We had this fascinating question from John Spencer which we thought we’d throw open for comments.
“My wife and I have been attending a local Pentecostal church and they use Powerpoint projection of the words of the worship songs. But they also project moving images behind the words – such things as crosses silhouetted against moving dark clouds, planets and exploding stars, rivers, waterfalls, people out of focus with their hands in the air, etc. Personally my wife and I find such moving images a distraction from the worship and feel that they are quite unnecessary. E.g. When we sing the William Booth hymn “Send the Fire”, we don’t need to see flames from a gas fire in the background while we sing the stirring words!
Do you happen to know if the projection of images as well as words of songs is a widespread practice in churches? Is it a new trend? I wonder if it is unique to the place where my wife and I have been worshipping of late.”
To answer John’s question, yes it is a bit of a new trend. We’d be really interested to know what other people think – do you find it helpful or a hindrance? My church uses one image of a boat on water which makes me feel quite seasick but sometimes I find pictures quite nice to help meditate on. It can be good to engage some other senses beyond singing.
Do comment in the box below.
22 Comments
It needs real discernment. Movement should be limited and slow – shots of the worship band are almost always a bad idea – and it is very easy to get wrong. And it should be done with careful attention to choice of colours and contrast, or the legibility of the words is compromised. Having said that, if done with care and restraint it can help reinforce the imagery of the words. Some presentation packages allow you to store your choice of background visuals for a song, so it doesn’t have to be a ’spur of the moment’ choice.
I see that images can be usefulto aid meditation, but if they are projected as a background to the words, you don’t have any choice but to look at the images, unless you know the words off by heart! Perhaps a separarte projection of images could be used if space and resources allow?
You know, I’ve been thinking a lot about this post since yesterday. I use a lot of visual imagery when I lead in church. Now I’m talking about leading way beyond the musical worship session. And in fact I teach a couple of seminars which get people to think about the use of creativity in church that goes way beyond music. Now in that I strongly believe that the use of symbols and imagery is really helpful to people in helping them engage in God, and conect in a “deep calls to deep” way (and more and more people are visual learners who need the reinforcement of the pictures beyond words alone).
But I’m actually a bit uncomfortable with this words and image combination on every worship song we sing. We become immune, bored, distracted, annoyed even by the image. It stops helping us engage and starts really hindering us. For the occasional song – brilliant – but let’s not have it on every one.
Do, however, use images to help people focus during the reading, during a prayer time, during a talk even. And perhaps even start with the images as a stimulus to prayer or worship.
Certainly I’ve found that background visuals need to be used very carefully and not regularly. I probably use a still picture for on average 1 song each service (tonight we will have “Blessed be your name” with a split picture of a parched desert and a green field to convey the essence of the song, and my current favourite is a great picture of an eagle against a clear blue sky to go with “Strength will rise”.) Selection of a picture has often taken hours, to understand fully the message of the and then to find something that doesn’t distract but enhances, and is not something I do by default.
Often we sing songs without really thinking about what they are saying – I guess I’m trying to use images to reinforce what the song is all about and help the praise to be more deliberate. If the picture is too busy, or you need to spend half the song working out the link with the words, then it is far better left blank.
Recently, I very nervously put a video behind a song (from http://reelworship.ning.com) and was very pleasantly surprised by the great comments it received. It was a stable picture of sea lapping in with a sunrise behind. It worked in the context (even though it was snowing outside!) but is not something I will do very frequently.
Many of our great churches contain great images (either of art or architecture) which were intended to help us worship. With visuals behind the song words I guess I’m trying to achieve something of the same and engage multiple senses in worship (all I need now is smells – joke!)
Hi,
Our church has been using projection for about 6 years. We use EasyWorship and we project all words on the screen; for songs, Bible readings and liturgy. We have experimented with many different ways of displaying the words, but we find it comes down to a simple principle:
- if you want people to read/sing the words that are on the screen, then they need to have words only. No background. It’s simple psychology – anything other than words splits the brain’s attention and detracts from the words.
That said, there is still room for adding imagry. For instance, between verses in a song, or during the intro, outro or a bridge. We find imagery during prayers is particularly emotive.
Displaying a video with words over the top does work when only the praise band is playing and the congregation is listening, not singing.
Also, during special events like Christmas or Remembrance Sunday, we would “water mark” all slides with a small image to the side. Not a background to the words, but a symbol to the side, reminding everyone of the meaning of the day.
