MennoNet.com

R7ehr wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2026 1:05 pm Just a passing question here. I like the proposition that more of us ought to be writing songs, though we seem to accept it as a self evident truth. I can certainly see the discipline it demands of, and the benefit for the writer. But in an era already having a superabundance of songs, a veritable plethora of songbooks filled with far more material than we will ever learn or sing, what exactly is the impetus for creating more?

I think this is a great question and can be broadened out to include the question of why we must constantly create more sermons, prayers, devotionals, books, articles, and more.

The ancient faith churches of course have the tradition of repeating songs, prayers, sermons, eucharistic formulas etc. They have their arguments in favor of all of this, of course.

But what is the argument for the reverse? Why do we need all the new songs, prayers, sermons, etc? Why not just repeat, recite, sing what has already been said or written?

One of our ministers said something that I have thought about a lot since. He said that it is hard to find things to talk about in devotionals. I found this idea hard to understand, as there is an infinite amount of inspiring content in the scripture that one could discuss and expound on, especially given he is a younger minister ordained less than a year.

So what's the argument for all the new content? Do we really need to create/re-create all this stuff, spending hours of study and work and creative energy? We have vast amounts of previously written material we could be using, more than we could ever use.

I remember years ago hearing a comment by Mose Stoltzfus of Ephrata Christian Fellowship during a sermon when they were ordaining another leader. He said a preacher must be "able to bake a fresh loaf." I've thought about that many times over the years, probably when partaking of a singularly stale bit of crust.

But again, why is that considered a necessity? Why must we have fresh music, fresh sermons, fresh devotionals? What's the argument for it, as opposed to the time-honored liturgy?

Hutterite tradition is to just keep preaching the same sermons over and over again. After a few years of church attendance, they are pretty much memorised, which does mean every congregant knows the teachings quite well. I recall from some time ago an older single Hutterite lady who shared how she pays attention during sermons by trying to write them out in shorthand and eventually had her own collection of written sermons (I am unclear on if the preachers read them off, or if they just preach them from memory), and she also liked to try to write out the scripture references when they read a verse (as I understand it, the scripture reference isn't given, but eventually everyone pretty much knows them by heart).

So we do have that aspect of Anabaptist tradition.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, we have the spectre of AI-generated sermons which are quite fast coming into vogue in evangelical circles, optimised for feeling fresh and engaging to audiences. One question I have faced is what does it mean, exactly, when AI tools can compose a better sermon than any human beings can, in terms of one that pleases audiences?

mike wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 4:14 pm I remember years ago hearing a comment by Mose Stoltzfus of Ephrata Christian Fellowship during a sermon when they were ordaining another leader. He said a preacher must be "able to bake a fresh loaf." I've thought about that many times over the years, probably when partaking of a singularly stale bit of crust.

But again, why is that considered a necessity? Why must we have fresh music, fresh sermons, fresh devotionals? What's the argument for it, as opposed to the time-honored liturgy?

Maybe because of what Isaiah said? In Isaiah 42:10?
King James Bible
Sing unto the LORD a new song, and his praise from the end of the earth, ye that go down to the sea, and all that is therein; the isles, and the inhabitants thereof.

Or the Psalmist said in Psalm 96:1?

King James Bible
Oh, sing to the Lord, a new song; sing to the Lord all the Earth!

Maybe so we don’t get stale with rote?

I think there's value in both new and old.

New songs, and familiar classics from the 1927 Church Hymnal.

Freshly prepared sermons, and revisiting those from the archives that challenged me.

Extemporaneous prayers, and recitations of the Lord's Prayer.

New devotionals, and rereading old ones.

ohio jones wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 8:00 pm I think there's value in both new and old.

New songs, and familiar classics from the 1927 Church Hymnal.

Freshly prepared sermons, and revisiting those from the archives that challenged me.

Extemporaneous prayers, and recitations of the Lord's Prayer.

New devotionals, and rereading old ones.

Bless you for sending that link!

R7ehr wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2026 1:05 pm Just a passing question here. I like the proposition that more of us ought to be writing songs, though we seem to accept it as a self evident truth. I can certainly see the discipline it demands of, and the benefit for the writer. But in an era already having a superabundance of songs, a veritable plethora of songbooks filled with far more material than we will ever learn or sing, what exactly is the impetus for creating more?

Because art is powerful communication that touches people, the art of the spoken word, the art of the story, the art of the testimony, the art of song, all these are part of being human.

barnhart wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 9:04 pm

R7ehr wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2026 1:05 pm Just a passing question here. I like the proposition that more of us ought to be writing songs, though we seem to accept it as a self evident truth. I can certainly see the discipline it demands of, and the benefit for the writer. But in an era already having a superabundance of songs, a veritable plethora of songbooks filled with far more material than we will ever learn or sing, what exactly is the impetus for creating more?

Because art is powerful communication that touches people, the art of the spoken word, the art of the story, the art of the testimony, the art of song, all these are part of being human.

Testimony - that is an excellent point. One could say the spoken word and the history we have in the scriptures is something that doesn't change, and doesn't need constant re-interpretation or revision. But scripture itself teaches the value of testimony, and gives us a huge number of examples. Testimony is something brand new for each person - the particular application of scripture and the work of the Holy Spirit is felt and understood from unique angles by each believer, who benefits others by sharing what God has done for him or her. From this comes new material in all its different forms - song, spoken and written word, all of that.

Because the song is your song...not merely restwting another persons.

All of the old songs were once new songs. (Duh.) Many of those new songs didn't 'make it', and are seldom if ever sung anymore. As I mentioned in another discussion, I think that we DO need song writers in our own midst, those who can create well-written songs that represent our anabaptist understanding of Scripture, and that flow easily (without forced lyrics that compromise normal English intonation patterns). And, music that is created for the human voice, not just the fancy choral music that is often difficult for the non-trained voice, or that draws attention to the human vocal capabilities more than to the Biblical truths of the words.

(I also think that it's time to let the old 'sea-going themes' rest. The old songs that use these experiences are fine - I'm not saying that we need to avoid them. But the average person today does not have those experiences, and new points of contact with both culture and common experience can and should be utilized.)

Some people say that they "do not hear the words" of the secular music they hear (either on purpose, or just when in public places, like stores or malls), and as a person who 'hears everything', I used to think they weren't being truthful. But over the years I've realized that it is actually true. So for them, they need to learn to listen well to the words of the songs we sing in our services, not only to draw meaning from them, but to also examine the ideas and theology behind the the song writer's word choices. There's a lot of 'foreign theology' being foisted on us by new songs that were written by people with either no depth of Spiritual truth, or who are representing belief systems that are not fitting for us as anabaptists.