The Problem With Today’s Worship


Try not to judge me, but nearly everywhere I look, the corporate worshiping of God is being practiced in ways that increasingly trouble me.  For starters, the concept of “worship” continues to be understood  primarily as “singing.”  This reflects a very limited understanding of how Christian worship has been practiced historically, biblically, and  theologically down through the centuries. A more accurate and holistic view of worship should include scripture, prayer, eucharist, ministry to widows and the poor, and the use of our spiritual gifts (charismata) for the sake of others, among other things.  

Chris leading worship_Fox_Theater_cropWhen I first began leading worship in the 1970’s (yep, that's me in the photo!), the “contemporary worship” movement was gaining momentum.  The movement -- and the changes it brought -- was a corrective to how heady, ritualistic, and rather impersonal worship seemed to be in most churches.  As Lester Ruth (a former mentor) and Lim Swee Hong have stressed in their book, The History of Contemporary Praise and Worship,

"The breadth of change was matched by the breadth of churches seeking to change. ...[not] just by theologically conservative evangelicals seeking to make new converts.  Moderate and even liberal mainline Christians, driven by a general anxiety about people's disinterest in and boredom with church, jumped into the pursuit of measures that would make worship more exciting, interesting, and relevant to the pressing matters of the day" (p.200).

The heartfelt intimacy brought on by the singing of fresh, contemporary worship choruses was undoubtedly a long overdue “pendulum swing,” apart from the positive effect it had on attendance and church growth.  An unfortunate long-term result, however, was that “worship” became almost solely associated with the singing of “praise and worship choruses.”  Despite decades of uplifting, feel-good choruses -- as well as some deeply worshipful ones -- many of today's "worship songs" are written as petitions to God or as celebrations of what He has done for us rather than songs that directly exalt, extol, and adore Him for who He is.  Don’t misunderstand – petitioning God is important and good, and so is recounting what He has done for us (e.g. Ps. 103:2-5).  But far too many of our songs end up sounding like many of our prayers --  a “To Do List” for God.

Thanks to a plethora of worship services being offered online by churches each week, I’ve been able to listen in to a wide variety of them.  As a result, I repeatedly hear worship tunes that are focused on “us” rather than on God.  Sure, they may be catchy tunes and many stir up deep emotions within congregants, but this does not automatically make them exemplary worship songs. When the people of the Lord gather on the day of the Lord in the house of the Lord to sing in worship to the Lord, I believe there needs to be much more direct focus on the Lord --  more adoration and not so much petition.  When we do sing, our songs need to consistently be more Christocentric, more Trinitarian, and more focused on declaring God’s supreme greatness, holiness, and worth.  This is the worship He deserves regardless of how we feel or what we need.  

Once again, we need a pendulum-swing adjustment.  In their book, Trouble at the Table: Gathering the Tribes for Worship, Carol Doran and Thomas H. Troeger put their finger on the problem, writing,

"...we observed the disillusionment of people who were originally attracted by the idea of completely innovative worship.  What starts with a burst of enthusiasm begins to wear thin because people cannot come up with an endless supply of new ideas and because ritual by nature is repetitive.  Innovators who get rid of one tradition usually settle into their own, which often fails to stand the test of time.  The new songs that were so appealing upon their introduction grow tiresome for lack of musical substance... The absence of prayers, words, and music inherited from ancient tradition gives the service a flimsy feeling, as if faith and worship were simply one more passing fashion among the myriad fads that come and go." (p.117)

Our understanding and practice of Christian worship needs to no longer be focused exclusively on music. While we must be careful not to abandon the personal and intimate expressions of worship that singing helps provide, we must return to intentionally connecting our worship to the full compliment of biblical worship expressions that have been passed down to us through the centuries.  Yes, our corporate times of worship should be characterized by the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph. 5:19), but also by teaching, fellowship, Eucharist, prayer, and meeting each other’s needs (e.g.Acts 2:42-47), and this in addition to living lives of holiness -- both socially and personally (e.g. Jas 1:27).

As you can tell, I am passionate about the Church’s current need for worship renewal. After spending over three decades in worship ministry, I specifically focused my post-graduate and doctoral studies on this central expression of our Christian faith. In addition, I continue to read and research broadly in the discipline of worship studies and enjoy teaching the same as time allows. My hope is that the Church will reattach herself to her ancient worship roots:  "Well, my brothers and sisters, let’s summarize. When you meet together [for worship], one will sing, another will teach, another will tell some special revelation God has given, one will speak in tongues, and another will interpret what is said. But everything that is done must strengthen all of you" (1 Corinthians 14:26, NLT).


