"Why aren't leaders talking about this?"

Probably because it's actually not as much of an issue as Mr. Swindoll actually thinks it is.

Probably because a load of ground work about worship and a passion for the glory of God's Name has been done in the younger generations.

It's become clear that what Swindoll means when he says "square with scripture" is that we interrogate our motivation for doing innovative things.

2 Things:

1. I don't think using the "square with scripture" language is helpful since it could be taken to mean that there actually is some kind of Scriptural issue with using videos and other media/forms in themselves. If what he means is leaders need to evaluate their motives, then he should simply just say that.

2. I don't think the "change for change's sake" or "new for the sake of the new" is really as rampant an issue or problem as some would like to say. I've been hearing that complaint for 40 years. Regardless, didn't Paul say what matters is Christ being preached, not the motive?

If someone innovates away and the videos are filled with images of beauty and truth, the screens let people read and see and hear the power of the Scripture, the songs lift up the name of Jesus and declare the work he's done and is doing, then personally i don't really want to know why the leadership did it, nor do I care.

If the message is true, then let God sort out the consciences that Mr. Swindoll and I are NOT called to worry about. I have enough responsibility worrying about my own.

It seems to me that Mr. Swindoll is exhibiting classic evangelical tendencies to (a) make trends out of anecdotal experience and (b) to complicate everything by creating ambivalence about OTHER PEOPLE'S motivations.

There is an issue of delineation here that traditionalists like Swindol do not understand - society is making spectators, we are simply reaping it's rewards. The overwhelming money is on technology, stemming from the advent of the television, to radically redefine how future generations learn, connect, relate to information. Is it possible that perhaps there is nothing we can do to retrain our people when culture is hardwiring them 60 or 70 hours a week? What if the church finally admitted defeat and addressed the reality instead of pretending that we can ignore it and prance merrily on? Unfortunately the church that took serious the sociological ramifications of culture would look like much of what we desperately hate about spectator, consumeristic pseudo-church. But what if it didn't?

"Probably because it's actually not as much of an issue as Mr. Swindoll actually thinks it is."

Actually, it is an issue, and one I've been thinking about for months now.

"Probably because a load of ground work about worship and a passion for the glory of God's Name has been done in the younger generations."

I challenge this assumption and I'm asking for proof.

"It's become clear that what Swindoll means when he says "square with scripture" is that we interrogate our motivation for doing innovative things."

And it is here where I agree with Mr. Swindoll.

A majority of the songs in church are repetitive, gangerous tripe. Meaningless, directionless, and soulless.
I stood in my church yesterday and out of the five songs we sang...one...one dared to mention G-d more than once.
The rest...could have been top-forty on the billboards for any reference to G-d.
The music, once again, crisp, clean, and professional, but I have finally realized...it's not the muscians technical skills, it's the songs.

A worship song should be constructed like a sentence, subject, verb, object, and complement...G-d is merciful to me. Simple, well constructed, and yet...for some odd reason, not "current" enough to put into a song.
Revelation song, modern, nicely constructed, and amazingly teachable...beautiful song.
So, I'm not saying that there are no songs that fit the bill of worship, however, I am saying that there are a majority of songs that don't even come close.

Also, for the sound engineers....turn the volume down, please, for the love of G-d, I'm old, but I ain't deaf!

I appreciate Dr. Swindoll's ministry. I've been encouraged by him and what he's done for the Kingdom.

This interview isn't something that is helpful for me. While appreciate his perspective I think he's reading too much into these things. We live in a media enriched age and if we can leverage some of that its okay. The truth is that there is a balance and a lot of us, younger than Dr. Swindoll, have thought about it and are talking about. There are conferences about it for goodness sakes.

At the church where I serve we have a large communications staff along with other staff members. It takes a lot of support staff to get our ministry done with excellence. We also know that while only one person communicates from the platform on Sunday it takes about twenty support staff to make that happen. That isn't a bad thing it is what it takes. Services are complicated things and that is okay.

A lot us, younger than Dr. Swindoll, aren't just using media to overcompensate for a weak message. We use media to leverage a strong message and make it connect with a media driven culture.

