I’m asking because so many people in Christian churches, and especially the music scene, seem to be doing their best to be cool.  Is this helping us connect with the world in which we live?

For years, a couple of Christian friends have been telling me that one of the things we should be doing is showing the world that we can be cool too.  Oh dear… even the idea of that sounds lame.  I mean surely you either are cool or you’re not.  I’m not entirely sure what cool is, but whatever it is, it seems to be something that you’ve either got or you don’t.  Perhaps it’s some level of confidence or an ability to be yourself in a way that makes people want to be like you.

What do you think cool is?

One thing’s for sure, there seems to be a contradiction in terms when we say, “I can be cool too”.  The point is, the cool ones are the ones everyone else wants to be like.

So what is it to be relevant then?  And is it any better than being cool?  Lots of churches are trying to be relevant to the communities in which they operate, and I’m often seeing genuinely good attempts to understand out context and connect ourselves with it.

For example, the city workers’ ministry that my colleague Craig Broman works with hosts events that regularly have as many non-Christians as Christians, partly because of the fact that something about these events has connected with the people being invited.

I wouldn’t say the events are uncool, but they’re certainly not trying to be cool.  And yet the proof is in the pudding: they’re getting people along…

I wonder if relevance is something we should be aiming for in our outreach to our community and in our music, more than coolness?  Perhaps it’s ok for us to be doing contemporary music, because it’s one of the languages of our generation…  Perhaps the thing about relevance is that it something we do for the purpose of communication and connection?

On the other hand, my gut tells me that ‘coolness’ (I hate the term, actually) is something that is all about trying to impress.  On this reckoning, trying to be cool might actually harm our efforts to be proclaiming Jesus to the world, because the very essence of Jesus’ ministry was not about trying to impress people, rather it was trying to love them and reach out to them.

He actually never said, “I am the Messiah, isn’t that cool” or even anything remotely like that.  He definitely sought to communicate his identity, which he did by asking pointed questions and by performing miraculous signs.  And he definitely did want people to follow him and to be like him… but it certainly wasn’t about trying to be popular.

No sooner had his disciple Peter acknowledged to him that Jesus was indeed the longed-for Messiah, Jesus told him about the way of the cross, the way of sacrifice: of laying down your life for others.  Those who want to be like him are to be like him in this.  Those who want to proclaim Jesus will have no hope if they are trying to impress.  I can’t see how trying to be hip will ever win anyone for Christ.  It’s almost pointing people in exactly the opposite direction…

Do you remember the song “Jesus was way cool” by King Missile?  I think it missed the point.

So I’m wondering if relevance is about connecting and communicating with people, whereas coolness is about impressing them.  No wonder I feel so weird about the whole idea of coolness in the first place.

What do you think?

Mark

So what’s the big deal?  Well, first of all, this time last year we were only 3 centres, but in the meantime (after several years of planning) 2 more centres were planted at Mount Barker and Northeast – see www.trinityadelaide.org.au.  So there’s a real sense that we’re getting bigger.

But although it’s wonderful to see the numbers growing, I’m also really buoyed by the positive attitude of so many of our musicians to the opportunities that lie ahead of us.  God has really blessed us in our ministries, and we have an opportunity to bless others with what we have.  In what ways?

Well among other things, we want to run our first music conference next year.  It’s been a long time coming, but 2011 is hopefully the year we can pull it together.  The enthusiasm of the team for doing this was perhaps best illustrated by the fact that there was basically a cheer from the crowd today when we announced the plan.

Why a conference?  Well certainly more training.  I think we have a real issue with the contemporary music that we play in churches today, that it really does put considerable strain on our volunteers, and it also is hard to get training for anywhere else.

But more than training, we need Biblical perspective.  Today’s talk from Paul Harrington was extremely challenging and encouraging about God’s grand vision in Ephesians.  It was wonderful to be reminded of the part we play in this cosmic unfolding.  I wish we’d had more time to be able to delve more and more into what the scriptures say about our music ministry role… but perhaps here is where a conference will be useful.

The more I’m involved in music ministry, the more I believe that spiritual maturity of our people is not only the enabler of our ministry, but it is also the goal of our ministry.  I continue to pray that God would transform us, use us, teach us and exalt Jesus through us.

What do you think I should put on the main section? Please give me your thoughts. Here are some options:

• Easy access to download mp3s, pdfs of my songs
• A player which streams any of my songs
• Blogs on music ministry, songwriting, reflections on the Bible and music
• Features such as upcoming events, CD reviews, book reviews, etc
• All of the above

So what do you think?  My website is a place to access my music as well as to engage with ideas around music ministry.  May you have thoughts about what would be interesting?

