«
»

How evangelicals lost me, and why I may go back (pt1)

Authors note: There are two crowds I want to address before I start into this. The first crowd is much closer to “home” than the second, and in the same vein they’re more likely to read this than the second. To those that would bemoan this as covering the same ground, forgive me, as I know we have indeed covered this before, but due to some recent trending I’ve noticed in my traffic sources, I’m attracting a touch more attention from my former circles than I had before, thus I want to address them. To the second group: Those that may have a personal stake in any of the following posts, you don’t have to listen to me, I don’t know if I would listen to me, but here’s what I have to say, read or ignore it.


I’ve mentioned before, I haven’t been to an actual church service in over a year, before that I don’t remember the last time I actually attended one. I’ve been out of the evangelical church for quite some time, and attempting to disconnect from it for far longer, but try as I might (or perhaps I really don’t try hard enough… we’ll touch on that later) I find myself still…  connected somewhat to the institution. Over the next few posts (read that as: when I have a break from coursework that enables me to spend any time on this) I’m going to address a few of these issues that began my drive away.

The first I want to touch on is music. Please note, I did not call this worship, but music. If your first response was “oh I think you meant worship” then you’re probably part of the problem. Don’t worry, I was there once as well. In fact, let’s talk about it!

The whole issue started my senior year in high school, its when I first realized that the church was failing to speak to what was going on in my life. By all means I shouldn’t have reached that point, I was on all the various leadership teams throughout my middle/high school days, I was part of the “worship” band for the years,  I had attended (nearly) every camp, discipleship now, mission trip, choir tour, and retreat that the church had offered me.

But, in the end, I was empty. Instead of building a foundation on this, I had been given a foundation reminiscent of this photo. I understand the allure represented in “cool” worship environments, I’m part of a generation that fell in love with them, the problem is this is not actually a foundation that promotes any sort of lasting change. It’s a hook, you’re suppose to come for the sweet action “worship” and leave after filling the “God shaped hole.” (I do not however believe in the “God shaped hole,” but for the purpose of this exercise we’ll continue to use that phrase) The problem is, instead of leaving with the “God shaped hole” filled, you’re given an emotion driven experience, one that can be thrilling and powerful, but not lasting. Instead of pulling the hook and hitting somewhere around Jesus, we end up becoming hooked on the emotional experience derived from our music sessions.

Eventually you reach a point numbness, while you may still have feeling in the singing, you’re grasping at straws, hoping to catch that emotional high so easily provided on a weekly basis. I remember growing up hearing a dating sermon(? he probably wouldn’t call it a sermon, a lesson is probably the word he’d use) talking about the law of diminishing returns, where you’d progressively go farther with your significant other to get that emotional high you got from the first time you kissed. The same mechanic applies here, except often times there are no “higher” outlets, instead we’re left with the same thing week… after week… after week… after week… after week… after week… after week… after week…

Now, before everyone gets too deep in a fuss, I’m not actually advocating we do away with either music, or the band. Instead I’m advocating (asking, pleading, begging) for a second look to be taken at where this is going. Explore alternatives, wake up to what’s going on, and give your parishioners (Students, laity, pew sitters?) something to actually think about. Take the option to just fade into the same routine and throw it out.

A couple ideas you say? Sure, I’ll give it a shot.

I remember while I was in a high school band we actually explored this idea, we removed the band from the stage, put a simple wooden cross up on the stage, set up in the back, and played that way. No focus on the cool band, no pretty flashing lights, nothing. A simple cross. A cross. The cross. It’s a jarring sight not to have that familiar band up on the stage, but when you replace the former object of  (at least your eyes) attention with a symbol such as the cross, you start to think. It brings you back.

Speak. We (the evangelical church— wow… I just referred to myself as part of the evangelical church again, I dunno if I really am or not, perhaps that was only a slip of the fingers… perhaps not) have lost the art of speaking actual adoration for God. I know a few High Church people who were powerfully affected (beyond just emotion, a deep affect) when they explored our Low Church singing experiences. Let’s put the opposite into play within our own communities, and explore the spoken word. If you’re not a fan of liturgies, then speak the songs you sing, speaking/hearing actual words instead of melodies affects the brain in a drastic way.

