Found here. My comments in bold.
-----------------------
This incendiary writer has appeared in this blog before. His presentation is typically slash-and-burn, frequently absent a meek heart or thoughtful, logical analysis.
He is somewhat more charitable today, but nevertheless has some pretty dismissive things to say about people who choose non-liturgical worship.
In addition, he cannot bring himself to quote or even reference a single Scripture or document any assertion.
-------------------
What business is it of yours how other people worship?
What gives you the right to force your way on me?
We all have different personalities, learning modalities, and preferences.
Our different expressions in our love to God are valuable to Him and that is all that matters.
You should have confidence in individual Christians to make discerning decisions for themselves.
I get this kind of response a lot here on the blog and on social media. Basically, just, “Mind your own business, Jonathan.” (Which he is apparently unable to do, because he has all sorts of good reasons why he should tell people their worship is wrong.)
There are a lot of aspects of faith in which minding ones own business is good and proper and right. Just as Paul wrote to the Romans in regards to the church’s sticking point about eating meat, there are times in which we should be gracious toward other believers when we diverge in matters of conscience. (Graciousness is something the author tends not to embrace.)
But worship in the church is not some lifestyle decision to be made. It is not a place to mind ones own business. Especially not now, not here. (Will he document these assertions?)
For most of church history, this idea of individual worship preferences would have been nonsense. (An appeal to history, not the Bible. What if the historical church was in error?)
Even as schism and separation and reformation and succession divided us, the concept of comfortable, entertaining worship was a non-issue. (Notice the false choice. Either it's the author's preferred method of worship, or it's "comfortable, entertaining worship."
Liturgy was liturgy. (Which of course is not true. The liturgy developed over the centuries, incorporating a multitude of changes.)
While theologies grew more diverse, the basic pattern remained the same. Liturgy was how the church worshiped. The church was nourished by Word and Sacrament. Ritual wasn’t derided as dead and meaningless, it was a discipline to anchor our minds and hearts to transcendent reality. Symbols were cherished as visible reminders of our life-long need of grace. (Appeal to tradition.)
Most of all, more than anything, worship was truly corporate in nature. Liturgy wasn’t a preference, it was of paramount importance. (Of course liturgy was a preference. It was the preference of the church. It was written by St. Basil the Great, Archbishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia. It is nothing more than someone's preference on how a church service should be ordered.)
But pop worship and sentimental blue-haired worship breed individualistic selfishness. (Undocumented assertion.)
Come in, sit back, relax, be comfortable. Emote your heart out somewhere in the Almighty’s general direction while our cover band plays some rockin’ good tunes. Hear a helpful, “relevant” message. Then go on with your fun weekend plans. (The author's facile dismissal of a caricature of non-liturgical worship is unseemly and disrespectful of other peoples' worship traditions.)
Sure, if the entertainment is good enough, it might get some butts in the seats. It might draw in a lot, actually, if the cover band is good, the sound system is expensive, and the “pastor” is charismatic. But getting butts in the seats is not the point. (Who has said it is?)
Drawing in outsiders is not worship. (Who has said it is?)
Providing good entertainment is the antithesis of the missional church.
If that’s your draw, you teach people to, in the words of that great American hymn-writer Smokey Robinson, shop around until you find “worship you enjoy.” And in the long run, that consumerist church model (There is no such church model.)
implicitly tells people to leave if they can’t find a church that’s entertaining enough.
But the gift of liturgy isn’t bestowed upon us individually. (This is a nonsense statement.)
No, this gift is presented to the church, (By whom?)
to strengthen and mold it as Christ’s body here on earth. (The liturgy uniquely does this? How so? What is the mechanism that makes the liturgy "strengthen and mold the church?" Will the author ever document any of his claims, either with the Bible, or with concrete examples?)
As we say here in Texas, it’s not for you and you and you and you, it’s for y’all.
In our contemporary situation, when many professing Christians make their tenuous or downright nonexistent church affiliation a point of pride because their “spirituality” is personal, private, and “between me and God,” (Who does this? Examples, please. And please explain how spirituality cannot or should not be individual.)
we need a robust liturgical theology to stop the bleeding. (Undocumented claim.)
We need a worship reformation. (That's what contemporary worship is, a reformation. It's the expression of people longing for something real, something the enlivens the soul and facilitates worship expressions that exalt God and crucify the flesh. It isn't about forms. It isn't about tradition. It isn't about preferences. It's about offering an acceptable sacrifice of worship to the King of kings.
Nothing else matters. And if the liturgy had done its job, contemporary worship would never had happened.)
You cannot serve Jesus faithfully while continually forsaking his church. (The author leaps to a non sequitur.)
True liturgical worship is evidence of this. Called out of the highways and byways, we gather. (Hmmm. Didn't the author just talk about how worship is not about getting some butts in the seats? Didn't he just tell us, drawing in outsiders is not worship?)
We listen to the Word proclaimed in the community, we hear the communal invitation to Table and together we are fed.
And then we’re sent out, the body of Christ like a burning coal on our lips and in our stomachs, and we begin to see things just a little bit differently. Like the body and blood of our Savior, we are fractured and poured out for the world around us. (Which is exactly what non-liturgical churches do.)
Dear brothers and sisters, this is why liturgical worship is not a matter of conscience. (Another nonsense statement.)
It’s not a matter of preference or comfort. Liturgy is the life and breath of the church. It is where we are made ready for our mission as Christ’s hands and feet. (A series of undocumented statements.)
The ancient standard holds true: Lex orandi, lex credendi. As we worship, so we believe. The church’s mission is at stake here. That’s why I write, and why I keep on writing about this. It’s why I won’t simply stay quiet.
The church’s worship is my business, and it is yours, too. (Having completed his presentation, the author remembers why he wrote his article. But he never addressed why it is his business to impose the liturgy on others, or why it should be his responsibility to tell others how to properly worship.
In addition, the title says it's "your" [our] business. Thus we who embrace more contemporary forms of worship are likewise obligated to correct the author out of concern for his dead traditionalism. True?)
Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment