Music and Change in the Christian Church by Richard Hickam

Change has always been a problem in the religious community. For centuries, theological differences have splintered Christians into camps that have become Catholics and Protestants, new denominations, and even sub-groups within denominations.

In 1611 as the King James Bible was about to be published, Dr. Hugh Broughton, a seventeenth-century British scholar in Greek and Hebrew, wrote the following review: “[The Authorized Version] was sent to me to censure: which bred in me a sadness which will grieve me while I breath, it is so ill done. Tell his Majesty that I would rather be rent in pieces by wild horses, then that any such translation by my consent would be urged upon the poor churches . . . .The cockles of the seashores, and the leaves of the forest, and the grains of the poppy may as well be numbered as the gross errors of this Bible.”

The King James Version . . . really? I thought that was the supreme sacred version?

Music within the church is no exception to this problem and has been a difficult subject for worshippers and worship leaders. Consider how German churches in the time of Johann Sebastian Bach reacted when new instruments were introduced in their worship services. Here, the incident happened within the sphere of classical music in a church setting: “When in a large town [Bach’s] Passion Music was done for the first time, with 12 violins, many oboes, bassoons, and other instruments, many people were astonished and did not know what to make of it. In the pew of a noble family in church, many Ministers and Noble Ladies were present, who sang the first Passion Chorale out of their books with great devotion. But when this theatrical music began, all these people were thrown into the greatest bewilderment, looked at each other and said: ‘God save us, my children! It’s just as if one were at an Opera Comedy.’ But everyone was genuinely displeased by it and voiced just complaints against it.”

Upset about J.S. Bach in church? Really? Wow!

One last story: A nineteenth-century Protestant Church was considering acquiring an organ for the worship services. At that time, most churches did not accept the use of instruments in worship. Even organs were not allowed since they were commonly used in theaters for entertainment. But one progressive church went against the established tradition: “Though the demand for better music was becoming increasingly insistent, the non-Episcopal Churches were very reluctant to admit organs. An English gentleman made an offer of 500 pounds to the first ‘dissenting’ church that would venture on the innovation . . . Finally the Brattle Street Church surrendered to the inevitable and decided to have an organ, but even after the order had been sent to England and the instrument was on its way, the congregation was torn with bitter strife. One wealthy member besought with tears that the house of God be not desecrated, promising to refund the entire cost of the organ if the evil thing might be thrown to the bottom of Boston Harbor. But gradually opposition subsided.”

Opposition to organs in church!?! The humanity!

The examples presented here illustrate the concept that, at one time, everything is new, then it becomes tradition, then it becomes old. The guiding force presented in the New Testament should be our litmus test when it comes to such things. The examples and theme here is taken directly from Lilianne Doukhan’s book “In Tune with God.” I would close with her illustration of a passage from Romans where she substitutes music-related terms for some of Paul’s expressions:

“One man’s faith allows him to [listen to] everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, [listens only to a particular style]. The man who [listens to] everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not [listen to] everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant?” (Romans 14:2-4).

Richard Hickam

A Great Epitaph by Andy McDonald

It may not be something you spend much time pondering, but when your loved ones are trying to decide what epitaph should be inscribed on your grave marker, what would you suggest?

Over the years I’ve had the privilege of working with families as they plan for funerals and burials. The whole process, no matter how honest and fair the funeral director, always leaves me with the same sort of feeling that I have after buying a car - maybe pleased, but always wondering just how much better I should have done in my dealings.

Part of the grave marker selection process is the opportunity to cast in bronze or carve in granite an appropriate epitaph, which the dictionary defines as: “an inscription in memory of the dead person.” Cemetery sales people make suggestions, which may work well for some families, but not for ours.

When my Dad was dying, he actually picked out his own epitaph! On his grave marker it says, “Napping till the resurrection.” That was what he wanted, and we made sure it was what he received. He was confident in his belief that death was like a sleep, and he was confident that, because of Jesus, he will one day rise on the resurrection day. Dad enjoyed a good nap, and the concept of thinking of death as napping until the resurrection brought him comfort as he faced death.

