ATTENTION: Visitors looking for the Royal Eagle restaurant website, click here

20081005

Follow-up to "'...salt...not sugar...'"

In a previous post, I quoted an article by Charles Spurgeon entitled Feeding Sheep or Amusing Goats? in which he denounced the entertainment-based worship of the nineteenth-century Protestant evangelical movement. The point of my post, of course, was to question the propriety of such practices in today's worship communities.

In response, one of my readers brought up an excellent question: What about being "all things to all men?" (1Co 9.22)

I think it's a good idea, first of all, to remember that Paul can be easy to misread (2Pet 3.15-16), so we might consider that, when he says he tries to be "all things to all men," he doesn't mean that he tries to worship God in the most culturally relevant manner possible in order to win converts.

I know, dear reader, that you were as appalled as I was by the video I showed you of the clown Mass. But I have to wonder why that bothered you so much. Doesn't it fall under the "all things to all men" heading? I imagine you felt that a clown troupe serving Communion was simply over the line, but the problem, I think, is determining where that line is: where does appropriate become inappropriate? If rock and roll and laser light shows and cutting-edge multimedia on a Sunday morning can be justified with the "all things to all men" argument, what can't be? Honestly. Why not a nudist church? Is that over the line? There's nothing inherently sinful or evil about nudity and it's a good way to be "all things" to the nudists. Wouldn't you agree?

What about the church whose pastor dresses up like the Joker and the Incredible Hulk in order to make his sermons more timely?

Or the church in which the parishioners don Star Wars costumes and sing hymns to the tune of the Star Wars theme?

Are these over the line? If so, then where exactly is the line, and how can we be sure that drum sets and "dramas" are on the proper side of it?

I submit that the line is still way back where someone decided that being "all things to all men" meant that Sunday morning worship should conform to the latest cultural impulses.

If St Paul walked into Grace Community Church on a Sunday morning, would he have any idea what was going on? Would he praise them for being "all things to all men," or would he scold them for having "conformed to the world" (Rom 12.2)?

Don't forget that Paul also wrote that we should "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them" (Ep 5.8-12). Is this done by allowing the secular world to influence our spiritual lives? By conforming the sacred to the profane?

Is it done by teaching converts to the Faith that worship of God Almighty need not be any more holy and reverent than a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert? Or by giving kids the idea that the Holy Scriptures are to be given the same honor as a comic book or an issue of Cosmo or Glamour? Is it done by allowing people to believe that attending worship should be as convenient and comfortable as watching the latest summer blockbuster from the front seat of their SUV? Or that there's nothing whatsoever inappropriate about merging Sunday worship with football?

Honestly, what's next?







When the Apostles went into the world to spread the Gospel, they didn't sacrifice the holiness and reverence of the Sunday worship in order to win converts. They learned the language, ate the food, they may even have dressed or shaved according to local customs. That's how they became "all things." They also translated the Liturgy into the local language, but they never abandoned it; they never allowed popular culture to supplant God-ordained worship. They knew that "friendship of the world is enmity with God (Jam 4.4)" and that to confuse holy worship with popular culture was to leave God behind.

In a brilliant article entitled Mission and Worship - America and the Orthodox, Fr. Stephen Freeman relates a story about Orthodox missionaries in Alaska, who "found a tribe of Native Alaskans who lived exclusively on cariboo [sic]. There were no vegetables in their diet - only cariboo. The first conundrum arose with the question of fasting. It is traditional for Orthodox to fast from meat, fish, wine, dairy and olive oil during a fast period (such as Great Lent). What to tell these native Alaskans? The missionaries wrote back to the Bishop who responded: 'During the fast, tell them to eat less cariboo.' A perfect Orthodox solution."

That's being "all things to all men."

Now, having said all that, are there ever situations in which popular music, laser-light shows, dramatic performance, or cutting-edge multimedia are appropriate? I would say that yes there are. In a church-sponsored coffee house setting, or a Wednesday night gathering, maybe even a talent show hosted by the local parish. These things take place and they're fine and they attract people. But again, we have to ask, at what point do we cross the line? I think that's one of those you'll-know-when-you-get-there situations. Keep in mind St Paul's instruction to "test all things; hold fast to that which is good" (1Th 5.21). A worship body that truly allows itself to be guided by the Holy Spirit will be able to recognize the point at which "God-honoring" becomes "man-honoring" and will avoid it. However, the church that chooses to abandon holiness in favor of spectacle presumes much by presuming guidance by the Holy Spirit.

I think it's fair to say that the way in which a church body conducts its Sunday worship is a pretty good indication of it's view of God.

So, when a seeker walks into Sunday morning worship, should he be entering into the presence of the King of Kings, the Creater of the Universe, Who is Holy, and Eternal, and Unequaled, and Unsearchable? When he goes to church on a Sunday morning, should he be taught to bow before the throne of "the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth"?

Or how to hang out with his buddy Jesus?

The Scriptures never promised that preaching "Christ and Him crucified" would be cool or sexy or hip or relevant, but would be regarded as a "stumbling block" and as "foolishness" (1Co 1.23).

