“It’s a tough call. You’d like live performers to adjust to the dynamics of a particular service. But on the other hand, if the live organ music is performed badly, it can distract.”

Paul, that WOULD be a tough call if the Lord told us we could only sing with organs. Thanks be to God Psalm 150 gives us many, many other options.

Again: right problem, wrong solution.

As an aside, I find interesting parallels between the SMP program and LSB Karaoke. Just as American pragmatism is leading us to a world where “specific ministry pastors” “lead worship” at which “regular pastors” then preach via video, so now the same synod will ‘resource’ congregations to sing along with trax before watching their video sermon.

Our grandfathers’ church had better solutions: circuit riding pastors who sought out the sheep; and singers who led the Lord’s Song where organs were absent.

Again, I love the organ. I play it every week. But it is not “the holy sound.” Organs stand under the judgment like all else that proceeds from the work of men.

It’s a tough call. You’d like live performers to adjust to the dynamics of a particular service. But on the other hand, if the live organ music is performed badly, it can distract.

The LW version only gives 4 stanzas of music, so the downside is you don’t sing verses 5, 6, 7, 8… unless the recording is started over. Personally, I won’t stop at verse 4 of “Here, O My Lord, I See Thee Face to Face” because, if you ask me, the turning point of the hymn is Verse 5!

While the congregation prefers live accompaniment, they find it necessary to use this technology in limited instances.

Your comment reminded me of an essay Joseph Herl wrote for a collection honoring Carl Schalk. In his essay, “Seven Habits of Highly Effective Liturgies: Insights from the Sixteenth through the Eighteenth Century”, Herl considers when churches lack the musical leadership to lead the singing. He suggests unaccompanied singing since it may be easier to find competent singers than competent instrumentalists. Herl references Eugene Brand who worked on LBW and recommended unaccompanied chant settings of the liturgy. Herl concludes that

“with the right leaders, it could work well; and such a church could serve as a model showing how it could be done. It would be an interesting twist if smaller churches were to adopt unaccompanied chant settings of the liturgy successfully, for they might well be the envy of the larger churches.”

Whether or not a congregation decides to consider the Concordia Organist, I think it is a worthwhile exercise for them to review their existing musical resources and opportunities to creatively use them in worship. They might find a treasure that they didn’t know existed in their midst. And perhaps, church musicians that are competent could make themselves available to serve neighboring congregations that need musical assistance. I currently serve as a musician for two LCMS churches and am glad to be able to use the gifts God gave me to serve my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ (a.k.a., vocation in action).

I hope that the use of Concordia Organist is carefully considered — both needs and results.

Good post on a timely topic. I think you are just scratching the surface on all the problems with this project, though. Here are two big ones:

1 – Not only will this promote inauthenticity in worship, it makes an icon out of the organ as somehow “the” music for leading congreational song. You mention quite rightly the beauty of a capella singing. Certianly a trained singer can be found to lead singing where an organist is unavailable. In addition to that, there are all sorts of other ways musicians can help lead congregational song. Why not a pianist – or two pianists (one with an electric keyboard to cover the bass and/or the melody, generating the 16′ and/or the 4′ sounds the organist uses provide foundational support and melodic leadership)? Or how about the high school flautist? All sorts of combinations could be used that would provide for much more authentic worship than “karaoke LSB”, a.k.a. “the Concordia Organist”. Don’t get me wrong: I love the organ. And I think it is the best instrument for leading large numbers of people in communal singing. But we should not elevate it up as some sort of “holy sound” that people must have to do Lutheran liturgy. Other sounds worked fine before the organ and can work just as well today.

2 – This product will also discourage congregations from using and/or developing talent. Sure, everyone gives lip service to how this is an “exceptional product”. But rather than sounding the alarm, the Concordia Organist will make it less likely faithful musical leaders will be used, come forward, or be developed. Why take 4-6 years to learn how to be a competent organist when the congregation can go karaoke? Why should Uncle Otto play the organ upon returning home from a lifetime of faithful service as an LCMS teachers somewhere else in the country when the congregaiton has gotten used to the excellence of Grime, Resch, and Hildebrand? And who will even want to consider letting a high schooler play the old electric organ after a few years of glorious pipes?

I know there is a real need out in the church for better musical leadership, and have good friends who struggled with this issue and came down on CPH’s side on this. I understand their points, but just am not convinced that this is a good thing for the church. “Right problem; wrong solution,” as they say.

For the record, I tried to withhold permission for my LSB hymntune, UNION CITY, to be used for this project, but was informed by CPH that they are using it anyway (under the ‘hostile use’ rule in the copyright law). Meanwhile, I’m hoping that technical problems with actually using this product live in the Divine Service will result in poor sales and its eventual discontinuation.

The church can do better than this.

I think the Concordia Organist has its place and pray that it meets the targeted need. The MP3 samples at the CPH website are top notch – a real pipe organ with great organists. Many church organists could learn some service playing skills from listening to Grime, Hildebrand, and Resch (and attending an Organist Workshop at Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, IN).

The need for a product like the Concordia Organist, though, should be a flashing red beacon to take seriously the need to encourage and nurture our future church musicians. We need not only faithful pastors, but also faithful musical leaders.

You should read the painful stories I’ve received from hundreds of pastors who are suffering without an organist.

The sample recordings on The Concordia Organist web site give folks an idea of just how high-quality this project is

The “addin” for the Builder software will be particularly helpful.

And think of all the situations and circumstances where folks will be able to benefit from a hymn accompaniment but have never had it before.

Yes, if we had enough competent organists we would not need The Concordia Organist for use in Sunday worship and other occasions, but even if every congregation had such organists there would be a place for this tremendous resource.

But even more is it necessary in light of the fact that we do NOT have competent organists.

May God grant His blessing to that end!