RC Creative Worship: EASTER SONG

Friday, March 9, 2007

EASTER SONG

We are looking to do a new song on Easter...

Beautiful Day, U2

or

Where the Streets Have No Name, U2

Thoughts? Have another?

17 comments:

Nashman said...: "Beautiful Day" all the way. That's my vote!; March 9, 2007 at 11:20 PM
hansonde said...: Both are cool songs, however I am not sure how they tie into the theme of Easter and the Resurrection. Where the streets have no name has strong overtones about Heaven. I cannot find the exact message or spiritual correlation in "It's a beautiful day" after reading the lyrics. After further internet searching I have found some opinions on the message and I think there definitely is one. I don't think it would immediately stick out with a lot of people though.

I would suggest something more directly related to the themes we are promoting although it does not have to be "traditional." I just don't prefer mixed messages.

I would also be careful in trying to re-create the U2 sound and experience. It is difficult, tricky and best reserved for U2 concerts.

Just my thoughts. Dan; March 10, 2007 at 9:14 AM
Graumamama said...: Perhaps "In the Name of Love"?

Rach; March 10, 2007 at 9:36 AM
Melinda said...: Great insights, Dan.
What do you mean when you say you found a definite opinion on the message. The message of "Beautiful Day?"

The use of these two songs are not trying to fit into the Easter theme rather have a familiar song that people will know when they come in.

I agree that it is difficult to try to do a cover song, especially U2. This is why we would have an enhanced track and we are a month out.

With that shared, any other songs?; March 10, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Aaron said...: ok... so I really want to do a "special" song for Easter.

Here are my thoughts about U2 songs in general.

If you've been to one of their concerts, (I'm sure PJ would agree with me)there is such a spiritual presence when they play "where the streets have no name" that it literally (got goose bumps now) commands a whorshipful type of response from the audience. I have a U2 DVD that illustrates this to the exact point when they start playing that song - be happy to share it with you all.

So, I agree that there is some anointing in the song and the message is clear that's it's about a life that is striving to get to Heaven.

My thoughts on Easter would have to agree with Dan's point about the message that's sent and really the intent on doing a song by a band that publically shares very strong liberal pollitical views. I don't want to over analyze this because I LOVE plugging the IPOD in and rockin out to U2, but my questions would be 1) why would we do the song? 2)what message are we looking to send wiht's its performance? and 3) would it be worshipful or challenge people (visitors) that there is something more to this life?

I think U2 can be worshipful, but may not be the "best" choice for Easter.

Melinda, did you ever get my email that sent you wiht my suggestions on some new Chris Tomlin tracks that really line up with wher we are going as a church? Just curious.

Anyways, thanks for hearing me out. My heart is to ensure that we can create an atmostphere where people CANNOT deny the reality of the Cross and the price that was paid. There are many, many conduit's and avenues where this can been see on a whole new level than where we're at right...all comes down to creativity and having an undeniable message of Christ's love.

I love you guys and absolutley have the utmost respect for your opinions.

talk to you soon!; March 10, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Melinda said...: Okay, I hear the point of U2 sending mixed messages as a group. We not only have to look at the song but look at the lives of the performers as well as the song's fruit.

So I am alright with bagging the U2 idea. I'll take these thoughts to the staff meeting.

Thanks for the insight.

I welcome song suggestions. I will need to have the decision made by Tuesday.; March 10, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Nashman said...: WOW! Phenom discussion. I am putting some thoughts together and hope to comment on this later. I love the dialogue!; March 10, 2007 at 3:32 PM
Nashman said...: Here are some thoughts I have on this discussion. This is all in love and simply for discussion sake...so don't kill me:-( Please:) Simply food for thought.

Here is a question.

Does a difference exist between the following: What we communicate openly and purposefully externally, or what we communicate to others subconsciously as an overflow of the internal?

As individuals, we are never not communicating. How we communicate and who we are is largely a result of what we take in. This is without prevarication.

