Author Topic: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?  (Read 43712 times)

Weedon

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #825 on: March 01, 2011, 08:27:44 PM »
Pr. Johnson,

We actually followed that principle in the creation of LSB and thus the Verba in the liturgy actually mirror the Verba in the Catechism... at least in English.  ;)

Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10374
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #826 on: March 01, 2011, 08:31:38 PM »
Ah! So the standard is: use whatever is the wording of the textus receptus of the English translation published by CPH. Now I get it.  ;)
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

Weedon

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #827 on: March 01, 2011, 08:35:35 PM »
By Jove, I believe the man has GOT it!

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11260
    • View Profile
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #828 on: March 01, 2011, 08:40:29 PM »
Except for certain terms that must retain the Latin.  ;)
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but itís not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

Weedon

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #829 on: March 01, 2011, 08:42:56 PM »
Actually, the SC tends to run in English from the Latin.  We do not say:

The power of God Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Amen.

to begin the day, but:

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.  Amen.

That follows the Latin, not the German.  So there.  ;)

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11260
    • View Profile
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #830 on: March 01, 2011, 08:54:42 PM »
So, you're agreeing with me.  ;)
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but itís not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

revdsid

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #831 on: March 02, 2011, 08:36:25 AM »
Ah! So the standard is: use whatever is the wording of the textus receptus of the English translation published by CPH. Now I get it.  ;)

Actually, yes! Because Luther specifically recommends to be consistent with the texts used in memorization. What is printed by CPH has passed doctrinal review and fulfills the synodical Constitution Article VI.4. "Exclusive use of doctrinally pure agenda, hymnbooks and catechisms in church and school." That is why we use CPH material for Worship, Sunday School and Adult Bible Study with very few exceptions. (Which we have the freedom to do within the integrity of using the guidelines for such evaluation as given in "Guidelines for the use of...")

Of course, the idea of "textus receptus" is an analogy that might be perceived negatively, as in the way that King James Only fundamentalists refuse to acknowledge the quality of modern scholarship regarding the texts of Holy Scripture. Or it can be taken positively, in that by having such a standard we are not importing the Gospels of Thomas or Mary, or with more devastating consequences the Gospel of Warren (Rick).

Now, to be fair, this Sunday's singing of Shine Jesus Shine will be done well and joyously because it is a happily performed tradition of Transfiguration- context is everything. I was expressing my personal opinion which doesn't matter because I will "suck it up" and sing it with gusto because I love my church. At least we will get it off the Organ (which doesn't suit it) to the Piano. I try to stick to the principle of playing music on the instruments for which it was originally composed: so guitar pieces use the guitar, piano the piano, organ the organ, African pieces use percussion, etc.  And yes, we can use a very fine harpsichord sound on a high quality keyboard to do Bach)

The "trouble" with CoWo is that it is much harder than it looks. I spend a lot more time placing appropriate contemporary music into worship than I do hymns. The skill sets are very different. My contemporary worship leader has a music degree from Concordia RF from before she raised her family and she has had to work through a huge new learning curve. She has been brave and tough but has made more than a few "rookie" mistakes as I have in supporting her.

What I have seen most often is how bad most sound systems are and how badly they are EQ'd. Let alone the lighting which again is uniformly inexpert. I have a husband/wife team that are theater professionals that have "fixed" my sound and lighting. Now when I visit other churches for various reasons (Circuit visits, etc) I am amazed at how bad most churches are in this area-- because I have been taught what its supposed to look and sound like. Go to contemporary worship church that has good sound and lighting and ask them how much it cost! A small church could spend  $100,000 easily. I spent near $25,000 on lighting to start. Look at the price of good amps (Crown) and speakers (Bose) and a good sound board (and wireless speakers and monitors for each musician). You just can't throw a teenager at the sound board and expect it to actually be mixed properly.

When I go to District Conference and they put up one graphic behind the Sermonator and leave it for 20 minutes I want to scream "Use it or turn it off!"

