Coming together as church

Am I the only person who's tired of seeing our churches copying the "mega church" revivalist anti liturgical model?

No, Luth55IL you're not. God spoke through me and continues to through the liturgy, the celebration of the Eucharist, etc. It saddens me to see Lutherans copy the revivalist anti-liturgical model when the ancient liturgical practices offer so much more and benefits of greater spiritual depth than feeling comfortable and rocking out to music.
I'm very happy that God is working in these congregations, but as Lutheran Christians we must also remember that God has and will continue to work through the liturgy.

Spoke to* me. Sorry!

Whatever model gets the sinner connected to Christ through the cross is one I favor. For some, this is the liturgy. For others, it's the megachurch. Thankfully, we have enough diversity in our church that we can be all things to all people for the sake of Christ.

I agree Peter, whatever model works, and different models work in different situations and attract different people. The style of worship and the style of music offered are like languages spoken. In Alaska we have a PLUME ministry (Presbyterian, Lutheran, United Methodist and Episcopalian) with a pastor that travels an area bigger than most east coast states and works with small gatherings of house churches. It is a great ministry and one that must be open to the many worship languages that are spoken and helping each worshiping community find what best meets their needs and abilities.

Luth55IL, I sense a sadness and valid frustration about so many American mega-churches, and by the perceived compromises you see being made in "wanna-be" Lutheran ones. You certainly have some ground to stand on, I'll admit.

But I'd also invite you to consider the details of what mission-minded ELCA models like ours have to offer in the discussion: We're a sacramental, church-season-following, non-lectionary "community church" whose Lutheran identity doesn't come from the traditionalism of its order of service or hymnody, but rather from its robust Lutheran theology, teachings, missiology and ethics--in our case, with some Reformed-theological perspectives and traditions (e.g., ordaining Council Members as "elders") thrown in, which we picked up from our PCUSA relations.

In fact, I'd submit that a contemporary worship, theology-of-the-cross, weekly-communing church like Kaw Prairie could arguably be called MORE Lutheran than sister churches that refuse to translate the Mass into the language of the people (with culturally-relevant music, media, and topical sermon series, etc).

Having a rock band that plays radio covers and "Crowders-up" hymns, for instance, may not automatically make a church non-Lutheran or aliturgical. It may just mean that non-Lutheran or unchurched people far from God are more likely to come try it out--and then find themselves blessed and challenged by what our ELCA churches have to offer: non-revivalist, deeply thoughtful theology of Law and Gospel and Justification & Sanctification, and an exhilarating incarnation of the Priesthood of all Believers.

Epiphany Blessings -- dan

When I was first ordained, I had the opportunity to rub shoulders with Dan McKnight. Dan has the gift of evangelism. The Church would do well to listen and learn from him.

Great to hear about Kaw Prairie!

Do you really "lift up" by "dumbing down" EVERYTHING!! The Lutheran Church has such a vital "living tradition" of music and liturgy. But I wonder if pastors even know what that means these days. So-called "traditional" worship is relegated to 8 a.m. where I'm not surprised we don't call communion "the Lord's breakfast." Are we called to be a people in search of the lowest common denominator? If our practice of liturgy and music were "literacy" we'd be reading at at 4th or 5th grade level at best. Then we say that some garage band is more more relevant. It's NOT! It's dorky-- and I LIKE pop idioms in pop settings. I even like varied musical language in traditional settings. But suddenly we're not calling the church a church or using the word sanctuary-- it's "worship space." And I'm thinking "here we go again" --- another round of "church speak." Liturgical practice is not pretense-- it makes things special with more layers of meaning. Great hymnody (which is the heritage of the Lutheran church)-- some written a long time ago, some written yesterday is part and partial of Lutheran identity. And it's participatory-- (although skilled musicians have to know how to facilitate, accompany, and lead.) It's SO frustrating-- and SO pedestrian. If at dinner time your kids said "We don't like that-- we want junk food!" would you say "Sure-- that fine. Let's do pizza or McDonalds every night, because that's what the kids said they like!" Yet in church-- the quality and nutrition of worship gets diluted and dumbed down. Quality and sincerity "lift up"! Have a talent show to give a forum to the fledgeling rockers in the congregation-- (be they kids or "collars") And, yes, be flexible with liturgies and hymns and musical styles-- but don't turn it into "American Idol-itry"! And it's not JUST the fault of those whining about "making it relevant." It's also the fault of half-assed, unskilled, tepid church musicians, and committee creativity. When you have excellence-- people of ALL ages are lifted up. It all has the feeling of being somewhere where people are ashamed of being musically, culturally, liturgically "literate." Even pastors seem to be intimidated by liturgy-- therefore they run from it. We have polarized people and created the "music/liturgy" wars with "relevance" as a pathetic excuse. Progressive doesn't mean pedestrian and uninspired. A living tradition embraces creative and vital expression with both "old" and "new" musical language. The tradition and liturgy itself is not a cage, but a trellis. If we create the ambience of a high school gymnasium in worship-- don't expect people to take sanctuary there or hold it as a special place. "I was glad when they said, let us go into the house of the Lord." Oh, wait-- I think we're in Denny's instead.

