Unifying the Body of Christ

I read an interesting blog entry earlier this morning about worship styles and the potential division that they can cause. There is a growing trend in churches to offer both a traditional worship service - consisting typically of hymn-based music and traditional liturgies - and a contemporary service - consisting typically of praise choruses and more "updated" liturgies. In addition to this trend, some churches are also choosing to have one service that utilizes what is called a "blended" style of worship - consisting typically of both a traditional hymn and a praise chorus and blended worship styles.
There is a great deal of controversy swirling around all three of these styles. Advocates for holding two services believe that in having both styles, they will be more attractive to both younger and older people. The thought is that the traditional service will attract older people and that the contemporary service will bring in the younger generations. Others adhere to a blended style because they believe that everyone could be attracted to this service.
I have listened to many arguments on both sides and have attended churches that offer all three kinds of worship services. Interestingly, these arguments tend to grow quite passionate. Advocates for two services tend to believe that two services can serve more people but those who differ on the subject, as does Tony Campolo, believe that two services tend to grow two separate congregations with two separate allegiances. He states his argument, along with scriptural justification below:

In Matthew 13:52, we read that Jesus said, “The kingdom of Heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure chest things new and things old.”"
"Any worship service that is all the new stuff is not the kingdom of God. Any worship service that is all the old stuff is not the kingdom of God. There needs to be balance between the two if it’s to be representative of the kingdom that Jesus wills for us to enjoy. Some churches have tried to settle this conflict by having two different services—one which uses contemporary worship music and one where the music is traditional. The problem with this is that it tends to create two separate congregations with two different perspectives on the faith." (Tony Campolo)

Those are some heavy words. On the other side of the subject, advocates for the separate worship services state that by blending worship styles, you tend to come up with a service in which no one is entirely pleased and you are left with a worship time that can feel lukewarm or non-committal to either one or both of the worship styles presented.
This controversy has been something that has troubled me for years. On the one hand, I really empathize with what Tony Campolo says. His main concern with holding two different services is a valid one. Do you want division and different allegiances within the same body of believers? Isn't unity in all things what we are called to have as Christians? Despite these concerns, I wonder if a blended approach to worship is really what is best.
I believe that there are a few ways to move to overcome the potential division that comes from having multiple styles of worship. First, I believe that all services need to be unified from the pulpit. That is all services receive the same teaching, rather in person, by Skype or some other medium that ensures that all services; regardless of venue or time are linked by the same message, theology and teaching. This approach seems to be utilized well in larger churches, as an example, like College Wesleyan Church in Marion, IN. Second, there must be offered times of combined services, whether in one style or another. Such a thing will encourage church unity. Third, the church needs to have other services: small groups, Sunday morning classes and Wednesday night offerings that offer multiple occasions to come together as a unified body.
Blended services may be a good alternative in the right situation. I think that churches that have worship services of 200 or fewer in morning attendance might be best served with a blended approach rather than a split approach. The easy and quick answer to this is that the are no easy and quick answers in regards to what is the best mode of worship. I believe that patience, prayer and vision are required in order to truly know what type of worship service will serve your church best.
The bottom line is that Tony Campolo, as always, is provocative and challenging. That is one of the many things that I love about him. He is a type of modern prophet in that he never allows his audience to feel comfortable or complacent. I think that he raises a very real question: are we more loyal to our own service or to the overall body of our church? Even more so, are we more loyal to the sign on the door or the reason why the door is there in the first place? We can never forget, despite differences in preferences, the church exists to be the one, the unified Bride of Christ. All else that divides her and that places schism in the mix is to be avoided and overcome through prayer and supplication to the Holy Spirit.
What do you think of the argument? Have you had positive or negative experiences with one style or another? I am anxious to hear what you think about this issue because it is a very real one and has led to too much division in the body already. Thanks for your input!