A place to snark and vent about CoC doctrine and/or our experiences in the CoC. This is a place for SUPPORT and AGREEMENT only, not a place to tell someone their experience and feelings are wrong, or why we disagree with them.
Pitts S2C wrote:I told her that I feel that tapping ones toes to the music is dancing, using a pitch fork is wrong, the song leader waving is hand(s) is distracting, walking out to go to the bathroom during services, kneeling during a prayer and babies crying during the sermon are all biblically unauthorized. She said that I was being ridiculous. I then changed the subject as fast as I could.
I love your calling out the song leader for waving their hand. I always saw that as awkward
klp wrote:I really don't see the old pitch pipe argument. To me it is not a musical instrument in normal parlance and it certainly is not used as an accompaniment.
I don't think the "old argument" conflates the pitch pipe with musical instruments; I think it puts them both in the category of "aids to singing." Everyone acknowledges that the NT instructs Christians to sing. The COC (mostly) allows that to happen with the aid of a pitch pipe; most other denominations allow it with the aid of musical instruments. In my understanding, the novelty of the COC argument is that musical instruments completely alter the form of the singing while other aids (e.g. pitch pipes, songbooks, song leaders) do not. At least this is the way it's normally been argued when I've presented the "old pitch pipe argument" (or variants thereof) to COCers.
Lev
Sorry if you are offended by the phrase " old pitch pipe argument". You make a great point about the aid. However I would point out that many musicians think they are also making a "joyful noise" unto the Lord...not just keeping folks in tune. And many a person will comment of how these musicians up here on stage are using the talents God gave them to create praise and worship with their talents. So it is a bit hard IMO to put a pitch pipe into that context or same consideration. But yes, a simple accompanying piano does essentially and mostly work as an aide to keep folks on key and on tempo. Mostly what I find these days are loud rock bands up on stage...and of course the drum trap set in a Plexiglas box. It is hard to even hear yourself sing in these places....IMO. I do not consider that just a pitch pipe aid. No offense intended.
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
klp wrote:Sorry if you are offended by the phrase " old pitch pipe argument". You make a great point about the aid. However I would point out that many musicians think they are also making a "joyful noise" unto the Lord...not just keeping folks in tune. And many a person will comment of how these musicians up here on stage are using the talents God gave them to create praise and worship with their talents. So it is a bit hard IMO to put a pitch pipe into that context or same consideration. But yes, a simple accompanying piano does essentially and mostly work as an aide to keep folks on key and on tempo. Mostly what I find these days are loud rock bands up on stage...and of course the drum trap set in a Plexiglas box. It is hard to even hear yourself sing in these places....IMO. I do not consider that just a pitch pipe aid. No offense intended.
No offense taken. Not sure how I gave that impression.
I see a continuous spectrum of singing "aids," stretching perhaps from hymnals to rock bands. My personal preferences are likely aligned with yours--I enjoy a nice piano or acoustic guitar but not a rock band--but we all know (or should know) how to separate our preferences from our theologies. Theologically, if I'm OK with the "addition" of a hymnal, I need to be OK with pitch pipes, tuning forks, hand-clapping, toe-tapping, pianos, acoustic guitars, electric guitars, drummers in plexiglass boxes, and rock bands. More relevant to COC theology is to state that in reverse: if I do not approve of rock bands, I should also not approve of the other "additions" on the spectrum. The concept of "expedience" is man-made and is used simply to justify inconsistency.
Lev wrote:Theologically, if I'm OK with the "addition" of a hymnal, I need to be OK with pitch pipes, tuning forks, hand-clapping, toe-tapping, pianos, acoustic guitars, electric guitars, drummers in plexiglass boxes, and rock bands. More relevant to COC theology is to state that in reverse: if I do not approve of rock bands, I should also not approve of the other "additions" on the spectrum. The concept of "expedience" is man-made and is used simply to justify inconsistency.
Lev
A nicely succinct summation of CofC doctrinal incoherence. The defense in such matters seems to be "we don't do 'x' because the __________s do it" - which is just another inconsistency. If you don't want to look like the Methodists or the Baptists, you've got a lot further to go in differentiating your church and doctrine.
Great post LEV. I agree totally, preference is just that, preference. I tend to see things also on the spectrum between performer to participant to passive consumer. When it is about "the show" (which is what I call the preacher slot in the CofC and most places) then the audience is an "audience" and is a consumer. I have not been able to find a place that is not generally a passive consumer role for the bulk of those present. I was and wanted to be a performer, and then wanted to be a participant. But have sort of given up that possibility over the last few years and now I am not even a passive consumer, more like a warm body that happens to be present physically. But I do still like to sing now and then if setting is to my liking. Often it is a stupid song or pitched/paced where it is dreadful. I just check out on the mindless phrase repeating like on so many songs these days where they project some lyrics and you sort of mumble along with the band.
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
margin overa wrote:The defense in such matters seems to be "we don't do 'x' because the __________s do it" - which is just another inconsistency. If you don't want to look like the Methodists or the Baptists, you've got a lot further to go in differentiating your church and doctrine.
Let's hope they never find out that the Baptists and Methodists read Bibles and love Jesus!
margin overa wrote:The defense in such matters seems to be "we don't do 'x' because the __________s do it" - which is just another inconsistency. If you don't want to look like the Methodists or the Baptists, you've got a lot further to go in differentiating your church and doctrine.
Let's hope they never find out that the Baptists and Methodists read Bibles and love Jesus!
Lev
Or that more scripture is read in most Anglican or other liturgical services than a typical CofC assembly!
