Boycotts are just not my thing and I'm not really sure that it's appropriate for the church at large to support them as a general rule. However, Jonathan Aigner's article titled, "It's Time to Boycott the Worship Industry" raises some keen points that are worth taking a good hard gander at. There are pros and cons to everything on this earth- worship industry included. Aigner's article, regardless of whether we agree or disagree on his individual points, creates a great starting place to discuss worship practices in our churches and worship teams.
First and foremost, Aigner discusses the topic of money, saying that the worship industry is driven by its money making capacities which affects the quality of music and theology that is produced. This is a good point - if we are taking music from the worship industry to use for worship services in our churches, what standards are we using to make sure that these songs are appropriate? There are quite a few songs that I must admit I disagree with theologically, but they receive an abundance of air play. Because they are popular and performed by famous Christian musicians, they are accepted as "gospel truth," but as a worship leader, I feel they don't have a place in our worship services.
The United Methodist Church examined the top 100 CCLI songs (many of which are directly from the worship industry) for theological content and singability. You can find their results here. While they examined each song with rigorous standards, the results were pretty positive for the music they believed to be in accordance with the doctrine of the United Methodist Church. However, they only posted the songs they felt they could endorse. I would love to see the list that they felt were not appropriate for church use and the reasons why. I commend the UMC for creating a focus group that strives to make certain our worship is sound.
Another point on money - according to www.therichest.com, Chris Tomlin's net worth is approximately 2 million dollars. For an average worship leader like myself, that's a lot of cash! And that makes it seem like his music is money driven. Then again, compared to Justin Bieber's net worth of $200 million, it's just a drop in the bucket. Furthermore, the Bible tells us that a laborer is worthy of his hire, and perhaps the grueling schedule of touring life is worth a couple million.
Speaking of Christ Tomlin, Aigner also discusses the idea that the worship industry creates musical idols, such as Tomlin himself. That's a great point, because we need to make sure that our worship music centers on Jesus, and not on someone else. It is difficult for us average folks to measure up to the talent, level of production, and team of support that Chris Tomlin has for his musical aspirations, so there is really no hope of us creating music like his anyway. Regardless, God loves diversity; He didn't create us to be carbon copies of someone else. But perhaps Chris Tomlin is as popular as he is because his music is theologically sound and beautiful (although not too many folks can sing in his keys!). His music is consistently excellent, theologically sound, and well-written, so why not use it?
The best point, in my opinion, that Aigner makes in his article is that the worship industry follows culture and is aimed at creating a passive audience rather than passionate worshippers. This is a great point. As worship leaders and ministry leaders, we aim to cultivate the congregation's response to God for who He is and what He has done. We give words and music to their experience so they can worship, but if we are using music that is created for passivity, where is the congregation's voice? On the other hand, the benefit to using popular music in the worship service is that the congregation already knows it. For those that listen to Christian radio, it is easy to introduce a hot, new song because the congregation has heard it over the airwaves again and again. And they are excited to use these songs in their worship repertoire. Would the congregation have a fuller, more passionate, more true response to God if we used only original music that was not a part of the worship industry or CCM movement?
If you know your church music history, you might be aware that many of the old favorite hymns were once popular tunes of their day, some even originating as drinking songs in old time bars and pubs. The music was relatable to the people because it followed the cultural norms of the day. They could easily learn it and sing it. It is the theology and musicianship that have made these songs stand the test of time. Only future generations will know if today's worship music will last.
Aigner also discusses the emotionalism of songs from the worship industry as well as the need to stop allowing ourselves to be satisfied with watered down worship songs. His points are excellent and his logic is clear and well -written. He gave me a great pause and a small chuckle with this line: "It’s time to end the Tomlinization, dethrone our jesusy American Idols, and once again foster creative beauty and artistry, especially in our children." It's a great point - but I don't think we need to boycott the worship industry in order to do this. I wonder if Aigner listens to music at all outside of church? What could he possibly listen to on the radio or on a CD that doesn't involve the music industry in some way? And I wonder what Aigner's solutions are for today's busy, bi-vocational worship leaders who just don't have time to find music that isn't from the worship industry?
I like Aigner's article even if I do disagree with some points, and I appreciate his willingness to share ideas that may not be popular, even if they are worthy to be discussed. I also like Chris Tomlin's music, and I use it in my church's worship because it is theologically sound and beautiful and people are already familiar with it. Next time, we'll talk about how we can have our worship industry and great worship music, too.
Another point on money - according to www.therichest.com, Chris Tomlin's net worth is approximately 2 million dollars. For an average worship leader like myself, that's a lot of cash! And that makes it seem like his music is money driven. Then again, compared to Justin Bieber's net worth of $200 million, it's just a drop in the bucket. Furthermore, the Bible tells us that a laborer is worthy of his hire, and perhaps the grueling schedule of touring life is worth a couple million.
Speaking of Christ Tomlin, Aigner also discusses the idea that the worship industry creates musical idols, such as Tomlin himself. That's a great point, because we need to make sure that our worship music centers on Jesus, and not on someone else. It is difficult for us average folks to measure up to the talent, level of production, and team of support that Chris Tomlin has for his musical aspirations, so there is really no hope of us creating music like his anyway. Regardless, God loves diversity; He didn't create us to be carbon copies of someone else. But perhaps Chris Tomlin is as popular as he is because his music is theologically sound and beautiful (although not too many folks can sing in his keys!). His music is consistently excellent, theologically sound, and well-written, so why not use it?
The best point, in my opinion, that Aigner makes in his article is that the worship industry follows culture and is aimed at creating a passive audience rather than passionate worshippers. This is a great point. As worship leaders and ministry leaders, we aim to cultivate the congregation's response to God for who He is and what He has done. We give words and music to their experience so they can worship, but if we are using music that is created for passivity, where is the congregation's voice? On the other hand, the benefit to using popular music in the worship service is that the congregation already knows it. For those that listen to Christian radio, it is easy to introduce a hot, new song because the congregation has heard it over the airwaves again and again. And they are excited to use these songs in their worship repertoire. Would the congregation have a fuller, more passionate, more true response to God if we used only original music that was not a part of the worship industry or CCM movement?
If you know your church music history, you might be aware that many of the old favorite hymns were once popular tunes of their day, some even originating as drinking songs in old time bars and pubs. The music was relatable to the people because it followed the cultural norms of the day. They could easily learn it and sing it. It is the theology and musicianship that have made these songs stand the test of time. Only future generations will know if today's worship music will last.
Aigner also discusses the emotionalism of songs from the worship industry as well as the need to stop allowing ourselves to be satisfied with watered down worship songs. His points are excellent and his logic is clear and well -written. He gave me a great pause and a small chuckle with this line: "It’s time to end the Tomlinization, dethrone our jesusy American Idols, and once again foster creative beauty and artistry, especially in our children." It's a great point - but I don't think we need to boycott the worship industry in order to do this. I wonder if Aigner listens to music at all outside of church? What could he possibly listen to on the radio or on a CD that doesn't involve the music industry in some way? And I wonder what Aigner's solutions are for today's busy, bi-vocational worship leaders who just don't have time to find music that isn't from the worship industry?
I like Aigner's article even if I do disagree with some points, and I appreciate his willingness to share ideas that may not be popular, even if they are worthy to be discussed. I also like Chris Tomlin's music, and I use it in my church's worship because it is theologically sound and beautiful and people are already familiar with it. Next time, we'll talk about how we can have our worship industry and great worship music, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment