he is a neo-fuddy-duddy.

So a contemporary service will have to be constantly changing its style. That is fine: that's what "contemporary" means; but when applied to a blended service it means a constant accrual of layers of newer forms, which in turn means less and less of any particular form of neo-traditional music. This in turn is just another way of saying that no one gets much of what they like.

This may be the best way to go. If you are a small congregation in a small town, you may not have the numbers to give everybody their ideal service. By comparison, I worship in a large city. I drive 45 minutes to get to my church, but it fills my needs. If I wanted some other sort of worship service there are any number of other churches, many of my denomination, that could do this. There is no need for every congregation to try to be all things to all people.

[Reuben Bowden]

My congregation has a commitment to being blended in a number of ways. Lately, I've been talking about blended worship having of mix of what I call "meditative" and "celebratory" elements. It seems to reframe the discussion and put in a different context.

[PyroPastor - Jeffry Bross]

Having lived in the various styles of worship, it is pretty apparent that blended worship works, traditional worship works, contemporary worship works, silent worship works, loud worship works as does puppet worship (though that doesnt always work for me). As long as the worship is meaningful and authentic, churches can live within any of the various styles offered. I even believe a congregation that normally lives in one genre, may easily move in and out of authentic efforts of other styles. Traditional music works in contemporary settings, when the context and meaning is explained and taught (then people understand the richness and depth). "Contemporary" music works well in traditional worship when offered in a way that allows those unfamiliar with hip hop or rock to learn how to sing that particular style. God spoke to us and speaks to us in many ways and it is important that the church matches the complexity of God's Word while engaging God's depth. Just some crazy thoughts from a traditional pastor who loves contemporary music!

[Debra Bendis]

Your responses confirm my sense that many churches are putting energy and heart into reframing music issues — and your responses are encouraging. Efforts to create diversity within each genre is one way; an emphasis on creating community (instead of great performances) in and through worship is another; thinking about "meditative" and "celebratory" seems like a good method too, one that will advertently or inadvertently let some "fresh" music into any service. And yes, I've tried adding instruction and background to both contemporary songs as well as Taize, and when done with an informal style and not too often, this helps too.

Other observations?

[Keith]

I especially appreciated your comment about how a service with very little music solves most of the problems. I'm ready to do away with all music in worship until we can all agree on what is important about worshipping God (and the answer is GOD.)

I am a church musician who can play in a variety of styles, and I have grown tired of listening to people arguing about "worship style." It's not an important argument; it's akin to arguing about which radio station we should have on in the car. How self-centered of us to perpetually whine "Play my favorite style of music!" as if our worship was supposed to be a reflection of our sinful selves! If the worship service includes music I hate, then there is an opportunity for the Spirit to produce patience in me. The big criterion Christian worship must meet is that our object of worship be the God who is revealed in Jesus Christ. Who cares whether I like it or not?

[Ragan Courtney]

I am of the opinion that in most churches today, ministers of music want to touch all of the people in the worship service from senior citizens to seniors in high school. In that noble desire they have blended their worship with all types of music. At our church we often have a jazz band leading us, but we depend on traditional hymns and new hymns, especially those found in the United Church of Christ's hymnal.

I have a hunch that any style of music could be effective in proclaiming the gospel as long as it is good music. How to define what is good music may be difficult or impossible and purely objective. Surely somewhere along the way standards were set by brilliant musicians. Could we not agree that lyrics must be literate, and music be able to point our minds and hearts Godward?

In my earlier days I was in the forefront of the Christian musical, doing the book and lyrics for a musical that sold a million copies. That genre has faded as music and the arts were used mainly as propaganda tools to espouse a narrow theological point of view. Art was sold to Christian publishing houses then sold to secular publishing houses that were factories who printed thousands of bland, simplistic, repetitive plays and songs. At a musical conference in California I witnessed drivel that did not attain the eloquence nor the depth of a bumper sticker be proclaimed "anointed." It sold quite well, I recall.

