Twentysomethings Leaving The Church??

I'm a BB and I prefer holding a real hymnal, staying with the KJV, dressing and acting modestly, no drums, wooden benches, altar calls, no super 'jumbo-tron' Powerpoints and a preacher who is not afraid to bang his hand on the pulpit on the hard topics of the day. Some churches depend too much on gimickry to boost attendance ("Christian"-rock music, gentle preaching, etc) - is there something wrong with the original message??

 

I'm a baby boomer(barely, made it by one year), and I love contemporary, and we mix it with hymns, I love our style mixture. But it isn't the music that keeps me coming back, it's hearing God's word taught,and meeting Him in worship.
Worship has to come from the heart, no matter what music style it is.

No theres nothing worng with the "original message". But as people change the delivery of that message has to change. There will always be those who perfer the olden ways of doing anything, but if you want to reach medern peoples in our modern technological world your going to have to change the way you do it, same message, it can never be outdated, but methods can. Now there are different people, and there needs to be different methods to reach each people types. God uses each each of us in different ways, and He uses our churches in different ways, becasue there are as I said different peoples in the world. Still same message, no one wants the message changed.

 

I'll just address the 1st point made: About a year ago, my church (Baptist) began to video-project the words to hymns. Here's what resulted:

1. Don't have a half-minute delay (with each hymn) while the people all turn to the proper page number. The service simply "flows" better.
2. Quicker & easier transitions between songs; the hymns can just flow from one to the next, without that delay.
3. Avoid all the noise/commotion of the hymnals coming out of and going back into the pew backs.
4. Instead of having their heads buried in a book, people can see the faces of others around them rejoicing in & worshipping God.

I doubt we'll ever go back to regularly using hymnals.

 

I'm on the tail end of the gen-x crowd. I seem to be the only person here the believes real worhsip is a matter of the heart and not beat, format, style, tune, or depth of theological assertiveness, archaic, or fancy. I also seem to be the only one who believes true preaching is a matter of a hard working preacher clearly and faithfully explaining the original meaning of the text (which always has relevance today) and not whether he does so with stories, alagories, the newspaper, slide shows, powerpoint, drama, "Banging on the pulpit", microphones, three piece suit, laid back tea shirt, etc to do so.

 

Quote:

I'll just address the 1st point made: About a year ago, my church (Baptist) began to video-project the words to hymns. Here's what resulted:
===========================================

Wait until you are old enough to need multi-focal spectacles!

Sorry, I'll take the good old hymn books anyday.

Further, we don't need to contemporize to hold the attention of young adults. We just need to have relevancy in our messages. I am 76 and had no problem holding the attention of the college and career set. They did not consider me an old codger, but then I treated them like they were someone; important to the church and most of all to the Lord.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I never realized that the use or non-use of hymnals could become an issue in some churches. One gentleman mentions that age (or use of multi-focal glasses) could be a reason some would still prefer the hymnals over projected words. Since I've never alluded to my age on the BB, I will now: I'm not exactly a spring-chicken myself. In my church, which uses projected words, the 88 year-old lady who regularly sits near me has voiced her liking of the new format too. She has said that her cane is enough to juggle when it comes time to stand & sing.

Since the use or non-use of hymnals is nowhere mentioned in Scripture, does it really matter which method a church uses?

 

I'm a GenXer, reared in rural churches in the 70's (translation: closer stylistically to the 20's-50's).

I love singing from the hymnal. And why not? That is what I'm used to. I love the old music styles. And why not? That is what I'm used to.

Most of us reject the argument that we should change worship styles merely to satisfy the tastes of the twentysomethings. But to avoid being hypocritical, we should also reject the same argument when we use it to justify maintaining a 1920's-1950's style.

The way out of this unending discussion is to focus on the Word. The Bible is clear that preaching is the primary method of worship when the saints gather. Prayer, Bible reading, singing Scripture songs are also mentioned in Scripture as methods. How we do this is open for discussion.

We should take the good songs from the old hymnal and chuck the bad (take any hymal and you are going to find songs that have little to no supportable Scripture basis and those that inadequately teach the truths of Christian orthodoxy). We should take the good songs from the each era since and chuck the bad.

What about hymnbooks versus Powerpoint? This is another issue of preference, not doctrine and thus, not a hill to die on.

What about organ/piano versus keyboard/guitar/trap set? Yet another issue of preference, not doctrine.

What will draw (and keep) the 20somethings, regardless of era, is a church where amplifying the glory of God is central.

This is an incredibly simple concept. The Mega-churches that utilize a "seeker-sensitive" model end up gaining just a few more members than they lose annually. Folks show up for the production values and the crowd dynamic and then folks leave without being confronted with the Text.

 

Here in our Church, the fastest growing group are our twentysomethings. Most all of our young people graduating out of our church schools are getting married and staying with us. We have had 10 marriages in 3 years and all have stayed with us. Now those young people are having children. I guess it is working here.
PS here is my son and his wife and my new grandson, They are part of our church.

