One of the things I've noticed about modern worship music (and I think I've mentioned this before) is that there are quite a few songs out there that contain lyrics that make statements like these:

"We lift our hands..."
"We stand and lift up our hands..."
"I stand before you now with trembling hands lifted high..."
"And I will daily lift my hands..."
"Lift up your hands, be lifted up..."
"We lift our holy hands up..."
"Lift up your hands and clap for joy..."
"Our hands are lifted high..."
"We lift our hands in praise to you..."

When I'm in a place like the National Worship Leader Conference, there are way more hands in the air than there are at people's sides. But when I'm leading worship in my church, on a "good" day there might be one pair of hands lifted up out of fifty, or even a hundred. You could pick almost any other phrase in any song that prescribes a certain posture (e.g., "We bow down..."), and more times than not (in my church, anyway), what we sing is not reflected in our posture in worship.

I suspect that to a great extent, this is a cultural thing that varies considerably from church to church, and our church is (apparently) not much of a "hand-raising" church. Should I be concerned about that? It is enormously tempting for a worship leader to assess the effectiveness of his or her worship leading on the basis of how many people seem to be "into" the worship singing enough to lift their hands, clap their hands, sing along, what have you. Is that reasonable?

I have led worship for groups of pastors and lay leaders from time to time, and I must admit that when I've led groups like that, they tend to get physically engaged in worship far more than our regular Sunday congregations, and I find it more exciting, more rewarding and more satisfying when that happens. Should that be the case? Is it really fair to assess one's effectiveness as a worship leader, or the effectiveness of a given worship set, based on what percentage of the group has their hands in the air (or clapping, or weeping, or (pick some other criterion)?

Maybe I should just chill out about this--but I confess that it bothers me just a little bit that so many of our people can sing songs like the ones I quoted from above, week in and week out, without actually doing what it is that they are saying they are doing by singing those songs. Is it disingenuous for us to sing lines like those while we're just standing with our arms at our sides (or folded, or with our hands in our pockets)?

In the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that I've not traditionally been much of a "hand-raiser" in worship myself. This is partly because I am a worship leader who plays the guitar, and one typically needs both hands for that, and the times that I'm in worship and not leading worship are, sadly, few and far between. And even in the context where I'm worshiping but not leading (like when I'm at a worship conference), I'm not likely to have my hands in the air all the time. I suppose I reserve that physical expression for times when I am (for lack of better language to describe it) "in the moment" emotionally.

Does that say something negative about me as a worshiper? Does it say something negative about anyone in worship who doesn't lift their hands (or clap, or otherwise become physically engaged)? Are those who don't raise their hands in worship somehow less spiritual or less earnest in worship than those who do? (Should I even be asking questions like these?)

If the raising of hands in worship is merely a matter of congregational culture and/or personal preference and style, should those of us who lead worship in churches that typically don't raise their hands avoid leading our congregations with songs that seem to encourage the singer to do that? To put it a bit more bluntly, are we singing lies? If I sing, "I lift my hands up" with my hands in my pockets, have I been dishonest in some way, or do we view such lyrics as merely poetic or somehow suggestive of the internal, unseen posture of our hearts?

As it turns out, the Scripture actually encourages worshipers to lift their hands (see Psalm 134:2, for example). Shouldn't I, as a worship leader, do the same? Should the members of our worship team who aren't busy playing instruments actually be modeling this posture for our congregation?

Is there danger that the lifting of hands in worship could become a peer-pressure thing? By encouraging the lifting of hands, are we running the risk that someone whose heart really isn't into worship will go along with it merely because they don't want to be seen NOT doing it? Shouldn't this expression of worship be genuine and natural, flowing from a heart that is truly yielded to God in worship?

And if the lifting of hands is to be encouraged and modeled, what of those people who are extremely uncomfortable, perhaps not really ready to express themselves in that way? Have we put them in an awkward situation?

Or is the lifting of hands in worship something that we do outwardly in obedience, whether we truly "feel it" inwardly or not? Is it the sort of thing that can affect our hearts in the same way that serving someone we don't really like can often end up endearing them to us?

I know that others have written about this extensively (yeah, I Googled it), and I'll go read what they have to say when I get more time, but in the meantime, I'm just asking these questions.

Do you have any thoughts on this?

