Tuesday, June 29, 2010

"Is bad sound a sin?"

That's the question that Gary Zandstra recently posted on his blog at Church Production Magazine. It's taken me a while to get the chance to write this up but the question reminded me of a conversation I'd had a few weeks previously.

Some friends and I - some techie, some not - were having a picnic after an open-air church event a few weeks ago. I was commenting to one of the other techies that the sound mix hadn't been particularly good, and he agreed. Someone else chipped in that, from where they had been stood, all they could hear was electric guitar.

Then one of my non-techie friends said something that the three of us immediately and strongly disagreed with:
"It doesn't matter if it didn't sound good, as long as people were worshipping!"
Having had plenty of time to mull this one over, I still stand by my initial reaction. But, at the same time (and I'm not just saying this so she doesn't feel like I'm picking on her!) I think she was completely right too...

The passage that came to mind when she said it was Malachi 1. There, through the prophet Malachi, God tells of his anger at the substandard offerings presented to him by the Israelites:
"When you bring blind animals for sacrifice, is that not wrong? When you sacrifice crippled or diseased animals, is that not wrong? Try offering them to your governor! Would he be pleased with you? Would he accept you?" says the LORD Almighty. "Now implore God to be gracious to us. With such offerings from your hands, will he accept you? Oh, that one of you would shut the temple doors, so that you would not light useless fires on my altar! I am not pleased with you," says the LORD Almighty, "and I will accept no offering from your hands. (Malachi 1 v8-10)

The days of animal sacrifices are over, but that doesn't render this passage irrelevant. The point remains that God deserves the best we can offer. Christians are called to be living sacrifices (see Romans 12:1) - our very lives become our offering to God, and by Christ we can be made "holy and pleasing to God". The Christian aim of living a blameless life is not (rather, should not be) to achieve salvation - though so often it's seen that way. (How many times has someone tried to summarise all religions as "try hard to be good and hope that $deity thinks you're good enough to get to heaven"?) Rather, having been given salvation through no act of our own, as thanks to God we are called to live to honour Him.

That was a little digression; I'm supposed to be talking about AV, right? But here's the thing: if our worship is technically poor, if it's produced with an attitude of "It'll do", if the mix is being drowned out by one instrument or whatever it is - then how does it form service that is "holy and pleasing to God"?

I want to make another short digression at this point and tell the story of a friend of mine from my first church. He first started getting involved in sound production in church as the person responsible for recording services to audio cassette (remember those?). And he was very happy in that role. Over the years, though, more and more sound equipment appeared at the back of church; and recording the services became just a minor part of the tasks that were required on a Sunday. My friend and I had a conversation a few weeks before I left the church to come to university. He told me how he'd not expected the demands to pile up as they had, and that he was thinking of stopping because he didn't have the technical skill that was now required.

I don't think I'm being mean to say that my friend wasn't able to mix sound very well. In light of the above, then, does that mean his efforts behind the sound desk were "useless fires"? Far from it! Because what ultimately matters is the attitude that we come with; to continue to be willing to serve for so long when you feel unhappy, almost overwhelmed, in the role - that's sacrificial worship!

Back to the picnic, then, and the original statement: does it matter, if people are still worshipping?

I know very little about sheep. If you placed a specimen in front of me, I'd likely have great difficulty in telling if it was a prized lamb in perfect condition or if it had some form of sheep-disease that reduced its value. If the specimen, say, had only one leg and hadn't moved after several hours of intense observation, I might suspect it of not being entirely healthy. But to a shepherd, or to a vet, those subtle symptoms of sheep-disease would be glaringly obvious. I figure, the same is true of sound mixing: the three techies in the group had no hesitation in calling out the symptoms that were obvious to us, but the others had counted the legs, checked for movement, and seen nothing wrong.

But should it matter, when we're not the ones behind the sound desk? On the one hand, the only way any of us improve at anything is from receiving feedback from others (I try and always tell the sound guy at church when it sounds beautiful); on the other, who am I to judge if the "mite" of an offering from my brother or sister is the change they found down the back of the sofa or their entire savings for this month? And why should I interfere with someone else's offering?

Tough call. This blog has comments open; what do you think?

6 comments:

claire and mike lucas said...

mike says "eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee", that sort of feedback?

Unknown said...

its all subjective I think. Aldates sometimes forgets how good its resources are, for example consider a church with a less well equipped sound system or person without a wealth of experience, the person operating the controls is (in theory) still worshipping God, just within the physical constraints placed on him/her by the equipment or skills they have available.

I was recently in a band with Martyn at Coventry Cathedral, the sound system was nothing more than a slightly underpowered portable PA, to say there was a massive natural reverb over saturation of the overall sound is an understatement, and it sounded pretty dire from where I was standing but the people operating the system and the congregation were obviously (to me anyway) worshipping with all they had..

Unknown said...

so no, I don't think it is a sin.

A sacrafice of praise is exactly that, and God loves praise.

Also consider, does God love it any less if a member of the congrgation sings out of tune? the principal is still the same.

Brian W said...

James - Some perceptive comments, especially using the verses from Malachi. It IS a balance - both spiritually and musically that's required! (What an awful pun!!). There were times in the OT (e.g. Isaiah) when the focus was on the ritual and not on God, so God "despised" the offering.
One danger is that those producing the sound (musicians and techies) can come to see what they do as the end rather than the means of "worship". When what is done is done for its own sake it cmight become a 'false god'.
Balanced against this the beauty of being led into God's holy presence can be enhanced or destroyed by the mix, the musicians and even the mannerisms of those who lead worship - that's why good, creative worship is a team event..... and when the Holy Spirit is part of all aspects of the team --> WOW!
Brian W

Jason Clifford said...

The issue being addressed in Malachi was not that the sacrifices were rejected by G-d because they were substandard but rather because those offering them were violating the Torah Law in its spirit while managing to honour the letter.

Those offering blind animals were bringing only their own rejects to G-d while keeping the best for themselves.

Had someone brought a blind animal because that is either the best they had or all they had it would have been acceptable to G-d both in the letter and the spirit of the Law.

If the music at your worship was poor because nobody could be bothered to do any better that might have been an unworthy sacrifice but if it was the best they were able to do then it was worthy and gave glory to the Lord.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.