The Problem with Praise Teams

Interesting perspective, well articulated.

Sample..

I think we would agree that distributing Spam and Coke during the Lord’s Supper is “unbiblical” in the sense of being “not quite biblical.” There are some biblical things about it, and some not quite biblical things about it. I regard the Praise Band (or Praise Team) as “unbiblical” in this particular sense; it is “not quite biblical,” and I would like to explain why I regard it so.

Are doing the musical equivalent of Spam and Coke in our worship? (or maybe cookies and koolaid …. or mega bacon burger with cheese fries on the side and large Snickers Blizzard to top it all off?)

It isn’t the worship band that is the problem. It’s the volume level of the instruments.

On a side note, Presbyterians argue about the same preferences as Baptists. :) I wonder how Warfield or Machen would reply?

It is ironic that the author titles this article as he does while admitting that his real problem is anything that gets in the way of congregational singing including organs and choirs. I get his point but it feels disingenuous. And does he not know that there are numerous praise teams around the country that sing at a amplified level that does not overpower the congregation? I am sure that over-amplification does happen but I don’t even know that it happens most of the time a praise team is being used.

What a praise team does is exactly what a song leader does—helps the congregation stay on pitch and in time. Is it at all sensible to pretend that it matters whether there is one person or six people leading the music?

I don’t know. this is a weird bit of logic.

I think praise teams can make congregational singing easier .. we also display all words with the music, and i know a lot of churches do that. Many have a music leader giving cues at the same time … So he’s making a lot of negative assumptions here.

the point of Col 3:16 might be more that we’re to be teaching and admonishing each other through our music, not that music must be robust, congregational, and together. Otherwise, there are tons of things other than praise groups that can disrupt that balance. I think it’s problematic if the praise group does cause others not to sing, but I think it’s just as often a help to singing.

???

The volume issue aside …itsn’t a choir just a big praise team?

• Choir: larger in number … further back from the congregation
• Praise team: closer to the congregation

[Jim]

The volume issue aside …itsn’t a choir just a big praise team?

• Choir: larger in number … further back from the congregation
• Praise team: closer to the congregation

Most of the time the choir is singing while the congregation is quietly listening. Most of the praise teams I have seen have been leading congregational singing.

[Chip Van Emmerik] Most of the praise teams I have seen have been leading congregational singing.

That would be a good thing - right!

What I don’t like - and I don’t have a lot of experience at this because I am a member of a conservative church with a choir:

• Arm waving
• Grunge-look (let’s wear the worn blue jeans look)
• Swaying

**article dated May 2013?

For all the emphasis on Scripture the author appeals strongly to anecdotes to support his assertion. A single blind listener is certain to have a different experience in the service than a single deaf observer who might be thrilled to see more than one person and engage music with more visuals. It seems a weak and anecdotal position to refuse to sing just because there is a praise team and the chance that you might not know the song as well as the congregation. This happens every time I visit brothers overseas and attempt to join in their singing knowing only a few words in their language!

As a pastor of a few self described tone-deaf brothers and sisters (an assertion I have come to agree with but love to hear them anyway!) the use of a choir or even a praise team when we’ve been in churches that use them has brought my brothers and sister joy being just being a part.

While I am nudged to be more be considerate of the details of our next church service, I think the author has painted with a broad brush those who have praise teams and is content to remain convinced of his position’s superiority not having engaged with other reasons for their use.

To me the problem is mostly about the intention of the praise team/band/chior. Are they there to get noticed? They will, and it won’t go well. Are they there to help the congregation? They probably will … if they’re excellent musically, play singable songs well, and keep the volume in check.

I have never joined a church that had a praise team, because that’s not my preference. I visited a church while out of town this year, and they had a praise band. Granted, I only had one experience, but it’s all I have to go from.

The band played a song, and the congregation was encouraged to sing along, but the band singing the song was significantly louder than the congregation. Also, the band varied both the tempo and the words to the point that, as the author of this article states, it became almost impossible for the congregation to “sing along” because they didn’t know when to sing or what to sing. It seemed to me to be a perfect picture of I Corinthians 14:8 “For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?” The uncertainty of the congregation was not worshipful.

