A recurring theme at mgpcpastor is trying to discourage the completely unhelpful fad of equating ‘worship’ with ‘singing’ (or the even worse habit of designating the fast songs ‘praise’ and the slow songs ‘worship’) and calling the song-leader in church the worship-leader or the worship-pastor.
So this post at Catalystspace caught my eye. With tongue somewhat in cheek Dan Kimball playfully suggests that the real ‘worship leaders’ should be those who oversee the area of church life that involves real sacrifice, that being giving.
Here’s an excerpt. (Complete with some interesting grammar. Oh well.)
In hyperbole way, I have been thinking about why we use the title of “worship pastor” or “worship leader” to designate the person who leads an area of worship that doesn’t cost us to much to participate in with our singing songs. So why don’t we switch the title to the person who does lead or oversee the area that people generally sacrifice the most – is finances – so shouldn’t the title of “worship pastor” or “worship leader” be the person who oversees the finances of the church? Usually the church accountant. Isn’t that person the one who truly oversees the most sacrificial worship of the people of the church, not the person who leads the music when people sing?
Read the whole post here.
All three churches I’ve been involved in at pastoral level have been served with wonderfully supportive and encouraging treasurers, by the way.
mgpcpastor's blog 