Got your note. I don't have it in front of me, but the gist of it (as I recall) was something along these lines: "Why don't we sing more songs from the hymnal? Why do we even have a hymnal if we're not going to use it? And please, get rid of the guitar, please, please." (That last part I'm pretty sure I've quoted almost exactly. That's the sort of thing that sticks with a guitarist like me.)

I'll assume that you attend our blended worship service, not our contemporary worship service. If you are attending our contemporary service, you're clearly in the wrong service (for you). But since we recently introduced the guitar into the first service, in an effort to move from a more traditional style of worship to a somewhat more blended service, combining traditional and contemporary music, it seems safe to assume that this is what you're taking issue with.

Quite frankly, I'm tempted to ignore your comment (and have been advised to do so), but I won't, since I'm the guitarist in question here, and as a contemporary worship leader, I take these things pretty seriously.

First, let me point out that in our blended service, about half of the songs we sing together are traditional hymns from the hymnal. Many of the contemporary songs that we do are also versions of traditional hymns.

I'll concede one point here at the outset--some of the contemporary worship songs in wide use in the church today are not as theologically rich as some (not all) of the hymns in the hymnal. This fact is not lost on many of today's contemporary worship songwriters, and many of today's songwriters are composing modern songs, with modern styling, melodies and instrumentation (and yes, even with a "beat") that are as theologically rich as anything written by Isaac Watts or Charles Wesley.

But I'm guessing that your objection to the use of the guitar is not based on theology, but rather style and personal musical taste. I've heard others reason that the guitar is too "informal" for corporate worship, or that the guitar has been too long associated with rock 'n' roll music and lifestyle choices that are ungodly and unbecoming of true followers of Jesus. Is it necessary to point out that the organ and piano are also instruments that have been widely used in rock music for decades?

Seriously, though, let's move this discussion away from specific instruments. For every person you might find who finds the guitar offensive as an instrument for accompanying worship, I can find just as many who find the organ (and traditional hymns) an impediment to true worship. "There is a fountain, filled with blood, drawn from Immanuel's veins..."--that's the sort of lyric that might be flush with meaning for you, but virtually incomprehensible to a 26-year-old who was not raised in the church.

The real questions here are questions of culture and relevance. Have you been in one of our contemporary services? I doubt it--if you disapprove of the guitar in worship, surely the electric guitar, electric bass and drums would not please you. But there is a generation of worshipers in our church and around the world for whom the contemporary style of worship was a major factor in drawing them back into the church, or into the church for the first time.

I fully expect that in my lifetime, the contemporary style of worship that I have given so much of my time, energy, talent and labor to will be outdated and unappealing to the generations of my children and grandchildren. I, for example, have a difficult time understanding or even listening to what is commonly called "rap" or "hip-hop" music. It comes from a culture that is not mine, and it is a musical style that I can neither appreciate nor participate in fully, and yet there are whole churches in our country in which no other style of worship is used. And yet it is meaningful and significant to those who are immersed in that particular culture, and I cannot argue that they are not engaged in true worship of their Creator.

I recently worshiped with a Burmese congregation, in which the Scripture readings, the music and every other aspect of the service, included the printed bulletin and the posters and banners on the walls were in a language that is wholly unknown to me. But there is no question that these beautiful Burmese believers were worshiping the same God I call my Father.

For me to insist that their guitars or their electronic keyboard with pre-programmed songs playing, or their Burmese lyrics were somehow not appropriate for worship would be absurd. Fortunately, for me, there are many other churches in which the language of my culture is spoken, and in which the musical style that I appreciate and relate to has been appropriated for worshiping the Father.

But back to our church. We once had a traditional service, one in which the guitar only rarely made an appearance, and in which the only instrumental accompaniment was the acoustic piano and organ. Unfortunately, the attendance at that service was dwindling, while the attendance at our contemporary services was growing. You can draw your own conclusions about this, but it is the conviction of our church leadership that if we are going to continue to be a relevant factor in our culture, we're going to have to be both anchored to the rock and geared to the times (paraphrasing Billy Graham).

I am not unsympathetic with you--my son, who also plays the guitar, is into a style of music that I find frankly grating to the ears and incomprehensible. Yet it moves him and inspires him. And I expect (and pray) that one day he will be in a church where even that style of music is used to give glory to God, and that he will find ways to express his love and devotion to the Father using the music that makes sense to him. My sort of music, which you are pleading with our church leaders to stop, is as incomprehensible to him as mine is to you.