Simply put, why is it okay to listen to something and love it, but then be concerned about publicly performing it for someone else? If it is a question of playing the music or performing it in a church, “The Temple of God”, then does this not call into question what we perform in our own body, “The Temple of the Holy Spirit”? What difference exists between an audience member on a Sunday morning and us on a daily basis with our iPod (…we all have those ubiquitous devices)?

I struggle to answer these questions myself. Moreover, and in all truth, it applies to much more than music.

I love the questions Aaron asked about evaluating the music we choose to play. I think it is important. I know too that P. Mel prayerfully considers every song and her choices are “exhaustively” poured over.

It is my belief that on Sunday mornings, it is equally as important to connect with people as it is to connect with God. You and I as Christians can connect with Christ anytime we want throughout the week. So, can the lost, but they don’t know that. It is up to us on Sunday morning to provide ways for people to make that connection. God loves to hear His people praise Him, but that should not be exclusive to the Sunday morning experience.

In fact, I believe God is more concerned about how we actively pursue the lost, in a way they understand, than how we demonstrate our love for Him through song during a service. Why? Because praise and worship is not something defined by a time set or by a certain type of song or lyric, it is defined by a lifestyle that we present on a daily basis.

Simply put, and let me state as my belief, the Sunday morning experience is not for God, but for people as a way to access God. Crazy!! Maybe, but it makes sense in my mind and heart. Sundays throughout the world have become mundane, religious routines, because people, with the right heart usually, have done them as an act of service to Christ.

Personally, I think Christ could care less, because for most, that is where it stops. What He does care about and what moves His heart is how uncomfortable, to what extreme, are we willing to go to reach those who have a barrier preventing them from accessing Him- a barrier most likely placed there by the church. I believe this may be one way He looks at Sunday mornings, or anytime for that matter, where the body of Christ comes together in corporate times of worship.

It has to be about others.

Sorry for the rabbit trail. Anyway, those are some of my thoughts.

1. What is the difference between music played in the corporate temple and in the personal temple?
2. Who is the music for and what is its purpose?

This is a great discussion and I know it will go on for generations. Keep it up. Love you all and see you tonight!; March 10, 2007 at 4:58 PM
hansonde said...: Just to respond to your question Pastor Mel. Yes, I found some opinions concerning the message about Beautiful Day. At a first read on the lyrics it was hard to get a definite - "this is what the song is saying." After reading some reviews I copied this:

Beautiful Day.
Much more than a happy day song. Here, U2 captures the promise of hope in the midst of ugliness, as exemplified in the following excerpt: "Sky falls. You feel like it's a Beautiful Day." More to the point, it's a praise song (though not immediately obviously so). Beginning with the allusion to the parable of the sower

"The heart is a bloom/
shoots up through the stony ground"

and right on to references to Christ's birth

"There's no room/
no space to rent in this town"

and then brings it down to everyday life with talk of traffic and stress and depression, before exploding into the chorus, cause it's a "Beautiful Day." This odd dichotomy is carried right through to the bridge where it becomes painfully clear that U2 is singing about hope and joy amid despair and destruction, with a clear reference to the ultimate source of all hope:

"See the sky in green and blue/
See China [read: RED] right in front of you/
See the canyons broken by clouds
[Natural Beauty]/
See the Tuna Fleets clearing the sea out
[Man destroys nature]/
See the Bedouin fires at night
[Primitive people at one with nature]/
See the Oil fields at first light
[Industrial people raping the earth]/
See the bird with the leaf in her mouth
[the dove from the Genisis Flood]/
After the flood all the colors came out
[God's most enduring symbol of hope and promise]."

This song, like the others on this CD, are much more than they appear.

Definitely a "deep" song that touches on many themes.

I would agree with Nashon that the discussions are great. Iron sharpens iron. And....Thanks Pastor Mel for the fire-starters and being open for suggestions.

And.......I am still thinking about other songs. I liked Rachel's suggestion of "In the Name of Love" It does touch directly on Easter type themes with Jesus' dying for us because of His love.

