The old hymns...we love them. It isn't taste, and we aren't stuck in a rut, but we love the glory and adoration expressed well in the doctrinally sound words which was part of our precious worship to our great and almighty God!
But the "church" seems to think that young people can't handle the old treasured hymns. The "church" seems to think the old hymns are making the young people leave the church. It doesn't matter what the words say; doctrine doesn't seem to matter to the "church".
I have always thought, "I was young, and I could sing them, and I liked them, and I loved them." But the "church" does not listen to "old people"~~the young are all that matter.
So we all attend our assemblies week after week, and as the time zips by we are starving for real MEAT in our singing praise to the LORD!
Please check out T. David Gordon's article, The Imminent Decline of Contemporary Worship Music: 8 Reasons which expresses what has been occurring including a new trend with a swing back to the treasured words we love to sing praise to our LORD:
"...Contemporary worship music hymns not only were/are comparatively poor; they had to be. One generation cannot successfully “compete” with 50 generations of hymn-writers; such a generation would need to be fifty times as talented as all previous generations to do so. If only one-half of one percent (42 out of over 6,500) of Charles Wesley’s hymns made it even into the Methodist hymnal, it would be hubristic/arrogant to think that any contemporary hymnist is substantially better than he. Most hymnals are constituted of hymns written by people with Wesley’s unusual talent; the editors had the “pick of the litter” of almost two thousand years of hymn-writing. In English hymnals, for instance, we rarely find even ten of Paul Gerhardt’s 140 hymns, even though many musicologists regard him as one of Germany’s finest hymnwriters. Good hymnals contain, essentially, “the best of the best,” the best hymns of the best hymnwriters of all time; how could any single generation compete with that?..."
"Just speaking arithmetically, one would expect that, at best, each generation could represent itself as well as other generations, permitting hymnal editors to continue to select “the best of the best” from each generation. Were this the case, then one of every fifty hymns we sing should be from one of the fifty generations since the apostles, and, therefore, one of every fifty should be contemporary, the best of the current generation of hymnwriters. Perhaps this is what John Frame meant when, in the second paragraph of his book on CWM, he indicated that he had two goals for his book: to explain some aspects of CWM and to defend its “limited use” in public worship. Perhaps Prof. Frame thought one out of fifty constituted “limited use,” or perhaps he might have permitted as much as one out of ten, I don’t know. But our generation of hymnwriters, while talented and devout, are not more talented or more devout than all other generations, and are surely not so by a ratio of fifty-to-one..."