This process is one of the few activities that I cannot decide my stance on fully... probably because I can see both sides of the issue. I can't bring myself to say that this is unnecessary, because it is always important to evaluate what we are singing and saying in church. However, at the same time, in my opinion, the standards I think that church leaders should use are different than the ones you had us use in class.
I think its important to look at the content, and if something contradicts scripture, this is obviously not okay. However, the process we went through of holding it up to scripture, while it was interesting to see where songs drew some of their lyrics from, I believe is unnecessary and limiting. I have always had a hard time with fundamentalist ideas in general... I believe that the Bible is true and inspired by God and should be used as a basis of truth. But holding every little thing up to scripture, and throwing things out just because they aren't in the Bible, while they don't contradict it, is wrong. I believe there is plenty of truth outside of scripture, and most of the songs we evaluated I found little problem with, even if what they said didn't directly stem from a Bible verse. For instance, many of the metaphors the authors wrote were beautiful and reflected truth that they discovered through their experiences with God. There are plenty of real Christians who live off the Bible alone, but I think that God is so much bigger than the Bible. He can't be limited to a book, and our responses to Him shouldn't be either. The people IN the Bible listened directly to God, and I feel like its a huge problem in our culture to only limit God to what He has said in the past. I'm not saying that we shouldn't hold all music up to the Bible... I think that it is important to hold compare lyrics to the Bible and the core beliefs of the truth, and if the words in a song clearly oppose these values, it should definitely not be sung. I understand this is a bigger issue than the topics we have discussed in class, something that separates denominations, etc. But I can at least argue that this process would probably be a little different for some churches than more conservative churches.
In addition, I think that reading the evaluating the text based on its literary style was kind of pointless, as well. You yourself said that its all about the words, the message. If the words are being clearly communicated, I think that it is a valuable song. Poetry and music are very intertwined, but it is not necessary for a song to function as a poem with a defined rhythmic scheme and rhyming words. However, even if we did use this standard of evaluation, I think that there would be very few songs that would not meet this standard, if any. Modern poetry comes in many many different forms-- it definitely doesn't have to rhyme, and the pattern of words can vary to the extreme. Because music is very rhythmical, I think that it almost always will be a poem in today's standards. But even if this song that doesn't meet the "standard" is found, throwing it out for that reason would be totally missing the point. If a song has a beautiful message and communicates it well, it doesn't really matter how we communicate it. It may not meet the standards of the musical world or the music faculty at a university of a good song, but if it has a good message, it definitely meets God's standards. And who are we singing to?
I understand that this was an important element of music throughout history and that a lot of the beautiful music we have today stemmed from music in the church. And contemporary music in the church is a lot different and simplified and would probably not meet the high standards of a quality composition. I think hymns are beautiful, poetically and musically, and its sad that a lot of the elements that made these songs beautiful has been lost as Christian music has evolved. However, the beautiful poetry that is found in hymns is just not NECESSARY. Its valuable, but not necessary. If we are evaluating the quality of a song, we could use this standard, but it is not a valid reason for throwing a song out of the church repertoire.
Here is where I agree. I agree that it is very important to evaluate what a song says, because we do not want to sing something that is untrue. And I think that a lot of churches fail to do this, and this is a dangerous thing to do. I also think that it is important to determine the function of a song and the overall message of a song, and it can be beneficial to choose a song that would be appropriate for a service based on its function. The music staff at my church very closely examine the message of a song and try to correlate the words to supplement the sermon. And I think that it causes you to leave church with the message firmly placed in your heart, versus singing random things and hearing random sermons and messages. This isn't necessary, but I think its a great idea. I think selecting and organizing music is an art, sort of like the music itself. It is nice to have a worship service with people that can sing well, with instruments that can play well, but it so much more about the heart. The same is true for musical compositions-- I think it is great to have music that is tastefully composed, but it is just as beautiful, if not more beautiful, to God if it is simple, but carries a powerful message. It makes me think of a story my worship pastor told us at church one Sunday about his experiences at a prison. He had brought his own music to sing at a prison with the inmates, but he realized when he got there that he had forgotten his powerpoint with the words. He only had time to make one with the choruses, but he realized that when it actually came time to sing, everyone sang the entire time. He said he didn't realize they were singing right away and then wondered what in the world they were singing. Some were singing the chorus the entire time, some were probably singing their own words. To a musician, it probably would have been viewed as a disaster. But our worship leader said that it was one of the most beautiful things he has ever experienced, because whatever they were singing, they meant it. I think that once we get off of our high-class American horse, we can really see what church music is really about. Its about communicating to God, whatever is on our heart, whatever is on our mind. And sometimes its about a hearing a message from God. There are definitely standards that we should evaluate, but when we get caught up in trivial matters, I think that it is easy to lose sight of the point. The point being that as long as our heart is in the right place, whatever we offer God is beautiful, even if it is ugly to the world's standards or even to our own standards. I believe that the best song for a service may be a song that does not meet your standards, or even my standards, but is a song that is the most beneficial medium for worshiping God. There are definitely standards we should never throw out-- we should never sing a song that is untrue. But I think that we need to evaluate and reevaluate our standards, especially if they are trivial. There are billions of people in the world and billions of ways to communicate with God, and we should definitely not limit ourselves to what we are familiar with.
I'd like to say, finally, that I hope that because I tended to disagree with you on everything, that I did not participate in the ideas that were presented in class. I definitely thought through and evaluated everything-- I just hardly ever agreed with it. But it has really shaped how I view music and how I will lead a congregation if God ever calls me to do that, giving me a better grasp of different views that I had hardly considered before. I'd also like to say that I don't just accept things as they are. I don't go to the church I go to or believe the things I believe because its been handed down to me. I have evaluated and reevaluated everything, and have switched churches and have thought through many issues and struggled with my faith. I do not just settle. I have just found myself in a different place than you find yourself, with different views and stances. But I hope you can respect that it is a thought out stance, at least. :) And I'm grateful for the issues that were brought up in class, they have definitely helped me in my growth as a musician and a Christian. God bless.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
pros and cons of hymn singing vs contemporary music
Just a few thoughts I wrote down during class that relate to some of our discussions...
Even before this was brought up, I found it interesting that our discussions seem a little one-sided. This is coming from someone who is very moderate in just about everything. Not "neutral"... I am very opinionated, I just get very turned off by people who argue extreme things. I just feel that people who argue "extremes" may have a valid point, but they just outdo themselves and lose some of the truth to it, if that makes sense. So this is my attempt to find some sort of middle ground in the class discussions.