We have an awfully feeble God if God is dependent on our numbers or popularity in the neighborhood or "are't we cool" factor. Faith is a gift of the Holy Spirit. We are called to proclaim the gospel, pray, and give praise-- and to live the gospel through our actions reflecting God's love, mercy, justice. The liturgy and the lectionary make sure that we do the " work of the people"-- and re-enact the drama of our salvation and the reason for our community without Leaving anything out and without being dependent on the mindfulness of a particular pastor or committee. Liturgy and lectionary keep us on track

I'm so inspired by the work God is doing at Kaw Prairie. Reading these comments reminded me of my own experience as a young person in the church. When I was 14, I started attending an ELCA church focused on reaching unchurched and dechurched young people in the community. I'd grown up in the church, so I wasn't exactly the target. But I was so blessed by being a part of a community focused outside of itself. The worship style at my new church (rock band, extended message series, intentionally sensitive to people who were unfamiliar with church traditions while still clearly being a gathering of those following Jesus) reached me in a way that the traditional Lutheran liturgy never had. God reached me emotionally and intellectually using the language that I spoke. I was able to engage fully and then to use my gifts to be a part of the mission of the church. I have been blessed, just as so many others have been, by the ministry of that congregation. It is in that context that I'm so encouraged to read about the amazing things being done by Pastor McKnight and the people of Kaw Prairie through the power of the risen Jesus. God's rescue mission to bring all lost people back to him will never fail. It is wonderful to see the people of Kaw Prairie boldly calling the people of their community to the full depth of relationship with Jesus.

I commend the work of the church in Kaw Prairie and lament the comments of people like James who seem to value the liturgy over the gospel. The fact is the liturgy is part of the problem in the church not part of the solution. The ELCA is in serious decline numerically and if it is unwilling to change it will die-which may not be a bad thing.
The question of what it means to be Lutheran is central to this discussion. If it means liturgical worship and hymns then Lutherans may become extinct. If it means a solid theology of grace and the cross and we are open-minded about worship, then we have freedom to develop and experiment with new forms. The liturgy in its purest form may work for some but younger generations in large numbers reject it. So is the liturgy a means or an end? Is the goal liturgical worship or sharing the good news of Jesus Christ? I for one am committed to sharing God's love with the world and could care less if people prefer high church, low church, or no church.

I posted a strong response to the comment "people like James who seem to value the liturgy over the gospel." That comment was not posted because it contained one objectionable comment in the name-calling category for which I am sorry. However, I stand by the feeling of taking offense at the comment. Valuing the liturgy over the Gospel is in no way said or implied in what I said. The REASON for liturgy it to keep us on track with the intent and content of worship. This can include a variety of musical styles and run the gambit from informal to very formal without throwing out the rich heritage of music and liturgy that connects us with the past, present, and future. I DO think it is odd to boast about not using the lectionary and at the same time bear the name of liturgical denomination. The reason for the lectionary is to proclaim MORE Gospel-- share MORE of scripture and not leave it to someone's chosen or favorite Biblical verses. My immediate family includes around 15 people who have served as pastors, deaconesses, musicians, teachers, social workers. I think the service of the Gospel is rather self-evident. And in the realm of liturgy and music-- my original comment stands. Many genres may be used effectively and properly without either throwing out the rich heritage of worship or excluding new forms (which, can be used without dumbing everything down or forcing others to suffer somebody's kids' garage band-- or somebody else's poorly done traditional music. It's the spirit of the thing-- HOWEVER, quality in liturgy and music has been a hallmark of Lutheranism. Why become "generic?" I wish the Kaw Prairie nothing but the best in their ministry. I think it is ignorant for someone to say they could care less if people prefer high church, low church, or no church. If you can say that you don't know what church is-- and for sure shouldn't be saying that someone values liturgy over Gospel. THAT is offensive. (And I never used the words high church, low church-- I think there is a place for a wide range of expression and we should be flexible.