When Church Services Leave People Still Needing Church

Frustration2_istockphoto During a recent conversation, friends were telling me about their journey back into the life of the Church, and of their experiences visiting various congregations.  One of these experiences easily stood out from the others:

It was a Sunday morning, and after loading their kids into the car they drove out to one of the larger, and fairly well known churches in their town. Once inside they felt overwhelmed by the performance-oriented "praise band", the constant use of the "big screen", and rally-like "feel" of the entire service.  As my friend put it, "I got out of there feeling like I needed to go to church!"

The point, of course, is that much of what is marketed and portrayed as "church" ends up being something less than that. And today's postmodern population is figuring that out.

Yes, my friend was raised in the church, and was exposed to worship styles both liturgical and contemporary.  But like so many -- young adults in particular -- he finds solace and comfort and strength from participating in liturgical worship and especially appreciates the ancient-future blend that characterizes the worship gatherings where I serve.

We evangelicals in particular have done violence to many of the ancient traditions of our faith, handed down to us through the centuries.  In their place, we have appealed to business and marketing models for doing church, and have used pop-psychology and political correctness as a measuring stick.  And although many of us are probably sick and tired of hearing how the Church's effectiveness and witness has been compromised by consumerism, materialism, and radical individualism -- the story of my friend's experience is a painful reminder that we certainly have done violence to the Church, and to her reputation.  How sad, that people would come desiring to worship God along with His people, only to leave feeling like what they just experienced wasn't even worship! 

Have we slipped THAT far?  Are we THAT blind? Are church leaders even open to the idea that we've got it wrong, or is it just easier to blame everything on consumer-oriented congregants?

.


Photo credit: © iStockphoto.com


2008 AEF Conference: David Neff's Summary

DavidNeff2
David Neff, who served as moderator for this year's conference, offered an excellent summary as part of Saturday's closing remarks.  Fortunate for all us us, David has posted his summary on his Ancient Evangelical Future blog.

It's definitely worth the read -- and even more so if you're pressed for time and would appreciate a quick yet concise overview of what took place at this year's AEF Conference.

Thank you, David!


2008 AEF Conference: Panel Discussion with Rick Richardson

Final Panel 2008
L-R: Joel Scandrett, David Fitch, David Neff, Howard Snyder, Rick Richardson.


This may well have been the most "friendly" amongst this year's panel discussions, but be careful not to think that means it was in any way less informative, interesting, or helpful.

Joel Scandrett commented that he doesn't like the term "Missional DNA" all that much (believing it was too "Pelagian"), preferring instead, "Missio Dei".  He also offered some fascinating thoughts on how careful the Church should be in using "DNA language" as well as "missional language", "kingdom language," and a few other common buzz phrases.  Finally, Joel hammered hard the need for churches to enroll our people in the work of catechesis. [this paragraph was edited on 11/9/08]

David Fitch focused on how when our communities of faith are "relational" and "communal", leading us to be "transformational", it connects us with the Missio Dei -- thus we become "missional."

Howard Snyder offered thoughts on the language of "the body of Christ," which he sees as more than simply a metaphor, but emphasizing the physical reality and presence of Christ.

A fascinating question from the floor, asked how "separatist ecclesiologies" (which he charged some of our panelists as have personally embraced) has affected our pursuit of the Missio Dei. In part, many of these "separtist" groups became such out of their commitment to renewal and a deeper commitment to ecumenical unity.

Rick Richardson echoed his talk, but went on to plead the importance the community of faith coming together to worship, and how we are formed into the image of God as we worship together.

At last, David Neff concluded not only the panel discussion, but went on to give an outstanding summary of what we had all witnessed at this year's AEF Conference (an EXCELLENT overview of what this conference was all about).  It appears at the end of this final panel discussion.
.
If you missed the panel discussion live, I've embedded it below:

.



2008 AEF Conference: Rick Richardson

Header_inside_01

The final speaker for this year's Ancient Evangelical Future Conference was Rick Richardson -- associate professor and director of the Masters in Evangelism and Leadership degree at Wheaton College.  Rick is also an ordained Anglican priest and served for three years as Pastor of Evangelism and Small Groups for Church of the Resurrection in Wheaton, Illinois -- a church known for its healing prayer ministry. Some of Rick's publications include: Reimagining Evangelism: Inviting Friends on a Spiritual Journey, and The Heart of Racial Justice: How Soul Change Leads to Social Change.