And I've never walked to church. My generation doesn't have that experience. Maybe that is part of the disconnect here. All this said I still have deep appreciation for Dr. Swindoll.

It is always difficult when someone comes along and questions the “status quo,” even when the people who are doing what they are doing thought they were bucking the “status quo.” Pastor Chuck Swindoll like many who have been in the ministry for decades are all beginning to cry out that something is wrong. I have been a pastor since 1983 and I cannot tell you how much it comforts me to see this since I wondered if I was just losing it. I have been laboring over what I am seeing in the American Church for some time now, sometimes to the grief of my congregation who are trying to be patient with me.

It is one thing to attempt to reflect the culture, it is quite another to so embrace it we no longer can be distinguished from anything around us. This is what has happened. Read Os Guinness and read James Emery White for some alternative views of what is happening in American church culture, especially Os Guinness; “Dining with the Devil” and “The Last Christian on Earth.”

The result of this embrace? Look around.
• Divorce rates equal to the world around us.
• Sexual promiscuity in our churches equal to the world around us.
• Addictions at such a high rate that churches are becoming recovery stations instead of salvation stations. Including Porn addiction running at more than 50% among our male membership.
• Our youth leaving the church at alarming rates because nothing is real and the level of hypocrisy is outrageous.

I could keep going, but I will stop there.

Don’t mistake me for some old fuddy-duddy who hates all of this new media and rock and roll. I grew up on Jimi Hendrix and Blue Oyster Cult and I have been a follower of Christ long enough to say that I knew some of the early pioneers of Christian rock on a first name basis. I listen to Chris Tomlin, Brenton Brown, Disciple, Decypher Down, and also August Burns Red. I play guitar and bass with our worship team and love Christian music in all forms. But when “worship” becomes something that looks like a Radiohead concert with all of the same celebrity status and fame to accompany it, something is wrong. When churches are creating spectators and not disciples…and they are, something is wrong.

It is not just that Swindoll is old and doesn’t get the new generation. Perhaps the new generation of celebrity pastors ought to listen to the “old school guys” who can see something has gone astray with what is now called “church” and what is called “ministry.”

Willing to debate this, talk about it, hold a long conversation…

There is a heavy metal song maybe the churches could play, it is very biblical too, by Brian Welch, would any pastors have this song played in church? Here is the link:

http://youtu.be/y7tuTOVjKOo

As a 20-something, I hope that folks are paying attention to what Swindoll has shared in his article.

Communal worship is one of the tools God has used to change me and draw me closer to Himself. I remember the first time I hesitatingly raised my hands at church as I worshiped the Lord who had powerfully moved in my life not long before. I felt awkward and shy, but also knew that He was worth it.

I loved singing to my God that evening and looked forward to the time I would enjoy with Him there each week.

The music has recently changed, though. Now they have a band and it's loud. Really loud. It's a lot harder for me to pray and be quiet and listen to the still small voice of my Father. It's also harder for me to enjoy the communion of those around me.

The folks in the band are my brothers and sisters. I care about them and my life has been blessed by them in many ways.

But I think we might be better off...or maybe it's just that I might be better off...if we could just sit around in a circle and sing KumByYa.

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to [his] purpose."

Simone Weil, the brilliant red (she volunteered to fight alongside the anarchists in the Spanish civil war) who came to Christ, refused baptism because she felt God preferred her to remain an 'outsider', among the rejected and forgotten. And she did become, and is, a wonderful witness to 'black fronters', communists and revolutionaries - 'hammer and sickle Christians' of all kinds.
Now, if God can work in such unexpected ways with such amazing people, can't we simply agree that different modes of worship can be useful in proclaiming the gospel?
The peace and joy of God is found in monastery and silence, old Protestant hymns, punk music and reggae musical expression, Sunday schools, businessmens' prayer lunches, factories - wherever we gather to pray to and worship Him.
There is a place for many expressions, many tastes and styles.
Thank God.

Steven, great story about Simone Weil. I personally do not have a problem with God using different and sometimes unexpected means and expressions. I also do not believe that Swindoll has a problem with that either.

