Sunday is a fairly laid-back day at the NAC. In the morning attendees are encouraged to attend one of the local Church of God congregations, most of which tend to swell on this day. There are minimal conferences during the day. But, by Sunday evening things start moving into full gear as many more people arrive in Anderson. The evening service has become a highlight of the convention as churches across the continent (and to a certain extent, the world) tune in online to participate in the Global Communion celebration. Tonight lived up to expectations. Fantastic music, and a very powerful sermon by Randy Bargerstock, who challenged us with "Permeating to Transform", calling us to permeate our world (i.e. definitely one to watch on online archive or on DVD purchase). Following the service there was also the annual Heritage Sing-A-Long.
Last night I indicated that Park Place was being used as an overflow venue. Tonight a new twist was introduced. Park Place participants were offered a different worship experience (i.e. more traditional), with only the sermon brought in through video. This is interesting for two reasons. First of all this has been hardly promoted. Earlier I had heard rumors that this was happening, but there were few other indications of this. It was mentioned at the beginning of tonight's service at Reardon, but even the program booklet contains no reference to an alternative service, with the exception of one obscure, passing statement. Very strange. The other interesting point of this innovation is that it marks the first time in NAC history that an alternative worship service was provided. It certainly reflects our times and is a further indication that in the midst of our growing diversity it is unrealistic to expect that a worship service can be the basis of or primary expression of our identity or unity.
I'd better get to bed. Tomorrow is a full day!
Last night I indicated that Park Place was being used as an overflow venue. Tonight a new twist was introduced. Park Place participants were offered a different worship experience (i.e. more traditional), with only the sermon brought in through video. This is interesting for two reasons. First of all this has been hardly promoted. Earlier I had heard rumors that this was happening, but there were few other indications of this. It was mentioned at the beginning of tonight's service at Reardon, but even the program booklet contains no reference to an alternative service, with the exception of one obscure, passing statement. Very strange. The other interesting point of this innovation is that it marks the first time in NAC history that an alternative worship service was provided. It certainly reflects our times and is a further indication that in the midst of our growing diversity it is unrealistic to expect that a worship service can be the basis of or primary expression of our identity or unity.
I'd better get to bed. Tomorrow is a full day!
4 comments:
Lloyd, thanks for keeping us up to speed.
I'm not surprised there wasn't much said about an alt-venue. Communication seems to be a systemic problem of ours. Why wouldn't it show it's self at NAC.
What a thought: Identity/Unity doesn't equal uniform worship style/gathering/space. Unity isn't limited to all of us knowing the same songs and when to harmonize? How dare you?
Wow sounds like you've got more to blog about. :)
Ok Lloyd,
I must take a bit of exception to the statement that it was not publicized.
Information discussing the venue options was in included in the lead article of the May CHOGnews. It was on the MyCHOG social network, on Facebook, LinkedIn and included in lead articles on the CHOG Homepage.
It was also included in the first issue of the NAC Roundup - daily newspaper for the convention, in addition to the references in the program book.
Could more be done? Probably.
Perhaps however, our constituents could keep better informed by leveraging the information already provided through our print, web and e-publications?
David,
I too know the frustration of communicating only not being heard.
And, you have done an exceptional job of getting the word out regarding this year's NAC. I still contend, however, that the matter of the two service venues was far from clear. I don't want to sound too critical about this (besides you don't have to be perfect), but hopefully this will be constructive criticism that can be used to make this clearer next year.
True, the dual venues have been publicized, but it was far from clear what was going to happen at each one. I think part of the confusion lies in the usage of words like "overflow" and "additional seating" which implies that Park Place is a second class venue, and only an option if you can't make it into Reardon. This diminishes the significance of what is offered at Park Place, which for many people is actually their preference because of the style.
But even with that being said I believe that it was also not clear that the Park Place experience was an alternative experience.
As I look through the Program Booklet I cannot find a single reference to the alternative service format, except for one brief phrase that was actually directed to people who might join the choir. The daily listing for the evening services only listed Reardon.
The first issue of NAC Roundup was also vague. As I mentioned the implication is that Park Place is mere "overflow". The only reference to the alternative style is the wording "Both worship teams will offer an inspiring worship experience that is stylistically tailored to maximize the use of the physical facilities". That's far from clear. Why not say what those styles are?
Also, in every issue of NAC Roundup in the "In the Spotlight" schedule listings only the Reardon location is listed for each evening service.
In reviewing the May 5th news item on the web page the message is getting closer, but it is still cloudy. Again, clarity of distinction between the two sites would be helpful.
Beyond my own personal confusion, I know this is an issue because as I talked with people most people prior to Monday did not know about the two worship styles.
Again, please take these comments with the understanding that I am not trying to be hard on you or any individuals who wrote or compiled this information. This one weakness should not overshadow the great job that is being done in so many other areas of communication. I want this to be helpful.
Randy's sermon was an outstanding challenge to the church ... on target ... the loudness of the music and bongo beat Friday through Sunday was tolerable only with the assistance my ear plugs. I have no quarrel with musical styles but I have ethical isues with the mechanical manipulation when audiences have no defense except stay or leave.
Post a Comment