Contemporary music
Cons:
I don't have the list we went over in class, but this is the modified version I jotted down in my notes, that reflects some of what we discussed, as well:
** It doesn't require the congregation to sing
** Discarded quickly
** Words less important
** Becomes more of a source of entertainment, which can potentially lead to idolatry
As far as not requiring the congregation to sing, I agree. BUT, I don't necessarily think that this is a bad thing, or something that is exclusive to contemporary music. When music is led by a lead singer or a group of singers, people aren't required to sing, people have the ability to sit back and listen rather than fully engaging in the music. While there is definitely something unifying in having a congregation sing, without microphones, I have found it just as powerful to sit back and listen. In fact, I have found it almost easier to feel like I am truly engaging in the music when I stop singing and I listen to the words. It becomes less about me singing and less about the music, and more about what the music is saying. If its about the music, and about the words, and about what it means, it shouldn't matter who is singing it and how many people are singing it, as much as the hearts of the people who are engaging in it.
As far as music being discarded quickly, I, again, don't view this as much of a problem. This is coming from a newer generation who is used to contemporary music and I can't fully understand what was lost... I can't really miss something that I never was a part of. However, while we are losing some valuable music, I can't agree that the music we have gained is inadequate. We lost something valuable, but what we have I think is valuable too... just in different ways. There is something valuable in adding new music and new ideas and new songs. Its refreshing and I feel like it helps me to be honest and think about what I'm singing rather than just going through the motions. And, at the same time, I think that a lot of the songs that stick are just as valuable... having a song that you have sung so much that you know everyone will know it and everyone will sing it. While there are definitely songs today that are sung and quickly discarded and replaced with new songs, I think that there are definitely still songs that stick. And, even though I don't have a handful of songs that I have sung every year of my life, I can still recall songs that I sang years ago, as well as songs I have learned within the last year or so, with words that help me in whatever situation I may be in. For instance, a lot of the new songs my worship leader has recently introduced us to have helped me through some hard times lately. But I also recall and sing some songs I learned in elementary school such as "have I not commanded you be strong and courageous." Even though a lot of songs have come and gone in our church services, there are still plenty of songs that have stuck.
As far as the words becoming less important, that is also untrue. Maybe less complex.. maybe... but not less important.
One point that really rang true for me, however, was the problem of music becoming more of a means of entertainment than worship. And this is something I have struggled with more than anything else, especially as a worship leader. There have been times when I have loved the attention. And there have been times when I have been extremely annoyed that people are complementing me and how I'm singing when I should have nothing to do with anything. And when people applaud after a song, something inside of me cringes. While I can see the necessity of having a "leader" to help the congregation sing the song, it seems very easy for it to become more about me and less about God.
So there are definite problems with contemporary music. However, I believe there are similarly problems with older music, as well, and not just racism and sexism that have already been dealt with.
For instance, as we already discussed, older music had the potential to become a performance as well... not as much for the singer as for the organist, or the pianist.
In addition to this, the biggest problem I found in hymn singing, was that when people sing the same songs over and over again, the begin to go through the motions. While repeating a song can really ingrain the words into your memory, it can just as easily take the life out of the song, especially if it was a song that didn't mean much to you in the first place. And while the congregation isn't required to sing in contemporary music, no one is really required to sing in hymn singing. There will be the few people that sing loudly, but, from my experience, there are also the people who mouth the words, stop paying attention or sing half-heartedly. Regardless of the method, there are going to be people who are engaged and people who are not engaged. I have seen just as many people who could care less about worshipping in a contemporary service as in a hymn singing service, and I have seen just as many people sing their hearts out at a hymn sing as a contemporary service. The problem is not the method, the problem is the people who are using the method.
The moderate response to this debate is, both sides have valid points. There are problems with contemporary music, there are problems with older music. But the problem is not the song or the music itself... the problem is the people who sing the music. And while the problems may not be the same, there are going to be problems... and there are also going to be good things about each method. And I believe that there are going to be people who have an easier time worshipping in one method than another, and not just because it is something they are used to. But I also believe that those people are capable of worshipping either way. The biggest problem is people shutting themselves off to a method and missing the point-- which is to worship God, regardless of whether not they enjoy the music or how people are singing it. I think it is just as disrespectful and wrong to refuse to participate in a hymn sing as it is to refuse to participate in a contemporary worship service. My friend started skipping worship services because he didn't like the style of music, it wasn't contemporary enough for him. There is just something inside of me that cringes at this. And older people walking out when someone pulls out a guitar makes me cringe just as much. People are missing the point. Even if we are dancing different dances, we are all still dancing. Even if people are singing different songs, they are singing to the same person who enjoys all of it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with using the method that makes it easier for you to focus on God, its just wrong to refuse to have anything to do with the other method...
Even before this was brought up, I found it interesting that our discussions seem a little one-sided. This is coming from someone who is very moderate in just about everything. Not "neutral"... I am very opinionated, I just get very turned off by people who argue extreme things. I just feel that people who argue "extremes" may have a valid point, but they just outdo themselves and lose some of the truth to it, if that makes sense. So this is my attempt to find some sort of middle ground in the class discussions.
Contemporary music
Cons:
I don't have the list we went over in class, but this is the modified version I jotted down in my notes, that reflects some of what we discussed, as well:
** It doesn't require the congregation to sing
** Discarded quickly
** Words less important
** Becomes more of a source of entertainment, which can potentially lead to idolatry
As far as not requiring the congregation to sing, I agree. BUT, I don't necessarily think that this is a bad thing, or something that is exclusive to contemporary music. When music is led by a lead singer or a group of singers, people aren't required to sing, people have the ability to sit back and listen rather than fully engaging in the music. While there is definitely something unifying in having a congregation sing, without microphones, I have found it just as powerful to sit back and listen. In fact, I have found it almost easier to feel like I am truly engaging in the music when I stop singing and I listen to the words. It becomes less about me singing and less about the music, and more about what the music is saying. If its about the music, and about the words, and about what it means, it shouldn't matter who is singing it and how many people are singing it, as much as the hearts of the people who are engaging in it.