Anyway, I hope this is helpful. As I say, it’s based on a few years experience and a lot of experimentation. In case you’re interested, we are an Anglican congregration.
If it were down to me and the way that I engage with God then I would flit between two extremes – 1)I’m in the mood to praise God and just the words are fine thanks – in fact anything else if off-putting or 2) I’m bored and anything which can add to my enjoyment/give me something to focus on (or criticise) would be great thanks! I am only one person and yet I want (or need) different solutions on different days of the week.
Overall I tend to test the appropriateness of images in terms of their relevance. Video of the tide lapping in whilst I sing about Jesus’ death and resurrection is incongruous to say the least! However, images which fit with a hymn like ‘How great thou art’ (pardon the archaic language but this one works particularly well) is even more powerful when accompanied by an image appropriate to each line (or two). Now I know that this isn’t terribly post modern but neither is the very idea of coming together and worshipping with one another in a common style (however many streams we incorporate into our services). I think that this kind of rule brings some kind of measuring stick for use of images behind words. The problem with the kind of moving images mentioned in the question is that they are all too seldom relevant to even part of the song, let alone the whole thing.
Images at other times are great – some of them can simply be there to inspire. Let’s make sure that people don’t resent the use of new technology because of the lack of thought in the way it is used. Just because we can do something doesn’t make it right or helpful. If we take responsibility for the way that we design all aspect of worship then technology (and its ability to project images) should be of real benefit to many in our churches.
Following on from Tim, I think good artistic expression, whether it’s designed to help people corporately worship God or not is most effective when it makes the watcher/listener find deeper meaning and understanding through the media used. Or perhaps like a good joke or story that you don’t quite see where it’s going until the punch line or the point is revealed in final moment and you basically say ‘oh now I get it’.
When we are talking about using images in worship my personal view is that we should always think ‘is this helping people to understand more/come off ‘worship autopilot’/think/shock/meditate/or even just disengage from the current stresses of the morning. and when it comes to what images we use its ‘art’ so there’s no one size fits all formula that will engage everyone but I do believe some intelligent thought needs to be applied to stop the art crossing that thick grey line and becoming clichéd. Therefore if we are singing about God being a consuming fire the image needs to be intense, moving, unpredictable, dangerous, intoxicating. So a picture of a gas fire in this instance might not do it justice. (Maybe Buncefield would be more appropriate!) Perhaps that’s even too much of an ask for a still image borrowed from google, but if we can’t find imagery that does something justice, lets not put up pictures just because we can, or we have to. Also even some images themselves have become overused metaphors and so using them at all may well bore or even insult the intelligence of some participants. For instance, we’ve so overdone rivers, streams and waterfalls in song in the last few years that meaning and freshness of that imagery has perhaps become lost.
Also, when using images or film, particularly to draw people into worship, there is a question of aesthetic quality and originality. Perhaps using a really beautifully shot and stunning video of the sea will avoid the cliché. I recently saw some HD film of the sea Thailand shot in slight slow motion that was truly breathtaking and awesome. But it doesn’t have to be big budget either. I also a short loop of a candle that was given some low res super8 cine film treatment, which was quite meditative and original.
I was involved in a church plant some years back where the leader wanted a cool, moody, arty space to gather in. He went out and bought some pictures from Ikea and Athena, muslin, and enough fairly lights to form a runway. Trouble is we were meeting in a grotty, smelly community centre and needless to say it didn’t quite achieve the ambience we were looking for!
Ultimately, when trying to focus on God in musical worship and use art to engage us, many of us find multiple messages to assimilate at the same time confusing, and so it needs real care and skill to choose media, subjects and moments wisely. So perhaps if people are experimenting in this it’s worth teaming up a techie person with an artistic person and someone who has a good worshipful strategic overview.
Andy
I am always weary of gimicks and tricks that make a mass or church service feel more like a packaged, overproduced concert rather than an hour of thoughtful prayer and reflection. I am not anti-technology, but the problem I see is that it can be so impersonal. If we are so in need of art for our services, why don’t we enlist the help of an artistic parishioner, and display their work alongside the music? Could’t we light a real candle in front of the altar or pulpit instead of watching a video of the same thing? Watching and listening to technology tends to be very passive, and I can’t imagine there aren’t better ways to engage the community than popping in a video.
