Threads from Henry's Web

Category: Worship

  • A Bowdlerized Lectionary Passage

    There are a number of lectionary selections that skip part of a passage. Sometimes this is for time. Sometimes it relates to topic, but sometimes it is simply used to remove material that might offend.

    I like lectionary preaching and teaching. I think it forces pastors to get out of their comfort zones and expound on passages they might otherwise not read. I don’t think it’s the only way to go. I think preaching through the Bible has a place, as does topical preaching. But topical preaching is especially subject to the limitations of a pastor’s particular interests.

    Further, I like a worship service that includes all four passages of the lectionary. As Christians we have remarkably little patience for hearing the scripture. I sometimes get the feeling that people prefer the sermon because it has less Bible in it. I have encountered very few services that do include all the passages, but I have truly been blessed by those that do.

    But having said all of that, the Revised Common Lectionary can get no my nerves, and this week was a case in point. The Old Testament passage is from 2 Samuel 6. The story, as told in 2 Samuel, brings out many aspects of worship as seen then in Israel.

    We start with the ark of the covenant in exile, away from the center of Israelite life. David wants to bring the ark to Jerusalem, so he proceeds to do so joyfully. But joy is turned to sorrow when Uzzah tries to steady the ark and is struck dead.

    Now I know that’s a difficult passage in the Old Testament, but you might as well not try to understand the Old Testament/Hebrew Scriptures at all if you don’t want to recognize that the writers viewed contact with the holy as a very dangerous thing. (This is one of the difficult passages that my friend Alden Thompson discusses in his book Who’s Afraid of the Old Testament God?.

    After the ark is kept in a home for a time, David again comes to move it to Jerusalem with better preparation. The story ends with David dancing before the Lord, and his wife Michal despises him for it.

    Besides the inherent danger of approaching that which is holy, this story also illustrates the combination of fear and joy. We want to separate the fear of the Lord from the joy of the Lord these days. We don’t understand how these things can co-exist. But the Bible writers had no such problem.

    Now what about the lectionary passage? Proper 10B gives us 2 Samuel 6:1-5, 12b-19. This splits the story as all the people are making merry and before Uzzah touches the ark in 6:6, then resumes it when David starts taking the ark on from the house of Obed-Edom. It skips 6:12a which tells us how David is motivated to do so when he sees that Obed-Edom is blessed while the ark is present.

    We now continue the joyful procession, with our scripture reading skipping a funeral and three months of time, heading on into Jerusalem. Presumably, the congregation is not supposed to ask just why the ark is in Obed-Edom’s house.

    Finally, the story ends with verse 19 as everyone goes home happy, and skips Michal’s story, which provides the other counterpoint. Worship can be destroyed by disobedience to God, but it can also be destroyed by those who despise the joy.

    You may tell me that people can read these additional passages for themselves, and that the extra reading will not contribute to the service. I don’t think one can be certain of these things. For many church people these days, the scripture reading is pretty much all the scripture they get.

    In this case, I think the story is made to say something completely different than it does in its full context. It’s like a different story all together.

  • Worship: Few Words, Boy Friends, and Girl Friends

    David Ker is complaining about modern worship songs (since the 90s), and Peter Kirk has partially taken him to task about it, wondering about the air down in Mozambique and whether it causes David to rant. (Personally I suspect it’s looking at too many hippos, but in non-essentials charity, I say!) David continues with a more in-depth piece, Droning, desymbolization and Christian mantra. I think the latter is especially well worth reading, though all three will help set the stage.

    Now I’m going to try to “let my words be few,” but I’ve already written quite a number of words, so that may not be easy. [Note after completing this–I failed.] Since I have an eclectic readership, let me note here that this is written to Christians. It’s internal shop talk and will probably be simply boring or weird to others.

    I’m personally in sympathy with David on this from the point of view of music quality and what makes me worship. Over the years, however, I’ve tried to learn to be less critical. If I find it difficult to handle a song, I look around the congregation and inevitably I see plenty of other people who are quite deeply drawn into the crowd. If I focus on that community, I often find myself drawn in as well–to the worship, not really the music.