I am reminded of an old hymn text that says, "Give of your BEST to the Master...".
Could we all agree to blend the best that we have to bring?

But then I may be all wrong and old and out of step with what's happening in the church today.

There must be something else about which we can fight beside music. It just seems uncouth and crass and dull witted to continue on this war...any war.

[Katie]

For any music in worship - look at the text and the sentiment/mood of the music. What is it about? What is it's intent? Does it provide a meaty spiritual diet for worshipers? Is it filler like a bridge between one thin "news" article on TV and another? Is is about corporate worship - the church together? Is it about the private relationship that one person has with their god?

Go to the source of what worship is and what the church together is. Then test all of the elements of worship to see if it supports those things.

[Russell Peek]

I want to comment about the first posting "please don't go with a blended style, everyone will be unhappy."

Our primary goal in worship is NOT to make any human being happy. Our happiness and what we may or may not like isn't really all that important in the grand scheme of things. The point of worship is to worship God.

So - with music, the point is not so much do I like it or not. My personal taste in music isn't all that important. I'm much more concerned with what the music is saying. How does this glorify God? What does it say about our relationship with God?

It is important that music be done well. I'm a big music lover, part of my own spiritual practice is to memorize hymns. If I weren't a pastor, I'd probably do something with music. But with music and most everything else in the church - it's not first about you or me... it's about God.

Let me tip my hat and also say - I despise these sorts of labels - blended, contemporary, and traditional. They are ultimatley lacking. Each worship service follows a tradition - a pattern of some sort. It is also contemporary in that it is done in the here and now. It is also blended in that worship brings together past (heard through the Word), present (the community gathered by the Spirit), and future (God's promise to come again).

(Stepping off my soap box)

[R E Wegner]

I just stumbled across your blog, and was grateful for the variety of comments on worshp, opening my mind to listening for new expressions of faith. Enrolled in seminary in the 60's, we felt so hip when we experimented with "multi-media" worship--- film, drama, dance, "folk" music (mainly Simon and Garfunkle). Even then, some older folks were open to this. Now I'm the old traditionalist, turned off by much contemporary worship, when it seems simplistic, repetitive and irreverent. But your dialogue reminds me that there are both inspirational and awful contemporary AND traditional attempts at worship. I loved the question asking whom we are trying to please (ourselves or God).
Thanks, C.Century, for oontintuing to open our minds and hearts!

[Susan]

I have been delving into Robert Webber's book Planning Blended Worship. In his estimation, in order to revitalize worship, there is need to get back to simply "telling the Story" of scripture through our old, traditional fourfold order of worship. But in doing so, we need to use contemporary means/media to pull this off, as well as re-educating our congregations on what the fourfold order of worship actually does and means. Does anyone have any concrete ideas of how this would/could be achieved? Thanks

[steve]

I do not have a good solution to this issue. For years our church has had a contemporary service and a traditional service on the same mornings. In the summer we tried to blend - but depending on the music leader, we leaned one direction or the other. What has happened over the years is that several different church groups have emerged around their music style. Hostility and suspicion now underlie relationships and divide the community. I have found it sad that a means to aid in worship expression of thanksgiving to God has become more important than being present for the worship of God. I am in favor of being relevant with the culture and what people listen to - but I also wonder if the church is not a place of helping people learn more about the rich traditions and contemporary offerings of Christian music, and not just a place to sing your favorites. Maybe we could all stretch a bit.

[Nancy W. Carle]

Is blended worship possible? "Something to offend everyone," as a friend of mine has put it. I guess it's like the colours in a paint box: when we blend them ALL together, each colour loses its own integrity and we get a muddy brown. But would we really want everything red or navy blue all the time?
And of course, we have to remember what it is that's going on in worship (hopefully SOMETHING!) and ask ourselves, "Are we glorifying God and enjoying God" as the rehearsal for "forever"? If we are, then won't we put our all into it -- maybe even study how music works, take some composition lessons, learn to sing, practice -- and not simply rely on "what I like"? What we like is so often what we're told to like through the media, who, let's face it, seldom have our best spiritual interests at heart.
And finally, please don't say the issue of music in the church is unimportant. Would people's rhetoric be so intense if it were unimportant? Would thousands of musicians spend millions of dollars and invest themselves for something unimportant? Wouldn't our own scriptures be silent about music if it were unimportant?
Yes, many people are quite "battle weary"; that makes it doubly important for worship leadership (pastors, musicians, lay people) to be careful what we choose to put into people's mouths and spirits.