I personally think that it’s a good idea (but I would say so, seeing as I’m the one who does most of the projection at my church). For me, it’s a really good creative outlet. However, I think you’ve got to be careful with the needs of your congregation (there’s someone who attends the same church as me who cannot see text when it is in front of a moving background, so I’ve had to go back to white text on a black background). I find still imagery on areas where there are not text works quite well, and can be very effective. I do think that it can come across as a concert more than a service, but if your church is trying to encourage young people into the service (as ours is), then sometimes that’s not such a bad idea (as long as your service is still for God).
Are Moving Visuals during worship Distracting or Helpful?
Discernment and Yet freedom of expression:
I agree that moving visuals behind images requires discernment.
Not using them at all, though, in order to focus on the words, … Why even sing them at all? Indeed, there have been movements to restrict singing, or restrict it to a cappella, or to just familiar tunes … all so that the music doesn’t distract from the message. All of these seem to contradict the basic spirit of Psalm 150 … “Let everything that has breath praise the Lord!” There are layers of meaning and expression that singing offers us that just can’t be achieved in any other way. The same holds true for using instruments. There is an atmosphere that can be created with instruments that is hard to achieve any other way. There are things that I can say with the guitar or piano, or bass, or drums or lyre or harp or…. that are hard to express with the human body alone.
That same thing is true of lighting, decorating and visual imagery. There is an emotional difference between an office flourescent tube and a candle lit dinner. They communicate, express, set the tone for different things. You may very well be able to read better in bright office lighting, but is that the atmosphere you want for reading a love poem to your wife?
In the same way, we need to use all of the creative arts at our disposal in glorious extravagant worship of our King and Savior and Lover of our Souls!
A few more thoughts though:
Newness
We are commanded to sing a new song. (Psalm 98:1) It is always distracting at first to do so. However, singing and doing something new speaks of the very character of God. He is the Great I AM. While we certainly should not be slaves to the “keeping up with the Jones’s” modern infatuation with the “new and improved”. We need a healthy balance. What are we saying about God if we only sing songs that were written hundreds of years ago? We certainly don’t want to lose our heritage either, which is why we aren’t told to “Only Sing New Songs!” We need a healthy influx of the new, and if at all possible Local! How cool is it to have a local testimony through song, even if it isn’t quite “AS GOOD” as the professional nashville songwriters or the tried and true classics. The content of the songs is NOT the only thing we need to be aware of. Singing a NEW song, says something about God. Singing a PERSONAL testimony of God’s work in our lives communicates something to the community too. Everything new is distracting at first. Every classic song was once a new song. Every classic instrument (guitar, piano, organ, drums, …) was once looked on with suspicion as that “new” instrument. Let us not be fearful or infatuated with the “new”, but walk a healthy balance.
Context
There are communities and contexts where I am sure it is wisest to simply sing from the hymnal or songbook, and times to just speak the words out loud together. Let us pray to God for wisdom to fit every situation, and yet the grace to allow others to do the same!
Our situation
At our church we put moving backgrounds behind most of the songs. We are careful to try to match songs with the right “atmosphere” kind of like you would the right lighting, or the right musical groove. This is art, not science, so it’s often a subjective thing with layers of better, even better, best of the limited choices we have. We usually provide printed song sheet handouts for those who have trouble reading. Sometimes we miss and there’s too much motion and it’s distracting. Sometimes we have people who are moved as much by the background as they are by the song. All talking about the same song even! As leaders we can’t and won’t make everyone happy. Let us ask God for divine wisdom as how to best make use of all the tools at our disposal in each situation with skilled hands and servant’s hearts.
Solo Deo Gloria (To God alone be the glory)
-jason
Hi Jason
Thanks for your response to this question. I wanted to reinforce what you were saying about local songs. Its great to sing the songs that reflect your journey as a community and we (Musicademy) love to encourage that level of grassroots creativity and musical expression.
I thought I’d share my thoughts as visual arts as an expression of worship are an interest of mine yet, as a worship pastor, I also understand the variety of personal opinions and preferences that are out there.
I think there are two separate issues here: the use of (moving) images and how they are combined with lyric projection.
“In the beginning God created” – we are made in the image of our Creator God and therefore reflect His creative nature in one way or another. That’s not to say that we are all artists but it is to say that the ‘creative’ is part of human nature.
I love the point above that flourescent lighting in an office is quite different to a candle-lit dinner. Some may argue that lighting is not important and yet this simple illustration demonstrates that it is… so lighting is important in church.
