To Hymn or not to Hymn
Though I like a lot of what The Boneman says on the subject of church music, I still think those old hymns are superior at this point in time. There is much good music still to be written in forms we haven’t even dreamed of yet. Hey, I’m a Postmillenialist, so there!
So, how can you use the old hymns and still get some bang for your shekels?
Don’t sing every blooming hymn in the hymnal. Out the 700-1000 hymns you find in an average hymnal, about 90% will be lame or unserviceable. Too sappy, too archaic in language, too weird. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, use those 50-100 gems. Sing ferocious hymns for your processional and recessional. There ain’t nothing new out there that matches “At the Name of Jesus†or “Christ is Coming†as far as content goes and if you stick to Ralph Vaughan Williams-type tunes set a little fast, your congregation will sound like a camp full Israelites preparing for a beatdown on the Philistines. Add some extra instruments, particularly some brass. Keep your canon of hymns small (under 100) so your people can learn the hymns and learn to love them over time. And when they know and love them they will sing them like warrior poets.
But why not 1) use tunes from this era, or 2) refresh old tunes? Why not have a combination of all? Why stay stuck in a certain genre / mode when doing so results in turning so many away that could be won over?
Don't say you're postmil. Be postmil.
Posted by: Boneman | September 17, 2008 at 07:28 PM
Dude, chill.
Send some links of what you're talking about. Surely there's something on YouTube. I'm having a hard time conceptualizing since the only stuff I've heard in this vein is RUF unplugged, pseudo-Celtic tunes.
Posted by: Garrett | September 17, 2008 at 09:20 PM
Yeah, send it to me too. I've been thinking about this more and more lately.
Posted by: Chris | September 18, 2008 at 10:02 AM
There was actually a recent survey of the unchurched that indicated that music was actually fairly low on their priority list for what attracted them to a church. I'll try to track that down, but if that's the case, then even the pragmatic appeal falls flat--and see my comment (hopefully) on the Boneman about how contemporary music excludes people as well.
Posted by: Joshua W.D. Smith | September 25, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Joshua,
Yes, I agree. Mark Driscoll says its all about the preaching at the end of the day but I think its also heavily weighted toward the community aspect. But I believe that for a visionary liutrgical church it should be the total package.
Posted by: Garrett | September 25, 2008 at 08:04 PM