I can only compare that to a song I’ve heard over and over through the years: Victory in Jesus. When this song is sung in the churches I’ve been a member of, the words are certain, the timing is certain, and the notes are certain. What is also certain are the voices of the congregational singers: they belt out the words because they believe the words, they know the notes, and when to sing them.

I’d rather that than watching performers on stage.

my church in the US doens’t use a praise group, but our church in ukraine does, and they also use phonograms— pre-recorded songs? When the one piano player left, he recorded all the songs … so everything is always exactly the same. And we all sing along just fine … I think maybe I even sing along better/louder because my voice won’t stand out when I do that.

Its interesting to think about … When we have youth meetings in the evening, it’s singing with no accompaniment— just voices, and I think people are a little more shy about doing that. But in the church service, you can belt out and not worry about being a bother or attention-getter …

?

I believe the problem often has more to do with the fact that the congregation does not know the songs well enough to sing along. This past Sunday on vacation I attended a church my friend recommended in south Florida—a huge church with a praise band. I looked around and found few people trying to sing with the praise band. My friend did not try to sing many of the songs; I did not know any of them but one. They did include one old hymn in the mix and you guessed it, that was the one time I heard the congregation over the praise band—why? Simple: they knew the words and music.

I’ve been in a few churches with praise teams, including as a member, and I would agree 100% with the writer that the temptation is to turn the volume “all the way up to 11”, to quote Spinal Tap. The overall effect is exactly what the author notes; the congregation is not “led” in singing. This is worsened as a lot of the lyrics are so simple as to be shallow, and are all too often devoid of theological meaning. And so there is yet more temptation to “turn up the volume” to try and generate enthusiasm. The overall effect is similar to a high school pep rally (gag) or political rally (barf).

And now the corollary problem in more conservative (musically) churches; you can (as the author notes) do the same thing by opening up the piano or pulling out the stops on the organ. Many good musicians complain about many “church musicians” (as a stereotype to be fair) as such; that they do not understand dynamics (increasing/decreasing the volume as the mood of the music demands) or pace. Everything is loud and fast, whether the music demands it or not.

Other ways we do it is by using “medleys”, and the trouble with these is that as soon as your mind starts to process the message, the message is changed. It’s almost designed to generate short attention spans. It wouldn’t do to allow music to fulfill its role of implanting God’s Word in our minds and hearts now, would it? One can also generate a man-centered mood with shallow theology with excessive use of “camp meeting” songs. In my view, a lot of such songs, besides often being musical dreck, are lyrically scarcely better than CCM. Come on, folks, it won’t kill you to sing something by Wesley, Watts, or one of those German hymns from the 1600s now, will it?

Really, in my view, it comes down to what is our Biblical theology of music—why did God give us the Psalms, why does He tell us to sing Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs? How does it differ from a spoken sermon?

My take is that what makes music special is that it has the unique property of uniting heart and mind to the Scripture. Hence our key questions about music are (a) do the lyrics come plausibly (if not directly) from the message of Scripture, (b) is the poetry of the words plausible (e.g. metric Psalms vs. word for word translation in GB/KJV/etc..), and (c) is the musical setting one which will allow the lyrics to take root in heart and mind? A tremendous portion of church music—on both sides of the worship wars—fails at least one of these tests.

[Bert Perry]

Come on, folks, it won’t kill you to sing something by Wesley, Watts, or one of those German hymns from the 1600s now, will it?

(a) do the lyrics come plausibly (if not directly) from the message of Scripture,

Those are good points, Bert. I appreciate the work done by Indelible Grace. They have updated the language, and refreshed the music for our time and culture. I’m not so sure that your second or third questions would be considered universal. You may not like my poetry, and my rhythm may not help your memory. It works for me.

The volume level is an excellent example of the subjective nature of music. Whose preference on the volume dial will win the debate?

(“note, note” —get it? pun intended :D )

When I studied the First Great Awakening I remember reading somewhere about what a controversy it was in churches when some started singing hymns instead of the Psalms/Psalter. The pro-hymn people were saying how terrible the psalter songs often sounded … But sheesh, to sing something other than the words of God …?

It’s an old, old issue …