Some may say that visuals aren’t important… but do they prefer to watch the news on TV or hear it on the radio? Are their eyes drawn to bright colours, outrageous hairstyles, etc or are they just unaware of these things? My guess is that we all respond on some level.
Art is part of the heritage of the church. From stained glass windows to painted ceilings (anyone aware of a place called the Sistine Chapel?!) to statues, art has spoken through the ages of our Awesome God.
In our pre-literate history, art was THE form of communication. For many, we are now in a post-literature culture where the visual is more important than the word.
Therefore image, moving or not, in one form or another, has its place and must have its place in a contemporary worship environment. A cross hanging on the wall is just as much a visual as a video extract from ‘The Passion’; a candle on the altar is just as much a visual as a filmed candle projected on a big screen – the medium just needs to be appropriate to the context.
The issue then isn’t so much whether we might use images but HOW we use them.
From my experience, the vast majority of people find moving images behind text distracting – it’s simply not something our eyes are used to so you’re forcing the brain to work over-time. Even news programmes on TV put their text on a solid background at the bottom of the screen.
So what about text over still images? This is much easier to read (assuming the contrast between the text and the image is clear enough) but I’ve seen it done badly so many times I’d be reluctant to recommend it. As someone else has said, just because you CAN show an image doesn’t mean you SHOULD.
The best solution I’ve seen to this is to have separate words and visuals screens. For example, a screen either side of your stage with the words (a simple white on black for example) and a central screen at the back of the stage showing images etc.
For many of us, this isn’t even an option. It’s something we might work towards or just aim for occasionally for a youth service for instance but it’s not the ‘norm’.
At the church where I work, we have a single screen off-set to one side (not an ideal location but it’s what we have to work with and I’m thankful we have anything!) so we keep it simple – lyrics and liturgy are projected white on black and when we want to use images (e.g. stills during prayer times, movie clips as illustrations, camera work during sermons or baptisms), we do that separate to the text and switch our media as necessary.
Ultimately, we each need to work out the best solution for our particular context, seeking the Lord’s guidance by His Spirit, that we may make wise choices and investments and use whatever we have to His glory.
Keep the wonder.
Nic
I think my views are summed up in three words: taste, restraint, background.
As others have discussed, it becomes a problem when the images attract more attention than the words themselves. Where it’s done best, the video trully is a background, rather than reaching out for attention.
Another issue here is the technical quality. It’s very easy with basic equipment to end up with video that hogs resources and is jumpy, and makes text transitions sluggish. If that’s your environment, then it really is better to keep with making simple work well!
Just a couple of thoughts I have on the matter.
I work with a package called ProPresenter in my own church and through various events in the locality through our own christian production company (we mainly do PA). For a band that we “tour” with we always use ProPresenter and subtle videos with some songs.
It helps (in my opinion) with focusing on certain aspects, such as creation if done properly.
Unfortunately there are far too many people ESPECIALLY in the christian worship environment who don’t do subtle, and have no idea what colour schemes are. This is why I don’t like churches with volunteers using Microsoft PowerPoint (or even some other windows based worship programs!) because it leaves them with “creative freedom” which can be disastrous (my minister for example).
Back on topic. ProPresenter can do subtle loops which can enhance worship. Having moving images in my opinion also keeps wandering eyes fixed on the screen, so we are always thinking about the words, even on a subconscious level, which is what it’s all about. I agree with a previous poster that the worship band on screen is not a good idea! However when doing a worship “concert” on the other hand, a lot of this changes, as the purpose of the night needs to have a slight entertainment aspect. This is probably mainly to keep up to par with secular events. The church needs to be able to provide what is culturally relevant, and if video on screen does this and keeps people interested and in church, I’m all for it.
Hi,
I’ve been interested in all the remarks because our church has done this a few times. I’m not a worship leader, or in the band, but I am a musician and just regular person in the pew. Maybe I’m ADD but I find the moving images (and sometimes the still images) very distracting. I’m constantly thinking things like, Ooh, I wonder what kind of hawk that is? Where did they film that? And how did they get it to do that? Wow, that person has an interesting shirt/hairdo/expression on their face… I notice my younger children stop singing just to watch the images. Some still images help in the praise songs that go on forever with the same words..relieve the monotony, I guess.