Please comment – I can’t leave it blue for long!

My view is that if traditional hymns are to be sung traditionally, then they need traditional orchestration and instrumentation. You need an organ or a choir or a range of orchestral instruments, or some combination of the above. This is because they usually have a harmonic structure that lends themselves to these kinds of sounds.

In particular, there are usually 4 parts written out: the melody itself, the bass line, plus an alto and tenor line which harmonises with both of the other lines. This means that an alto in a choir is able to sing quite an interesting line of music with melodic movement, which is sympathetic with the lines that the basses, tenors and sopranos are singing. The same is true for a viola line or a trumpet part – the parts working together CREATE the harmonic movement, and therefore considerable musical interest. The chords flow out of the parts; they do not dictate the parts.

In contrast, in contemporary music (thinking especially of the rock/pop idiom that so much contemporary congregational worship music represents), it’s all about the chords, not the parts. The chords dictate any parts that the members of the band may play.

So therefore I believe that playing traditional songs with a band cannot be done properly without either making a mess or making some changes!

Here’s what I mean. Many of our contemporary song books such as The Source or Songs of Fellowship retain the traditional choral parts of the old hymns, but place chord symbols above the stave at the points where the harmonies imply a changed chord. This is indeed helpful in the situation where a church band consists of perhaps a guitar player (who needs the chords) and a classically trained pianist (who needs all the parts). Other instruments can easily be added, such as bass, which would also follow the guitar chords, or singers, strings players, horn players etc, who would be able to play one of the written parts.

Theoretically, this is fantastic. It can allow our church music to be inclusive of a wide range of musicians, regardless of the type of instrument they play. Traditional instruments can be blended together with contemporary instruments.

The problem is that, musically-speaking, it’s a recipe for a great big mess. Rather than parts being clearly heard and implying chordal changes, they are competing with the instruments (like guitars and synths) that pound out the chords. Worse, if a bass player cannot read the musical notes and simply plays the chords, there will be a monumental clash with any other instrument playing the bass line, such as an organ/piano, cello, or trombone. There is no subtlety left, unless something is done to reduce the competition between the different types of instruments.

Styles have developed throughout the history of music, and have often happened because of happy accidents. However, this is an unhappy accident! In an effort to maintain the use of hymns in an era where organs and choirs have given way to bands, we’ve come up with not a new style, but a rejection of stylistic distinctives, and therefore a problem for our listeners: it just doesn’t sound that good.

Perhaps you may say that you’ve heard bands just playing the traditional chords with the other instruments stripped away? I certainly have. The problem with this is that rather than the sweet lyrical interaction of harmonising melody lines, you’ve got the “clunk, clunk, clunk” of continually changing chords. The hymns weren’t meant to be played like that. The effect is that old hymns are made to sound more pompous than they need to sound.

I think we have a choice of two ways to approach the old hymns. Either do them with traditional arrangements and therefore also traditional instrumentation, or change the harmonic structure to fit the contemporary band. In my music ministry, I do both. 2 of our weekly services have a traditional feel to them. I have maintained the pipe organ as the main accompanying instrument, but added a range of other instruments to the rosters. We have a strings group that has 8 players and plays once per month. We also have a small once-a-month choir. I am working at pulling together some brass to make an additional group. The congregations love this kind of variety, and it really allows the old hymns to flourish in the way in which they were intended.

However at our other 3 services each week, there is a contemporary feel. We still want to do the old hymns because they are often very singable, connect us with our spiritual ancestors, and so passionately and richly express the wonders of our life in Christ together. So we do them with contemporary arrangements. For the lovers of the old harmonisations (a group which includes myself), this can be quite confronting, because it sounds a bit different. But if the arrangements are done well – in particular if the chord progression chosen properly SERVES the melody it is written to – it can revitalise an old melody.

I think the best thing about coming up with good new arrangements of hymns is that it allows a very wide range of age groups to sing the same songs. That is no small benefit.

Many churches have been torn apart over music, and it is undoubtedly the work of Satan, causing us to be more pre-occupied with the little stuff than the big stuff. Nevertheless, not every discussion about these things should be labelled the work of the Devil! Music raises many closely held opinions and feelings, and we must all listen to each other. Just because I have made these decisions for my own music ministries doesn’t mean that I’ll never change my mind or my approach. I must be humble, but also act with conviction.

