3 answers

★ Best answer

I think it's a mix of things. Some folks genuinely prefer the tactile experience of holding a hymnal - there's something about the physical book that makes people feel more connected to the practice, plus older congregations often have members who find projected lyrics distracting or hard to read depending on eyesight issues.

It's also way cheaper to maintain books you already own versus investing in projector systems and dealing with technical glitches (I've seen plenty of those fail mid-service, trust me).

A lot of churches stick with what works for their community rather than chasing what the megachurch down the road is doing - kind of like how I still prefer my old field guides to birding apps even though everyone tells me I'm being stubborn about it.

There's definitely a practical side too - hymnals don't require electricity, projector maintenance, licensing fees for digital hymn rights, or someone operating the tech during service.

Plus they're honestly more reliable than dealing with a bulb burning out mid-song or someone forgetting to queue up the verses. For a smaller congregation especially, the cost-benefit just doesn't make sense, especially if the current books are still in decent shape.

The licensing thing is overstated - most hymnal publishers like Hope Publishing or GIA have blanket licenses that churches get anyway, whether they print or project. The real reason places stick with books usually comes down to budget and comfort rather than some hidden advantage. A projector system costs money upfront, needs replacing every few years, and honestly some congregations just like their rituals staying put. That said, your 1990s hymnals aren't some magical preservation - plenty of churches have switched and it works fine. The preference isn't always rational; it's just what feels like "church" to people who've sung from those same pages for decades.

Your answer

Log into answer.