As far as music being discarded quickly, I, again, don't view this as much of a problem. This is coming from a newer generation who is used to contemporary music and I can't fully understand what was lost... I can't really miss something that I never was a part of. However, while we are losing some valuable music, I can't agree that the music we have gained is inadequate. We lost something valuable, but what we have I think is valuable too... just in different ways. There is something valuable in adding new music and new ideas and new songs. Its refreshing and I feel like it helps me to be honest and think about what I'm singing rather than just going through the motions. And, at the same time, I think that a lot of the songs that stick are just as valuable... having a song that you have sung so much that you know everyone will know it and everyone will sing it. While there are definitely songs today that are sung and quickly discarded and replaced with new songs, I think that there are definitely still songs that stick. And, even though I don't have a handful of songs that I have sung every year of my life, I can still recall songs that I sang years ago, as well as songs I have learned within the last year or so, with words that help me in whatever situation I may be in. For instance, a lot of the new songs my worship leader has recently introduced us to have helped me through some hard times lately. But I also recall and sing some songs I learned in elementary school such as "have I not commanded you be strong and courageous." Even though a lot of songs have come and gone in our church services, there are still plenty of songs that have stuck.
As far as the words becoming less important, that is also untrue. Maybe less complex.. maybe... but not less important.
One point that really rang true for me, however, was the problem of music becoming more of a means of entertainment than worship. And this is something I have struggled with more than anything else, especially as a worship leader. There have been times when I have loved the attention. And there have been times when I have been extremely annoyed that people are complementing me and how I'm singing when I should have nothing to do with anything. And when people applaud after a song, something inside of me cringes. While I can see the necessity of having a "leader" to help the congregation sing the song, it seems very easy for it to become more about me and less about God.
So there are definite problems with contemporary music. However, I believe there are similarly problems with older music, as well, and not just racism and sexism that have already been dealt with.
For instance, as we already discussed, older music had the potential to become a performance as well... not as much for the singer as for the organist, or the pianist.
In addition to this, the biggest problem I found in hymn singing, was that when people sing the same songs over and over again, the begin to go through the motions. While repeating a song can really ingrain the words into your memory, it can just as easily take the life out of the song, especially if it was a song that didn't mean much to you in the first place. And while the congregation isn't required to sing in contemporary music, no one is really required to sing in hymn singing. There will be the few people that sing loudly, but, from my experience, there are also the people who mouth the words, stop paying attention or sing half-heartedly. Regardless of the method, there are going to be people who are engaged and people who are not engaged. I have seen just as many people who could care less about worshipping in a contemporary service as in a hymn singing service, and I have seen just as many people sing their hearts out at a hymn sing as a contemporary service. The problem is not the method, the problem is the people who are using the method.
The moderate response to this debate is, both sides have valid points. There are problems with contemporary music, there are problems with older music. But the problem is not the song or the music itself... the problem is the people who sing the music. And while the problems may not be the same, there are going to be problems... and there are also going to be good things about each method. And I believe that there are going to be people who have an easier time worshipping in one method than another, and not just because it is something they are used to. But I also believe that those people are capable of worshipping either way. The biggest problem is people shutting themselves off to a method and missing the point-- which is to worship God, regardless of whether not they enjoy the music or how people are singing it. I think it is just as disrespectful and wrong to refuse to participate in a hymn sing as it is to refuse to participate in a contemporary worship service. My friend started skipping worship services because he didn't like the style of music, it wasn't contemporary enough for him. There is just something inside of me that cringes at this. And older people walking out when someone pulls out a guitar makes me cringe just as much. People are missing the point. Even if we are dancing different dances, we are all still dancing. Even if people are singing different songs, they are singing to the same person who enjoys all of it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with using the method that makes it easier for you to focus on God, its just wrong to refuse to have anything to do with the other method...
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Denominations.
"People from every nation and tongue, from generation to generation: We worship You."
Going to different churches from various denominations has always been somewhat challenging for me. Not that I don't believe that we are all brothers and sisters in one body... its much easier for me to believe that when I'm interacting with the people in an atmosphere I am familiar with-- at school, at work, on a church trip, at perkins, etc. When we all seem on the same page, when we overlook our differences and share, most importantly, the love we have for God. I grew up in an Evangelical Free Church, which exposed me to both hymns and modern worship, but overall it was a pretty modern church. We wore nice clothes, maybe khakis and a nice shirt, but it was usually pretty casual. There was worship music the first half of the service, and there was a sermon the second half. We stood when we sang, we sat when we listened to the sermon. It usually wasn't HORRIBLY boring-- the pastor usually had something interesting and meaningful to say. I remember going through a sermon on the end of the world. The service was designed to engage you, but at a comfortable informal level.
Until high school, I had never been to any church from any other denomination. I went to a Calvinist elementary school, but we didn't have chapel and I never went to church with anyone. Otherwise, I was actually pretty sheltered from most denominations. I remember my parents telling me when I was younger and playing by a Catholic school that Catholics weren't Christians. I asked my parents what denomination we would be if we moved to a different city that didn't have an Evangelical Free Church once. They were uncomfortable with the question... MAYBE baptist? Then lutheran. Never catholic. Granted, my parents were very adamant Evangelical Free Church-ers... both of my mom's grandparents were E. Free pastors. They weren't completely close-minded, just very dedicated. However, as a kid my view of other denominations was skeptical.
It wasn't until high school, after I had become a Christian, that I began visiting and becoming close friends with people from different religious backgrounds. My best friend in high school went to a non-denominational "plymouth brethren" church. I assumed that her "nondenominational" church would be similar to mine. It was probably the most unique church I have been to yet. The women all wore nice clothes and head-coverings. There was no sermon... or pastor. There was no structure. We would sit quietly with our Bibles and hymnals open, and various men would stand up and read a passage from the Bible or request to sing a specific hymn, or give a short word about what God had been teaching them the previous week. Women weren't allowed to speak. I have honestly never felt so uncomfortable in my life, particularly because I didn't have a head covering and felt like a heathen. Looking back on it now, while I don't completely agree with the traditions, the church was pretty community-oriented and very Biblical. Rather than having a pastor enlighten them with a word, they primarily
"promoted and equipped" each other, which probably led to a very unified body where everyone was appreciated. And the songs they sang were meaningful and purposeful, sometimes with a message afterwards or before, explaining the message. The songs were used to instruct and equip very purposefully. It was completely different, but I think God valued the praise and worship at their church as much as the worship at my much more informal church.
