In the year 1755, a diminutive but dynamic preacher by the name of Shubal Stearns settled his extended family and a few others on the undeveloped land of what is now west-central North Carolina. The place was called Sandy Creek, and the little band of Separate Baptists (as they were called) quickly constituted the Sandy Creek Baptist Church.
Somewhere around 1740, Shubal Stearns, along with most of his family, was gloriously saved under the preaching of George Whitefield. Heavily influenced by his “new birth” experience, Stearns began preaching, and soon his little band of followers officially became Baptists. When he arrived in North Carolina, he brought with him his own unique blend of New England orthodoxy and revivalist worship. In Stearns these two blended to form a style of preaching and worship that I feel still lives in my own spiritual DNA.
Immediately, the Sandy Creek Baptist Church, and its congregational offspring began to blaze a holy trail into the rugged country of their adopted home. John Sparks, in his interesting biography of Stearns, says this:
“…the religion and preaching of Shubal Stearns exploded over the Piedmont like a hurricane, the enthusiasm it generated rivaling that of the original Whitefield Revivals and its success surpassing anything that…Stearns…could have possibly have hoped for.”1
To support this, Sparks cites some remarkable statistics from Stearns’ ministry. Between November of 1755 and January of 1758, Stearns and his brethren baptized 900 people, 590 of whom became a part of the Sandy Creek Church ministry.2
As impressive as those numbers are, especially considering the sparse population of the country at that time, what really draws me to Stearns is the style of preaching and worship that he seems to have fathered. Stearns’ preaching was enthusiastic, melodic, ecstatic, and energetic. The people who listened to him fed off of this, and together they were a noisy and boisterous bunch. Outsiders who were used to a more formal, refined, or liturgical church experience were puzzled by these back country Baptists. Many times they were viewed not just suspiciously, but with disdain and embarrassment by the more “high church” Baptist brethren.
What does this have to do with me? Well, my dad was saved in 1972, in an independent Baptist church in Boone, NC. He was called to preach not long after, and he and my mother both grew up, spiritually speaking, in churches that worshiped with a style and form much like that of those early Separate Baptist at Sandy Creek. The fiery preaching and fervent worship of those mountain churches had very much descended from the ministry of Shubal Stearns.
My dad still talks about “the glory”. I know what he means by that. If you’ve ever been “in the glory”, then you know what he means by that too. Though I grew up in a “city” church, my dad was my pastor, and he brought that same Stearns-style worship into that church. Though my definition is my by no means technical or authoritative, “the glory” is when the Holy Spirit moves upon the congregation, and God’s people begin to shout, weep, praise, and sing. It is when the preacher preaches with a special unction, and the Word goes forth with a passion and power that I imagine sounds very much like the enthusiastic, melodic, ecstatic, and energetic style of a little, fiery Baptist preacher who shook an entire region some 250 years ago.
In I Corinthians 1, the Apostle Paul rebukes the Corinthians for their petty factions. In verse 12, He writes, “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.” I assure you, not with the same party spirit that was sinful and divisive, but rather with a clear recognition of who I am by God’s grace, and a gratitude for the heritage of my faith, I proudly say, I am of Shubal. Somebody say, “Amen!”
1 Sparks, Elder John, The Roots of Appalachian Christianity: The life and legacy of Elder Shubal Stearns, (The University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 2001), p. 63
2 Ibid
Friday, October 15, 2010
Monday, September 13, 2010
Just a theory...
I know that in writing about contemporary worship there is a danger of falling into one of two extremes. One extreme says that nothing new or “contemporary” in any way should ever be used in worship. The other extreme says that only new, innovative, and contemporary forms of worship are effective and relevant. At the very beginning, I want to go on record as rejecting both of these errant and foolish positions.
With that being said, I do have a theory (for what it is worth) about the ultra-contemporary worship that exists in our day. I know I need to define the term “ultra-contemporary”, but I want to be careful in doing that. I will list some practices that I believe characterize the ultra-contemporary model of worship, but I understand that these are general and can exist in a church to greater or lesser degrees.
