"Our job as worship leaders is to help move people's hearts...toward the truth of God..." (p. 81)
This statement seemed to directly contradict my previous post. He seemed to focus on feeling; people must feel a certain way before they can know God better, non-churchgoers must feel like they aren't jumping over hurdles. The musical argument (familiar/out-of-date vs. new/"relevant") distracts from the real core issue: the worth of a text, it's value as a teaching tool, the presented truth itself as the main focus.
Continuing this paragraph, he writes as if the "overly familiar" and the "genuine and real" cannot coexist. The pivotal problem is, as he states, "when the subtle goal of using hymns is to maintain tradition, not to deepen worship." (p. 81) You can't just do something in corporate worship because "that's just how we do it here." Everything must be intentionally selected and placed. He did concede that exact same mindless, passive lip-service occurs in contemporary worship just as often.
Does familiarity engender complacency? Or can it deepen a relationship? Depends?
No comments:
Post a Comment