At St Olaf, where it was difficult to find people that went to church, let alone find a way to get to church, I attended the ELCA (or is it ECLA) church on campus. The church was very music-oriented-- granted, it is a music school, so I didn't think too much of it. We sang a great deal of hymns, we sang responses to a cantor, we listened to piano and organ interludes, and each Sunday one of the St Olaf choirs would trade off and sing about three songs. I had the opportunity to sing in the choir, and to sing hymns with the congregation. The church was much more structured than I was familiar with, with a program that laid out the entire service nearly word for word. The service was very repetitive, singing a lot of the same songs every week. We had communion every week. The sermon was maybe 10 minutes long, versus the 40 minutes I was familiar with, however the scripture readings evened out the distribution. The service was friendly to people who weren't familiar with the Lutheran tradition, probably because it was a college and, at the very least the participating choirs, would have several people who wouldn't know what to do. So in the program, they laid out everything the congregation was supposed to sing and say including the "the word of the Lord" "thanks be to God" chant we said every time they read from the Bible. Like the nondenominational church, I believe the hymn singing had the potential to be beneficial, with very purposeful selection of songs that often correlated with the scripture-reading. The sermons would often be meaningful, promoting and equipping the congregation to live lives of love. It was noticeably much less passionate, however, than any other church I had been to. And, with beautiful choirs and cantors that were studying to be opera singers, it was very easy to be engaged in the music before the words.
It wasn't until last summer that I visited the ("dun dun dun") Catholic Church. I had learned that Catholics could be Christians long before, actually, I had just never gone to church with them. In fact, some of the closest Christians in my life are Catholic and are very dedicated to God. One of my best friends went to pre-seminary to study to be a priest. I had the opportunity to go to church with my friends when they asked me to chaperone their high school youth works trip to South Dakota. It was a unique experience, because most of the trip we sang modern worship songs with them that they and I were familiar with, actions and everything. On both Sundays we were gone, however, we went Catholic mass. I was fortunate enough to go with people I knew. With a Catholic friend on each side, they flipped through the readings for me, showed me where the hymns were in the hymnals (even though they knew all the hymns they were singing, even at a church from a different state.) The sermon was about transubstantiation, was made me a little uncomfortable. However, the songs were meaningful, the scripture readings were meaningful and it was very very reverent. The people I was with I know have hearts for God, and it was interesting to share the experience with them.
My second Catholic experience was in Nicaragua this last week, but it was a much different experience. It was Easter Eve, which may have had something to do with it. We started out outside the church at a bonfire that all the people gathered around while the priest gave a long message in Spanish. Then we walked inside, sat in pews (men on one side and women on the other), and sang songs, listened to the pastor preach, sang songs, listened to a child read the Bible in Spanish, listened to the children sing a song in Spanish, listened to the pastor preach, sang songs, for what felt like 3 hours. We didn't have watches, so I'm not sure how long it was. It was interesting, though, because the order was structured, but the church itself was very informal. 50% of the church was the neighboring orphanage, so that may have contributed too. But the songs were passionate with clapping. In rather than hymns, they sang Nicaraguan-style music with drums and a xylophone-ish instrument. There were definitely songs without accompaniment, but there was no organ, and they didn't seem to be anything like the hymns we sing at home.
I also was able to attend about 5 pentecostal services In Nicaragua, which were much different than anything I had ever experienced. The pastor gave a loud passionate message. We sang some songs, which were also in traditional Nicaraguan-style, with a tacky keyboard that played a pre-recorded accompaniment. We danced a few times, for about an hour. Every time, we would pray over them, and every time people would fall to the floor and cry and scream and shake. These people were some of the most genuine Christians I have ever met. They're style of worship was totally different than what I was used to, but it was very obviously God-centered and they were the most unified churches I have ever met, equipping each other in their services and in their lives. The song was passionate and I couldn't understand the words, but they seemed to mean all of them. It was humbling, challenging and beautiful.
Currently, I have reached a little beyond my Evangelical Free Church upbringing and am attending a non-denominational church called Open Door. The church isn't crazy and wild, but it isn't traditional... so maybe I haven't reached out too far beyond what I'm used to. But even in the "modern" worship music and the standing and sitting and singing and raising hands, I believe that in this style of music I have been able to praise God and talk and to God and learn about God, in just the same way every other church I've been to has been able to. With a pure, humble, contrite heart, I believe you could sing a thousand different kinds of songs and it will be pleasing to God.
Going to different churches from various denominations has always been somewhat challenging for me. Not that I don't believe that we are all brothers and sisters in one body... its much easier for me to believe that when I'm interacting with the people in an atmosphere I am familiar with-- at school, at work, on a church trip, at perkins, etc. When we all seem on the same page, when we overlook our differences and share, most importantly, the love we have for God. I grew up in an Evangelical Free Church, which exposed me to both hymns and modern worship, but overall it was a pretty modern church. We wore nice clothes, maybe khakis and a nice shirt, but it was usually pretty casual. There was worship music the first half of the service, and there was a sermon the second half. We stood when we sang, we sat when we listened to the sermon. It usually wasn't HORRIBLY boring-- the pastor usually had something interesting and meaningful to say. I remember going through a sermon on the end of the world. The service was designed to engage you, but at a comfortable informal level.
Until high school, I had never been to any church from any other denomination. I went to a Calvinist elementary school, but we didn't have chapel and I never went to church with anyone. Otherwise, I was actually pretty sheltered from most denominations. I remember my parents telling me when I was younger and playing by a Catholic school that Catholics weren't Christians. I asked my parents what denomination we would be if we moved to a different city that didn't have an Evangelical Free Church once. They were uncomfortable with the question... MAYBE baptist? Then lutheran. Never catholic. Granted, my parents were very adamant Evangelical Free Church-ers... both of my mom's grandparents were E. Free pastors. They weren't completely close-minded, just very dedicated. However, as a kid my view of other denominations was skeptical.
It wasn't until high school, after I had become a Christian, that I began visiting and becoming close friends with people from different religious backgrounds. My best friend in high school went to a non-denominational "plymouth brethren" church. I assumed that her "nondenominational" church would be similar to mine. It was probably the most unique church I have been to yet. The women all wore nice clothes and head-coverings. There was no sermon... or pastor. There was no structure. We would sit quietly with our Bibles and hymnals open, and various men would stand up and read a passage from the Bible or request to sing a specific hymn, or give a short word about what God had been teaching them the previous week. Women weren't allowed to speak. I have honestly never felt so uncomfortable in my life, particularly because I didn't have a head covering and felt like a heathen. Looking back on it now, while I don't completely agree with the traditions, the church was pretty community-oriented and very Biblical. Rather than having a pastor enlighten them with a word, they primarily
"promoted and equipped" each other, which probably led to a very unified body where everyone was appreciated. And the songs they sang were meaningful and purposeful, sometimes with a message afterwards or before, explaining the message. The songs were used to instruct and equip very purposefully. It was completely different, but I think God valued the praise and worship at their church as much as the worship at my much more informal church.