The ultra-contemporary model of worship is one in which the production and presentation are of the utmost importance. The music must be cutting-edge in its performance and style, accompanied by adequate light shows and smoke for dramatic effect. The use of media is central, and images and visuals are highlighted, even over the actual content of what they convey. Within this model, other “forms” of communication, such as drama, dance, and art are brought forward and presented for the audience’s consumption. Within this model, “preaching” as it is traditionally understood, is minimized, de-emphasized, or altogether replaced by other means of communication. When the pastor speaks, he does so in a conversational style, with little biblical emphasis, and strong emphasis on the personal needs of the congregation. The messages become another avenue of satisfying the desires of the consumers, otherwise known as the congregation. Rather than teaching the Word of God, the sermon becomes a sort of motivational pep-talk, with verses sprinkled in to sanctify the whole discourse.
Though there are other elements that could be added to that description, and parts of it that some would contend are unfair, I think that will suffice to define what I mean by ultra-contemporary. With that in mind, here is my theory. The ultra-contemporary worship model is nothing more than children’s church for grown-ups.
Think about it. Many of the people that are proponents of this style of worship are the children who grew up in traditional churches. In those churches, those children move from the nursery to children’s church, where they are entertained with puppets, pictures, story-books, and movies. Each Sunday was an effort to keep up with Nickelodean, Disney, and other entertainment devices that the children were consuming throughout the week. Churches tried to make it “fun” for the kids, while giving their parents a break in “big church”.
When the kids are too old for children’s church, they move into the youth group, where the entertainment continues, though it moves from the style of Nickelodean to MTV. The music is updated, and activities, games, and outings replace the puppet shows, but still the effort is to keep the kids interested.
Finally, when the young adults are too old for the youth group, the only thing left is to move them into the auditorium where they have to sit and listen to hymns, and hear the preacher preach from the Bible. When they are no longer entertained, they either leave, or they stay and demand that something be done to entertain them. With that, we find the entrance and expansion of what I described above.
Now this is just a theory. I am not a sociologist, nor an expert on the church. I do, however, feel like we have hurt ourselves by not involving the children in the simple process of sitting in a worship service with other generations, and learning from them what it means to come to church, not to be entertained, but to worship the Lord by focusing on Christ and His Word.
It is just a theory.
With that being said, I do have a theory (for what it is worth) about the ultra-contemporary worship that exists in our day. I know I need to define the term “ultra-contemporary”, but I want to be careful in doing that. I will list some practices that I believe characterize the ultra-contemporary model of worship, but I understand that these are general and can exist in a church to greater or lesser degrees.
The ultra-contemporary model of worship is one in which the production and presentation are of the utmost importance. The music must be cutting-edge in its performance and style, accompanied by adequate light shows and smoke for dramatic effect. The use of media is central, and images and visuals are highlighted, even over the actual content of what they convey. Within this model, other “forms” of communication, such as drama, dance, and art are brought forward and presented for the audience’s consumption. Within this model, “preaching” as it is traditionally understood, is minimized, de-emphasized, or altogether replaced by other means of communication. When the pastor speaks, he does so in a conversational style, with little biblical emphasis, and strong emphasis on the personal needs of the congregation. The messages become another avenue of satisfying the desires of the consumers, otherwise known as the congregation. Rather than teaching the Word of God, the sermon becomes a sort of motivational pep-talk, with verses sprinkled in to sanctify the whole discourse.
Though there are other elements that could be added to that description, and parts of it that some would contend are unfair, I think that will suffice to define what I mean by ultra-contemporary. With that in mind, here is my theory. The ultra-contemporary worship model is nothing more than children’s church for grown-ups.
Think about it. Many of the people that are proponents of this style of worship are the children who grew up in traditional churches. In those churches, those children move from the nursery to children’s church, where they are entertained with puppets, pictures, story-books, and movies. Each Sunday was an effort to keep up with Nickelodean, Disney, and other entertainment devices that the children were consuming throughout the week. Churches tried to make it “fun” for the kids, while giving their parents a break in “big church”.
When the kids are too old for children’s church, they move into the youth group, where the entertainment continues, though it moves from the style of Nickelodean to MTV. The music is updated, and activities, games, and outings replace the puppet shows, but still the effort is to keep the kids interested.
Finally, when the young adults are too old for the youth group, the only thing left is to move them into the auditorium where they have to sit and listen to hymns, and hear the preacher preach from the Bible. When they are no longer entertained, they either leave, or they stay and demand that something be done to entertain them. With that, we find the entrance and expansion of what I described above.
Now this is just a theory. I am not a sociologist, nor an expert on the church. I do, however, feel like we have hurt ourselves by not involving the children in the simple process of sitting in a worship service with other generations, and learning from them what it means to come to church, not to be entertained, but to worship the Lord by focusing on Christ and His Word.
It is just a theory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)