RickR Rick sees "missional" as the new code word in the theology and praxis of ecclesiology.  But how do we become genuinely missional and not just rhetorically missional? Rick's presentation seeks to help people understand what God is doing in restoring the missional identity of the church, and how each church -- with its own unique missional DNA -- might fit.

Key thought: the Missio Dei is who God is, not what the church does.

*this is who we get our missional DNA from.

.

Rick_Richardson Far too often, we employ "missional rhetoric" as a badge of honor or simply as a way to differentiate ourselves from "others" (esp. those more liberal or revisionist-oriented than we are), rather than being compelled to live out God's mission.

After Rick's enthusiastic and fast pace teaching, he offered us the following questions as a springboard for dialogue:

  1. With which previous and present missional movements that Rick talked about do you and your church most identify?  What movement would you most like to learn from, and why?
  2. What might be your church's most natural missional orientation, among the different missional orientations Rick suggested?
  3. What steps might you take to help your church discover and embrace her own missional DNA?

As before, let me encourage you to post your reactions, thoughts, & questions here.  Let the conversation begin!

And... if you missed Rick's presentation LIVE -- the archive video file is embedded below.

.


2008 AEF Conference: D.H. Williams

Header_inside_01

D.H. Williams is tonight's speaker; his presentation entitled, "Preserving the Church's Story."

Dr. Williams is the professor of Religion in Patristics and Historical Theology in the Department of Religion at Baylor University. Prior to 2002, he was associate professor of Theology in Patristics and Historical Theology at Loyola University Chicago. His publications include scholarly works on early Christian thought and literature as well as studies that seek to integrate the ancient Christian legacy into contemporary studies.  Most recently has appeared, Tradition, Scripture and Interpretation: A Sourcebook of the Ancient Church, as well as Retrieving the Tradition and Renewing Evangelicalism: A Primer for Suspicious Protestants.


WIlliams_DH Williams emphasized that if the church forgets its story, it will be shaped by the world's stories.  We can easily lose our identity and our mission.  To prevent such loss, the ancient church developed a systematic approach to Christian education.  It aimed to preserve its message by teaching its story.  Because many of its members were illiterate, the church's message had to be preserved in the minds and hearts of its members -- and this is exactly what is needed again today.  We must learn from the fact that the early church was a strongly didactic "teaching" Church.

As his presentation concluded, the following discussion questions were offered to conference participants as a springboard for dialog:

  1. What can we glean from the mechanics of the early church's catechetical practices?  What things from the ancients are of little use?
  2. How do Christians learn the cardinal points of Christian teaching (doctrinal and moral) in church settings?
  3. In what way does one's view of baptism affect how the catechetical process should take place?
  4. What cultural obstacles seem to hinder Christians from gaining a specific knowledge of their faith?

Well... give these some thought, and then don't forget to post your comments, thoughts, and reactions here. 

If you missed Williams' presentation, here it is:

Part 1

Part 2


2008 AEF Conference: Panel Discussion with David Fitch

2008AEFpanel01

This afternoon's panel discussion immediately dove into a fundamental disagreement about David Fitch's use of the term "capitalism" to describe the culture we find ourselves in.  Some on the panel felt that the term or concept of "American marketing" should be preferred over "capitalism", which should rightfully be seen as a friend-of-the-kingdom of sorts. Fitch aggressively disagreed.

As the conversation continued, the panel addressed the challenge of reaching the rich -- whom the Church frequently relies on for its programs and "progress", noting that the rich would not be so were it not for the capitalistic culture in which we live.

Next, the global expansion of capitalism was discussed -- in light of America's recent financial collapse.

Afterward, I had the opportunity to talk with David Fitch personally about American capitalism and the idolatrous tentacles it has in our national consciousness. It is David's conviction that despite our blind loyalty to the benefits of American capitalism at home and abroad, it in fact is in jeopardy of complete and utter failure -- a failure we will likely see materialize within the year.

This was a very lively panel exchange that you'll definitely want to listen to in its entirety.  So if you missed it, here it is:



2008 AEF Conference: David Fitch

Today's afternoon session featured David Fitch -- founding pastor of Life on the Vine Christian Community, professor of evangelical theology at Northern Seminary, and author of The Great Giveaway: Reclaiming the Mission of the Church from Big Business, Parachurch Organizations, Psychotherapy, Consumer Capitalism, and Other Modern Maladies (among other books).  David's topic: Should the Church and Capitalism Get Along?