    After hearing from friends overseas who must drive a couple of hours to fellowship, and have no options, I have felt very convicted about my complaints regarding local worship services. If I don’t like the worship one place, I can easily move to another. Many Christians can’t. Thus read the following advice with reference to American Christians, and to others only where truly applicable.

    To worshipers, if you can’t stand the worship music, get over it. Worship is a communal activity, and it’s likely that if a particular style of music is repeatedly presented at your church, somebody is being attracted to it.

    I recall one church where my wife and I could barely stand some of the music. It always seemed out of harmony with the worship service itself. But then we noticed that there was almost half of a section of the sanctuary filled with kids, many of whom attended that church without their parents, and those kids were completely involved in the very music that was driving us nuts. We chose to get over it.

    If you can’t get over it, and I admit that this is quite possible, find another congregation. I can think of a few churches I’ve visited where I believe my best efforts to follow my own advice would fail. In that case, you need to find a place where you can become a part of the community.

    There is a third option I hesitate to mention, and that is to try to improve the worship experience of your own church. The problem with this approach is that, barring debates over the color of the carpet, debates over styles of worship can be the most divisive, and frequently lose the goal of the best worship for the community in efforts by individuals to have everything done in their personally favorite style. So if you try this option, do it prayerfully and make sure that you’re trying for the best for everybody and not just for yourself.

    Having said this to members of the congregation, I would like to emphasize a paragraph from David’s second post:

    But, worship leaders also have a key role in this. On the stage, it’s easy to get swept away in the beauty of the music and the enjoyment of the moment and not realize that a hundred people in the congregation have their hands in their pockets and are bored out of their minds. Open your eyes, worship leaders! Be aware of the temperature of the congregation. You are supposed to be leading others in worship not zoning out in the front.

    I send a separate message to leaders and congregants. Leaders, if you see your congregation bored, uninvolved, uninterested, or simply not worshiping, then you have some work to do. It’s fine for someone like me to tell people (especially myself!) to get over themselves and worship. But that’s not an excuse for some of the careless crap that goes on in worship.

    People treat a stumbling presentation of the liturgy as a joke, something nice and folksy about the church. Communion is done so frequently that many pastors don’t take time to connect it to the message and the rest of the liturgy. One gets the feeling of “oh yes, we’ve gotta hand out some bread and wine” from such presentations. Worship leaders don’t pay attention to scripture or theme.

    Rather than being folksy and fun, such things make the congregation treat worship as something unimportant and casual. If the minister can’t even find one sentence to insert in the communion liturgy at the appropriate points (marked conveniently with asterisks in the United Methodist hymnal), or the worship leader can’t be bothered to communicate with the minister and provide musical settings with a sense of connection, then the worshipers are justified in concluding that somebody doesn’t really care.

    But finally, what is this business about boy friends and girl friends? Yes, I finally got to that point. It has to do with “I am so in love with you.” (No, not YOU, someone else!) I believe that in scripture one of the strongest metaphors for the way in which God seeks people and for the bond between myself and God is sexual passion. I don’t mean sanitized, hand-holding, going on a date level passion. I mean the kind of passion that makes one unable to wait to get to the bedroom before the clothes are coming off. I imagine that image offends some. Enjoy being offended.

    Then read Ezekiel 16, for example, and see God’s passion for us represented as the passionate desire of a lover, while unfaithfulness is represented as the passion for someone other than our true spouse. There are many other texts. The problem with “lover” music, in my view, is not so much that we trivialize our love for God by expressing it in the form of cheap love lyrics; rather, it’s that our love for God is often so much more shallow than those cheap lyrics.

    Hmmm. I intend none of this as judgmental about any particular person. There are many of you, such as both David and Peter, whose service for God indicates that they speak from a depth of passion that most stay-at-home American Christians cannot hope to match. If you’re in that situation, please don’t be offended at my suggestions here.

    But if you’re just checking off the boxes of your supposed weekly activities, then give it some consideration. Is your relationship with God a casual date or a life-long covenant?

  • First UMC ICON Service

    A few days ago I posted a video about the new service being offered at my home church, First United Methodist Church of Pensacola.

