Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Michael King]

i was asked to write an article for a maqazine recently. and i am by no means a writer, i am a techie. however i took them up on there offer and this is part of what i have came up with. This is by no means a finished product. However, since i work full time as a mostly secualar foh operator, and only volunteer services at a few regional churches and of course my home church, this has been a challange. please if you dont mind would you read this and tell me what you like and dislike about it. and i will gladly take all opinions openly.

here is the link

http://michaelandrewking.com/TechInChurch.html

[Sam Antley]

FWIW, I would change two things:

First, In an attempt to keep the tone of the article positive and upbeat, I would put the first paragraph somewhere towards the bottom of the article rather than starting out with it.  Placing the article at the beginning of your thesis puts you, as the writer of the article, in the position of defender of all things technical, rather than the proponent of said technicals.  Now, this article may have been the inspiration for your article, but you still don't want to start the article with a defensive tone.

Second, I would, when mentioning studies and any other outside correlative information, mention the specific instance, rather than generalities.  For example, rather than saying "Studies Show that two out three people prefer peppermint gum" (sounds great for a commercial, but not for a paper) you would say "The study on Gum Preference published last year from the American Dental Association states that 2 out of three.....  Again, this puts you in a more tenable position and adds credibility to your thoughts rather than just making it an opinion piece that can be more or less taken with a grain of salt.

Hope this helps.

Sam Antley
Musician/Techie/Frustrated English Major

[Guest]

I realize this is probably a first draft. But what is your goal?? Right now, it is 'painted' with far too large a brush, giving straw man arguments that ouls only further divide rather than convince those in polar postions.

This beinmg a technology forum, you will be hard tend to find folks who see technology as an end all solution, with many here attending churches that embrace all change far more readily than any tradition.

But we come here to learn of the application of technology, while we may often disagree on beliefs.

[Brad Weber]

Michael,

When you were asked to write an article was it an open invitation or was there a particular subject or perspective they asked you to address?  From my experience I am often asked to write about specific subjects and knowing what that is might help in reviewing what you have written.

I do agree with Sam, the draft does come across as being a little defensive and almost felt like reading a rebuttal.

Some things change slowly but then become accepted.  It was only 42 years ago, after the Second Vatican Council and in the midst of the radical 1960's, that mass was first performed in English and many then thought that a heretical change.  But now you have people who have only experienced mass in English and accept that as the norm.  I'm not voicing an opinion as to whether this change was good or bad, but where do you think the Catholic church would be now if they still only performed mass in Latin?

Personally I think there are two major reasons for technology as a part of worship.  One is presenting the message in a way that is relevant and effective to an ever changing audience.  The other is to draw in people that may have not taken part in the church in the past by offering them something they can relate to.  That does not mean abandoning your existing members and their preferences and I think that some churches forget that in the rush to address new members.

I would suggest trying to personalize the article.  Don't just say that someone complained, put readers in the situation.  Perhaps something like "You're running sound at your weekly service when someone walks up to you and says "It's a sin that we waste so much money on technology and toys when those funds could go directly to those needing our help.""  Maybe use some personal experiences to make it "real".

Good luck with the article!  Any hints as to what publication we can look for it to be in?

[Michael King]

thank you for replying. When asked to write it was for a specfic side of an argument. i belive the publication is doing an ongoing segment on this topic, so i am trying to be defensive. but you all might be right in saying i am "too defensive" i wil keep all opinions open as i try and settle down and write the real article

[Brad Weber]

If you are being expected to take one side in a "debate", then that is a little different.  Unless you are addressing specific points that someone else has raised I would think about not even discussing the other persepctive, you give it credence just by mentioning it.  The opening paragraph is fine, but you almost make the other argument for them in the second partagraph.

I like Sam's wording of presenting yourself as the proponent of your view rather than the defender of it or the opponent of a different perspective.  Focus on how using technology can be beneficial.  Use examples if you have any, maybe such as a specific case where the use of technology got the message to someone who otherwise probably would not have receieved it.

You can also make practical business cases.  Projectors and hymn lyric software have a cost, but compare that to the cost of purchasing and maintaining hymnals.  Several churches have told me this actually rediuces teh costs and frees up money for other purposes, not to mention that it gets faces out of looking down at a book and makes the people more part of a group rather than a bunch of individuals.  And what is the value of being able to stream or provide recordings to those unable to attend services?  Should they be forgotten because it would require technology and money that could be used elsewhere?  Would they still be as involved if they were left out or might their staying involved through technology actually result in more money for other purposes?

[Langston Holland]

"It just is not self-serving to upgrade to the best as long as you are using it to its fullest potential, and to fulfill the mission of the church in growing the body of Christ."

Good point - though I might use wording such as "to use the technology best suited to fulfill the mission of the church..."

Then I would consider focusing on how the character of God is to be revealed through His Body, specifically in the realm of excellence.

God is all about excellence and if we intend to be fully like Him, we too need to do what we do to the best of our ability. The technical ministries in a church are not magically excluded from this fact. Budgets are limited, but I'm convinced there is a way to achieve world class results in any church worship setting - leadership permitting. If God is calling a group of folks to do something, He will provide the means to pull it off in a way that reflects His character. Buying cheap junk that will have to be replaced in two years and perform poorly in the mean time is not humble or godly or anything other than a waste of sacrificially given funds.

http://www.churchsoundcheck.com/excellence.html

[Tom Young]

Very well said and oh-so true !

[ProSoundWeb Community]