If there is a place in church for entertainment, and I think there is, it should not be in place of proper Sunday worship. We should be all things to all men, but never at the expense of holiness, dignity, mystery, awe, beauty, or reverence.

Here again let me recommend Fr. Stephen's article:
Mission and Worship - America and the Orthodox

And, while you're at it, read these:
The Circus Church
In Spite of all the Church Entertainment...
Young adults aren't sticking with church
Americans Leaving Churches in Droves

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

There is a difference between "clown church" and churches which employ contemporary worship style and I'm sure you know that.

I will agree to some extent that there are churches that have become so pre-occupied with having an entertaining service that they completely miss their actual trget. With that being said, the church I attend is probably one of the most contemporary churches you'll find, much more contemporary than Grace I would say. But Newark Naz is also probably the most Christ centered church I've ever set foot in. So just to assume that contemporary worship is purely for entertainment is wrong. I can tell you from personal expereince, that I have most certainly felt God's presence during our worship. When people dress like clowns or Yoda or The Hulk, I too feel thats wrong. Why? Because those are things which were crafted for the sole purpose of entertainment and it ultimately distracts from what is being said. Speaking of which, you should get a clip of the Star Wars church worshiping in the Star Wars song style for your "Things you won't see in an Orthodox church"

But I think it becomes a problem when God is taken out of the equation. And I think that is what is being addressed when the Bible talks about conforming to the world. How many people do you think have come to know Christ through contemporary worship, or at concerts of contemporary christian artists? Countless. How many have been saved at a Metallica concert? Probably none would be my guess. God can reach people through many different instruments (no pun inteneded) and I believe that contemporary wroship is one of those.

Matt said...

Mike,

As I said, contemporary Christian music etc has it's place and is a wonderful way to bring people into the fold.

But on Sunday, the Lord's day, why not worship God in the way He Himself has chosen to be worshipped? (which is the way the way the Apostles worshipped)

I'm glad you feel God's presence in church. I myself tend to distrust feelings. Feelings are subjective. Our worship of God should be purely objective. That is, it should be about the object of our worship, not about us and how we feel. (besides, I'm fairly certain that the parishioners of the nudist church are feeling something, too. Is it the presence of God? Well, it's the presence of something.)

You're right: one should not assume that a modern style means out of touch with God.

Nor should one assume that winning converts is the same as making disciples. It certainly is a problem when God is taken out of the equation. That's not my gripe with Grace or any other contemporary church. My question is, what type of God is being presented to the people? Is it one you can approach in a casual and relaxed way? Or one who damands that you deny yourself and take up your cross daily? (Lk 9.23) Who requires that you work out your salvation with fear and trembling? (Ph 2.12)

p.s. I've tried like heck to find a clip of the Star Wars church. No luck yet.

Anonymous said...

Your "church to go" clip was really funny!! I agree that the "line" is sometimes difficult to distinguish. And I agree that too often one attends church without ever encountering the awesomeness, greatness, or power of God; it's a piece that's frequently missing in the Protestant church. I like your coffee house/extra-service idea. Conundrum.
However ... where do you fit "praise the Lord with the drums and cymbals..." into your idea of worship?

Matt said...

I would say that, other than on Sunday we can worship God in whatever manner we choose, whether it's with drums or cymbals or tubas or kazoos or whatever. (However, I'd be careful not to endorse every manner of worship used in the Bible. King David was known to worship God by dancing around naked (or nearly so). Sincere, fervent, zealous? Yes. Appropriate for weeknight coffee house? Ah, no.)

But on the Lord's Day, why not worship Him in the way He wants to be worshipped (for example, in Mal 1, He said that, "in every place," Gentiles "shall" [not "may choose to"] worship Him with incense), and the way the Apostles themselves worshipped (in Acts 13.2, the Greek word for "ministered"--or "worshipped" in some translations--is "leitourgounton," which is the verb form of the noun "leitourgia." Any guess as to what that word means? At no point did the Apostles say "Y'know, this liturgy business is for the birds. Let's rock out!")?

The danger, of course, is in thinking that ritual and liturgy will somehow make a worshipping heart out of a non-worshipping one. False piety--ritual without reality--is definitely something God abhors (see Am 5.21-23; Is 1.11-15; Hos 6.4-6; Ps 51.17). So, mechanically going through the motions without contrition, humility, repentance, etc, is no better than worshipping MTV-style.

Anonymous said...

I heard a good phrase that really summarizes my point, "The method can change as long as the message doesn't."

Matt said...

I would agree that certain particulars of the expression of worship can change without changing the message. I think, though, that through any alteration at all in our worship we must take special care not to alter our understanding of who God is.

For example, can the God who allows us to kick back and chill in His presence possibly be the same God that commanded Moses to remove his sandals because he was on holy ground? I could be wrong, but I'm not aware of anyplace in the Bible where God allows His people to approach Him on their terms.

Can we "give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name" (Ps 29.2) by worshipping God in the manner that best suits us? One could answer "sure, as long as we approach with the right attitude."

Again, can we possibly even have the right attitude toward worship if our tastes, our preferences, our comfort have any influence whatsoever on how we worship? When we worship God according to how we want to worship, can we even really be worshipping God at all?