    Yesterday I attended the first service. We ran out of standing room and about 80 people had to be sent to the other service. I am very interested in the concept of the service, which combines strong traditional elements of liturgy with technology and contemporary music and art. In fact, one of the characteristics claimed for the service is “art embracing.”

    I will confess that “art embracing” isn’t at the top of my personal list, but I think it must be a priority in a service that will serve the generation after mine, and also people who are more visually oriented than I am in my own generation.

    The preaching continues to be great, and the preaching was one of the reasons I joined First UMC. Dr. Wesley Wachob and Rev. Geoffrey Lentz (who is kind enough to remind everyone that I was his first Greek teacher, even when I forget to!) are both very adept at the sermon form.

    I was most impressed, however, with the was the program came together logistically. It looked to me a great deal like accomplishing several impossible things before breakfast, and then piling on a few more before lunch. The only major issue was one that resulted from the overwhelming success–it was crowded. I’m guessing that the leaders will have their own long list of things to make better; that’s just who they are. But I’m just impressed with what was accomplished.

    Well done!

    PS: I wrote the devotional for my wife’s list this morning, also about this service. She was unable to attend due to work, and so asked me to write a response.

  • Fulfilling Needs or Catering to Wants

    The Internet Monk recommends a couple of books in a post titled Recommended: Wicker and Duin on The End of Evangelicalism, and I’m not going to gainsay his recommendation, considering I have read neither. But one comment he made caught my attention:

    Despite being an interesting read and passing along many good pieces of information and research, Duin’s own point of view is jumbled. One moment she longs for communal simplicity, another for the seminary atmosphere of intense theology and the next for the erudition and authenticity of L’Abri. . . .

    Duin in this quote is Julie Duin, author of Quitting Church. Now please understand that I’m not responding to her viewpoint, which I know only from a very brief second-hand reference. It’s the attitude that the Internet Monk seems to have found in the book, and which I have heard time and time again. Many people seem to be on a wandering quest, looking for whatever is not there in a particular church.

    Further, please don’t read anything I’m writing here as a suggestion that church leaders should be sloppy, or should not care about fulfilling the needs of their congregation. Too often when church leaders tell people to suck it in and live with the church, they are really simply not that interested in reaching those particular people. On the other hand, there are large numbers of pastors and other church leaders who are working themselves to death trying to reach people who may be searching for something that does not, and will not, exist.

    I recall preaching on a Sunday night once, in a church in which that service was attended by the most dedicated folks. I commented that I believed one should join a church not because of the needs it fulfilled, but rather because of how one could serve in and through that church congregation. A gentleman in the congregation objected strenuously. He thought the church needed to do a better job of serving him and of providing the kind of worship service he needed.

    He was not entirely wrong. We do have spiritual needs that must be fulfilled through worship, but ironically, I think, those real needs will never be served while our wants are being catered to.

    Hold that thought for a moment. While I was thinking about some of this, I read 8 in 10 Don’t Want Sunday School on John Meunier’s blog. The study from which he cited these numbers goes on to show that very few people are interested in spiritual formation beyond the occasional church service, and few want a small group experience.

    As a teacher and small group leader, this bothers me quite a bit. But I’m not sure that we’re generally going the right way in response in many churches. You see, we try to find out what people want to have happen on Sunday morning, and then we try to do that. But I believe that when Jesus gets hold of you, you’re going to go places and do things that you might not want to do.

    Worship is about God. Now I’ve argued before that leaders still have to pay attention to the people worshiping. You can’t just do anything you want and expect your congregation to encounter God in worship. But ultimately worship is going to involve loving God with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves, and that can get uncomfortable.

    Our neighbors? How about the neighbors down the pew? You see, worship is a giving exercise, and it might mean that I need to go and be part of Christ’s body when something is happening that I really don’t care for. If I’m the Bach lover, perhaps I need to be there for the teenagers with their praise band. If I want drums, perhaps I need to be there when the choir is singing an anthem.

    Or the problem might be in sermons. I might be longing for a message filled with intellectual stimulation, but the body, the whole congregation, needs to hear a message of conviction, or one of encouragement. Going to worship together will involve commitment, and horror of horrors, giving up some of what I want in order to be with that body. I want to be made happy. I need to serve and to surrender to God.

