Why the Bible in Progressive Worship?

I must confess that my own faith journey is deeply rooted in the evangelical tradition (I am, after all, a Fuller Seminary graduate, twice over.  I may not be an inerrantist or even an infallibist anymore.  I understand that the science and the history present in the text may not be "accurate" in the modern sense of the word.  I affirm evolution as the means by which the world we know today came into existence.  That said, I still find myself unable to move outside the biblical witness.  In my own preaching I have sought to root the sermons each week in the biblical text, which is why I once sat dumbfounded in a personnel committee meeting at a former church and heard that one of the complaints was that I didn't preach from the Bible -- in conversation I discovered that what they wanted was the kind of proof-texting sermons you get in some conservative churches. 

For some Progressive Christians, the Bible is problematic.  Not only is it an ancient text but it can give support to all number of regressive views, including the submission and suppression of women, genocide (read Joshua), and slavery (remember that 19th century evangelical preachers in the south were quite adept at defending the "peculiar institution" from Scripture).  So, why not just jettison it and start over?

Keith Watkins, Professor Emeritus of Parish Ministry and Worship at Christian Theological Seminary, in his continuing series of essays on Worship in Progressive Churches takes up this very issue in this week's contribution.  He writes that the Bible "is the book with which Christian conversation always begins. It provides a set of stories, interpretations, commands, and promises that all Christians hold in common, argue about, mix together in various ways, profess, sometimes reject, and which to some degree shape everything else that we read and incorporate into our lives of faith."

Keith acknowledges that we should read and study the entire Bible "with historical, theological, and devotional methods," but we should also recognize that "some sections are more suited than others for use in public worship. The Bible is a grand epic, which in highly stylized ways, portrays the story of God’s interaction with the world, a story that begins with creation and continues with the establishing of humankind in God’s own image."  It is for this reason that he recommends the lectionary -- a device that allows for a three year tour through this grand narrative, but which is seen by some as truncating the story -- and even pulling out parts that we'd rather not deal with.  But, the point here, in terms of worship, is that the people of God hear the basic story, so that they may see themselves and God in that story.

So, he continues:

This epic tells of God’s work in history, especially with the people of Israel, and reaches its climax in Jesus of Nazareth in whom “all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell and through whom God was pleased to reconcile to himself all things” (Colossians 1:20). The Bible’s grand narrative anticipates a time, in this world and the next, when all of God’s intentions for the world and its peoples will be fulfilled.

This dramatic narrative takes time to tell, which is the underlying principle in the year-long pattern used by many churches to determine which parts of the Bible to read in their weekly services of worship. I have long been persuaded that “the ecumenical hermeneutic of the three-year lectionary,” to borrow the words of Fritz West, makes sense. Sundays feature a sequential reading of the four gospels and provide additional readings from the biblical canon that serve as a commentary on the principle text.

The ability for these words to bring us the Word of God is affected and enhanced, Keith writes, "by the way they are read, by the music and devotions that surround the reading, and by the interpretation—whether in silent pondering, sermon, discussion, other readings from non-biblical sources, or dramatic-musical form."  In other words, the reading of Scripture and the proclamation of the Word doesn't happen in a vacuum.  There is a connection, which is why I take great care in how the service is constructed.  It doesn't always work but that's the intent. 

I invite you to join both Keith and me in this conversation about the importance of Scripture to worship in progressive contexts. 

Related articles by Zemanta

• Evangelicalism's Radical Diversity 4 (beliefnet.com)

Progressive Christian Worship -- The Starting Point

Keith Watkins is in the midst of an ongoing discussion of what an alternative worship for progressive churches might look like.  Keith is a theologically liberal/progressive Disciple with strong commitments to the historic liturgical tradition.  In setting out a starting point for our discussion, he asks whether we will start with a "music/message" position, which has been common among Protestants since the Reformation -- that is, we sing and then we finish with a sermon -- or will we choose the "Word/Table" position that has ancient roots.  Being that he is Disciple, a tradition that places great emphasis on weekly communion, it's not surprising (at least to me), that Keith chooses the Word/Table position.

In this week's post he suggests three bases for this choice.

• He notes the early Christian dependence on both the synagogue  worship practices using Torah and Prayers, which were then combined with Jesus' Table fellowship practices.
• Noting dependence on Margaret Mead, he points out that bathing and eating are basic to human life, and can become important bearers of meanings that are distinct from the actual functions of these acts.  He writes:    

It is easy to understand why the ritual bath of regeneration (baptism) and the “bread of heaven” (eucharist) are the basic sacramental forms of the church’s life. Meal ceremonies generate are used to remember the past (anniversaries and birthdays), anticipate the future (weddings), celebrate important events, delimit and manifest family and associational connections. It is no surprise that some of the most complex theological and sociological discussions in the Pauline epistles are stimulated by meal imagery in 1 Corinthians (especially chapter 11). Similar challenges face progressive Christians today.

• Finally, intertwined with this pattern of Word and Table one can find the basic theological affirmations of the Christian faith -- the nature of God, the person of Christ, sin, salvation, atonement.