But then, I even get distracted with who’s up front and what they’re doing. I’d love to put the band in an orchestra pit so I can really concentrate on the words and the meanings. If you think about it…the band is a moving image under the words. Maybe I’m the oddball, but I’m SO visual that I really need to close my eyes or better yet, bury my nose in a songbook so I can re-read that phrase that really took my breath away or take it home and meditate on it during the week. I understand the use of creative ways to communicate the message, especially since people nowadays seem to have disconnected their imaginations. (And on the flip side, I like to really fill my visual senses with an image (sculpture, painting, photo) without the distracting singing in the background.)
Just my comments from a distracted mom.
I am grateful to be part of the body of Christ where its members are both creative and sensitive; where such things as moving images and even the projection of lyrics are questioned, defended and cautioned in the interest of glorifying the Master we serve. Satan would have us remain silent.
As one of those often responsible for the graphic augmentation of worship lyrics in our church, I offer one more thought on the subject.
** Presentation of graphics in church services is just like playing any other instrument as an act of worship. **
Like the drummer boy in the well-known Christmas song, it is–or should be in my view–an offering of praise and service that lifts up the object of our worship and enables others to connect with the effort.
One should not take lightly the opportunity to play an instrument in worship service. Indeed denominations have split over such things and perhaps that division was fueled by indiscretion as those satanic seeds of division were germinating.
Many annoying features of graphics are result of short-fall in the effort to serve the congregation without distracting flaws: timing, tone, colors, content, layout, fonts, transitions, coherence, relevance, complexity… subtle nuance more often than gross adjustments. Like any musical instrument (or teaching skill or preaching style for that matter–even the administration of the Gifts of the Spirit), this art is born of passion and discipline and the Spirit when it does well. One who would make such an offering will find it as strenuous and demanding of preparation as any other art offered on the alter to our Lord in worship.
I wrestle relentlessly with the balance between safe performance and unreserved service to the God of the universe, author of grace and mercy. That is to say I have failed to perform flawlessly far too many times. However, on some occasions I have learned that my choice of graphic took a fellow worshiper to new places. For example, once my choice of a landscape with a spectacular storm cloud photo to accompany lyrics about the God of peace that passes understanding was far from what someone expected. This person shared thoughts with me, having been jarred from a Pollyanna perspective and was grateful.
One more thing about this instrument. As a rule, the artist has played it well only when it was not obviously noticeable. At our church we say it is a most unrewarding art or service, because it is usually only the flaws that make it noticed. The artist has done well as a rule only when it does not draw attention. While this be the case, it is often hard to get reliable feedback. If you know a performer of the art, try to encourage he or she next time they succeed in performing unnoticed but still bring honor and glory.
In this perspective, I find this instrument to be an intense form of active worship experience and service. In my respect for brothers and sisters of the Kingdom, I know that it will take different forms in different circumstances–even though on some occasions it must be as sublime as silence in its own analogous form.
Journey well with no less than your best offering…
as sinners bought…
in His name,
:)uane
I am a digital media student and am on the tech team at my church. So I am probably biased slightly towards using moving images than most. My views:
- Moving images can and are very effective when used in the right way, at the right time. Just putting any old video up on the screen for the sake of it, is to be honest rather silly and bound to get negative feedback, or questions like “Why did we have an image of a Safari on the screen during worship time today?”
- As Duane said above “timing, tone, colors, content, layout, fonts, transitions, coherence, relevance, complexity” all need to be considered and worked on before just using any old video / motion loop. The running of the clip is almost as important about what the video is about. Making sure it’s started at the right time is important, never start /change a video in the middle of someone talking or a quiet time in between songs unless instructed. Far too obvious and distracting.
- The Church should be leading the way with new media :-)
- A quite from The Wired Church 2.0, great book, worth reading on uses of digital media in the Church:
“Dealing with Naysayers
Criticism is inevitable. There will always be people who find reasons to oppose whatever new thing is happening in the church, but you can rise above that by focusing on the higher objective. Be willing to take risks.”
Like any other thing in the Church, you must not loose sight of what it’s for. We were made by a Creative God! And that is who we want to see glorified through our Worship and effective use of moving images or any other platform of media. Effective use being key, but it being God led is even more important.