It is when the medium becomes the message and the message is lost. It is when we embrace the culture so much that no one can tell whether we are holding church or just having another concert and it could be anybody on stage since it wouldn't matter. I am currently trying to lead our congregation into new realms of expression understanding and I think it is a necessity.

Nevertheless, how sad that someone could walk into a church and never need their Bible...ever... How sad when someone can walk into our gatherings and never hear that they have a sin issue with God and they could end up eternally cast out when they walked in the midst of believers and never heard the truth. The truth was just considered one of many expressions...its all good. Yeah, that is the sad truth.

It is not a war against expression else the early voices would have been the predominant ones. (someone always is not happy about something) These are seasoned men of God who have a long history of hearing from God that are speaking. And these great men of God see something wrong…that alone should be enough to stop the rhetoric about expression and examine what it is they are saying. But the new status quo are refusing to imagine they are wrong…

"Nobody sings louder in our church than I do...."

"Loud doesn't help. Why do they do that? Do you want me to be impressed with how loud you are singing, how accomplished you are? I'm not. I'm not here to be impressed with you."

There are lots of shortcomings among church-led Christians, as we all want to feel good about ourselves. Pastors are reluctant to force us to look at ourselves, but they're willing for us to fault others. Swindoll fits right in with the majority on this. In the Swindoll books that I've been asked to read, Chuck has never come across as either a Jonathan Edwards or a Charles Wesley. And in this interview, he continues to find fault with others who don't fit his cultural biases.

It seems to me that if we would all focus on loving God and our neighbor, this would not be an issue and there would be no need for debate. I will state, that we must be careful in judging the motives and practices of others. If the Churches of Christ really are autonomous, we should be worried about our own congregations and reaching our own communities. I sometimes feel we spend time wanting to "straighten out" the beliefs of other congregations instead.

That said, the congregation I am blessed to be a part of does utilize media and innovation to a degree. We also keep an eye out for how we can help each individual passionately worship their God "in their own language/style." While some of us find older songs and 3 point sermons uplifting, others like newer, simple songs and inductive sermons. We try to do our best and mesh together so that we can respect each other and offer a unified but varied praise to our father.

We are trained to
1) Sit and pay attention
2) Be passive
3) Let the paid professionals handle the spiritual tasks (worship, teaching, preaching)
4) Be submissive

Is it any wonder the church has such a difficult time with:
1) Participation
2) Aggressive pursuit of God
3) Initiative
4) Leadership

Does the church need to change? Sure - stop the professional teaching, preaching, and singing - and give it back to the people. All of this has become a substitute for LIVING IT.

I've been at several churches where the 'worship' time is really only a show. The leaders literally said 'if you don't like it, find another church'. These same folks felt they 'radically loved all', but really they were only loving themselves and their niche. The older folks, were ignored at best, barely tolerated in reality. Only tolerated since they were paying the bills. But no tear was shed as they stopped coming.

If you try to say something to reign in the ridiculous volume, you are demonized. You pharisee!!! If you want to sign a solid hymn once and a while your not cool enough, as if being cools by worldly standards is anything at all. Basically, you voice any negative view of what is happening you are called a judgmental pharisee and demonized.

Chuck is pointing out a very important point, and look how many are this forum are labeling him out of date or stuck on his own view of culture.

What happens if you rebuke a wise man? Does he call you misguided or does he listen and consider lovingly what you said? If you feel rebuked by what Chuck is saying, are you belittling him or honestly considering what he said?

If you're wondering, I'm 45 and love contemporary worship that I can participate in from the congregation. (NO ROCK CONCERT PLEASE!) I also love the grandparents in the church and the old hymns they love. If you younger folks actually love the older folks the community of worship at your church will include considering their needs and opinions.

@JBF

Chuck is pointing out a very important point, and look how many are this forum are labeling him out of date or stuck on his own view of culture.

But what if he is? Does that matter?

@Jerry:

Your prescription seems a bit utopian.
I go to a church that has all the things you describe as bad structurally and we don't have issues with participation, aggressive pursuit of God, etc.

It's an incredibly activated congregation that understands the value of trained pastors-teachers, it's healthy polity, etc.