Or how about re-doing an older hymn (using the same words), but with our own flavor? I like the hymn - "The love of God how rich and pure, how measureless and strong....etc."

I look forward to practice tonight.
See you all there.

Dan; March 10, 2007 at 5:08 PM
Nashman said...: Nice on the lyrical breakdown Dan!! Where did you find this? I would love to get the site to add for my onw music research.

Thank you too for the dialogue. It is fun and challenging.; March 10, 2007 at 5:23 PM
Nashman said...: Here is another thought on Easter.

Who comes on Easter? Answer...usually the same people who come to church on Christmas eve or mothers day!

These are people who may never set foot in a church except for three times a year. Why should we give them what they expect?

Let's give them a song list they can't forget and which will compel them to say, "WOW...I never expected that!"

Then, just maybe, those "3-a-years" will become "throughout the years...as often as I can-a-years".; March 10, 2007 at 5:32 PM
Nashman said...: FYI - Dan's suggested hymn was redone by Mercy Me. I don't recall whether it was cool or not.

Rach (seen here as Nashman); March 10, 2007 at 10:22 PM
hansonde said...: http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/u2_all_that.htm

Nahshon. Here is the site where I found the reviews and comments on music.

I found your last comments very thought provoking. A part of me disagrees and another part agrees. I am not sure if what you said is not challenging me to be more careful of my influences overall. At this point I would feel uncomfortable if any/all the movies I have watched would be shown in church(because of language, violence etc.) I think all of us would agree that not everything is profitable to our temples and in the local church venue. I am pretty conservative about my music choices, but do listen to U2 and occasionally some "guitar" oriented stuff like Clapton, Joe Satriani, Stevie Ray Vaughn and what have you. For the most part I listen to worship music. Honestly, I can't get enough of it and the feeling of being close to JESUS. It is not the same feeling I get by just listening to or watching anything.

Jesus was certainly about giving people what they did not expect, but it was also something they had "NEVER SEEN OR HEARD."

I believe God is calling us to connect people to him, but I don't take that as connecting them to something familiar. If what they need is JESUS, then they must experience HIM. Many have listened to U2 and had spiritual experiences and probably other ones too. I don't think we need to debate the quality of the music. I think we could also agree that U2's mission is not necessarily to draw others to Christ as much as it might be to cause them to think about the world, the problems in it, social change, and the spiritual realm.

Once someone has already shown up to church, we need to do something that ushers in God's anointing, something that creates the "temple" atmosphere, something that stirs the waters in the pool of healing. People are hurting and searching for something. God wants to speak to them. This is where they need to experience something they have "never seen or heard." Jesus said we must lift him up and HE will draw all men unto himself. I just don't find U2 songs doing that in an overt kind of way.

I want to reach out to "unchurched" and if they come one Sunday and hear a U2 song will they be disappointed if when they come again they don't hear one? Isn't our setting the stage to honor and worship God going to create the atmosphere where HE can do something awesome and speak to people through HIS anointing? It is difficult for me to see the balance in connecting to people and also connecting them to God. In my experiences, I find most seeker-friendly churches in their effort to connect with a larger audience through new methods also inadvertently weaken the message. I want a strong message and strong presence of God. It was not so much what Jesus did as who He was. Now obviously those two are related. Being in His presence, however, was the life change.

I think that if others genuinely experience something new (an authentic worship time, a touch from God, healing in physical, emotional, and spiritual ways) they will be connected to God. I don't want to change our DNA of worship to connect to others. We ultimately want them to change their DNA to ours when they are born into a new family, the family of God. When they are born of God they will come to realize they are made to worship, called to love, forgiven and free(credit to Chris Tomlin).

I can hear your heart Nahshon and it is HUGE. You want to see us reach out to people. This discussion is important and I obviously don't have all the answers. You have caused me to think and this leads me to pray. My prayers lead me to search God's Word so thank you. I welcome your thoughts concerning what I have written.