    The idea of being spiritual without a social aspect bothers me. The more I study, the more I see the command to love God and to love one’s neighbor as almost identical. This week’s lectionary text, Matthew 25:31-46 (The Sheep and the Goats), brings that more to the fore. Jesus is appearing in the form of people who need my help, and my love for Him is manifested in what I do for them.

    I think quite often when we drop out of church, what we are saying is that we can’t be bothered to spend an hour or two a week doing things that have to do with other people. It all has to be the way I want it to be or I’m not going to go.

    Now we can try to cater to that kind of folks if we want to, but I don’t think they will ever make a congregation. Our problem may not be so much that we lack enough entertaining music, adequate or excellent audio-visual material, or an engaging enough pastor. Our problem may be that we–myself included–lack enough commitment. If such folks are to become truly part of the body of Christ, they’re going to need to be converted, not catered to.

    It may be that rather than a change of church programs we need a change of heart.

  • Religious Attitudes and Worship Styles

    One thing I have observed over the years is that relatively few debates in church congregations center around serious theological issues. A few are about administrative and financial issues, but there is nothing like the order of worship to produce an angry debate. Some congregations spend years fighting over things like whether one should raise one’s hands during singing or not.

    But there is an interesting theological point tied up in all these debates. From time to time those who prefer a less structured style of worship will accuse those who prefer formality of having a religious spirit. For those not into the charismatic vocabulary, you can translate “religious spirit” to “ingrained religious attitude.” Attribution of the state to a resident spirit or not is irrelevant to my point.

    I have encountered this when I question certain activities in worship services that seem disruptive or unwise to me. I have been asked if I’m sure I don’t have a religious spirit. Of course having a “religious spirit” is pretty much the bottom of the heap in terms of spiritual maturity.

    Yet at the same time, those who prefer the wilder form of worship often look back at the more traditional folks with very similar criticisms of their worship service. Repeating the Lord’s prayer is “vain repetition.” Preferring a weekly celebration of the Eucharist is “strange.” Multiple scripture readings as part of the worship service is excessive and boring. Following an order of service results in a service that is dead.

    It seems to me that both of these sets of criticism depend on the externals. There are certainly arguments to be made in favor of one or another style of worship under particular circumstances for particular people, but the majority of these debates in churches are really about what makes one feel comfortable and what one enjoys. If those debating them could recognize that we would perhaps have a great deal more peace.

    The problem arises because we identify what feels comfortable to us personally as “right” and what makes us uncomfortable as “wrong” when the best thing to do is to recognize many of these items as matters of taste.

    There are some matters that are more than matters of taste, and for those the accusation of some kind of excessive religious tension, religious attitude, or a religious spirit simply makes it harder to discuss the matter rationally. The accusation of a religious spirit is, in my view, a manipulative technique to prevent one from examining the practices in question.

    But if there is any sort of religious attitude involved, it seems to work pretty regularly on both sides.

  • Exceptional Church Service at 1st UMC Niagara Falls

    Even when traveling I like to make it to church, and I especially like to visit new churches and see just what they’re doing. One often ends up in an annoying service, but I’ve also had some of my most encouraging moments with regard to the state of the church in attending services I picked out of the yellow pages (as I did today) when traveling.

    Today’s choice was First United Methodist Church of Niagara Falls. I couldn’t even find a web site for them, but I could follow the directions to their address, so off I went. I’ve previously blogged about St. Paul’s United Methodist Church in Niagara Falls, which is now closed. That was disappointing though not too surprising due to small congregation and large building that was demanding to maintain. The good news is that the building was donated to a growing congregation and is thus still being used to God’s glory.

    I generally am not going to blog about negative experiences, and certainly not by name. There’s enough negative stuff going around. I’ll do what I can to influence United Methodist worship by underlining the things I like.

    Since Niagara Falls First UMC doesn’t appear to have a web site, I’m not sure what the situation is with the pastor. Rev. Tom Kraft, listed as senior pastor of Pendleton Center UMC was presiding, and appeared to be covering the church as pastor. A retired pastor under appointment is listed on the conference web site. In any case, Pastor Tom conducted an excellent worship service.