James,

Valuing liturgy over Gospel is a serious charge. I don't think it was meant solely to offend so much as to reveal the sin so that it can be healed. Based on your first posts, I think there's evidence substantiating the charge:

You dismiss most contemporary music as a "garage band", compare the service to "junk food", and the church to Denny's. You then claim that "The liturgy and the lectionary make sure that we do the " work of the people"" and that "Liturgy and lectionary keep us on track". Later, you do clarify that you stand mostly by a "quality" argument, and were contemporary services well-done, would be acceptable.

All of these statements place liturgy over Gospel. I don't think that's your goal, but it's what you are doing in your statements. I think you do feel Gospel primacy is important, which is why it's worthwhile to discuss this issue. I agree that the goal of liturgy (and lectionary) is to proclaim the Gospel. However, sin permeates this world, and corrupts all things, including liturgy. That happens for a lot of younger people, for whom the rich liturgy is just a bunch of empty words wasting their time. But it also happens when we trust the liturgy and lectionary to keep us on track. The problem is that liturgy and lectionary aren't Christ, so if we're trusting liturgy to keep us on track, we're not trusting Christ to do that. And Christ doesn't speak to us solely in the liturgy and lectionary. That means non-liturgical ways can proclaim Christ to some who do not receive Christ in the liturgy. Nor is quality is the hallmark of Lutheranism. Trust that our quality derives from Christ alone and only, and not how well our musicians perform, is the hallmark of Lutheranism. Luther started with bar tunes after all.

Peter-- you seem clearly to be "all over the place" in your seriously judgmental comments that have little to do with what I said. Yes, to say that someone valued liturgy over Gospel is a serious charge. And the first thing you should learn when "holding court" is that neither you nor I can say what someone else's intention was/is behind their words. But it is certainly valid to comment on their words. You put words and intention into Ben's mouth with your harsh "reveal the sin so that it can be healed." Whoa! I don't believe arbiter or judge is exactly the assigned role in the christian life. Jesus tells us to look at our own sins. Still, to me you seem to be spouting off and judging and misinformed. Certainly the fact of "sin" in the world affects all of human behavior, including that of humans in the church.

First of all, I do not dismiss "garage band" or even "junk food" expression or whatever someone wishes to express. Within a community, there is a time and place for all kinds of expression. It's a good thing. And in a more serious setting I have experienced wonderful guitar masses, jazz masses, and seen all kinds of musical language employed effectively. However, I think we cheat ourselves and our children out of rich treasures if they are not introduced and fed by the rich heritage of christian and Lutheran expression that is ours. A lot of young people, you say, think that liturgy and lectionary is a bunch of empty words. You propose that we accept that rather than educate, teach, introduce, inspire. You'd be surprised in a wonderful setting at just how much kids get into taking part in liturgy. And whatever the music style of the liturgy is-- it is participatory, not just a jam session or a concert, with "work" to be done.

I am sorry that you are not better informed on the subject matter.