Recommended Reading List:
The Wired Church 2.0 – Len Wilson, and Jason Moore
Midnight Oil Productions Website – http://www.midnightoilproductions.com/reading/how-to/bettersonglyrics/
Am happy to be questioned on what I have said. I have quite strong views on a few things and this is one of them, I can go off on a rant rather easily :)
I’m all for using the visual arts in worship, (I’m a graphic designer by trade), but I have very seldom found moving video behind the words on projected worship songs to be anything other than a terrible distraction. I’ve been in a number of different venues in several states, and it’s always been the same… your eyes can only focus on one thing at a time, either the words or the moving background. I had to leave the sanctuary during one “worship service” at a Charismatic conference, because the background images were not only extremely distracting, they were almost psychedelic, attacking the eyes, and disturbed my spirit tremendously. I met another person in the lobby who was highly incensed that they were showing video like that, he said it was exactly like what he used to see when he was psyched out on LSD trips before he became a Christian. And this video had come from a Christian worship media resource! As others have said above, discernment is so important. Blessings on everyone’s worship ministries here! Shalom.
I often use still images behind song lyrics; ensuring the image is appropriate and helpful to the message of the song. I try to use simple or subdued images, with usually empty space where the lyrics are displayed. In other parts of the service I do use videos and more complex images.
Many people have said many times that this has helped them to worship and focus on the meaning of the words.
I have rarely used videos however, expect they could easily be distracting, so such use for me will be occasional, again subdued with little movement, and for special reasons such as celebration (eg fireworks), getting people to really engage with the message of the song on a deeper level (rarely), or for special occasions such as Christmas. I expect such use to be very rare, even though I’m trying to develop the ability to do so.
Key to me is also asking for feedback from every0ne engaged in worship.
One thing I forgot to add:
A sister church I occasionally attend uses white text on black background all the time.
Personally I find this depressing and distracting. It does not lift my spirit and help me to raise my heart and hands in worship and I feel it does not bring glory to God.
Then again this could be because there isn’t much of a worship group (just someone playing 2 finger piano). In my church we have a keyboard player (myself) and acoustic guitar. Again this is limited, so maybe the images I use help raise and extend the worship adding some colour that is otherwise missing.
I don’t want to pour cold water on the ideas expressed for being creative in worhsip, but there’s one glaring issue that nobody has mentioned – if you put pictures behind words, some people will not be able to read the words!
Now this affects a whole host of people – children still learning to read who need to be able to see words clearly; people with visual impairments who need clear words, in a colour which contrasts with the background sufficiently; adults or young people with learning disabilities who may find reading harder; anyone with Dyslexia – my wife is pretty fed up with going to churches with wonderful “artistic” use of colour and imagery which obscure the words completely. She already wears tinted glasses to read black on white – why make it any more difficult?
And given the number of people who begin to lose sight to a greater or lesser extent as they age…moving images behind words could be excluding a significant chunk of your congregation from being able to fully participate.
(For the record – accessibility advice is to use a large, clear font such as comic sans ideally black on pale yellow. I know aesthetically minded folks with howl in disapproval but that’s the advice from the RNIB to make words easy to read for all!
Find a handy link here on making church accessible: http://www.throughtheroof.org/ )
Thanks for that comment Mark. I have dyslexic children and have also taught in adult education for years. A lot of my students (I have taught marketing and business to performing arts students) have learning difficulties of some description – normally dyslexia or ADHD. So I know from experience that even still images int he background can be very distracting.
Personally I also tend to find a lot of the images people use simply very corny. I was at a big worship conference a couple of months ago and there was an animated loop behind a song about the kingship of Christ. The loop just showed different perspectives of a cartoon crown. It was mildly interesting on the first loop but by the time we had sung the chorus 17 times it was particularly annoying.
Images date, they are subject to individual’s taste. Let’s use them sparingly and occasionally to add interest but not get hung up on having them all the time.
I’ve lost count of the number of times we’ve been asked if our Worship Backing Band DVDs have moving images behind and those customers are always disappointed when I say no. We decided to keep it simple and this comment thread outlines a lot of the reasons for why we took that decision. But inevitably a lot of people feel that they need more than great music and wonderful lyrics etc to fully facilitate their congregations in worship. I guess we are very used to multi media explosions happening elsewhere that we feel that we should be bringing this to corporate worhsip too.
You’ll see plenty elsewhere on this blog about visual worship – in fact we’ve given it a whole category and have a growing number of posts giving practical ideas for it. We’re in favour of using images and really happy to embrace it in worship. But let’s also be aware of some of the negative issues too.