    Amongst the things I really appreciated were the relaxed style, even for a service with liturgy in a traditional format, well-done music. The choir isn’t large, but is accompanied and well-directed by Carl Mayer. I could listen to him play twice as much without getting bored, but then the service would probably be too long. He chooses music that is well suited to the choir size and abilities. (Probably the most common failure in church choir directors is selected music that doesn’t suit the choir. Even a non-musician such as myself will notice the results.) He also plays some engaging music on the piano.

    Probably my biggest pet peeve, and the one I encounter the most frequently is a communion service that is sort of an appendix to the service. You’ve probably all experienced such services. The whole service appears to go one direction, and then all of a sudden it feels like someone suddenly remembers communion. This is followed by a rote reading of the liturgy from the UM hymnal with no additions, a very formal blessing of the elements, and offering the elements in an efficient and rapid way.

    In this case, the liturgy of communion fit in, Pastor Tom connected liturgy and proclamation of the word seamlessly, “words appropriate to the season” were sprinkled where they belonged, and thus the Eucharist became part of a unified act of worship. The pastor prayed for people at a kneeling rail which I think is an awesome addition to the service.

    It is unfortunate that the sanctuary was much less than half filled. The folks who weren’t sitting in those pews missed something special.

    I say all this not to flatter or advertise a particular congregation but simply to relate my own experience, and hopefully to encourage some folks. I’m not a consultant on liturgy, and I have no idea what next week will bring at this church. But why not take the trouble to visit churches on vacation? Sometimes you will be disappointed, but many times you will be blessed, and maybe you will have an opportunity to bless others. I have found that I receive a blessing many more times than I’m disappointed. Often I see things that I can take back to my home church and apply. I also find that actually experiencing various United Methodist churches is a strong antidote to the negative attitude of some United Methodists about our denomination.

    There was nothing really complex used in this service. Simple props and a video screen enhanced the presentation of the Word, but the props didn’t take over the message. The sermon was on “Handling Complaints” from Exodus 16. I particularly like the suggestion of the “five finger check”–when someone claims “everyone” is complaining, ask them to name five. I think that would work. Enthusiasm, energy, and a serious effort at congregational involvement all paid off. Of course it didn’t hurt at all that the pastor presented a message he clearly believed, and thought important, or that he clearly was fully involved in the Eucharist.

    I won’t be in Niagara Falls for another Sunday, so this will be the only church service for this trip. I hope all those faithful readers who have tomorrow off will enjoy themselves, and I empathize with those who have to work!

  • Worst Worship Song

    Peter Kirk is discussing the “worst worship song,” a theme (or proto-meme?) that seems to be running amongst the Christian blogs, and he’s particularly concerned that “Heart of Worship” is regarded as the worst by a number of bloggers.

    That one isn’t my favorite, but I also wouldn’t call it the worst. I’m a bit more of a hymn person, preferably accompanied by a fine pipe organ or excellent synthesizer.

    A great deal of the quality of worship music has to do with the time and circumstances. Too many times worship leaders just work off a list of favorites.

  • Inreach and Outreach

    My previous post, The Most Wasted Piece of Architecture, didn’t generate discussion here, but it was picked up by Locusts and Honey with a substantial quote, and some interesting discussion took place there.

    The discussion seemed to center a good deal around the specific issue of church sanctuaries. But what I would hope we would consider would be the balance between inreach and outreach both in our personal lives and in the lives of others. Church sanctuaries are beautiful. I do appreciate them. But I have to ask whether they represent the best use of resources to build the kingdom. I’m writing this on Sunday morning. Once I hit the “publish” button I’ll be headed to church, where I’ll meet with the pastor and pray with him before he goes out to preach three services for the day. I’ll attend one in a very nice old sanctuary, and I will be spiritually fed there. All of this will do me good, but is it the best Sunday morning possible in terms of building the kingdom?

    I don’t question the need for inreach. Church members must be motivated, trained, empowered, and released for ministry. That will take resources, in space, time, and money. My question, however, is just where we will find the balance. How much do we spend maintaining the machine, and how much do we spend using it? We can come to different answers on sanctuary design and value, but I think none of us can avoid asking just how well we are stewarding the resources God provides us in the church.

