Enlightment

Why do you view yourself as "under a preacher"? Show me that, in the Scriptures.

 

If my church wants to do away with choir robes, abandon the organ and choir or abandon the mid week service in lieu of small groups so be it. I may not agree with it but I will keep it to myself and if I do feel I must speak out I will do so to The Pastor or appropriate leadership. I hope I can become and remain part of the Solution.

If your church..., so called, wants to come of age..., head for the door and take your pastor with you.

As Jesus turned over the tables of the money changers and "cast" them out of the Temple He clearly stated that His House (the believers) Was The House Of Prayer. When a church begins to drift away from this basic premise..., then the flesh has taken over.

There is no glory to Jesus to be found in the Flesh.

 

You were a little vague, Berean

Berean, what exactly is your church going to change?

Doctrine?
Schedule?
Essential message?
Choir robes?
Other?

 

You have a mixed up Christianity, my friend. The Holy Spirit of God is your Spiritual adviser.
Again, show me in the Scriptures, where we are to look to an earthly priest. We are priests.
Are you able to eat meat? Then you should be teaching. You don't need a leader, Christ is the head of the body.
Do even read the Scriptures with our eyes open any more?

 

Berean

If this is the change I inquired of, I think you as an individual have little to fear. I thought you might be undergoing some massive doctrinal changes. Whew!

I must confess, I do not appreciate some 'modern' Christian music in the same way I appreciate 'classical' Christian music. The classic hymns have doctrine and joy in them, while modern hymns (is that term even used?) have a minor amount of words and a huge infusion of emotion. In my mind, not even joy and awe, just emotion. Then again, I've been old since - well, a long time.

My current church uses a fair amount of modern music. The younger people seem to like it, and most of the younger people seem to have a proper grasp of Christianity that goes beyond the merely emotional. We do enough classic hymns to keep the peace, so to speak.

There once was a time when instruments played only one note at a time. No chords, no harmony of instrumental music and such. I cannot remember the exact date - a music teacher of mine in high school did - but in the 1300s as I recall was the first to play two notes at once on the instrument (can't remember the instrument either - I think a harpsichord, but that may not have been invented yet) in a worship service. The congregation reacted by dragging him out in the town square and stoning him to death.

Our current music plight could be worse.

Seriously, if all else in the church is acceptable and you feel God has a purpose for you there, stay there. If you find the 'new' style to be contraindicated to God and proper worship, you need to make that objection known. But do not move without evidence or proper cause.

 

The above is a bit inaccurate. It speaks of the "plainsong" type music in which some (certainly not all) folks attribute to the music of the early church and which some (certainly not all) attribute to the Jewish singing style of the time of Christ. However, it has been known that harmonic invention took place almost from the earliest indication of music not only in worship but in society.

Here is an example of "plainsong" or "plainchant" for your enjoyment: "Caritas pater est"

Pope Gregory I (about the latter 500's) desired to revise the music (Gregorian chants) as a result of the thinking that some harmonic dissonance was not appropriate in the church. And although there are some who do not see the move to plainsong until a century or more later, it is true that Gregory is credited (being the most poplar) for the move to "plainsong." (Note: some use Gregory II because he was a bit later - early 700's - but that just is inaccurate - he was too embroiled in other conflicts) The "plainsong" chants on a single melody would at times take on the sounds of parallel fourths and fifths, while more "conservative" (or more strict) use were actually non melodic - more often both enjoy a great amount of melismata.

Melismatic technique is often used in the typical modern singers - especially that of the Black gospel and blues.

Click here for an example of the medieval church music which includes an extensive number of songs including instrumental from about the 1000's and from many different countries.

The earliest known music is performed on a replica of Lyre and dates back to some 1400 BCE. You can listen to it here: The Oldest Known Melody

Note: I do not know if the performer added the harmony, but it is still an interesting listen. Wonder if David played like this for Saul. Here is a video clip of one playing the instrument. The Oldest Complete Piece of Music in History

The earliest church fathers did not think musical instruments should be used in the church, and would even proclaim that instrumental music was fellowship with the enemy (picturing the "organs and pipes" of Satan).

As the centuries increased, the RCC moved from the monophonic (single tone) to the polyphonic occurred in what was the setting: monastic life - monophonic; masses for the populace - a blend of monophonic and polyphonic.

What was not systematized (until Bach's "Well tempered Clavicord") was the "tempering" of the musical scale.

For those who don't know: The typical piano is not "in tune" but tuned to the natural occurring vibrations. The result is that the higher the sound the more "squished" the scale, and the deeper the sound the more elongated. It is ever so slight, but the result is that a person can play any key, and match to basically any like tuned instrument and they resonate together. Before, the "perfect tuning" of the instruments did not allow for that ability, and often retuning took place as different instruments were added or a key was changed.

What is really strange is that the RCC music was largely rejected by the Calvinist as not holding to Scriptures - that anything that did not come from the Scriptures and quotes from the Bible was just not worship. The "psalm singing" done by the protestants reflected that thinking; at least until Watts who would "rewrite" the psalm into a pleasing form that the church still enjoys. Here is a very good write up on the impact of Isaac Watts.

Martin Luther of course and a great number of the reformed did not have the same view as the Calvinists, and so in that area of the world, "church music" such as Bach took on a much greater emphasis.

I think at this point, I will stop.

The post is far too long, but I trust will give some a good perspective on the great history of the music as it relates to the believer.