At St Olaf, where it was difficult to find people that went to church, let alone find a way to get to church, I attended the ELCA (or is it ECLA) church on campus. The church was very music-oriented-- granted, it is a music school, so I didn't think too much of it. We sang a great deal of hymns, we sang responses to a cantor, we listened to piano and organ interludes, and each Sunday one of the St Olaf choirs would trade off and sing about three songs. I had the opportunity to sing in the choir, and to sing hymns with the congregation. The church was much more structured than I was familiar with, with a program that laid out the entire service nearly word for word. The service was very repetitive, singing a lot of the same songs every week. We had communion every week. The sermon was maybe 10 minutes long, versus the 40 minutes I was familiar with, however the scripture readings evened out the distribution. The service was friendly to people who weren't familiar with the Lutheran tradition, probably because it was a college and, at the very least the participating choirs, would have several people who wouldn't know what to do. So in the program, they laid out everything the congregation was supposed to sing and say including the "the word of the Lord" "thanks be to God" chant we said every time they read from the Bible. Like the nondenominational church, I believe the hymn singing had the potential to be beneficial, with very purposeful selection of songs that often correlated with the scripture-reading. The sermons would often be meaningful, promoting and equipping the congregation to live lives of love. It was noticeably much less passionate, however, than any other church I had been to. And, with beautiful choirs and cantors that were studying to be opera singers, it was very easy to be engaged in the music before the words.
It wasn't until last summer that I visited the ("dun dun dun") Catholic Church. I had learned that Catholics could be Christians long before, actually, I had just never gone to church with them. In fact, some of the closest Christians in my life are Catholic and are very dedicated to God. One of my best friends went to pre-seminary to study to be a priest. I had the opportunity to go to church with my friends when they asked me to chaperone their high school youth works trip to South Dakota. It was a unique experience, because most of the trip we sang modern worship songs with them that they and I were familiar with, actions and everything. On both Sundays we were gone, however, we went Catholic mass. I was fortunate enough to go with people I knew. With a Catholic friend on each side, they flipped through the readings for me, showed me where the hymns were in the hymnals (even though they knew all the hymns they were singing, even at a church from a different state.) The sermon was about transubstantiation, was made me a little uncomfortable. However, the songs were meaningful, the scripture readings were meaningful and it was very very reverent. The people I was with I know have hearts for God, and it was interesting to share the experience with them.
My second Catholic experience was in Nicaragua this last week, but it was a much different experience. It was Easter Eve, which may have had something to do with it. We started out outside the church at a bonfire that all the people gathered around while the priest gave a long message in Spanish. Then we walked inside, sat in pews (men on one side and women on the other), and sang songs, listened to the pastor preach, sang songs, listened to a child read the Bible in Spanish, listened to the children sing a song in Spanish, listened to the pastor preach, sang songs, for what felt like 3 hours. We didn't have watches, so I'm not sure how long it was. It was interesting, though, because the order was structured, but the church itself was very informal. 50% of the church was the neighboring orphanage, so that may have contributed too. But the songs were passionate with clapping. In rather than hymns, they sang Nicaraguan-style music with drums and a xylophone-ish instrument. There were definitely songs without accompaniment, but there was no organ, and they didn't seem to be anything like the hymns we sing at home.
I also was able to attend about 5 pentecostal services In Nicaragua, which were much different than anything I had ever experienced. The pastor gave a loud passionate message. We sang some songs, which were also in traditional Nicaraguan-style, with a tacky keyboard that played a pre-recorded accompaniment. We danced a few times, for about an hour. Every time, we would pray over them, and every time people would fall to the floor and cry and scream and shake. These people were some of the most genuine Christians I have ever met. They're style of worship was totally different than what I was used to, but it was very obviously God-centered and they were the most unified churches I have ever met, equipping each other in their services and in their lives. The song was passionate and I couldn't understand the words, but they seemed to mean all of them. It was humbling, challenging and beautiful.
Currently, I have reached a little beyond my Evangelical Free Church upbringing and am attending a non-denominational church called Open Door. The church isn't crazy and wild, but it isn't traditional... so maybe I haven't reached out too far beyond what I'm used to. But even in the "modern" worship music and the standing and sitting and singing and raising hands, I believe that in this style of music I have been able to praise God and talk and to God and learn about God, in just the same way every other church I've been to has been able to. With a pure, humble, contrite heart, I believe you could sing a thousand different kinds of songs and it will be pleasing to God.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Guiding Biblical Principles (rough draft)
God desires a grateful response for all that He has done, is going to do and is continuing to do for us (including, especially, His forgiveness and love), with a humble, broken and contrite heart. The outworking of that response is a life oriented toward God, a sacrificial life of love for God through our obedience to Him, and love for one another in the context of the believing community and the world beyond.
We gather as Christians to meet with each other and God-- remembering what He has done for us and meeting with Him in prayer, praise and worship. We also meet to encourage one another, promoting and equipping this life of love through teaching, fellowship, fasting, and sharing of gifts, prophecies, possessions and communions; and allowing God to share His Spirit, His word and healing. As a result, we should be equipped to continue to serve in the Christian community and beyond.
Song is one of the ways the Christian community learns and remembers the truth about God, and an opportunity to present an offering of love to God. Through song we hear instruction, recall God's deeds, receive comfort, and communicate with God by expressing sorrow, anger, joy, confusion and thanksgiving, while still allowing Him to speak to us. In the communal act of singing, the word of Christ becomes a part of us; we teach and admonish one another while giving thanks to God.
(Based off of the Book of Acts and the Psalms as a whole.) I will definitely go into more detail if asked to, but I based it off of about 50 verses...)
We gather as Christians to meet with each other and God-- remembering what He has done for us and meeting with Him in prayer, praise and worship. We also meet to encourage one another, promoting and equipping this life of love through teaching, fellowship, fasting, and sharing of gifts, prophecies, possessions and communions; and allowing God to share His Spirit, His word and healing. As a result, we should be equipped to continue to serve in the Christian community and beyond.
Song is one of the ways the Christian community learns and remembers the truth about God, and an opportunity to present an offering of love to God. Through song we hear instruction, recall God's deeds, receive comfort, and communicate with God by expressing sorrow, anger, joy, confusion and thanksgiving, while still allowing Him to speak to us. In the communal act of singing, the word of Christ becomes a part of us; we teach and admonish one another while giving thanks to God.
(Based off of the Book of Acts and the Psalms as a whole.) I will definitely go into more detail if asked to, but I based it off of about 50 verses...)