Dan; March 11, 2007 at 6:18 AM
DFunkWarren said...: I happen to agree with Grand Master Nash on this one. Easter is one of the biggest services of the year and it is when we see many many many new guests or as nash put them, the "3-a-years" and so in order to get those people to come back, we really gotta make a huge impression on them. Half the time, those people are only there because their mom or grandma wanted them to come and you just cant say no to mom or grandma on Easter. "Well how do we make a huge impression on them?" you may ask, well i'm here to lend some thoughts:

When new people come to church, the one thing that can drive them away is feeling uncomfortable. If we opened a service with an alter call and people were praying in tongues, being slain in the spirit, and all that other spiritual stuff (which i love, dont get me wrong) they would bolt for the nearest door. You gotta ease the new people into the service which is why the alter calls are usually at the end of the service because by then, they begin to feel comfortable with what is going on and God usually touches their heart and they just cant say no to him after see loads of people worshipping him with all their hearts...uhh...i lost my train of thought....ahhh yes, easing them into the service, I think that it is a great idea to use a well known secular song to start off a service that is usually 50% full of new guests (not sure if that's the right % but oh well, you get my point). Opening with a song like that just seems to draw those people in. Think back to the first time you went to church, if they started playing some Guns and Roses (just threw that out there) you would be immediately sucked in saying, "this is a church?". I just think that using these songs that people know are a great tool to say, "hi! we are different! We promise this wont be like any other church service you have ever been too." Once you have gotten their attention with that opening song, if you continue the set with an up beat song that we all can just dance and go crazy too, that person is going to be like, man this is where it's at!

Now i see where Aaron is coming from in thinking about how the band members of U2 live their lives and their beliefs but i dont think by doing a cover of their song we are saying that we agree with their lifestyles and I think that the people would see that. Sure we may upset someone in the congregation by playing a U2 song but I highly doubt it, look at when we played "In the Air Tonight", I saw some people rocking out that I never thought I would see rock out but I also saw some people doing the "I'm not to sure what I think about this" pose. In the long run, those people see how we used it as a ministry tool and they got over the fact that we did a secular song in church. I'm all out of thoughts cause it's 3 am and i should be sleeping...more to come.

Just my 2 bits.; March 12, 2007 at 3:01 AM
Nashman said...: I want to chime in, but I am on a tight schedule over the next couple of days...8.5 days until portfolio presentation.

Dan H.- once again you have put forth some thought provoking statements and I am challenged like you to examine it in the Word. I will get a response back, though not right away. Thank you for the commentary and openess. I love you man!

Dan W.- cool stuff! I think that is the most I have ever seen you write on a blog...maybe ever. Just kidding. Great feedback. And by the way, 80% of all statistics are made up on the spot:-); March 12, 2007 at 10:44 PM
Nome said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; March 13, 2007 at 11:33 AM
KyleDavis said...: I don't think I could've worded it any beter then the Jr. Grand Master D. Warren =)

I try not to ever forget the first time I stepped into The Rock Church and I don't think it is possible for me to forget. All because of the presentation, and the dare to be different (but not out of line) attitude. It was this type of enviroment that helped me remove the giant "chip" I had on my shoulder that was directly related to the "Traditional" Church.
I understand everthing that has been discussed, and I also agree with all the points of conversation. I don't like listenning to non-christain music, I don't have any in my I-Pod even, it makes me angry, BUT I also know that a sinner hates listenning to christain music. It makes tham uncofortable, and they close off.
So not that my thoughts are on one side of the discussion or the other, but my thought are back on "E-Day" (my first time in TRC) and my heart burns for the one that are going to be there on Easter and needs a God thing to happen in there lives.

So lets do U2, not for you, not fo r me, but for the drunk, for the druggy, for the sinner that need more of a non-traditional touch from God than "Sister Mary" in the second row that is there every week.
Now don't miss-hear me, "Sister Mary" need God's touch also, but God's Grace will aslo be apart of everything we do, and "Sister Mary" might not like it at first but she will by the time it's over.; March 15, 2007 at 7:39 AM