Many years ago when I went to the Dark Side, the preaching conference at Saddleback, Rick Warren thanked the "producer" who was real time editing the video display (from four cameras) for the conference. He was a producer for Disney who took a day off to "volunteer" for the conference. It was very well done. The sound and light and music was well done. Yet, there is no sacristy there-- literally a "green room." I just want us to know what we are dealing with and do a good job at what we are capable of without feeling the need to copy anyone and in so doing embarrass ourselves.

Evangel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 780
  • Rev. Mark Schimmel
    • View Profile
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #832 on: March 02, 2011, 09:06:58 AM »
...
What I have seen most often is how bad most sound systems are and how badly they are EQ'd. Let alone the lighting which again is uniformly inexpert. I have a husband/wife team that are theater professionals that have "fixed" my sound and lighting. Now when I visit other churches for various reasons (Circuit visits, etc) I am amazed at how bad most churches are in this area-- because I have been taught what its supposed to look and sound like. Go to contemporary worship church that has good sound and lighting and ask them how much it cost! A small church could spend  $100,000 easily. I spent near $25,000 on lighting to start. Look at the price of good amps (Crown) and speakers (Bose) and a good sound board (and wireless speakers and monitors for each musician). You just can't throw a teenager at the sound board and expect it to actually be mixed properly. ...

Back in my worship leader days I also wore the "technical director" hat.  I spent a few years as a participant on the Church Sound Check discussion list - an email listserv group of professionals in the church sound reinforcement business.  If you are doing contemporary or blended worship that involves thousands of dollars worth of equipment it is worth it to spend some serious time researching what you are planning on doing and it's also probably worth it to hire one of the few real pros (and I do mean few ... there are a ton of music stores that have people that do this stuff that do not fit this description) to consult.  The best plan is to have one of those folks on board before you even start talking to architects ... but they deal with existing structures too.  They also do a lot of free on-line "consulting" with competent church technical people asking questions through that list.  Spend the time learning what you are about to get into first ... then even if you don't have the funds to do it "right", perhaps you can at least not do it really badly.
Mark Schimmel, Pastor
Zion Lutheran Church, LCMC
Priddy, TX
--
ACXXIII, "Your majesty will graciously take into account the fact that, in these last times of which the Scriptures prophesy, the world is growing worse and men are becoming weaker and more infirm."

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #833 on: March 02, 2011, 09:17:51 AM »
...
What I have seen most often is how bad most sound systems are and how badly they are EQ'd. Let alone the lighting which again is uniformly inexpert. I have a husband/wife team that are theater professionals that have "fixed" my sound and lighting. Now when I visit other churches for various reasons (Circuit visits, etc) I am amazed at how bad most churches are in this area-- because I have been taught what its supposed to look and sound like. Go to contemporary worship church that has good sound and lighting and ask them how much it cost! A small church could spend  $100,000 easily. I spent near $25,000 on lighting to start. Look at the price of good amps (Crown) and speakers (Bose) and a good sound board (and wireless speakers and monitors for each musician). You just can't throw a teenager at the sound board and expect it to actually be mixed properly. ...

Back in my worship leader days I also wore the "technical director" hat.  I spent a few years as a participant on the Church Sound Check discussion list - an email listserv group of professionals in the church sound reinforcement business.  If you are doing contemporary or blended worship that involves thousands of dollars worth of equipment it is worth it to spend some serious time researching what you are planning on doing and it's also probably worth it to hire one of the few real pros (and I do mean few ... there are a ton of music stores that have people that do this stuff that do not fit this description) to consult.  The best plan is to have one of those folks on board before you even start talking to architects ... but they deal with existing structures too.  They also do a lot of free on-line "consulting" with competent church technical people asking questions through that list.  Spend the time learning what you are about to get into first ... then even if you don't have the funds to do it "right", perhaps you can at least not do it really badly.