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
"out with the old, in with the new"
Although I am only 21 and I haven't experienced nearly as much of the world as most people, I am old enough to have experienced at least part of the progression of society into one of the most innovative, rapidly changing periods of time in history. Within the last century, we have decreased travel time and increased the rate of production and communication. We have built highways, flown airplanes, developed computers and cell phones. As a business major, I have become very familiar with the pushing of our economy for effective and efficient products and services. Today, if you aren't adapting, rapidly changing and rapidly growing in an industry, you will not survive. If you aren't quick and productive at your job, you will probably be fired. If you don't go ten over the speed limit on the freeway, you will be run off the road.
It is not surprise that in the rapid pace of society, we run through ideas and services like a box of kleenex. Side ponies and fros were an 80's thing. Beanie Babies went from being worth hundreds of dollars to about $5 in just a few years. People laugh at the enormous computer you bought 10 years ago or the cell phones as big as your face used in the early 90s. In fact, if nearly any electronic appliance (computer, cell phone, ipod, etc.) is thicker than your fingernail, it is sooo like two years ago.
Although I am no expert by any means, I know enough about business and the economy to know that this is considered a very good thing. The faster we are able to produce, the easier our lives become. While our rapidly growing global market economy is using a large majority of the earth's resources, it is producing far more than it is exhuming and resulting in better lives and greater opportunities. In the academic world, the increase in communication is considered a good thing as well, allowing people to be exposed to more information and ideas and resulting in a well-rounded education.
While its hard to argue that NO good can come from this society, its easy to see that the quick pace of our society causes us to miss out on a great deal of things. Many families are suffering, largely because they don't have time to spend with each other. Children are sent to daycares for the majority of their childhood, families no longer eat dinner together every night, speeding leads to car accidents, traffic jams and road rage. People can easily become a means to end when the end is the primary concern. The rapid production of goods can cause people to value the goods far more than more important things, such as relationships.
And how are we to deal with our new society as Christians? God tells us to "be still and know that He is God." Jesus took the time aside when life God to crazy to be alone with God and pray. And obviously when relationships suffer, we are definitely missing the point, because Jesus said that's basically all Christianity is: our relationship with God, our relationships with each other. Are the development of new ideas and new products really necessary to Christianity when we were given the "truth" 2000 years ago and we are called to give everything away and follow God?
So, now we come to how worship music fits into all of this. For years, Christians compiled a collection of songs that were repeatedly sung and were "universally" known. Churches today still have access to songs that were sung hundreds of years ago by parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, great-great grandparents, etc., and many still sing them. However, like the rest of the society, Christian music is beginning to go through different songs, artists, styles and trends like the fashion industry. As Christians we are supposed to separate ourselves from the world... is it wrong for the church to parallel the rapid progression of the outside world? Or are we supposed to remain exactly the same, as a body of Christ that continues to follow God exactly the same way, like generations and generations before us?
Well, first I have to say that I don't believe it is possible to completely avoid the change of society. We are always going to be influenced by the people around us unless we completely isolate ourselves, like the Amish. And I just don't believe that is what God wants from us. God wants us to be the salt of the world, to be an example to the world, and I think that in order to do this we HAVE to be in the world, just not OF it. Early Christians were especially wary of this, but while they remained in society and ministered to their Roman and Jewish neighbors, they were careful to remain obedient to God. Jesus told them to continue to pay taxes... giving to Caesar what is Caesar's and giving to God what is God's. Many people, after they were saved, gave up their lives and followed Jesus, but many continued to live similar lives with similar jobs, but were now obedient and Spirit-led. Daniel, when captured and forced to live in Babylon, lived the way the Babylonians did and spoke their language, but made sure He continued to pray and continued to follow God's commandments. Esther lived the life of a princess in order to save Israel and God blessed her. My point is, we can continue to follow the pattern of society, we just NEED to be able to discern what is sinful and always remain obedient to God.
I personally believe that this applies to Christian music today. While, with the rest of society, we are beginning to value innovative, new music, we first need to step back and discern whether or not what we are doing is sinful or harmful. But the act of following the trends of society in itself is not.
To be continued...
It is not surprise that in the rapid pace of society, we run through ideas and services like a box of kleenex. Side ponies and fros were an 80's thing. Beanie Babies went from being worth hundreds of dollars to about $5 in just a few years. People laugh at the enormous computer you bought 10 years ago or the cell phones as big as your face used in the early 90s. In fact, if nearly any electronic appliance (computer, cell phone, ipod, etc.) is thicker than your fingernail, it is sooo like two years ago.
Although I am no expert by any means, I know enough about business and the economy to know that this is considered a very good thing. The faster we are able to produce, the easier our lives become. While our rapidly growing global market economy is using a large majority of the earth's resources, it is producing far more than it is exhuming and resulting in better lives and greater opportunities. In the academic world, the increase in communication is considered a good thing as well, allowing people to be exposed to more information and ideas and resulting in a well-rounded education.
While its hard to argue that NO good can come from this society, its easy to see that the quick pace of our society causes us to miss out on a great deal of things. Many families are suffering, largely because they don't have time to spend with each other. Children are sent to daycares for the majority of their childhood, families no longer eat dinner together every night, speeding leads to car accidents, traffic jams and road rage. People can easily become a means to end when the end is the primary concern. The rapid production of goods can cause people to value the goods far more than more important things, such as relationships.
And how are we to deal with our new society as Christians? God tells us to "be still and know that He is God." Jesus took the time aside when life God to crazy to be alone with God and pray. And obviously when relationships suffer, we are definitely missing the point, because Jesus said that's basically all Christianity is: our relationship with God, our relationships with each other. Are the development of new ideas and new products really necessary to Christianity when we were given the "truth" 2000 years ago and we are called to give everything away and follow God?
So, now we come to how worship music fits into all of this. For years, Christians compiled a collection of songs that were repeatedly sung and were "universally" known. Churches today still have access to songs that were sung hundreds of years ago by parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, great-great grandparents, etc., and many still sing them. However, like the rest of the society, Christian music is beginning to go through different songs, artists, styles and trends like the fashion industry. As Christians we are supposed to separate ourselves from the world... is it wrong for the church to parallel the rapid progression of the outside world? Or are we supposed to remain exactly the same, as a body of Christ that continues to follow God exactly the same way, like generations and generations before us?
