Monday, June 15, 2009
The Worship Wars 1
It had been expressed over the past few months leading up to my scheduled move to St. Louis that after I left, Mom and Sam would no longer have to suffer through such boring Sunday morning services and that they would start going to the Celebration Center—the south campus of multi-site First Church United Methodist. In other words, they were going to exchange the boring, formal, traditional, liturgical worship I had gotten them into for trendy, contemporary, informal, uplifting worship at a place that has a movie theater, a coffee shop, a bookstore, and whose "sanctuary" is a big auditorium that doesn't even look like a church.
Well, the move fell through, I'm still here, and we've had to reach a compromise. We are doing Saturday night at the Celebration Center and Lord's Day at Broadway Pres. That's fair enough. Even Broadway is trying to do the same thing. They've started a more contemporary, informal service on Saturday night, "Morning Light" at the early service on Sunday, and traditional worship at 10:30. I would like us to try the contemporary service at Broadway, but since Samantha has connected with the youth group at First Methodist, it's best that we worship there with her.
I can tend to be a little dogmatic and pushy; I must admit I've become somewhat of a formal old prude in my insistence on a Christianity that has roots plunged deeply into the past and that is committed to sacramental and liturgical renewal. The mainstream evangelicalism that I grew up with as a Southern Baptist is no longer enough for me. I don't mean to belittle those who are quite content with mainstream evangelicalism and find themselves fulfilled and fruitful there, but, from my experience, that tradition has serious shortcomings in its individualism, subjectivism, and otherworldliness. I can't go back there. This is why I am going to continue to be a voice calling for the reform of mainstream evangelicalism until it develops a robust and thorough communal and covenantal emphasis, until it values the sacraments and the Church in their full biblical and patristic glory, and until it fully rejects Gnosticism and gets serious about reclaiming the world for God's glory and Christ's Kingdom.
Yes, I'm an old codger and, yes, what I'm doing may very well lead us back to being a bunch of stuffy old confessional Protestants or, worse, a godless horde of Papists (sorry, my "Romish" friends, you know I say this jestingly), but I am not opposed to contemporary Christian music on principle or to the "emerging church" or any other trendy new form or exercise of Christian faith that has as its aim the true worship of God and the advance of Christ's Kingdom. I don't think these things are necessarily bad. Like anything, they can be used for God's glory and the benefit of His Church.
In my hurt feelings that my family does not find my traditional Presbyterianism the "bees’ knees," I have used certain disparaging terms, for their benefit, to refer to the kind of worship that goes on at the Celebration Center. For instance, I've hurled the "Gnostic" label, and I've used "Pietist" in an unflattering fashion on numerous occasions. I've also pulled "McChurch" or "fast food Christianity" out of the hat a few times, which to my disappointment are not at all original but are already being used by opponents of multi-site churches.
Okay, for mainstream evangelicalism, we can avoid Gnosticism by building churches that actually look like churches, not big empty spaces filled with nothing but . . . well, nothing. We can refrain from making so many of our songs and so much of our preaching refer to "flying away" or going to heaven, because, remember, Christianity also has a this-worldly element called discipleship and eternal life is not going to occur for us in some disincarnate plane of existence but in material bodies in a material heavenly city. We can also avoid Gnosticism by keeping in touch with history. Say the Apostles’ Creed, at least, for Christ's sake, or do something else to show that you give a hoot about the 2000 years of Church history that have passed. Finally, we need to take the sacraments seriously. God doesn't just want to touch us on the level of our feelings or our minds but to also appeal to us according to the senses and to seal our faith with objective realities like words, people, water, bread, and wine. Also, "seeker churches" like the Celebration Center must not shirk on the Bible reading in their services. Read some Scripture to those heathens you're trying to convert! Our faith is not based on purely subjective feelings and experiences but on the objective witness of Christ, the Word of God in history, and Scripture, the written Word of God.