FITCH_DAVID_exp1 As he began, David pointed out how capitalism is wrought with pitfalls, including the redefinition of the church according to business models.
He had -- as he called them -- Five Big Ideas:

1. The 50-year Niebuhrian Hangover.

Anti-capitalism is automatically considered to be socialist  (negatively).  Elevating the importance of economic success in the church flows from our capitalistic culture. "Christ and Culture" continues to hold the evangelical Church under its spell. The reductionist notion of "culture is all bad vs. culture is all good", draws from an overly simplified and polarized view that sees culture as "monolithic."  Further, Reinhold's idea of culture being "neutral" led us into trouble (cf. "Moral Man and Immoral Society"). Reinhold maintained that we must differentiate between private belief and social realities ("Jesus only relates to individuals").


2.  Incarnating the Gospel in Culture.

The church must enter the culture, be present in the culture, and discern the culture piece by piece.  There is no longer the reductionist dualism of culture as either bad or good.

3. Postmodern Critique of Capitalism

Deleuze - Capitalism disciplines desire and it disrupts all other structures in order to do that.
Bauman - Consumer Capitalism produces desire for the ongoing growth of the capitalist machine.
Hauerwas - Capitalism comodifies everything and in process trains us to see the world in its way.
Milbank - Capitalism is built on an "ontology of violence."

*you've got to hear David's summary here of the critique of Capitalism -- very enlightening.


4.  The Evangelical cultural accommodation to capitalism.

  • Success is numbers/budget/buildings
  • Worship as a commodity
  • CEO leadership of an organization
  • Making justice into a program -- keeping the poor at a distance ("justice at a distance")
  • Ron Sider's "Rich Christians"

5.Discerning Practices "in but not of" Capitalism

  • Worship as formation-liturgy
  • Create a counter-politic of money (e.g. we will not know how to spend, apart from the work of our spiritual formation.  We might begin by revealing your bank account status to your Triad [i.e. discipleship small group].
  • Create zones of consumerist resistance
  • Engaging the poor communally
  • Living simply-beneath your means
  • Eucharistic meal
  • Multiple relational leadership

We need to put the "market" at the service of Christ, rather than allowing to continue being the other way around.

As we broke for discussion around our various tables, David suggested the following questions as a jumping-off point:

  1. List some ways "the Niebuhrian hangover" (either H. Richard or Reinhold) is evident in your local church.
  2. In what ways does your church give evidence that capitalism (as a system and a set of values) governs the way you operate as a church? the discipleship that takes place at your church? the leadership and management of your church?
  3. What practices can you foster to resist ill effects of capitalism upon your church body? to promote Christian community (versus delivering religious goods and services), relational justice (vesus safe "justice" at the distance), leadership of service (versus management of people), transformational gatherings (versus the "show"), etc.?

I'd really enjoy hearing your thoughts on these or other related matters.


If you didn't catch David Fitch LIVE, I will make it available within the week (sorry, but our live webcasting server unexpectedly dropped the connection and stopped the recording feature) once I upload it from my secondary camera and convert it to comply with maximum file size requirements).


2008 AEF Conference: Panel Discussion with Janell Paris

When asked how her experiences within Black churches and Emerging churches has shaped her view of the Church, Janell immediately pointed to the syncretism she sees within White evangelical churches, between Christianity and capitalism -- a syncretism that leads to the selling of our faith as a product to change one's life.  This, however, is refreshingly absent within Black and Emerging congregations, according to Jenell.  In a follow-up question, Janell observed that the Black congregation she was once part of -- although clearly evangelical in their preaching -- did not categorize themselves as "evangelical", in part because the term "evangelical" remains so closely connected with white, evangelical America (for those living within the U.S.).

Of particular interest to me was a part of the panel discussion which centered around whether or not we should focus on and celebrate our ethnic diversity, or whether that focus ought to be on the transcendant oneness we all share in Christ.   Is "ethocentrism" the enemy of the gospel?

If you missed this discussion, LIVE, then here it is:


2008 AEF Conference: Howard Snyder

I hope you enjoyed Howard's overview of the Church and her varied journey through time to where we are today.  Immediately following his talk, Howard Snyder encouraged everyone to discuss the following at the tables they're sitting at.  Here are his questions:

  1. How has the church been visible throughout history, and in your own experience?  How should it be visible?
  2. Do you think that Evangelicals have accepted an unbiblical divorce of heaven and earth?
  3. How and to what extent should the early church provide the model for the church's life and mission today?

If you missed Howard's talk, LIVE, you can watch it below (including the introductions), then post your answers or thoughts, and let's let the conversation begin!