Drop the light show. I know I lose a lot of fans on this one, but come on! Is it really necessary? Does it really draw anyone to a point of introspection and relation to God? Or does it simply highlight a purposeful emotional manipulation? If the songs we sing are actually powerful (lyrically) to bring that relation to God, do we actually need the light show or the fancy pants backgrounds? I don’t quite think so.

Last one… Cut back on the music. In the process of mixing in liturgies, other spoken word, visual explorations (ie ART), and any other way to reflect on God we’ve ignored, lessen the music, by hitting us with so much of it, you leave little choice but to make us ignore it. Oh sure, we’ll be there, but we’re ignoring it, or we’re listening to the killer guitar player hit some freakin’ hot licks, instead of focusing on any sort of relation the words have to our relationship with God.

I typed half of this up yesterday, and then was pointed to this post by the iMonk this morning, which touches on the same topic. It’s certainly worth a look (and reminded me of that brilliant ASBO comic which I surreptitiously put into the top of my post as well. (Yup! I steal ideas!)

email2friend

This entry was posted Saturday, June 13th, 2009 at 1:34 pm and is filed under church, evangelical. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • Kyle
    I don't always see eye to eye with you on church things (I'm not anything close to an emergent, for example), but I think this post was dead-on. For me, I never "got" the whole worship experience in the first place. It always felt like I was supposed to wave my hands in the air and have some sort of transcendent experience like everyone else, but this never happened to me at all. I just watched people play guitar - that was the most I ever got out of it.

    My impression from attending the same church as you did was that church was just supposed to make you feel good - I never actually felt like I was learning anything or being challenged at all, and this is why I totally quit going to college student church events. It was more of the same flashy emotional experience and sermons a second-grader could understand. Now I go to an adult Sunday school class and find it a far more rewarding and enlightening experience. And a more traditional worship service where we sings hymns and there's less glitz in general.
  • Heh, now that you mention that (in the first paragraph where you mention you never quite understood the whole worship thing), I remember being on stage and seeing you and saying "Man, that kid just can't get into it, whatta shame." Oh, how things change.

    And, for the record, I'm not advocating that a return to a "traditional" service is the best avenue. I'm more of a fan of a mixture of incorporating liturgy, art (actual physical art, not musical art), actual meaningful lyrics (he's got the whole world in his hand x4 doesn't quite resound a meaningful expression of the divine), and more intentional exploration of that part of worship. (and for the love of everything, stop calling it worship to the extent that it's the only way we think of worship.)
  • Tristan
    Just to add something else, I think that because of the fact that there is distance between yourself and the established church that you are able to notice the difference between the music and actual worship, which is something that most people miss out on. Most people are perfectly content to sit on the pew and sing the praise chorus shown on the powerpoint and then go home. Half of my childhood was spent in the traditional church, where I was a part of a "normal" congregation and the other half was (and now my adult life is) spent traveling around to various churches. Seeing how dead and lifeless "worship" has become bothers me. Nearly, every Sunday, I'm at a different church and probably 8 out of every 10 feels as if the worship is empty. That's not to say that some people aren't genuinely getting something out of the song or that it doesn't speak to certain people, but on the whole it appears to be just another song without passion or meaning behind the words.
  • Tristan
    I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Now, it seems as if the focus in "church" is not on Jesus or a personal relationship with him, it is more about the personal relationships with other members. More about the music than the word. More about the building than what happens outside of it. Personally, singing the same 6 words over and over again to loud music and flashy lights does not help me in my Christian experience. It might be fun, but you're right. After a while, it all runs together in a string of meaningless words. I'm not familiar with the terms "high church" and "low church." I'm assuming that high church is the more established "normal" church? The church that Jared and I attend is completely different from the churches that I grew up in and I feel like that has made a huge difference in my walk with Christ in the past year and half. There are no lights or huge crowds. There's not even a building unless you count the carport we meet under a building. It's taught me that God isn't always found in the places we conventionally look for him. I'm immensely glad for the series of events that led my family to where we worship now because that's what I feel like happens there both in the music and the word.
  • Sorry, High church means things like Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Anglican, Episcopalian and the like, essentially liturgical churches. Low church would be the churches that you and I grew up in (and attend now). Sounds like a very negative differentiation, but it's useful in discussion.
  • Tristan
    haha thanks because I was slightly confused! I'll be sure to use the terminology in later comments so I'll sound like I know what I'm talking about.
  • LOL. I know some low Anglicans who'd beg to differ. :-) Not sure why you'd say it was a negative differentiation.
  • I agree with Andrew. There are far more "low church" Anglicans than "high church" Anglo-Catholics. I, too do not know why it wasw a negative differentiation.
  • Apologies, I should have stated it "sounds" like a negative differentiation. It rings in my mind similar to "High view" and "low view" of the Bible, where I would be considered to have a "low view" of the Bible, but in fact consider my view to be quite high.
  • you said: "I know a few High Church people who were powerfully affected (beyond just emotion, a deep affect) when they explored our Low Church singing experiences. Let’s put the opposite into play within our own communities, and explore the spoken word. If you’re not a fan of liturgies, then speak the songs you sing, speaking/hearing actual words instead of melodies affects the brain in a drastic way."