Mainstream evangelicals can avoid the worst abuses of Pietism by replacing some of our "I's," "me's," and "my's" in our trendy praise and worship anthems with "us's," "we's," and "ours's." Our public worship isn't just about how Jesus saved me and you and you but about how Jesus has saved us and made us corporately His Bride and Body. Certainly let's sing about "our" salvation, and occasionally about "my" salvation, but let's also sing about Creation, the Church, and God's might displayed in both acts of power and in the humility of the Incarnation and the cross. After all, doesn't salvation encompass all of this and show us how wonderful it all truly is?
Finally, let's not do the "fast food Christianity" thing where we run a bunch of people through our churches like it's the drive-through window at the local Wendy's. Worship isn't about our convenience but is about offering something to bless the heart of God. We can go longer than an hour. We can trade a few worship songs for a time of communal confession in the service, we can put Bible readings in, we can do the Lord's Supper in such a way that it isn't just a tack on at the end of the service, and we can say the Apostle’s Creed and observe the liturgical seasons in a meaningful way. I don't think this is inconsistent with the contemporary style of worship, unless the whole goal of contemporary worship is just to please ourselves.
Next time, I'm going to recap my little sister's complaints about the traditional liturgical style of worship and discuss how more formal worship can avoid the pitfalls of the excesses it is itself prone to.
Blessed Be the Name of the Lord
In commemoration of John Calvin's 500th birthday (which coincidently falls on July 10, yours truly's birthday), I've been reading his great systematic theology Institutes of the Christian Religion. Fortunately, Princeton has been given permission to offer daily readings from the Battles-McNeill translation, which is much better than the 19th-century Beveridge translation. Love Calvin or hate him, he's easily the greatest theologian in the history of Protestantism, so one would do well to become acquainted with his thought.
One of the aspects of Calvin's thought that has irked me is his thoroughgoing focus on God's sovereignty and Providence in governing the universe. Calvin seems to think that God's instrumentality (direct or indirect) is present in all that happens, whether for good or ill. This is so pronounced in the Institutes that it approaches a strict determinism. Argue with this if you want. I most certainly have, and something indeed still seems wrong with this kind of approach, but in this season in my life in which things have not quite worked out for me as I had planned in regard to seminary and my move to St. Louis, Calvin's confidence that God is radically in control begins to sound pretty good to me. I take comfort and hope in this from today's reading:
If things do not go according to our wish and hope, we will still be restrained from impatience and loathing of our condition, whatever it may be. For we shall know that this is to murmur against God, by whose will riches and poverty, contempt and honor, are dispensed. To sum up, he who rests solely upon the blessing of God, as it has been here expressed, will neither strive with evil arts after those things which men customarily madly seek after, which he realizes will not profit him, nor will he, if things go well, give credit to himself or even to his diligence, or industry, or fortune. Rather, he will give God the credit as its Author. But if, while other men's affairs flourish, he makes but slight advancement, or even slips back, he will still bear his low estate with greater equanimity and moderation of mind than some profane person would bear a moderate success which merely does not correspond with his wish. For he indeed possesses a solace in which he may repose more peacefully than in the highest degree of wealth or power. Since this leads to his salvation, he considers that his affairs are ordained by the Lord. 'We see that David was so minded; while he follows God and gives himself over to his leading, he attests that he is like a child weaned from his mother's breast, and that he does not occupy himself with things too deep and wonderful for him.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Top Five Solutions for My Personal Care Quandary at Seminary
4. Purchase a spider monkey and train him to get me dressed and into my wheelchair, etc., etc.
3. Mail-order bride, preferably a strong, buxom gal who can easily sling me around and who likes the idea of being a preacher's wife.
2. Skip seminary, start a Reformed house church, and make Sedalia, Missouri a new enclave of the Federal Vision and the Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches to rival Moscow, Idaho. Eat your hearts out, Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart.
1. Find a drunken hobo, clean and sober him up, teach him not to swear, and get him to be my live-in attendant in exchange for food and shelter.