But it isn't about me, or you or him. It's about giving glory to God, singing praises to His name, making much of who He is. And for those of us whose musical styles are rapidly becoming the styles of the past, it is important to make room for the styles of the present and of the future, so that future generations of people continue to worship God in new and creative ways.

I am willing to step aside and allow the future leaders of the church to explore and nurture and develop their creative expressions of devotion to God. I will not insist that they worship in the way that I am most comfortable with. Are you willing to make that same sort of commitment with me?

If the style of music we use in our worship service offends you, I sincerely hope you will look elsewhere and find a church where the music encourages you and helps you focus your attention not on what's happening on the stage, but on God and His glory. But I have an even greater prayer for you--that you would take to heart what the apostle Paul recommends in Philippians 2:4: "Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others." That's what we're attempting to do in our blended worship service, by using music from both past and present generations, and that's what our church leaders, many of whom do not necessarily prefer contemporary worship music, are trying to do by providing a contemporary worship service for younger generations.

Having said all of this, it occurs to me that perhaps I've been mistaken--perhaps you've been offended not by the presence of the guitar, but rather by the way I play it. If that's the case, I assure you I'll keep practicing.

Sincerely, Doug

Looking back over what I experienced over the last few days at the National Worship Leader Conference, and having attended a fair number of these sorts of conferences over the last eleven years, I'm struck by several aspects of such experiences. I'm not sure I can articulate well everything that is swirling around in my brain right now, but I'll take a stab at it.

The camaraderie among the participants is genuine and meaningful. Worship leaders are a unique breed of people, with unique challenges, unique gifts and abilities, and while each of our situations is different, we share a common purpose, our hearts beat more or less in unison with the goal of helping our congregations express their love for God in a corporate context, and experience his presence in profound ways. And when we come together to talk about leading worship, to learn how to do it more effectively, and to worship together, there is an uncommon unity of spirit. At meal times it was easy for strangers to enter into meaningful conversations quickly. There was a prevailing, permeating sense that we're all in this together, and that even though our situations and cultures may be vastly different, we understand a common set of pressures and stresses, and we experience the same kinds of blessings. That unity made our conference worship times very intense, and very special.

There was a shared sense of brokenness among the participants. I don't want to overstate this, because it wasn't as though the auditorium was filled with weeping people the whole week, but there were certain moments, certain songs, certain messages during which there were many wet eyes. I believe this is a very natural part of genuine, heartfelt worship--when worship helps us somehow get a clearer picture of the holiness of God, we are undone in the awareness of our sin, and at the same time we are filled with an overwhelming realization that God loves us anyway, no matter what. Worship can take you apart that way, and I suppose that when worship leaders worship, they are more likely to get to that place more quickly. Although one might expect that it would be easy for a worship leader to become jaded over time, I have found the opposite to be true. The more I lead worship, the more I become aware of my own brokenness, and the more I experience a tenderness of heart, if you will.

There is a seemingly endless variety of expressions of worship. This is, I'm sure, evidence of the creative character of God in us. Yes, there are some truly awful worship songs out there--I've sung a bunch of them, and I've even written a few. But I'm amazed and awestruck by some of the beautiful new songs that I heard this week. And it was not only the music, but also the visual stuff--the video loops behind the projected lyrics, the worship videos between bands, the creative ways that stages can be arranged, the creative ways that lighting is used...and there is still room for more.

There are still some great songs yet to be written. I read (or heard) something recently (before the conference) about how many worship songs are expressions of a level of devotion that few human beings can honestly claim, and by leading songs of this sort, we may be actually lying to God and bringing our congregations with us in the lies. That may be an unfair criticism, but I think there is something to think about there. As we sang dozens of songs together this week, I found myself drawn more to the songs that seemed to me to be more honest and real. And it occurred to me that if we need any more worship songs in the world (and I believe we do), we need more of the sort that help people understand the truth about God and the truth about themselves. We need songs that help give expression to our struggles and our doubts, songs of confession and repentance, songs that acknowledge our brokenness and pain, and help us hold on to hope and experience forgiveness.