[Allan]

I don't have anything new to add, but I was refreshed by reading this blog. This morning, I arrived at the church and opened the chancel door into the sanctuary. There sat Betty, Richard, Russ, Jack and Tom. It was 8:30 am and the early service that was started twenty years ago because we needed more seats had reached a record low in attendance. In the place of the children's sermon we have at 11, we have a hymn sing. Russ asks for "The Old Rugged Cross." It's not in the blue hymnal, it's not even in the red. Tom dusts off an old book and begins to play and sing. We join in on the parts we know. It's different, and it's small. We question why we do it. We wonder how to end it, but it is on days like this that I am hopeful that Jesus does show up when we gather in His name regardless of the time, space, language, culture, harmony, and media we employ. How do you label a service when it is a rag-tag bunch of people from all sorts of backgrounds, cultures, ages, races, and economic classes who gather to worship God? You don't. I agree, that we need to move away from the language we use to describe our worship services and seek to give voice to the variety of words, styles, and genres of music that best call people to praise the God they know and love. It may be Taize, and it may be a college kid pickin' his guitar. But whatever it is, we try to make use of the God-given gifts, dreams, talents, and aspirations of those who are there to enjoy and give glory to God. What's it called? Worship

[J L Hoffman]

I attended a college campus congregation in the mid-90s that I believe did blended worship very well. Sunday services drew on 2-3 traditions each week; weekday chapel services were typically mostly in one tradition, though each day was different, and the church did not post the style in advance so members could not choose to attend only their favorite styles.

What made it all work was a recurring theme shared by the pastor, Rev. Gerald Coleman -- probably shared in one format or another at least once a month. The message was that "Joe" may prefer classical music, but he worships joyfully during contemporary chapels or parts of the service because he knows that Sally loves contemporary worship. And Sally does not care for spirituals, but she gladly joins in because she knows that Tami grew up in a Gospel church. And so on.

The larger metaphor, of course, is the body of Christ as presented in Romans 12-13. In this sense, blended worship was part of the pursuit of a multicultural church, an intergenerational church, a church of dialogue rather than division.... It was a beautiful experience.

[C. Roland Marcus]

I think terms currently being used to describe worship styles are inaccurate. For example there is a vast treasury of contemporary hymnody which would never be used in so-called contemporary worship, only in "classical" or "traditional" settings. Why? Because such hymns are not sung to driving rock beats or played through sophisticated sound systems. Instead, they are accompanied by pipe organs, brass ensembles and timpani.
Ironically what is called contemporary is often thirty or more years old. But as long there is syncopation and artificial it is considered "contemporary."

But if those are the only marks of the "contemporary" as they surely seem to be in many congregations have we not short changed our own age? Have we not also produced a wealth of a cappella choral music, anthems, and even stirring organ music? These offerings are as "contemporary" as any other, but our narrow definitions of that term allow no room for them to be regarded as such.

[Linda M. Smith]

At our church we provide the 2nd Sunday for our more contemporary music and the other three Sundays for the traditional. We have experienced with the blended, but it normally get very mixed reviews. However, it seems that the mix I describled works well for the most part. I have observed that those who are opposed to the contemporary music normally will stay away on 2nd Sunday. I am not sure this is good!

[dan mcgowan]

The issue I have with "blended worship" is that it puts the focus of our attention on the "HOW" of worship, rather than on the "WHO" of worship. It is not important to God WHAT SONG STYLES WE SING. But along the worshipping spectrum we have many, many church members, leaders, musicians, pastors and others who have not yet figured this out. We actually think God is concerned with the TYPES of songs we sing!

