Disposable Worship

Head of Contemporary Music Studies at Macquarie University in Sydney, Dr Mark Evans, fears for the future of contemporary worship music, suggesting that -- because of its insatiable appetite for the latest, 'hit' praise songs -- the Church is propagating a culture of 'disposable' worship and building a 'canon' of similar-sounding songs as shallow as the throw-away pop-culture it mimics...

Most health professionals acknowledge that a balanced diet is essential to the well-being of any person. To achieve this we are encouraged to include foods from the five basic food groups into our diet everyday. It would seem to me that a similar philosophy would be helpfully applied to the musical diet of our modern churches. Due to the denominational branding of churches, or even the specificity of individual churches and their musical needs, some churches are effectively restricting their diet to one food group. Often this food is the music produced from their particular church or denomination. For example, Christian City Church used to pride itself on only using its own music in its corporate gatherings around the world. Most CCC music is produced from their Sydney homechurch, so even at a base level this music is going to be less localised and distinct to congregants in the Vancouver CCC church, for example. This is not to single out CCC by any means. Indeed they represent an interesting case study exactly because they have changed their position on the matter, with Senior Pastor Phil Pringle recognising the need for diversification in the worship diet of the congregation.

"The need to hear what the Spirit is saying to the Church is imperative. The Holy Spirit brings the current message of God and colour of what he is doing in a major way through the worship expressions of the Church both locally and universally. Thus we [at CCC] recognise our own worship leaders as bringing a constancy of fresh life as well as keeping our congregation in connection with the Church at large around the world. We recognise other song writers are bringing what the Lord is saying to the Body of Christ, so we will incorporate them as well."

(Phil Pringle, personal communication with the author, 2006)

Such a diversification is even more indispensable in smaller churches where there may only be 2-3 main songwriters. In such cases limiting the catalogue to songs from these writers inhibits the breadth of Christian experience being sung about, and experienced.

Many of the large music producing churches around the world restrict the use of other people’s songs during their gathering. Certainly, they argue that they have enough good songs to satisfy a meeting of believers – no matter the thematic concerns of the service. Yet the point remains; they are only consuming one kind of song, their musical diet is one-dimensional. A cynical observer might conclude that the reasoning for such a policy is strictly commercial – that is, we sing only our songs so people will only buy our albums. Advocates will argue, saying that they only use their own music because that is the church’s ‘brand name’, that is the language and experience they understand. The real travesty of this thinking comes when one reflects on the vast volume of contemporary song being produced around the world. There is now so much quality congregational song being written around the world, which is easily accessible through CDs, music books and the internet, that there can be no excuse for using material of an inferior standard. How refreshing it was to hear Darlene Zschech invite members of the Hillsong Conference evening rally in 2005 to join in singing How Great Is Our God (Cash/Reeves/Tomlin) in whatever language they were used to singing it. It is simple logic that using music only from one source will not always yield the optimum results. A diet of only one food will make you sick – no matter how good that food is.

One offspring of this unfortunate tendency is that the constant turnover of contemporary songs means very few songs are being retained around the world as some form of modern canon. Now all those involved in popular music studies realise the inherent dangers in promoting a canon, a list of songs valorised and applauded exclusively. Yet perhaps these pedagogical problems are lessened somewhat in the context of the Christian faith. As people age they often return to the music of their youth, music they grew up with, music that was special to them at important moments. Indeed, oftentimes particular artists are lauded throughout their career by fans for exactly those reasons. Does this have even greater resonance in the life of Christians? Songs important in the formative stages of their Christianity, or as a response to significant periods in their life, remain integral to the faith life of the believer. This is one of the reasons that classic hymns remained revered by older members of congregations. This is their music. They identify with and draw strength from those songs. The question for us becomes, what will happen to our currently popular congregational song given its place within a throw-away pop culture society. With the constant turnover of albums every year, a new hit-list of must use songs, the facility to retain a catalogue of tried and tested songs soon disappears. Many great songs adopted and loved by congregations are never to be sung again, such is the requirement that new songs be adopted, tested, recorded and sold. But this is true virtually across the board. Will it be enough in 30 years that Christians constantly sing new songs, and have no history of hymnody of which to draw? I know there are those who say ‘yes’. But I want to question such a mentality. If we are producing congregational song which we consider to be disposable, fleeting and of little long-term worth, then what does that say for the quality of the text to begin with.

North American author Barry Liesch remains sceptical about the number of contemporary songs we will still be singing in 30 years. Yet a time will come as current congregations age that a yearning to find comfort and encouragement from the songs of the past will emerge. Will the songs still be in current rotation, or will we have replaced them with last year’s ‘best of’? Certainly, songs like Shout To The Lord (Zschech) may continue on into the future, but will it take a song of such universal acceptance to make the next congregational song canon? We do risk becoming a victim of a musical trend, even more a cultural trend that praises the immediate, the successful and the popular. We need to ensure that the congregational song of today leaves a lasting value to the Christians of tomorrow.

Dr Mark Evans is the Head of Contemporary Music Studies at Macquarie University, Sydney. He is the author of Open Up The Doors: Music in the Modern Church (Equinox Press, 2007). He is Co-Editor of Perfect Beat: The Pacific Journal of Research into Contemporary Music and Popular Culture and author of Markets and Margins: Australian Country Music (2005).