Liturgy comes from the Greek -litugia-- and means "the work of the people"
The work of the christian community is "liturgy"-- and liturgy includes confession, forgiveness which prepares us for worship (and reminds us of our relationship to God; then comes the educational part-- the lessons-- the lectionary-- (It's rather "wack" to knock lectionary in a christian setting-- since that's the BIBLE! It's like saying "We want less of the word of God." The lectionary is only an organized way of including more of scripture-- exposing you (and the kids) to more of Holy Scripture. Then comes the prayers of the people, and the offertory-- giving of ourselves and seeing simple elements of bread and wine brought up to be made special in the eucharist, in communion, the family table. Then comes the table itself-- the communion and then we go in peace to love and serve the Lord. We know Christ through Word and Sacrament. And liturgy keeps us on track in experiencing Christ and community fully. I don't think it's such a good thing to have the teenagers who, as you say, think church is a waste of time and a lot of empty words, set the agenda and content of worship for the whole community. It would be much better to educate them, introduce them, and, of course, include them. The "junk food" comment was nothing against a burger and fries-- just that many kids would chose that all the time if you's let them. You wouldn't want your kids to be illiterate, or ignorant-- so you teach them, and expose them to good writing and to information.

Can someone receive Christ in non-liturgical ways? Of course-- scripture teaches us about the presence of Christ in the needs of others. (What you do to the least of these you do to me.) We encounter and serve Christ by responding to the needs of others, striving for justice, and peace. Someone can certainly feel God in many settings-- in a garden, or on a hiking trail, on the golf course, in a concert, in the kitchen. But in the christian community-- whatever musical style you use-- the liturgy is a community check list for what is supposed to happen in worship (and that content comes from scripture)--- we are to acknowledge God, pray, give praise, proclaim the word of God (lectionary) because it teaches us and guides us, and administer the sacraments-- baptism, the Lord's Supper. WORD and SACRAMENT are referred to as "means of grace." Means by which Christ lives in us.
You can water that down and rearrange it all and say what you will, do what you will, but that is not the Lutheran tradition. Why, by the way, would "quality" be a bad thing to you? Quality and Lutheranism means well informed, well educated, a conscientious Christian community, including both skilled and amateur visual and musical artists, with a trained clergy leading the congregation and celebrating (participating in) the priesthood of all believers. The "slogan" as it were for Lutheranism and for Luther was Sola Scriptura-- God's word alone! That's how we KNOW about Christ! (Even though we experience Christ in other ways.) At the time of the Reformation, scripture was suppressed and the authority was Rome alone. Luther translated the Bible so that the good news of the Gospel could be shared and was accessible (lectionary) for proclamation and learning-- Sola Scriptura. So our heritage is Biblical and educated. You are absolutely wrong and ill-informed when you state "Luther started with bar tunes after all." Luther wasn't even against abolishing the Latin Mass at first. But he wanted people to participate. Did he throw out the liturgy? On the contrary, he loved the liturgy and embraced a variety of expression. He wrote hymns-- read them and you'll know what Lutheran theology is! He did the so-called "Luther-mass in which he took parts of the liturgy and instead of the Latin used hymn tunes so people could sing along. Even hymns until that time had been solely in Latin. He introduced hymns in the vernacular-- that is, in German, so people could participate. He re-did a number of traditional Latin hymns where the people would do one line in Latin and then continue in the language of the people (In dulci Jubilo). He was a trained musician and, yes, he also used some tunes like "Innsbruck Ich muss dich lassen" that were not Latin church music, but "lute" songs, that did not originate as sacred music. (Like we use Greensleeves as "What child is this?" The "Innsbruck" tune became "O sacred head now wounded" one of the most beautiful christian hymns both for the text and the tune. (It's also sung to other tunes.)

Certainly, a church community should provide plenty of opportunity for people of all ages to make music, sing. But not teaching and embracing the rich heritage of the church (which includes new stuff) is like winning the lottery and tearing up the ticket.

If you really think that it should all be brushed aside for "if'y" words and three chords-- go for it! I'll embrace and keep my heritage because it articulately and mystically proclaims the risen Christ. And, I forgive you for judging me. I wish you knew better.

Peter: while I appreciate your passion, conviction, and love for the Lutheran tradition I do stand by my original comment. It was not meant to accuse you at a salvific level more of a commentary on the preference of most in the ELCA today. Leaders at the denomniational, synod, and seminary level are in general apologists for liturgical worship and many, and it would seem you as well, cannot separate the proclamation of the gospel from liturgical worship.

The problem is people have rejected our form of worship. you have to have them in church to train them! anf if all you have is liturgical worship they won't be there. If we do not change we will die. so if being Lutheran is totally wrapped up in our style of worship we might as well start planning our denominational funeral.