Well, first I have to say that I don't believe it is possible to completely avoid the change of society. We are always going to be influenced by the people around us unless we completely isolate ourselves, like the Amish. And I just don't believe that is what God wants from us. God wants us to be the salt of the world, to be an example to the world, and I think that in order to do this we HAVE to be in the world, just not OF it. Early Christians were especially wary of this, but while they remained in society and ministered to their Roman and Jewish neighbors, they were careful to remain obedient to God. Jesus told them to continue to pay taxes... giving to Caesar what is Caesar's and giving to God what is God's. Many people, after they were saved, gave up their lives and followed Jesus, but many continued to live similar lives with similar jobs, but were now obedient and Spirit-led. Daniel, when captured and forced to live in Babylon, lived the way the Babylonians did and spoke their language, but made sure He continued to pray and continued to follow God's commandments. Esther lived the life of a princess in order to save Israel and God blessed her. My point is, we can continue to follow the pattern of society, we just NEED to be able to discern what is sinful and always remain obedient to God.
I personally believe that this applies to Christian music today. While, with the rest of society, we are beginning to value innovative, new music, we first need to step back and discern whether or not what we are doing is sinful or harmful. But the act of following the trends of society in itself is not.
To be continued...
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
A few thoughts...
I was planning on writing more than this before I turned anything in, but I didn't know the deadline was Wednesday until Monday... whatever.
So I'm going to give a quick synopsis of my thoughts so far on what we've discussed in class and elaborate more later.
Life of obedience-- Yes. I agree completely. There's more to worship than rituals... its important to live a life pleasing to God or worship means nothing. I would go further than that and say that its not what we do, but where our heart is-- God really desires a broken and contrite heart. Faith without works is dead. Love is not love if you never show it. But actions without faith and love are even worse. I think worship is the same way-- it isn't about going through the emotions. But you are really worshiping in "spirit and in truth" you are going to outwardly demonstrate it... whether through singing, through obedience, through service. Just a brief thought I haven't totally thought through...
Contemporary Christian music is not as valid as old-- I disagree. I also don't think new music is better than old music. I think both are equally as pleasing to God-- it is all about the heart of the person singing them. This goes off of what I said before. Obviously details matter to God, because if you read the Old Testament commandments, they are extremely detailed. How you prepare the sheep before you sacrifice it, etc, etc. But as far as I know, there isn't anywhere that says "sing to the Lord... but only if the words are scripturally based." "worship the Lord... but only if the music is a certain style." I mean, obviously if the words are not true, you shouldn't sing them... if they contradict something in the Bible. But I think that as long as your heart is in the right place and you mean what you are singing-- it is pleasing to God. I think that meditating on a few songs for the majority of your life is pleasing to God. But I also think using a new melody and new words, singing "a new song to God" is just as pleasing. Personally, I think they are both benefitial in different ways.
Most of the rest of my thoughts on class discussions so far relate to what I just said.
So I'm going to give a quick synopsis of my thoughts so far on what we've discussed in class and elaborate more later.
Life of obedience-- Yes. I agree completely. There's more to worship than rituals... its important to live a life pleasing to God or worship means nothing. I would go further than that and say that its not what we do, but where our heart is-- God really desires a broken and contrite heart. Faith without works is dead. Love is not love if you never show it. But actions without faith and love are even worse. I think worship is the same way-- it isn't about going through the emotions. But you are really worshiping in "spirit and in truth" you are going to outwardly demonstrate it... whether through singing, through obedience, through service. Just a brief thought I haven't totally thought through...
Contemporary Christian music is not as valid as old-- I disagree. I also don't think new music is better than old music. I think both are equally as pleasing to God-- it is all about the heart of the person singing them. This goes off of what I said before. Obviously details matter to God, because if you read the Old Testament commandments, they are extremely detailed. How you prepare the sheep before you sacrifice it, etc, etc. But as far as I know, there isn't anywhere that says "sing to the Lord... but only if the words are scripturally based." "worship the Lord... but only if the music is a certain style." I mean, obviously if the words are not true, you shouldn't sing them... if they contradict something in the Bible. But I think that as long as your heart is in the right place and you mean what you are singing-- it is pleasing to God. I think that meditating on a few songs for the majority of your life is pleasing to God. But I also think using a new melody and new words, singing "a new song to God" is just as pleasing. Personally, I think they are both benefitial in different ways.
Most of the rest of my thoughts on class discussions so far relate to what I just said.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
testimony- part 3 (college)
I divided my blog into 3 parts for a reason-- when I honestly look back on my life, I think of it as three different phases. Honestly, I almost even look at myself as 3 entirely different people during each "phase," because the different circumstances I faced really shaped me. The third part, I would classify as a phase of suffering, and I think God brought me through these last few years with just as much intention as my high school "spiritual high." You could look at it as a marriage, in a way... the first few years, I was in love. And after these last few years, I am still in love, but a different sort of love. A love that is not rooted in emotions, and not rooted in circumstances. That still experiences happiness and blessings, but is not dependent on them.
My suffering began immediately, to be honest. I had built a life before I became a Christian that I couldn't continue to live in as a Christian. It was like I had been a part of a puzzle, and I had changed shape and didn't fit anymore. I was in love with Jesus, and I didn't want to continue sinning-- and my friends at school continued to hate Jesus and continued to sin. I didn't really want to spend as much time with them, and they in turn began to resent me, and eventually hate me. I decided to switch high schools halfway through my Junior year.. I had to start over, whether I stayed at Buffalo High School or not, and Rockford High School had been impacted just as much as I had by Travis's death. I wanted to be a part of it. And obviously, it was a good experience, and we were able to encourage and grow together in school, in youth group and as friends.
After I graduated, however, I went to St Olaf College. And, again, it was like a puzzle my piece really didn't fit. I had no desire to drink, and the majority of college students did. The first semester of school, I found a few people who called themselves Christians, but they begrudgingly went to the campus church, and sometimes the weekly "worship" service, and otherwise gave no reason for anyone to think they were any different from any other non-Christian. To make things even worse, the college and all the faculty considered themselves "Christian," but followed a new, more "liberal" Christianity that accepted things I believed were clearly sinful, and taught a curriculum that suggested the Bible was inaccurate and unreliable-- historically and conceptually. Several people who had come to St Olaf as Christians their Freshman year, graduated as atheists, causing Christians like myself to become even more of a minority.
Through it all, I continued to follow Jesus. Mostly with a handful of other Christians, but for about a semester, completely alone. I didn't understand my circumstances, I couldn't always sift through the lies, but I ultimately knew God was real and God was in control.
I went from having a tight-knit community as in love with God as I was, to pretty much just God and me. The song that really meant a lot to me at the time:
"You are the only one I need
I bow all of me at Your feet,
I worship You alone.
You have given me more than
I could ever have wanted
And I want to give You my heart and my soul."
I know that's not necessarily what the composer intended the words to mean-- but that's what it meant to me. I was basically saying, if I have to worship You alone, I will. I believe worship is a community thing, but I had no choice. For a little while, it was just me.