I've never encountered any Lutheran congregations that went so far over-the-top in doing a "Jesus Show" instead of a worship service with contemporary music that the question of the expense of the gear made any difference. That's not to say that there aren't any that are so big that they need major amounts of expensive gear. But for most Lutheran congregations with between 100 and 300 worshippers at a sitting, it's no more of a technical challenge to accomodate an electric piano, some guitars, a bass and a drum kit than it is to accomodate extra musicians when adding special music for a traditional music service. When my congregation's music director brings in a string quartette or some trumpet players for a festival Sunday, that's neither a bigger nor smaller challenge than when we bring in a rock or bluegrass band. As for lighting, regardless of what kinds of songs and instruments are being used, lighting consists of, "turn the lights on before the start, and off after we're done."

revdsid

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #834 on: March 02, 2011, 02:29:49 PM »
We had just over 5 lumens in the first pew on a light meter before we started fixing the lighting.

I disagree on the equivalence of the instruments. In order to hear our vocalists we have to EQ the lead guitar, bass guitar and keyboard. We also make a DVD of the service so that sound has to be balanced in order to record properly. Only the choir sings with the Brass or Wind ensembles. And our classical vocalist has the voice to match the piano or the organ-- so we don't mix her. Our "contemporary' vocalists are supposed to lead the congregation and not sing over them or present to them-- so it is a different form. My point is that this all takes some expertise (which apparently you have) but that I would not underestimate or undersell.

bz

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #835 on: March 07, 2011, 02:54:10 AM »
I am now taking the position that not only should pastors not be permitted to monkey with the liturgy, they shall now be required to preach only Sermons authored by Luther, as translated and approved by CPH and a designated body of theologians. We will have unity and avoid offense completely.

We cannot trust pastors to write sermons when they cannot even stay on a simple subject on an internet message board and stray to author silly rants against each other.




bz

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #836 on: March 07, 2011, 03:05:49 AM »
I'm surprised I agree entirely with Pr. Hess's comments here:

Quote
I think it is unlutheran to say that you must do the western liturgy in order to be Lutheran, for the same reason that it is possible to write an orthodox creed that is not the Nicene.  Rather, Lutherans historically have consented to a common form of worship in order to make it clear that they are united and in order to avoid causing trouble. 

So the theoretical possibility that we could construct a new form of worship that is orthodox I grant.  The question is whether it is wise to do so, and I would answer, no. On the one hand, there is the offense it causes when everyone does their own thing.  Another problem is that it appears as though we are saying that we are not united with the centuries of Christians who were nurtured by the form of worship that seemed to be able to nourish Christians and present the Gospel clearly to unbelievers until the last 30 odd years.  That's all assuming that both forms are equally proclaiming the Gospel in its fulness, which frankly is not the case.

I also agree entirely with this:

Quote
Where I think we have a problem is the cowo assumption that in order for the Gospel to be heard in our context, we have to change the music, shed the robes, etc. 

But I have argued with many so called "confessionals" here against the same proposition. Most of the conversations I've had on BJS, or Pr. Weedon's blog lead to a confessional Lutheran claiming that the traditional  liturgy is a requirement in the confessions, and preaching the Gospel without the traditional liturgy violates the confessions. That is exactly the same argument as the CoWo argument that for the Gospel to be heard we must change the music, robes, etc.

But that's entirely Unconfessional! The Word does not return empty, and will accomplish what God desires! Even if it's stuck in a dead liturgy, or in a cheesy cowo campfest.

Can we all agree that the Word does not depend on any particular format to be effective? And that the confessions do not mandate any particular format for preaching the Word so long as it does not cause offense and promotes unity and love?

Charles_Austin

  • Guest
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #837 on: March 07, 2011, 06:58:49 AM »
bz writes:
Can we all agree that the Word does not depend on any particular format to be effective? And that the confessions do not mandate any particular format for preaching the Word so long as it does not cause offense and promotes unity and love?

I comment:
Obviously not.
And some of us even think that preaching the Word should, at times, "cause offense" even at the expense of unity (but not at the expense of love.)

racin_jason

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
    • View Profile
Re: CoWo, What's Wrong with It?
« Reply #838 on: March 08, 2011, 09:22:36 AM »
Christianity Today has an article on hymns and hymnals, showing the most commonly included hymns over the last 100+ years, including those included in contemporary evangelical hymnals.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/march/hymnsthatkeepgoing.html?start=2
Recipient of the official Forum Online Get Us Back on Topic Award