Keith goes on to say:

What these three points imply is that developing an alternative way of worship for progressive churches is a specific form of the task that faces every generation, which is to inculturate Christian worship. The work has to progress at several levels: theological (how we define and explain our faith), artistic (how we embody faith and theology in rites, ceremonies, song, dance, and drama), practical (how we form and maintain communities) and missiological (how we live our faith in the world “groaning in travail waiting for its redemption).

As I read this, Keith is saying that there has been a historic pattern that provides us with the key elements by which worship can be formed, but these patterns must be re-inculturated in each new day.  Starting with this perspective one can look at what is happening today.  Much "contemporary worship" is of the music/message variety, while many mainline churches have the Word/Table pattern but remain stuck in the 1950s as far as the culture part of the equation.  By placing the focus on Word/Table, however, the emphasis is not placed on music, which is not to say that music isn't important.  I believe that music is critical to vital worship, but music supports the pattern, while not forming the pattern itself. 

You can read the entire piece at Keith's blog by clicking here.  While there you will find a link to a lengthy paper dealing with the question of inculturation that Keith wrote several years ago.  As you read this post I invite you to engage in conversation at Keith's blog and here as well. 

 

Worship and the Progressive Christian Church -- laying out a new pattern

It may seem ironic that some of the churches with the most conservative theology have the most culturally-connected "worship."   I put "worship" in quote marks, because in some ways -- as planners of church services have a tendency to do -- much of this "worship" borders on pure entertainment.  It uses all of the technology and style of the current cultural moment.   Worship in many progressive or liberal churches -- those in the old Mainline traditions -- have a tendency to be quite traditional and conservative.  The theology might be liberal but the medium is old style and traditional -- with liturgy, hymns and organs instead of guitars, free form worship, praise songs, and preachers in Hawaiian shirts.

So, what might a more culturally engaged, but theologically progressive worship look like?   I reposted a piece last week written by my friend Keith Watkins, which launches a series of posts that will engage this question.  Keith is deeply rooted in liturgical studies and treasures the ancient patterns.  But, he wants to envision what might be if we were to create worship contexts that are true to our liturgical patterns of Word and Table and yet be culturally aware. 

In his second post of the series, he takes up an address by Thomas Schattauer, the current president of the North American Academy of Liturgy.   In this address, Schattauer lists five perspectives on worship and the ways in which we formulate it:

•Recovery of historic practice toward a distinctive community witnessing to God’s purpose in the world

•Use of cultural materials toward a wider embrace of people (be it the unchurched or particular ethnic groups)

•Attention to the experience of the marginalized toward justice and inclusion of God’s reign

•Focus on relational community toward social belonging and wholeness

•Openness to the movement of God’s Spirit toward personal healing, holiness, and hope

Keith admits that his focus us been on that first perspective, but seeks to broaden it out in search of an alternative way of doing worship in progressive churches.  I'm going to repost three key paragraphs so you can see what Keith is trying to do. 

My perspectives have been deeply influenced by the first of Schattauer’s impulses: the liturgical movement. Schattauer says that its central interest is “to give the church clearer definition as a community of Christ through the focus on central practices which constitute persons in relation to Christ and to one another, most especially the reading and proclamation of Scripture, baptism, and Eucharist. Moreover, the purpose of this community in Christ constituted in its liturgical assembly is to be understood in relation to God’s purpose in the world.”

As useful as it is, Schattauer’s list gives insufficient attention to another impulse that I encounter with increasing urgency in theological literature and in conversations with church people week after week: the need to restate central Christian doctrines in ways that can be affirmed by people who have dismissed older ways of stating Christian beliefs and who are searching for believable ways of describing their faith. My early theological studies focused upon the continental liberal tradition and for a generation my closest theological colleagues were advocates of process theology. While I have only limited competence as theologian, the mood, perspective, and themes of contemporary liberal theology are important to the way I think about my life as a Christian.

My plan for this series is to propose that the classic union of Word and Table, understood in its simplest and most direct form, is the place to begin our construction of worship that is “something other.” I then will discuss each of its components, in their order as they appear in the classic shape of the service. Along the way, I will take time out to comment on specific challenges—atonement theologies in the eucharist, for example—that are especially challenging to the progressive Christians whom I meet week after week, in churches on Sundays and lots of other places on the other days.

I am deeply interested in where Keith will take this.  I have devoted considerable attention to the form that worship takes, in the hope that the worship services I help plan will bring people into the presence of God, so that they might worship God fully, and be empowered and encouraged so as to engage in the mission of God in the world -- bringing wholeness and healing to a deeply fragmented and wounded world.  To do this one must think deeply about what one is doing -- bringing theology, culture, and tradition into conversation with each other.  Theology provides the fulcrum upon which we balance culture and tradition.  It is not an easy task and requires that we attend to those who have wisdom in these matters -- even if we don't follow in every point of contention.  I invite you to participate in the discussion here and to continue over to Keith's blog, where you can read the full piece and engage him in conversation.