In my suffering, God brought me music. I began to write a lot of songs that were encouraging to me and still are encouraging to me. It was no longer just people putting words in my mouth, but me actually singing my own words to God. I'm not sure if any of them are typical "worship" songs people would sing in church. But I think I would consider it worship music. Maybe this course will change my definition. But at the very least, it was music I think came from God and was mostly for God... but also for me.
"in the midst of tragedy, my heart can only grasp Your eternal hope.
and this love i now receive helps me understand i'm never alone.
there's more than we can see, there's more than all we know to look forward to.
this world means nothing to me, its time to let go and cling tightly to You.
rethinking what i've been, undoing what i've done
and all i'm living for, cause there is so much more.
i'm finding now the truth is there's so much left to come.
there is so much more, there is so much more.
and all i held onto that doesn't lead to You, i'm not following.
and all atrocities, unexplained mysteries, i throw them to the wind."
"Sometimes life is a mystery
Where you are might not make sense to you or me
But God's bigger than all we can see
You are where you're supposed to be
Don't lose heart:
You're where you are for a reason.
Don't give up hope:
God brought you here and He'll carry you through.
Sometimes it's hard to see that things will change
It's hard to see that things won't always be this way
Sometimes it's hard to see life comes in waves
There's a time to be happy and be sad
Things won't always be so bad.
Somewhere in this misery
There is hope that you have failed to see
The sun's rising in the East
Shedding light and warmth, bringing love and peace.
Just let go
and understand that God has a plan.
And although
it's hard to see, God holds all things in His hands."
Not the happiest songs, but they were encouraging to me.
Things got better at St Olaf, and I met some amazing people-- many of whom were just as passionate about God AND music as I am, and who taught me a lot. And God was just as present at St Olaf as He was anywhere else. But St Olaf was always hard for me, and it wasn't the greatest environment for a newer Christian like myself. And I decided, while I could have survived the school, I had an opportunity to be in an environment that would encourage me, rather than discourage me, to be close to God, which was, and still is, my ultimate goal. So I transferred to Bethel... and there's not much else to say.
"The one thing I ask the Lord-- the thing I seek most-- is to live in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, delighting in the Lord's perfections and meditating in His temple."
-Psalm 27:4
My suffering began immediately, to be honest. I had built a life before I became a Christian that I couldn't continue to live in as a Christian. It was like I had been a part of a puzzle, and I had changed shape and didn't fit anymore. I was in love with Jesus, and I didn't want to continue sinning-- and my friends at school continued to hate Jesus and continued to sin. I didn't really want to spend as much time with them, and they in turn began to resent me, and eventually hate me. I decided to switch high schools halfway through my Junior year.. I had to start over, whether I stayed at Buffalo High School or not, and Rockford High School had been impacted just as much as I had by Travis's death. I wanted to be a part of it. And obviously, it was a good experience, and we were able to encourage and grow together in school, in youth group and as friends.
After I graduated, however, I went to St Olaf College. And, again, it was like a puzzle my piece really didn't fit. I had no desire to drink, and the majority of college students did. The first semester of school, I found a few people who called themselves Christians, but they begrudgingly went to the campus church, and sometimes the weekly "worship" service, and otherwise gave no reason for anyone to think they were any different from any other non-Christian. To make things even worse, the college and all the faculty considered themselves "Christian," but followed a new, more "liberal" Christianity that accepted things I believed were clearly sinful, and taught a curriculum that suggested the Bible was inaccurate and unreliable-- historically and conceptually. Several people who had come to St Olaf as Christians their Freshman year, graduated as atheists, causing Christians like myself to become even more of a minority.
Through it all, I continued to follow Jesus. Mostly with a handful of other Christians, but for about a semester, completely alone. I didn't understand my circumstances, I couldn't always sift through the lies, but I ultimately knew God was real and God was in control.
I went from having a tight-knit community as in love with God as I was, to pretty much just God and me. The song that really meant a lot to me at the time:
"You are the only one I need
I bow all of me at Your feet,
I worship You alone.
You have given me more than
I could ever have wanted
And I want to give You my heart and my soul."
I know that's not necessarily what the composer intended the words to mean-- but that's what it meant to me. I was basically saying, if I have to worship You alone, I will. I believe worship is a community thing, but I had no choice. For a little while, it was just me.
In my suffering, God brought me music. I began to write a lot of songs that were encouraging to me and still are encouraging to me. It was no longer just people putting words in my mouth, but me actually singing my own words to God. I'm not sure if any of them are typical "worship" songs people would sing in church. But I think I would consider it worship music. Maybe this course will change my definition. But at the very least, it was music I think came from God and was mostly for God... but also for me.
"in the midst of tragedy, my heart can only grasp Your eternal hope.
and this love i now receive helps me understand i'm never alone.
there's more than we can see, there's more than all we know to look forward to.
this world means nothing to me, its time to let go and cling tightly to You.
rethinking what i've been, undoing what i've done
and all i'm living for, cause there is so much more.
i'm finding now the truth is there's so much left to come.
there is so much more, there is so much more.
and all i held onto that doesn't lead to You, i'm not following.
and all atrocities, unexplained mysteries, i throw them to the wind."
"Sometimes life is a mystery
Where you are might not make sense to you or me
But God's bigger than all we can see
You are where you're supposed to be
Don't lose heart:
You're where you are for a reason.
Don't give up hope:
God brought you here and He'll carry you through.
Sometimes it's hard to see that things will change
It's hard to see that things won't always be this way
Sometimes it's hard to see life comes in waves
There's a time to be happy and be sad
Things won't always be so bad.
Somewhere in this misery
There is hope that you have failed to see
The sun's rising in the East
Shedding light and warmth, bringing love and peace.
Just let go
and understand that God has a plan.
And although
it's hard to see, God holds all things in His hands."
Not the happiest songs, but they were encouraging to me.
Things got better at St Olaf, and I met some amazing people-- many of whom were just as passionate about God AND music as I am, and who taught me a lot. And God was just as present at St Olaf as He was anywhere else. But St Olaf was always hard for me, and it wasn't the greatest environment for a newer Christian like myself. And I decided, while I could have survived the school, I had an opportunity to be in an environment that would encourage me, rather than discourage me, to be close to God, which was, and still is, my ultimate goal. So I transferred to Bethel... and there's not much else to say.
"The one thing I ask the Lord-- the thing I seek most-- is to live in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, delighting in the Lord's perfections and meditating in His temple."
-Psalm 27:4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)