Where has Swindoll been?? Sally Morgenthaler has been talking about this for two decades. But, unlike Swindoll, she doesn't have to denigrate media or, for that matter, any kind of technology, in her efforts to help people engage rather than spectate. She knows full well that good old fashioned "biblical" preaching and music have been incredibly successful at creating passive worship experiences for years.

BTW, here's a quote from her on this exact subject, from her 1995 best-seller, Worship Evangelism. I guess Swindoll didn't bother to read it.

"We are not producing worshipers in this country. Rather, we are producing a generation of spectators, religious onlookers lacking, in many cases, a true encounter with God, deprived of both the tangible sense of God's presence and the supernatural relationship their inmost spirits crave. - Sally Morgenthaler, Worship Evangelism

Before he passed away, Michael Spencer (AKA The Internet Monk) was discouraged and angry at how the secular music industry had infiltrated and bought out the Christian music industry.

His points of contention may not be exactly the same as Swindoll's, but they may be more contemporary:
1. Overemphasis on dramatic elements (such as lighting and sound effects) often don't enhance the worship experience, but detract from it.
2. A tendency to blur the lines between concerts and worship services in public venues has blurred the lines in church venues...thereby forcing out elements of worship that are not concert acceptable (such as silence, Scripture reading, etc.)
3. Tendency of worship leaders to talk about themselves and their achievements (such as what they name their guitars) instead of focus on Jesus.

Internet Monk, we need your voice.

Nathan:

I'm not against training - every believer should be equipped to do the work of the ministry - like in Eph 4. Only when every member is doing the ministry will we / can we even begin to see The fullness of Christ.

I was in one church for 25 years - in the last 5 years - I've been in many. The level of participation in most churches is minimal. One of the larger churches had a published 5 year goal of 5% participation in their programs. I thought it particularly brave of them to admit that. Usually 20% (or much less in my experience) of the people do 80% (or much more in my experience) of the participating.

If you're in a place opposite of my comment - I really don't think you're the norm. Consider yourself blessed.

However - reading your comment - this verse came to mind:

Jeremiah 5:31

The prophets prophesy lies, the priests rule by their own authority, and my people love it this way. But what will you do in the end?

What do you do when Father Purity falls into sin? Or how about when Dr Divinity deviates from what you think scripture clearly says? You just go along with it - or do you challenge the status quo?

"But everything must square with Scripture. We must make sure that new things actually help people grow in the truth, that they edify the saints and build them up."

Swindoll cannot square up his ideas with scripture. There is so much scripture that Swindoll is ignoring as he pushes his particular form of platform and expert driven "worship". If Swindoll wants "Spirit filled" gatherings it must square with what Paul said that is in Eph. 5.

Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit. Sing and make music from your heart to the Lord ...

This is full participation by all in mutual, two-way verbal experession. This is what is considstant with our identity as "members of one another". This is what is consistant with our identity as a "royal priesthoot" so that we "proclaim the glories of Him...". Swindoll is only square with traditions of men and popularity - a long shot from scripture. There are many more than Eph. 5. Swindoll, and all the crowd oriented gathering folks are in a tradition bubble where Spirit filled gathering is rendered meaningless and they settle for a version of edifying the saints in the truth that is non-reproductive and self-centered.

So we get these people in the door with a cool band, an overhead cool projector with cool pictures and a coffee bar in the back. They can wear anything, torn jeans, t-shirts, etc. I am not against any of this if it is used to bring new people to Jesus. But most churches do not disciple these people and are like the seed that never grows to maturity. That is what I am against. Almost all of the volunteers at my church come from the traditional services, while the rest are there for an hour of entertainment once a week.

I agree with Mr. Swindoll on pretty much all of his points. But here's one that I'm concerned about and have been thinking about for a while. He says:

"We must make sure that new things actually help people grow in the truth, that they edify the saints and build them up. Will it equip them to handle the world around them? Will it form them into the kingdom of God rather than the kingdom of this world?"

Isn't worship meant to be about us expressing our adoration to God? I agree that the words need to be rooted in Scripture so that they're conveying the Truth about God and not causing anyone to stumble. But if worship is about God, why is it important that the words equip, inspire, and grow US? Shouldn't our worship be an expression of our recognition and gratitude for who GOD is and what HE's done?