There are clearly some popular formulas in worship music today. Some songs and worship bands are becoming incredibly predictable. There is a certain electric guitar sound that every guitarist on stage seemed to have, on every song (am I guilty of that, too? Probably). The same is true of keyboard parts and pads, and the drum beats. And it seems to be true of song architecture and arrangement, as well--so many songs start really big with full, in-your-face walls of sound, then you get to a very quiet bridge that builds back into the in-your-face wall of sound, which the cynic in me tends to see as the get-them-on-their-feet-with-their-hands-in-the-air cue, and if it doesn't work the first time, you repeat the cycle until the people respond appropriately. Is this really the only way to lead worship meaningfully? It's a minor thing--musical styles and trends and tastes change, I know, but there was a small part of me that longed for someone to do something really different, and not to just play for the hands-in-the-air response. (Again, that's just the cynic in me coming out. I'm not above that sort of arranging myself.) I'm just saying.

I've still got a lot to learn. The content of this conference was quite good, perhaps better than at some of the other conferences I've attended. And I know I've got a lot of work to do to improve the quality of my worship leadership, musicianship, etc.

I've still got a few good years left in me. I was so blessed by hearing Lenny LeBlanc lead worship before Louie Giglio's talk--he's as old as me, maybe older, and still doing it well and effectively. I'm tempted often to think that because I'm older, God can't really use me as effectively as he could use someone younger and fresher. I don't think that's true; though it may be that as I get older, he's going to use me in different ways. I'm totally okay with that.

I didn't mean to make a whole book out of this post, so if you're still with me, thanks. If you're a worship leader and you need some inspiration, some fellowship, some time to worship without being the leader, or some new ideas or resources, I highly recommend that you find something like the National Worship Leader Conference to attend. There are many such conferences in various locations around the country. You never waste any time sharpening your tools.

It's all over, and I'm spent, and probably rightly so--the schedule for the National Worship Leader Conference is pretty much packed for three and a half days. I typically arrived before 8:30 a.m., and didn't leave until 9:30 or 10:00 pm each day. There were four Nights of Worship, four general sessions, and eight workshop sessions; eight times of worship ranging from 30 minutes to three hours.

Today was "practical workshop" day for me--I attended a session on "Leading Worship Between the Songs," a session on learning how to read music, and a session on vocal stylings. All very practical and helpful. I was exposed to so much content that it will take me quite a while to synthesize and digest what I heard and learned. If I am able to apply even one or two of the things I learned about this week, my time will have been well-spent.

It is hard to over-estimate the importance of the worship times at a conference like this. Worship leaders sometimes carry significant job, relational or personal burdens, and when a worship leader can experience worship without being the leader, that's a good thing.

Today's worship leaders included Shannon Wexelberg, Pocket Full of Rocks, Starfield, Scott and Vonda Dyer, the conference worship choir, and Israel Houghton. I was so tired by the end of the day that I decided to bail before Israel played (sorry, Israel). Lisa Harper spoke this morning in the general session, and Scotty Smith spoke during the evening worship session.

If you're a worship leader considering whether to attend the NWLC, let me offer this advice: if you can do it, do it. You won't be disappointed.

I was wiped out last night after the worship concert with Jonathan Lee, Laura Story and Chris Tomlin--an amazing time of worship. So I'll try to get caught up a bit today.

The highlight of the day yesterday was Louie Giglio's talk in the afternoon, in which he simply encouraged us to "focus on Jesus" in our worship leading. Seems obvious, but the truth is that most of us focus on our work--our songs, our band, our appearance, the people we're leading, etc. Laura Story said essentially the same thing, admitting that sometimes when leading worship she's really working, not worshiping. I can definitely relate--it was good for me to hear that stuff.

I attended a great session about storytelling through video in which we learned the basic elements of every great story and how they resonate with the human heart because God designed us that way--the Gospel is that story.

Gotta run now, Day 4 has begun!

Happy Birthday! (to me)

I think it's going to be a good day--Louie Giglio speaks this afternoon at 3:30 (streamed live at http://video.worshipstream.com/channel/NWLC2010 at 3:55 CDT. I've heard Louie enough times to know that any time he is on the schedule, you can expect to be challenged and encouraged.

Tonight Chris Tomlin and Laura Story will be leading worship and several members of my home church worship team will be joining me for that event.

I haven't decided what workshops I'll be attending today, but I'll let you know later.

Peace.