    What I’m really asking of my fellow Christians is that we honestly evaluate our resources and our use of them, not asking what we like, but rather asking what will do kingdom work in the best way.

  • Worship that Builds

    Peter Kirk has a post on one of my favorite topics, order in worship, titled God is not a God of disorder but of peace. I want to call attention to a couple of points in his post.

    First, on the context of the passage from which his title was taken, he says:

    It seems to me that this verse gives a general principle, which here is being applied specifically to gatherings of the church but can be applied more widely. I don’t think the specific application here is only to prophecy, but to everything described in verses 26 to 32. Indeed the point is basically to support the last part of verse 26, “Everything must be done so that the church may be built up.” (TNIV). Thus it does apply to “untoward” manifestations of any kind, but of course that depends on exactly what is considered “untoward”.

    This is a good point, because Paul is talking about order in the worship service throughout 1 Corinthians 14. We tend to pick the verses from that chapter that best suit our own style of worship. Those who speak in tongues have one set of verses that talk about positive aspects; those who prefer not emphasize the verses that speak against it. But in order to understand the entire chapter, one needs to realize that the whole question here is what activities will be constructive, or building, in a worship service.

    (more…)

  • Nostalgia and Idolatry

    In worship recently I was privileged to hear a group sing some old gospel music. They were enthusiastic, energetic, and clearly enjoyed worshipping God through their music. As I sat and listened, I could feel a wave of nostalgia roll over the congregation. There was the feeling that this was the sort of service–campmeeting style, singing good old hymns, and expressive–in which they had really met the Lord.

    Now I’m not complaining about people being nostalgic for the style of worship that they experienced in their youth. It’s wonderful, in fact, to see people trying to look for that first love, the intimacy with the Lord that was felt for a short period of time but that they don’t necessarily feel on a daily basis now.

    But there is a point at which nostalgia can become idolatry, and that point is when we let the form replace the substance. For many of the folks in that service, while they loved the form, they knew and sought the substance, God’s actual presence in their lives. For others, however, they loved the form, and let it replace the substance. Just across the campus, during the next hour, at another worship service, there are people who are worshipping with enthusiasm and sincerity, and experiencing that good old time revival encounter with God. Many of the second group–those who long for the form but have forgotten the content–think that the group of people in the other service have either departed from the faith, or at least have ventured onto dangerous ground. They don’t recognize that these people, using modern music and a modern setting are experiencing the communion with God that they experienced when they were young. The form has changed, but the substance is the same.

    I call it idolatry when we let the form replace the substance. This is the Exodus 32 dancing around the golden calf. “These are your gods, oh Israel!” (Exodus 32:4). We replace the golden calf with the order of worship, and the plural “gods” with “God’s presence” but we still substitute the image for the reality.

    And lest anyone get me wrong, it is just as easy to worship the modern form as an idol as any older form. Young people who look at their contemporary worship service with modern music and equate the music and the form with the presence of God are just as much idolaters as older members who remember the past with nostalgia, but forget the God who is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

    It’s about God’s presence, not the form!

    During the years when the Brownsville Revival was going strong here in Pensacola, people would come from all over the country, and yes, all over the world, to see what God was doing at Brownsville Assembly of God. They would observe the music, the order of service, the style of preaching, even the prayers and personal ministry, and then they would go home. Some understood that God was not necessarily going to work everywhere in precisely the same way. But many went home and tried to duplicate the “Brownsville experience.” The folks on the platform could say, “Don’t go home and try to duplicate Brownville. Pray and listen to what God has to say, and do that!”

    Some people couldn’t get past the form. Their golden calf was a band with guitars and drums, a sequence of songs, a style of preaching and prayer. When God didn’t show up, they pretended. They danced around their golden calf.

    Worship is about you in community with others worshipping and communing with God. It is not about the particular form. You may find a particular form most helpful, but that’s not the definition of worship; it’s just the way worship works for you. Others may find that communion with God through other music and other forms. The key is to be watching for God. In order to do that, you have to get your eyes off the golden calf, whatever that is for you.