United Through Worship

Archive for November, 2011

When planning an act of worship, hymns are usually selected to reinforce the theme of the service. One technique which I have used very successfully on a number of occasions is to effectively reverse this and actually use the hymn words as a basis for preaching. In other words, I don’t prepare a single 15 – 20 minute sermon but follow each hymn with a ‘mini’ sermon of about 5 minutes taking a particular phrase or phrases from the words of the hymn as a text. By careful selection of hymns it is possible to create a really cohesive service which flows easily from one element to another. I have found congregations to be very responsive to this approach.

Ideally, it is best to choose a service which has a very particular theme. I have used this approach for a Harvest service, on a Mothering Sunday and at a church anniversary. Any Sunday which has a very precise place in the church calendar would be appropriate for this approach. Pentecost or Advent, for instance, would be ideal. In all cases there is a wealth of suitable worship music available, from traditional hymns to contemporary worship songs.

This approach is particularly effective in an all-age worship situation. A ‘blended’ worship approach would be most appropriate for this kind of service so that both hymns and worship songs can be used; – something for everyone. Also, this way of doing things means that the young people don’t have to sit through any lengthy talks by the preacher. There is a lot to commend it!

To give an example of how this all works I will refer to a Harvest Service I did in this way a couple of years ago. I took the twin themes of “Thanksgiving” and “Caring”, two topics which we associate with Harvest. I then used three of the hymns as texts for my ‘mini’ sermons. These three hymns were:

- “For the fruits of His creation” – This hymn relates to both the chosen themes. The two main quotes from this hymn which I used were “The just reward of labour” which led logically to the issue of the Fair Trade movement. The line “In the help we give our neighbour” led me neatly into the importance of caring and sharing.

- “For the healing of the nations” – This hymn contains the line, “For a just and equal sharing of the things that earth affords”. I made the point here that the earth has the richness to easily feed, clothe and resource all its people yet so many go on living in poverty, in despair and, sometimes, in virtual slavery. The hymn then goes on to give us the answer, “To a life of love in action help us rise and pledge our word.” The reference to “love in action” is, of course, at the very heart of the Christian faith.

- “God in His love for us lent us this planet” – Sung to the tune ‘Stewardship’, this is a relatively recent hymn which focuses our mind on the resources which our world has and how we should be doing better in preserving it for future generations. It has been said that we don’t own the planet we just have it on loan from our children.

By using these hymns in this way and expanding on the main points I have mentioned, (I have just given you the ‘bare bones’ here) I got across the message of my twin themes in a concise way which the congregation found easy to follow.

As I said earlier in my article, I have found this approach very successful and I intend to use it more when leading worship on appropriate occasions. A secondary issue with this way of doing things is that it makes the congregation very aware of the words they are singing, perhaps giving them a whole fresh understanding of hymns they have sung for many years.

Copyright (c) 2010 Robert Hinchliffe

If you’re a rock fan, then you know Radiohead is. One thing that you may not know is how they got the unique sound that you hear on the track “Paranoid Android”. I want to take a moment to help you understand how this unique sound was achieved so that you can recreate it at home, and hopefully get some good ideas about new things you can do with your amp and effects.

The song kicks off with an acoustic guitar playing rhythm. Shortly after we hear a light guitar part join in to create an interesting ambiance. The two guitarists of the band, Jon Greenwood and Ed O’Brien continue to play dueling guitar effects, drawing the listener in until finally reverting to an all out rock section starting around 2:42. This is the tone that I want to focus on. To get this sound, you’re going to need a vintage or grunge style fuzzbox.

This same fuzzbox will be used to good effect all throughout the solo that starts around 3:10. The whole distorted section has a very “lo-fi” sound that’s typical of the music made at that time. Shortly after the solo, there’s a bridge where all distortion disappears, followed shortly by the return of the distorted sound, with an added pitch-shifting effect. To achieve this, you’ll need a pitch shift pedal, which isn’t hard to come by.

I want to return quickly to the beginning to touch on how they got the light electric sound that accompanied the acoustic guitar. To get the sound that they used, you’re going to need a tremolo, some reverb and a compressor. On your amp, you want to get a nice fat sound, with a good bit of bass and middle, and reduced treble. I think about 3/4 bass, 2/3 mid and 1/3 treble is about the right mixture (the fractions are of the total amount of each bass middle and treble and not how they relate to each other). Turn your reverb knob about halfway up, keep the tremolo on the slow side, with a good bit of gain & as for the compressor, turn the attack and sustain up about 3/4 the way up and the level should go up about 1/2 way. This should be pretty easy to achieve, just use a little finesse and you should be there.