At Men’s Convention we did 5 old hymns to my own new arrangements. Some of them worked better than others. The most striking thing was that we had some people asking us for the arrangements, and we had other people saying that the treatment of the old hymns was disappointing (putting it nicely!). Here I have tried to express some of the reasons why our music group took the approach we did. One thing that I do take great comfort from, however, is that on average these older songs produced a much higher volume level from the crowd than much of the more contemporary stuff! We need to keep balancing our music programs with old and new material to ensure we’re connecting with our various generations. But we really should be looking at ways of making these old hymns continue to have relevance in our churches today.

For your interest, the hymns we rearranged and played at MKC 2010 were:

1. It is well with my soul
2. Amazing Grace (using Chris Tomlin’s recent re-arrangement)
3. Be thou my vision
4. Holy holy holy
5. Guide me O thou great Jehovah
6. Stand up, stand up for Jesus

Hillsong Church has been doing amazing things in the world of Christian praise and worship music for decades. Who am I to talk about the maturing of a church who has put as much effort as they have into the ministry of music, connecting with so many people in our generation who have remained untouched by mainstream churches?

But the fact remains: I have to say that the most recent album Faith + Hope + Love from Hillsong shows signs of a bright new focus. It’s as if (as we’d expect from any professing Christians) they’ve taken on board critiques, and asked themselves, “What actually do we stand for, and what are we prepared to let go of?”

I have at times joined the chorus of complaint. Rarely have my complaints focussed on musical issues. Every Hillsong DVD has taught me something new to help me in my own music ministry, and I have often picked one or two songs from each of their albums for us to do in our church in Adelaide.

Nor have I ever been able to point the finger at anyone but myself and our own traditions when it comes to the enthusiasm of their congregations and the praise leaders on the Hillsong stage. Sure, there are significant differences in our church backgrounds, but we all know that God calls us all to love him with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength.

For me, the biggest area of frustration with Hillsong albums thus far has been the emphasis of many of their songs not so much on God himself, but on the worshipper.

This is a somewhat subjective judgement in an area where balance for any church is hard to maintain. It’s not just as simple as removing the word “I” from your songs. The Psalms regularly use that little word, and there’s no point us trying to outdo them in correctness.

However, from the Psalms we learn that God is the centre of everything. Every personal statement, reflection or intention in the psalms is a response to the character and works of the almighty, merciful God. This response in the Psalms is always generously supported by lashings of awe-filling descriptions of God and reminders of his promises.

The overwhelming sense I had listening through the songs on Faith + Hope + Love is that they sound so much like the Bible. The songs are full of praise of God. The word “you” is sung over and over with passion, sincerity, and truthfulness. A wide range of biblical ideas and themes is there for our encouragement, including the overall theme of faith, hope and love from 1 Cor 13.

Lyrically, my favourite song on the album is “His glory appears”, by Marty Sampson and Darlene Zschech. It shows a balance of simplicity and life-giving theology.

You gave me hope, you made me whole at the cross
You took my place, you showed me grace at the cross
Where you died for me.
And his glory appears, like the light from the sun
Age to age he shines, look to the skies, hear the angels’ cry
Singing holy is the Lord.

In general, the singing of the congregation seems to be a higher priority on this DVD than previously. A number of the arrangements are stripped back to make the unamplified voices the priority, the mix generally picks up the congregation, and often the song leaders actually step away from the microphones to hear the sound of the crowd. This is a good thing! It is after all meant to be led praise, rather than watched praise.

And this, of course, raises the question of the extremely high production and performance values, and whether these things are a distraction. However, I really think they’ve done well to engage 10,000 people. The reality is that interaction for a crowd of that size is a different ballgame from your average 200 or so in a church building. At the Sydney Entertainment Centre, I’d imagine that involving the crowd just would not be possible without some degree of animated performance from the front. In the end, the true motivations of any of us ministering in front of a crowd are known best by our heavenly Father.

Perhaps there are various critiques we could make of this album. I’m sure the production team themselves would have a list of things they’d do differently next time. However I feel that this is a time to acknowledge some really good things.

I do wonder whether at times we find ourselves looking on with jealousy at Hillsong’s successes and writing our own mental lists of the things they’re not doing right, perhaps even to help us to feel better about our own more modest successes. But a more godly approach is for us to pray for them. And I believe some of my own prayers of the last couple of years are being answered.

Will you join with me in continuing to pray for our brothers and sisters at Hillsong and in other high profile churches? May God prosper their ministry and our fellowship together in the gospel!