I don’t ever remember having any conversations with my father-in-law about grave stone epitaphs. So when my mother-in-law and I met with the cemetery representative, we weren’t really prepared when we were asked what the epitaph should say. All the “helpful” suggestions from the cemetery personnel weren’t that helpful.

Then, in a moment of genius, my mother-in-law suggested just three words. When I heard her, I laughed and agreed it was the perfect answer. He was a great man, a good father, and a loving husband, but giving him all the honors due him doesn’t honor him as well as the epitaph. Any other accolade would only champion a single side or individual trait that marked his life. How could we capture, in just three of four words, his lifelong journey? He had jumped into some youthful rebellion, spent time in the armed services, worked for some good and bad bosses, finally developed his own business, and did well for himself. Life transitioned him from stubborn to determined, from competitive to cooperative, from controlling to relaxed, and from demanding to accepting.

So on his marker you’ll find this three-word epitaph: “Improved with age.” What a compliment. While his health deteriorated, and his freedoms became restricted, and his ability to control disappeared, it is such a compliment to note how he faced all that life brought his way, and he “Improved with age.”

So what about you? Improving with age? And at the risk of being accused of being morbid—What would you choose as your epitaph?

Andy McDonald

Rediscovering the High Road by Tami Cinquemani

I have friends who are of a variety of faiths or no faith at all. I have friends who are sold out to their political party – to the Right, the Left, and those in between – as well as friends who want nothing to do with politics. I have friends who have been hurt by prejudice and racism and others who struggle with judging others based on their culture, gender, or ethnicity. I have friends who are pet lovers and others who find life much happier without a feathered or furry friend. I have friends who are married and others who are single – either by divorce or loss of a spouse. I have friends who are straight and others who are gay. I have friends who have had children, grandchildren, and even great-grandchildren and others who have decided not to have children at all.

I am both blessed and challenged by these relationships. They force me to think outside of the box and understand that I live in a world where there is beauty in variety and richness in knowing others unlike myself. There is a kaleidoscope of people whom I appreciate, welcome, and admire – people with whom I enjoy sharing life and its diversity.

Facebook has become a wonderful “place” to gather with all of my friends in one place. It is because of this reality that I sometimes find deep frustration when viewing what fellow Christians post on Facebook.

As Christians, we profess a desire to follow Jesus – the epitome of grace and mercy. We treasure scriptures filled with direction to “Love your neighbor as yourself . . . Honor one another above yourselves . . . Clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.” These are faithful and regular church attenders who post comments, cartoons, and essays without any concern given to those who may be wounded. It’s not a respectful and thoughtful exchange – it is an aggressive and careless offering without regard for someone struggling with and finding identity with the very issues they flippantly malign.

Politics, sexuality, race, religion . . . the list goes on. I personally believe these topics can and should be discussed in a positive and respectful manner – even when there is a difference of opinion. This is where learning, understanding, and tolerance take place. However, most of what I see has no resemblance to honest and respectful thought. It is generally a cheap shot taken to smack someone down.

I know the standard response: “Can’t you take a joke?” “Come on, lighten up.” “If you don’t like it, just don’t read it.” Really?

Or there’s another attempt at justification: righteous discipline. After all, Jesus didn’t tread gently when clearing the temple. Well, here’s the thing: (1) We’re not Jesus, and (2) Jesus’ anger was directed at those who were misrepresenting who He is to those who needed Him.

It is so easy to throw stones and cast judgment from our computers. I wonder if these same comments would be made face-to-face, or if personal contact might cause pause before those hurtful words and thoughts are flung. I would like to think the eagerness to “share wisdom,” by offering scorching opinion and making snap judgments might be stalled when it is seen first-hand how they cut and hurt.

At the 2009 Willowcreek Leadership Summit, Gary Hamel stated that “Church has become a weekly convocation for the converted and the content.” How sad . . . and how true. If what we are hearing and experiencing at church does not challenge us and demand that we behave differently when we leave, why do we bother attending? If we put on a “Jesus face” and shake hands with our fellow believers then turn around and behave with unconcerned ugliness to our world, we are defaming and defacing the name of the God we claim to serve.