Using this guide, you should be able to achieve about 75% of the sounds they got in the studio with your home setup. The sounds that Radiohead gets out of their instruments during this period were based heavily on equipment that they were using in the studio at the time, so it’s a little hard to pinpoint exactly the same thing. With a little playing around, however, you can get a very close approximation. Good luck & have fun!

There is no doubt that the United States is a diverse nation.

Meanwhile, it is also true that a common language binds a people. We need look no further than our neighbors to the north for evidence of what can happen without one: Canada is officially bilingual, which has brought about burden, conflict, and the prospect of secession by Quebec. This sounds far removed from anything that would happen here, but in our country’s early history there was a real fear among Pennsylvanians of the language of German immigrants taking over. Had the government acquiesced to speakers of German, we may have found ourselves in a similar situation.

We can see the influx of immigrants. Generations ago most immigrants eagerly embraced English, certain that their future was dependent upon doing so and adopting the “American Way of Life.” Today, many immigrants resist English and even U.S. citizenship. Many newcomers cannot speak English and some oppose learning the language of America.

Opponents say that we need not make English official, we should rather encourage non-English speakers to learn English. City governments churn out documentation in Spanish at a cost of thousands of dollars per year. This does not encourage non-English speakers to learn English. According to a Department of Labor study, churning out materials in other languages actually discourages immigrants from doing so.

Opponents also claim that making English official would be mostly symbolic. This is perhaps true — it would be a very important symbol. It would send a message to all who want to participate as citizens that there are responsibilities as well as benefits to being here. And one of those responsibilities is learning the historic common language of these United States. Our national motto is E pluribus unum – “out of many, one.” Immigrants of many nationalities built our nation, but the “melting pot” melded us into one people. This long tradition of assimilation has always included the adoption of English as the common means of communication. There is no reason why our expectations for current non-English speakers should be any less than our expectations for those who came before.

We’ve worked hard to curb illiteracy in this country. So why a different standard for those who don’t know English? Learning English improves the lives of these immigrants. Why put up barriers to discourage this from happening?

Why must we spend our tax dollars to publish ballots in Spanish? Because a certain percentage of the population speaks Spanish. That may be true — but — you have to be a citizen in order to vote. Those who have become citizens have passed a test in English in order to do so. There are some exceptions to this, too many if you ask me, but the bottom line is there is no reason to have ballots printed in Spanish.

As our federal government has been slow for decades in dealing with illegal immigration, local municipalities have had to take up the slack. In Maryland however, government leaders are looking to allow illegal immigrants to for instance, pay in-state tuition to state schools. Over the years, where local governments have acquiesced toward those who speak Spanish, illegal immigration has increased. In the municipalities that have cracked down on illegal immigration, such activity has decreased. Prince William County in northern Virginia is a good example of this. Unfortunately, illegal aliens that have fled that county, have seen Maryland as a more welcome environment.

If we concede two languages, which shall they be, in addition to English? Polish? Or an Arab tongue? There are 322 numerous languages spoken here, according to the last Census. If there were an influx of illegal immigrants from Quebec, would we add French to the mix?

Thirty states and many municipalities nationwide have passed amendments or laws making English official, most if not all with large majorities – as high as 9 to 1 – voting to do so.

53 UN-member nations have English as their official language, why hasn’t America? 85 percent of Americans (including a majority in every subgroup) favor doing so. Even more interesting, more than 2/3 of Hispanics favor it, and 91% of foreign-born Latino immigrants agree that learning English is essential to succeed here.

Pro-English does not mean English only. None of the states with official English laws prohibit government agencies from using another languages when there is a compelling public interest for doing so. These include: protecting public health and safety, assuring equality before the law, teaching foreign languages, and many other legitimate needs.

If English were made official, other languages could still be used in private life and in worship. Other languages could be used by the government in emergency situations or in the investigation of crimes. Other languages would still be taught. Other languages could still be used by elected officials to communicate with constituents. Non-English terms of art, names, phrases or expressions could still be used.

So what is the fuss about?

It is fine and good to honor one’s language and culture. But to enter America is to accept a fresh start. English is the historic and common language of the United States. Making it the official language is not meaningless, it is the thing to do.