When a church decides it’s service is going to be traditional or contemporary, they unnecessarily box themselves in stylistically. I’ve already commented on the dangers of churches creating separate traditional and contemporary services, so what’s my perspective on this very pressing issue in the church? My answer is simple, really: focus.

That’s it. Focus.

But what does that mean? Well, I’d liken it to some level of purpose-driven worship, but that would be a misnomer in the end, because its less an emphasis upon the purpose of the service and more a focus upon God and what he wants to accomplish in the hearts of the people.

Consider this over-generalization of the elements of a traditional service:

• A choir with a leader (who doesn’t necessarily sing)
• Simple instrumentation – usually organ or piano, rarely a mix thereof
• traditionally led from hymn book, though could be done with lyric display now
• large majority of songs would have been found in a hymn book from 30-40 years ago
• Songs generally have minimal dynamics, with the emphasis being upon singing a specific set of words (verses 1, 2 and 4 – for example)
• high emphasis upon respect and honor (very low on emotionalism and experience)

Yeh, I know that’s a very stereo-typed list. Check out my version of the stereotyped elements of a contemporary service:

• Band-driven – i.e. drums, guitar(s), 1-8 vocalists, and other instruments, sometimes including piano/keys
• most songs sung are less than 15 years old
• songs (if played correctly) have a strong dynamic elements
• emphasis in service upon experience and an encouragement to engage emotions
• more informal atmosphere

There is also the Emergent worship movement, but I consider that a mutated variation of the contemporary service. It’s primary emphasis is upon the experience, and it merges very modern concepts of art with a blending of more liturgical styles with contemporary practices.

In the end, most modern-day takes on the worship service tend towards a purpose-driven model. But the fault here is that the purpose-driven model seeks to bring something about – it has something to accomplish. What I am proposing here is less trying to do something more trying to perceive something. Trying to perceive what, though? To perceive Christ, to perceive the Gospel.

The question to ask when preparing a service is not “What do we want to accomplish in this service?” but rather, “What does God want to say to us – to show us through his Word – in this service?” That is your FOCUS.

Once you know what the Focus of the service is, then you choose songs, as well as styles which complement and reinforce it, which help the congregation contemplate upon it. There are always solid hymns which explore these themes, but the use of them should always be equally evaluated alongside many modern songs/hymns which will also complement and/or reinforce the Focus of the service.

If the Focus is best served by a Gospel song, then use it. If the Focus would best be served by a quieter, simpler set, consider just using an acoustic guitar or two with a djembe (or two!). Maybe you really just need two singers for that set as well.

But maybe the Focus calls for something bigger, and you need to pull out all the stops. Call in that violinist you keep on speed-dial for special occasions. Round up a few extra singers. Make sure you have at least two electric guitarists as well as the acoustic. And challenge the keyboardist with songs that’ll have him/her stretching between two keyboards!

Just realize that hymns are songs just as praise choruses are. Some are more theologically correct than others – but each of them says something and explores something about God and his Gospel. Do not choose a song because it is a hymn or because the congregation likes it. Choose it because the congregation will best be served by singing that song on that day, when the preacher is going to be teaching about that specific topic/passage.

This way, when the service begins, it’s not about ‘doing’ church, it’s about knowing Christ – knowing him within the context of the local body worshiping together. And it’s about focusing on him and what he wants to speak within that body on that day.

These are just a few thoughts I’ve developed over the past few years in regards to the rather common occurance of two different types of services on Sundays – the Traditional Service and the Contemporary Service. Why do churches usually do this? I it usually a very honest and heartfelt attempt to reach as many people as possible. They know that the older generation, as well as a minority of younger people prefer a traditional service over a contemporary. They also realize that they must begin to develop more contemporary practices in their services so that they will remain relevant to the present younger generation and generations to come.

For most churches the traditional service utilizes a choir and organ, many times with piano. There is often a hymnal used (instead of a lyric display system). The contemporary service, on the other hand, is typically characterized by the use of a band, more chorus-type songs, and a lyric display system. The stylistic differences, in fact, are limited. But there is often an attitude difference between the two as well, the traditional service often emphasizing, well, tradition as well as the holiness and righteousness of God (an emphasis upon respect when entering the Sanctuary), while the contemporary service emphasizes a freedom in structure and the community of believers.

So what is wrong with having a traditional service to minister to those who prefer to worship that way, and then a contemporary service for those who prefer to worship that way? Well, are you pastoring one church or two? In many churches the only point of continuity between the two services is the message – different songs are used in each service (songs which are more complementary to the style of the service).

In developing two differently themed services the message being sent to the congregation is that worship is about what you (as a worshipper) are comfortable with. Starting with the story of Cain and Able, and running rather overtly through the Old Testament and even emerging in the New Testament is a very clear theme of worship not being about man’s comfort zone. God dictates how we worship, not us.

So what does a pastor do about the contemporary versus traditional conflict which rages in every church? Simple and yet very, very tough: pastor your flock. They need to be taught and loved into understanding the true heart of a worshipper – one that is more focused on the meaning and theology of the songs than their style, a heart that is more focused on the glorification of God than on its personal comfort zone. As a worship leader, please realize that if all you sing are hymns you are depriving your congregation of numerous, relevant and theologically sound worship choruses. On the other hand, if all you sing are choruses, then your congregation’s worship diet is in dire need of the theological depth (insight and wisdom) found in hymns.

There are contemporary takes on hymns which will take your breath away, and there are songs written in the modern age which have the same theological depth as many hymns. Understand that there is no theological argument for either contemporary choruses or traditional hymns to be used exclusively. And in pandering to the whims of the fringes of the congregation, the creation of differently styled services, instead of promoting unity, feeds the selfishness in their hearts and feeds the discord even more.

Understanding these theological and pastoral concerns, this more practical reality must also be swallowed: for most of the worshippers, the time of the service will be more important than the style. “What?!” you say. “‘Tis true,” I must admit. Depending on their sleeping schedules and afternoon plans, people will supercede their personal stylistic preference for a worship service that fits into their schedule better. So when the attendance of your early traditional service surges in the summer, the reality is more than likely that many of the additional attendees during hat season are not there for the traditional style, but rather because of a planned golf game or trip to the lake or some other event.

But what if you have already broken your congregation into two different services? Should you just suddenly stop? That would be foolish. Rather, if I were assuming a worship pastor position at a church that had both contemporary and traditional services the first very subtle step I would take would be to use the same songs in both services, with specific arrangements for their respective settings. This way the congregation is at least singing the same songs on Sunday. There would have to be a good amount of pastoral teaching on worship and specifically on the different types of songs (whenever it fit in to the sermon schedule or was appropriate in the sermons), and I would also utilize worship comments to contually teach the congregation about worship and about the songs being sung. Then after several months or even a year (or even more than a year if need be) of this I would begin to gradually utilize the same arrangements of songs in each service. There are probably hundreds, if not thousands of ways to do this while teaching and shepherding the body into a biblical mindset towards worship (and styles therein) – it will just take time and wisdom. And probably many lunches (or at least meetings) with those individuals who are the most concerned (and/or vocal) about the transition.

So there is my personal reason for an aversion to the utilization of a separate contemporary and traditional service in a church: it is dangerous to the health of the body because it introduces a element of continual division in the congregation. And, also, by forcing yourself to become either “traditional” or “contemporary” you actually box yourself in stylistically (this latter reason is worth a post unto itself, mainly because it’s a creative/artistic reason….hmmm…check back on Wednesday…)

[note: also see my post on an alternative to the common conceptions of traditional and contemporary services]