 

There's nothing wrong with the original message, but let's not confuse the original message with the modern methods and innovations that you prefer. Hymnals as you know them are only a bit more than a century old. Many used to have shape notes instead of round (some still do). About 200 years ago, they didn't contain music, just the lyrics. Less than 300 years ago, they pretty much didn't exist, because other than a choir, most Protestants didn't sing hymns during worship services. Or they sang only from the psalter. And when hymn-singing was first popularized in the modern church during the Great Awakening, it was controversial, since hymns were set to modern, worldly styles of quick-tempo music that you've come to know and love (such as Blessed Assurance). And of course, older than modern hymn-singing to fast tunes using books containing music was melodic chanting in Latin.

The KJV is less than 400 years old, and was unpopular (especially among conservatives) for decades, as most people preferred their beloved Geneva Bibles. Less than a hundred years before the KJV, the only choice in English was Wycliffe's translation, and before that for a thousand years, the Latin Vulgate.

Dressing and acting modestly is almost entirely cultural and changes with time. There are probably many things you do and almost everything you wear that would have been considered immodest at some time in the past, even in America. Outside of peasantry, wearing shorts to church was normal for men year-round--they were called knee britches. Even some peasants did the same: when the Amish arrived here from Switzerland, they were embarrassed to see American pioneers wearing full-length trousers and ankle-length skirts; so the Amish gave up their knee britches and lowered their skirts' hemlines so as not to appear immodest here, even though their clothing had been very modest in Europe. There were other times when a woman could show cleavage in church but was thought modest. And for centuries, a man couldn't appear in church wearing a shirt (you know, button-down with full-length sleeves), because that was underwear--he had to wear a vest over it. Until just a few decades ago, no woman would ever appear in church with her head immodestly uncovered--she'd have a hat or some other head covering on for decency and propriety.

No drums is fine, but the piano is a very modern instrument, too. Shall I assume you are consistent? The organ was invented in the middle ages, and widely rejected during the Reformation as Catholic. Conservative churches sang acappella, just as the early Christians did and the Orthodox still do.

Wooden benches and pews came into common use right around the turn of the modern era from the middle ages. Just as the early Christians did and the Orthodox still do, for over a thousand years, worship services were conducted standing up (with periodic kneeling). Sitting in church is very modern.

Altar calls were popularized by Charles Finney and his imitators during the Second Great Awakening less than 200 years ago, though they were possibly invented as early as the first Great Awakening just over 265 years ago. In all of history, they had never existed before that. Nobody had ever heard of them or thought them up yet. They are a very distinctively modern innovation.

I'll hand it to you about easy-to-follow sermons clearly organized and outlined visually so that people can better understand them--PowerPoint didn't exist long ago, and couldn't have before electronics, and slides were almost unheard-of before electricity was common.

As for your favorite preaching style, that mostly came out of the Second Great Awakening in the 1800s. One of the most famous preachers of the original Great Awakening, Jonathan Edwards, who preached the well-known sermon, "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God," was notorious for preaching in an innovative new style--the ordinary, everyday language his congregation used, instead of the normal style of sermons, which were written in dry, flowery, elaborate rhetoric, read word for word from the pulpit, typically without looking up. However, even Edwards still used his voice the way preachers normally did: he spoke in a deliberate, monotonous voice, without shouting or inflection.

When they were introduced only a few generations ago, conservatives, traditionalists, and other old-timers railed against the novelty of secular-style, fast-paced gospel music and the emotional excesses of fire-and-brimstone preaching as worldly gimmicks appealing to emotions to draw huge crowds attracted by the spectacle and entertainment value (especially the debauchery-filled camp meeting revivals). 200 years ago, you'd have been opposed to almost everything you now embrace, because it would be too worldly, entertaining, gimmicky, and new to you.

[ September 29, 2003, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: Taufgesinnter ]

 

I'll just address the 1st point made: About a year ago, my church (Baptist) began to video-project the words to hymns. Here's what resulted:

1. Don't have a half-minute delay (with each hymn) while the people all turn to the proper page number. The service simply "flows" better.
2. Quicker & easier transitions between songs; the hymns can just flow from one to the next, without that delay.
3. Avoid all the noise/commotion of the hymnals coming out of and going back into the pew backs.
4. Instead of having their heads buried in a book, people can see the faces of others around them rejoicing in & worshipping God.

I doubt we'll ever go back to regularly using hymnals. </font>[/QUOTE]We've ben using the over head for a few years now and just recently got the projection and we al love it. As you said you move smoothly from one hymn to the next without haivng to find the page, if your slow at finding the page you loose the first part of the song. We really like it this way.

 

I agree with you, it's from the heart nothing more to it.

