Garage Blog 
“Not invented here” syndrome
In the last week I’ve had the great pleasure of playing piano at two great events - the Burn Your Plastic Jesus event at the Sydney Entertainment Centre, and Engage 08 conference at Katoomba. Mark Driscoll (www.marshillchurch.org) spoke at both events.
There was a huge amount for everyone to process at these events. But one thing that Driscoll said after the events at a talk he gave to clergy at the Cathedral was that he thinks Sydney Anglicans have much to learn from the charismatics about how to run big events. The way we do things, apparently, is really weird: breaking up the night with interviews in awkward spots, music peppered through the night without flow … etc.
He described us as suffering from a “not invented here” syndrome, where we refuse to welcome ideas and techniques which have their origin in other traditions or places. If the charismatics know how to run great events — he went on — then what is stopping us from ripping them off?
At our church we’ve just started fiddling around with the order of service. Trev (who has recently taken over running the music from me so I can focus on my work as a trainee youth pastor — praise God!) suggested that we put the songs into two blocks. One small one (2 songs) at the start and a bigger one (3-4 songs) after the sermon (so we can respond to the word in song).
That’s how they normally do it at other more charismatic churches he has been involved in. And it works. It really does. We had the best singing I’ve ever heard in an Anglican church the other night. Loud. Meaningful. Focused.
What else can we learn from other churches?
I’ve been trying to think of things to learn from other churches but the sad fact is I have too little exposure to them!
I think Driscoll is right in his criticism of the structure of some of the events he was featured in recently, though. I detected a bit of the old “put a song in here so everyone can stretch their legs before the sermon” mentality at some points.
I’ve thought before about doing a series of songs after the sermon, but I’m still struggling with how a songleader would link them together without drifting away from the sermon’s take-home message. I often find it hard enough finding one song that will fit well after the sermon, let alone three! Any tips?
BTW I think there are some things we can learn *not* to do from other churches, for example synth pad backing for altar calls…
Flow.
A silky smooth service structure (or flow) is something that is significantly lacking in our conservative churches.
Where is the authenticity? Where are the real raw emotions?
We preach “God is Creator” and our eyes glaze over as we say, “that’s nice to hear”. Our beliefs should be convictions that naturally flow into real authentic expressions especially through song.
So, I agree with your thoughts Tom.
You could direct the songleader’s thoughts in the right direction by giving him/her short passages of scripture (which are relevant to the message) to say in the song transitions.
Also, before the service you could explain the main point/s of the talk and invite her to think through her response before she sings for that service.
Which else can we learn from other churches?
That we should not do away with the public reading of scripture (1 Tim 4:13) but rather engage people with well-prepared readings in which the tone matches the content.
Monotone readings are very outdated!
Flow! Yes! Yes!
We work pretty hard on flow and transitions at my home church, and use the kinds of technique that Andrew mentions, but the specific case I’m struggling with is linking multiple post-sermon songs to each other without “moving on” from the main point. I’ll keep thinking.
I visited Hillsong (Waterloo) for the first time on the weekend and was surprised that their songleaders said almost nothing in between songs. But I came away thinking “I want that level of competence and passion!” and realising that you can do a sending-out over music…