I believe our world is richer because of the variety of thought and opinion found on this journey of life. My hope is that, as we make the trip, those who profess Christianity rediscover their directions to the “high road.”

Tami Cinquemani

Our Gut Response by Chad Hess

A few months ago, I was leaving work and heading home. I picked up my phone to call my wife as I usually do. However, when I grabbed my phone, I discovered that it wasn't working. I had been having some problems with it, and now it was completely dead. For a geek like me, a dead cell phone is a big deal. I started thinking of every possible way of contacting my wife, and after about five minutes, I had come up with a complicated plan of using a computer to text her. As I was walking back into the office, it occurred to me that I could simply use the land-line phone in the office to call her. Such a simple and obvious solution; yet it took me five minutes to think of it. I realized that the reason I didn't think of such an obvious solution sooner is that I wasn't used to using a land-line phone to call her.

Our gut response to a problem is formed by the habits we make. When something happens, we turn to what has worked for us in the past. When it comes to communication, my cell phone and computer are my gut response (when a face-to-face conversation isn't possible). When it comes to my spiritual life, prayer should be my gut response, but I have to admit that it isn't always. This is probably because I don't pray as much as I should. But this experience taught me that my first response isn't always the best response. Prayer should be our first response in every situation. When we are used to praying to God about little things, it will be more instinctual to pray when bigger things happen. Prayer is the best response – in little situations and in big ones. I plan to make a habit of it.

Chad Hess

Frustrated By God by John Monday

He’s a little frustrated with God – a new experience, at least in his conscious mind, although it’s probably been a growing reality for a while.

As a Christian, getting frustrated or, heaven forbid, angry with God is really not acceptable. Any hint of it should be quickly met with repentance, and self-flagellation or maybe just the easier route, denial. You see, He has a problem; it doesn’t matter what it is, but it’s real and poignant, and the outcome is uncertain. Dealing with it is like swimming in mud, and God isn’t fixing it!

A moment of honest prayer went something like this, “ If you’re the God who made everything and cares about all of us, then you’ve got to fix this.” Make no mistake; this wasn’t so much a prayer of surrender as of frustration. Then, out of the blue, when he wasn’t asking or listening, he became aware of God. While “prayerfully” wallowing in his problems, God said something like, “You want Me to work on the things that are important to you, but who’s praying for the things that are important to Me?”

He was ashamed as a litany of the people, places, organizations, programs, and initiatives that are in desperate need paraded through his mind. Things that are in need of time, attention, money, love, prayer. He felt small. Not because he was unimportant to God, but because he’d become way too important to himself. He was reminded that God has an agenda (Jeremiah 29:11), and it’s not our agenda (Isaiah 55:8-9).

So the question we all must ask is, What kind of a God do we want? Do we want a god in a bottle who pops out on demand, does our bidding, then conveniently returns to his bottle until needed again? Or do we want a God who made plans for us before the foundations of the world? Do we want a god who will bless our plans? Or a God who graciously allows us to participate in His? In short, do we want God or an idol?

Truth be told, many of us just want a genie, a god who will hear our problems, listen to our solutions, and implement them. But there’s a better way, and I want to want it.

However, as we move toward Gods’ agenda and away from ours, there’s another learning; As long as we keep frustrations to ourselves, deny our depravity, and put on a false face before God, idolatry will continue like a festering sore. But we need not live in a state of denial or self-flagellation – nor hide our anger, frustration, disappointment, impatience, self-importance, and arrogance. As we approach God honestly and give our garbage to him, he will take it and do with it as he sees fit. We can bring our crud to God. Because . . .

”We have a chief priest who is able to sympathize with our weaknesses. He was tempted in every way that we are, but he didn’t sin. So we can go confidently to the throne of God’s kindness to receive mercy and find kindness, which will help us at the right time.” Hebrews 4:15-16 (GOD’S WORD Translation)

This God we profess is not a magical servant or a cruel master. He is our loving Father, Redeemer, and Savior. When we get that, it changes everything.

John Monday