For me being Lutheran is about radical grace. We do have something to say that is unique and the world needs to hear. We have to decide however if we will be a church of the Reformation, stuck in the 1500s or if we will be a reforming church, continually open to the Spirit and faithful to the gospel.

James,

I don't know what Ben's intentions were. I was trying to give them a charitable intepretation (ie explain why your defense of liturgy was inadequate) instead of hostile (try to offend you because he doesn't like your position). Given the way you reacted to his first and later my comments, it seems to me that you are acting as though you were offended by his comments and feel under judgment for your stance on the liturgy. Your long defense of liturgy is also consistent with that. It very much seems to me that you feel the church will die without the liturgy. I disagree-- it lives and dies on Christ alone, and only. I think time will bear this one out.

Personally, I prefer liturgical services to non-liturgical ones for some of the reasons you name. That doesn't mean liturgy is the only way to Christ. There are those (and I'm thinking more 20's and 30's folk than teens) for whom liturgy does not connect them to Christ. We can proclaim all we want, but if the message is not heard and not received, it is empty proclamation. Thankfully we tend to have enough churches that we can provide liturgy for those who get meaning out of that, and non-liturgical practices for those who get meaning out of that.

Let me rephrase the quality argument: Jesus called illiterate fishermen to proclaim the Gospel. Even Paul, who was very highly qualified to do theology, counts his qualifications as loss (Phil 3:7-8). The quality that is important is what we are given by Christ.

Again you "think" you know my feelings-- in your statement ""it seems...you feel the church will die without liturgy." I didn't say that--
But you are equating "liturgy" with a style of worship. The definition of liturgy is "the work of the people." The reason we gather in corporate worship is liturgy-- greek, liturgia meaning "the work of the people" which is to confess our need of God, receive assurance of forgiveness, give praise, pray, teach-- via the lessons and sermon--and administer the sacraments-- the Lord's supper, baptism-- i.e. the things Jesus told us to do. Liturgy isn't which hymnal your using or what style of music the 20's and 30's or teens like in the everyday lives. It is the table of contents of Christian worship, which came out of Hebrew worship, which Jesus practiced and respected, and out of what Jesus himself instituted-- baptism, the Lord's supper, preaching, teaching, proclaiming the gospel. I'm not sure if the disciples who were fishermen were illiterate or not-- but even if they were doesn't mean that we would stop teaching people to read. Everyone is respected the same. Being proud of good theological education being part of the Lutheran tradition is a put-down to those who haven't had the benefit of education. Luther valued study, and scholarship, and liturgy not for the "school blazer" and insignia-- but for the God given gift of diligent study and education as a means for further opening up scripture and the teachings of Jesus and the good news of the Gospel to all people. It was Luther's study of scripture that gave him the courage to stand up to the errant practices of Rome. You say "the quality that is important is what we are given by Christ." What are we given by Christ? We are given salvation that we know about through the word, which we are told to proclaim. We are given instructions in scripture on how to pray, how to praise and thank God. And Jesus gives us the sacrament of baptism and communion. Liturgy takes us (as a people) through those things that Christ has told us to do in worship and as we prepare to "go out and serve the world." These are undoubtedly "quality" things that Jesus taught us. That's why the liturgy of the church includes them-- because Jesus told us. And, yes, Paul was a devout educated Jew but reminds that that is nothing-- we aren't redeemed by pious practice or keeping the law (in the sense of law and gospel)-- but by the cross of Christ. The liturgy helps us keep that central. Even Peter, the rock-- "upon whom I will build my church", denied Christ. He needed the redemption of the cross as do we all. I personally like any form of liturgy that doesn't leave out the essentials and doesn't cheapen the beautiful, mystical, deep meaning and roots of our faith. I believe congregations should be taught to be flexible and should be able to worship both formally and informally-- but respectfully, and lovingly, with sincerity.

correction-- being proud of good theological education being part of the Lutheran tradition is NOT a put-down to those who haven't had the benefit of education. There is nothing wrong with wanting your spiritual care to be guided by teachers (rabbi means teacher) / pastors with education. You certainly wouldn't want your kids in schools where the teachers didn't have an education, nor would you go to a doctor that hadn't studied medicine. Education is for serving better-- and in the case of the church, for serving Christ better.