 

I know most hymns by memory but we're going to have 3 projectors in the new sanctuary. One will be for announcements and upcoming events they tell me. However, with my poor eyesight I think I'll benefit from the projector. I have a very hard time reading the choruses printed in the bulletin each week and our Minister of Music likes to spring new ones on us all the time!

Diane

 

I would suggest (if the hymnal publisher doesn't supply them) scanning every page of the hymnal and turning each into an overhead transparency bound in a three-ring binder. They could be used as a backup after converting each scanned hymn into a PowerPoint slide. That way, each time something went wrong with the computer or its software, a lower-tech alternative would always be handy. The only time you'd be out of luck and have to rely on memories would be during an out-and-out power failure. (Keep copyrights in mind.)

I would suggest, though, retaining hymnals--in braille--for the blind. Another accommodation for the handicapped could be (this would be cheaper than an ASL interpreter) using a speech-recognition program to display the preacher's words on a screen for the deaf. For the merely hearing-impaired, I take a tie-in for hearing-assist devices into the sound system for granted. If preaching in a bilingual environment, time can be saved having the translator speak into a mic that is tied into hearing-assist devices on a separate channel, with the earpieces worn by the speakers of the other language. That way, the main speaker can speak continuously without pausing for the translation.

It might also be a good idea, if the screen or wall is large enough, and PowerPoint slides are being used during a sermon to outline it, to have a slide or overhead of the Scriptures used be up next to those, throughout.

 

Our Hispanic pastor preaches his own sermon in another section of our church while the English sermon is being preached. Attendance runs about 16 each week. They've joined us on special occassions, sat in the back in a reserved area so Bro. Pedro and Sister Lori could translate for those who needed it.

 

Cool!

 

Our Minister of Music is a stickler for doing things right. He's had Jim make (CD) copies for Alto, Tenor, Bass, etc. and always has permission to even do that! LOL

Good idea Guys!

Diane

 

Like I said, keep copyrights in mind. Definitely. They don't apply to old-time hymns, which are in the public domain. But anything created since the 1920s may still be copyrighted.

"The United States Copyright Law provides that any music (live or recorded) performed during the course of a regular worship service (typically Saturday evening, Sunday morning and Wednesday evening for many WCA Member Churches) is exempt from public performance licensing. However, churches are required to clear the copyrights for any music used outside of worship services. This can include, but is not limited to, youth functions, outreach events, banquets, and concerts." (From
http://www.willowcreek.com/news/story.asp?id=NF01112001)

From
http://www.willowcreek.com/news/story.asp?id=WN11Q22002--

However, "Making photocopies of copyrighted printed materials such as songs, and including them in bulletins, liturgies, programs, and song sheets, or projecting the lyrics onto a wall or screen, is illegal unless permission has been granted by the owner of those songs and words.... Obtaining a license from the Christian Copyright Licensing International (CCLI) enables a church to legally execute those activities."

Misconception #2: I already have a CCLI license and that’s all I need.

"Possessing a CCLI license is an economical way to obey laws regarding copying and projecting song lyrics. There are a number of other activities, however, that many churches regularly engage in that are not covered by this license....a separate license is needed. Two competing companies...have been established to meet those licensing needs.

Misconception #3: I don’t need both the ASCAP and BMI licenses.

"ASCAP and BMI provide churches with separate licenses for performing music by different Christian artists. These two licenses normally would cost a church several hundred dollars, but Willow Creek Association members may obtain both for a total of only $100.

“'Churches need both of these licenses. With just one, you’ll only be gaining rights to about half of the songs,' Allee said. 'But churches also need to remember that these licenses provide performing rights only.'”

 

Just like to endorse Taufgesinnter's two earlier posts. We're talking about changing the medium, not the message. Now, I'm an Xer, but I prefer the expository Bible preaching,on the whole. I like some choruses (definitely not Graham Kendrick, apart from the Servant King ) and pretty much all Baptist Hymnal contents. However, I accept that there are those in my generation and below for whom this just doen't scratch their itch, anymore than CCM scratches Dr Bobs itch . They tend to be more at home with multi-media presentation than the traditional hymn-prayer-sermon sandwich.

Having said that we need to strike a healthy balance between relevance on the one hand and consumerist entertainment on the other.

There is however perhaps an additional explanation with regard to the reasons for the fall-away in the 20s, and this has perhaps more to do with the message originally preached: we live in an age unfortunately when we tend to have just 'half the gospel' preached. We hear all the part about inviting Jesus into your life and forgiveness and eternal life etc, but nothing about repentance - or hardship . Most people come to faith in their late teens, it would appear from the stats, often as a result of the half-baked message referred to above, and are then not adequately discipled. As a consequence, we are talking shallow soil, parable of the sower-wise; when testing times come (for me it was my divorce, for others a bereavement or simply not 'feeling' God's presence anymore), they fall away; happily, like me, many then come back, but churches need to wise up their acts and more effectively equip these young people for the difficult times

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[ September 30, 2003, 09:45 AM: Message edited by: LarryN ]