    The phrase "if you're not a fan of liturgies" bothers me a great deal. It doesn't bother me that you used it, because I know why you used it. You're hearing people say exactly that and you're responding to them.

    I know high church is boring when you're 8. When was the last time some of these people went back to try it as an adult? I know droning words sound robotic when you don't know them and haven't been thinking about them week after week. But also, be sure you're in a high church with people who know why they're there. Even low church can be dead if its full of people meeting a social obligation.

    But when I first joined the RCC, I didn't do it because I was a fan of high church or even thought I'd -like- it. I just knew I was going to get something out of it I wasn't going to get out of Rock Band Church. And it took a long time to get to the point where I did get it. But I got there.

    And to dismiss high church as "not your taste" is to insist that there is a whole world of thinking and experience based on very sound doctrine that simply has no meaning of value for you. It isn't about what's your taste. It is about knowing G-d and learning more.

    So I'd strongly encourage people to get over themselves, stop being so American, and just go try it even if it isn't your cup of tea (or so you think). You may be very surprised.
  • Jim Said: "So I'd strongly encourage people to get over themselves, stop being so American, and just go try it even if it isn't your cup of tea (or so you think). You may be very surprised."

    I agree, sometimes we need to move beyond what appeals to our personal sense of taste (something I've begun doing in other realms, and finding appreciation for what I didn't think I'd actually like) but at the same time, I'm not sure I'm willing to say "It was done for so long with such great affect, we must do it again." If something works, it works, but see where the endpoint of the activity is.
    I'll have a touch more to say on this in a later post.
  • Definitely not saying "it did work, so it can work again". For one thing, I'd say "it has worked, and continues to work, and will continue to work". I think there is a tendency for people from very contemporary denominations to think of high church not just as old fashioned, but -of the past-. Having a historic tradition doesn't make what you're doing out of date, it makes it rooted. Certainly it -can- become out of date, out of touch, old fashioned and disconnected, but that isn't inherent. But that's no different than what is being described here with regards to evangelicals getting out of touch and disconnected from their very contemporary forms of worship.
  • Thanks for this, Matt. One of the things you wrote really hit close to home for me.

    You wrote, "Eventually you reach a point numbness, while you may still have feeling in the singing, you’re grasping at straws, hoping to catch that emotional high so easily provided on a weekly basis."

    Scott McKnight termed the emotional thrill seeking that we often do in church "spiritual eroticism," and I think he is right. Of late, I have been trying to work more of the old liturgies into our services and centralize the service more around Jesus, than around individual entertainers.

    It has been an epic failure.

    The fail is a result of the fact that I have only ever known fundamentalist and evangelical worship patterns. They are so ingrained into me (though I am numb and bored) that I am hopelessly awkward outside them.

    I pray for more vitatlity in my worship experience. I want true depth, not "ohhh... look! Light show!"
  • An understandable difficulty, we tend to fall back on what we always "knew". It's easier for us to revert back to the old ways, but change is a growing experience, keep at it bro.
blog comments powered by Disqus
ramblings-theology-my thoughts