In a sense, He is! He wants us singing songs of praise and worship TO HIM - not ABOUT Him. Dart your way through scripture and see if that is true.

But, God is MORE concerned with the HEART ATTITUDE of those who are singing those songs. If you hate hymns, and only love singing songs by Chris Tomlin - how do you respond in your church when your music leader decides to sing "How Great Thou Art?" Do you cross your arms and frown your eyes and then "sing anyway" protesting in your heart? If so - guess what - YOU ARE NOT WORSHIPPING GOD! Same is true of those who love the great hymns of the faith but suddenly are faced with singing "How Great Is Our God."

And isn't it funny that BOTH songs talk about the very same thing!

Personally, I think focusing on and discussing the validity of "blended worship" is a waste of time because it misses where our energies should truly be focused:

BLENDED WORSHIPPERS!

[Steven C. Stark]

I find it amazing to see how the church has become so focused on the style of music we use to worship God. The diversity of “OUR” choices being served in our services these days reminds me of being at Baskin Robbins 31 Flavors; Rock Music Worship, Jazz Music Worship, Country Music Worship, Alternative Music Worship, Blended Music Worship, etc… Instead of simply, “Come And Worship The Lord” it’s now “Come and Choose What Flavor You Like To Use To Worship The Lord”. How petty, selfish and self-centered we Christians have become. If it isn’t enough that we’ve been saved from our sins by our loving and gracious Father that we now expect, insist, even demand that the music we use to worship Him is first suitable to our own palate.

It’s as if we were to say, “Thank you Oh Lord for saving me from Hell. I would love to dine with thee at thy banquet table, but only if you serve chocolate ice cream for desert, otherwise I shall wait to see what might be on thy menu in the future”.

Worship has never, is currently not and will never be about “US”. It has always been, currently is and will always be about “THE FATHER”. The more we continue to make worship about us, the less “Worshipful” it is and the more “Selfishful” it becomes.

[Jon Whiting]

I am responding to the original blog.
As Director of Music at our church, my concern is not about using music that has been written in recent years verses hymns that were written say 30+ years ago. That is not the issue regarding blended worship. The generally understood meaning of "contemporary Christian music" today is music that is of a Christian nature that is fashioned to reflect the styles popular in the world but reflecting Christian philosophy and values. We can't know all the motives of the composers or of the performers, but we can compare the message of these songs to that of the Scriptures. Once we have decided that the Word is faithfully represented in the text, we can evaluate the musical part of the song. This is where we find such contention. The concern is whether believers should be patterning their music after the popular styles of the world. We have "our" versions of rock, metal, rap, blues, etc. We did not create these styles - we copied them from worldly performers! Many believers, such as me, understand this to be in defiance of clear biblical teaching: "Be not conformed to this world..." (Rom. 12:2). There is no question that CCM copies greatly from the styles, sounds and look of the lost world. This has created a great burden in the hearts of many senior believers who have toiled to build churches over the years and now see them being led into worldliness in music and even in a watered-down message. Many of these senior saints now feel abandoned by their church and leave in search of congregations who want to clearly "shine as lights" in this world. Blended worship is alienating these people in order to please younger people who want church to accommodate their tastes. If we are trying to accommodate people, is that really worship? This is not to judge motives, which may be sincere. But, who are we trying to please? There is a strong trend today in defense of CCM in church to judge, belittle or condemn those who resist “progress” because the new leadership wants to attract more people with music they like. The music can become the object of worship and the feeling it brings can create its own form of addiction. Instead of “I want my MTV” it becomes “I want my CCM”. Worship is to set aside our desires and tastes as we approach our holy, awe-inspiring God in humble adoration and praise seeking to please Him and discover His will. Is this the goal of blended worship? If so, it is not always evident.

[Essie May]

For another perspective from the pew, you might want to check out the March 24 post at www.seenthenews.blogspot.com.