«
»

Liturgy: Beauty and Beast


Not long ago, I attended a contemporary worship leader conference with some big names in modern worship. Matt Maher was one of the key participants. For those who don’t know, Matt Maher is best known as the author of the song Your Grace is Enough. This song is played in modern worship settings in countless churches every week. I just checked, and Christian Copyright Licensing International (CCLI) lists it at #13 in their CCLI Top 100. If you tune to a Christian radio station, give it maybe 20 minutes, and I bet you’ll hear it. Especially if your Christian radio station is as repetitive as mine…

I only say this to establish this fact:  in terms of modern worship, Matt Maher is A Big Deal.

That being said, Matt Maher is also Catholic. I’ve always found this to be amazing. I’ve been leading groups with this song since its release and when I heard he was Catholic, I was somewhat amazed. Here’s a snippet of his lyrics:

Great is Your faithfulness O God of Jacob
You wrestle with the sinner’s restless heart
You lead me by still waters into mercy
Where nothing can keep us apart

So remember Your people
Remember Your children
Remember Your promise O God

For Your grace is enough
Yeah Your grace is enough
Yeah Your grace is enough
Yeah Your grace is enough for me

Now, his Catholic background amazes me for a couple of reasons. One, quite simply, is theology, but that’s beyond the scope of this post.

The other is that he’s written a driving, pulsing, lively worship song that is embraced by churches across the denominational spectrum… and he’s done it all while being a part of a church steeped in age-old traditions and rituals… and organs. Such a dichotomy.

Maher is also interesting because he’s brilliant. Seriously, brilliant. A small group of conference attendees (perhaps a dozen of us were in the room) sat and listened to him talk for a couple of hours one day. I’m not sure I saw him breathe at all. The man has an amazing memory. Combine this with unique insight and wit and you’ve got someone that I can listen to for a while.

What was he talking about for 2 hours? Liturgy.

Completely off the cuff.

With no notes.

At all.

I thought the talk was going to be about meshing modern worship with traditional churches, at least that’s what I was hoping for. He never got to that topic (which he apologized for later). Instead, he walked us through the entire church calendar of the Catholic church, a calendar almost identical to that of the Lutheran church. And through this odd, lively Catholic, I found an appreciation for liturgy.

Maher addressed the fact that many “modern” churches are attempting to throw off “old” traditions in order to meet new generations where they are. His opinion seemed to be that while this approach may be successful in the short-term, these churches ultimately end up either bringing back some elements of these traditions later on or simply creating new ones that seem very similar to the old ones. He seemed to be saying that if you’re just going to come back to the same traditions you threw off, why throw them off to begin with?

He began to discuss the liturgical calendar of the church as an example of this, but I don’t think he ever got around to tying it back to his original point. Primarily because he was so clearly passionate about the liturgical calendar, that he distracted himself right out of the original topic of the discussion. And none of us seemed to mind…

Maher understood the liturgical calendar so well that he saw beauty in it. The liturgy follows the life of Christ from birth to ministry to death to resurrection and the descending of the Holy Spirit. It gives the church a way to ensure nothing gets missed, as the entire life of Christ is important to the walk of a Christian. Maher stepped through this calendar section by section, from memory, and with a passion that was contagious. Through him, I began to see the beauty in it as well.

While I can definitely see a beauty now in the liturgy, it still prompts some questions from me. The biggest question I have on this is:  how can the church ensure contextual relevance if it is locked into a set path through the scriptures? In non-liturgical churches, pastors discern the needs of the congregations in their care and select scriptures and teachings appropriate for those needs. But in a liturgical setting, the scriptures have already been selected. Wanna’ know what the sermon is for this week? It’s Mark 6:1-13. Wanna’ know next week’s? And the weeks after that? It’s all mapped out. We’ve got it all covered. Some Lutheran pastors, I’ve noticed, force themselves to “lock in” with the liturgical calendar and won’t stray from it. So while the church may have a need to hear a certain scripture or a certain topic addressed by the pastor, they may not be able to get it since the pre-selected scripture for that week has already been determined. Or worse still, a pastor may discern the need correctly and attempt to force the pre-selected scripture to fit an application that is out of place. These square-peg-round-hole sermons are immediately noticeable.

So while I see that a non-liturgical church can miss some important aspects in the scriptures as they strive to maintain contextual relevance, I also find that the occasional lack of contextual relevance in a liturgical church seems to be missing something. Is it possible to get the best of both worlds?

, , , ,

This entry was posted on July 2, 2009, 10:34 am and is filed under Lutheran Church, Music. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • matt maher's congregation is where i learned liturgy, st. timothy catholic community, mesa, az. when i was first ordained in 1997, and in the fall of that same year, i attended the first life teen mass. i had to arrive a half an hour early to get a good seat for the 1400 or so that would show up that sunday evening. i went up to that priest who was responsible for the liturgy and community and asked to have lunch. he was the brains behind the entire process for involving the young in ancient forms. we became good friends and i embraced deeply, and translated appropriately to my lutheran context, what he was up to. i don't believe you can read about this in a book, it needs to be lived, experienced, gobbled and soaked in. it is a community living and breathing this through time, like music itself, that is the key. to read a book is to miss the heart beat of God in and through a gathered community embodying the very thing we hope to achieve in the "thingy-ness" of it all. so book a trip to phx, az and visit st. tim's catholic community, sunday evening life teen mass. if you can't well, try to find one in your area. i'm sure they exist. btw-i've known of this community now for over ten years, benefited from it very deeply in my spirit, practice and love for being church. i could go on for a long time, but will rest well knowing i've passed along a key resource in the community, not just the person of matt maher.
  • Thanks so much for your comment David! I definitely agree that the "modern" non-liturgical churches are missing out on something. Being a part of old traditions and customs gives people a sense of connectedness with the history of the church. I find that the longer I'm Lutheran, the more I can appreciate that. I still want modern music, modern approaches to worship, etc., but I think these modernized trappings and trimmings can fit in the structure of an ancient liturgy. And, apparently, I'm not alone. :)
  • Ryan
    Just to throw in a comment from the Catholic side of things...
    I'm a young convert to the Catholic Church from Lutheranism, I was 19 when I joined the Church, I'm now 23. What you were saying about Matt Maher is pretty much on-target. The Church right now is experiencing an incredible time of new life among the younger members, who are deeply orthodox and faithful to true Catholic teaching and traditions, unlike our baby-boomer parents and grandparents. When you survey those in the pews at a traditional Latin Mass, over 60% of the people are typically 35 and under. People in the confession lines are really, really old or really, really young. Those in that middle generation are nowhere to be found, except in groups who left the Church looking for more liberal theology.
    Matt Maher is one example and he is representative of a young faithful and orthodox Catholic who is passionately in love with Jesus. Our "traditions" are awesome for the ancient character- just think how many Christians have recited the Nicene Creed throughout the years (1600 years, that is), or even the incredible dialogue of "The Lord be with You"...even Augustine himself had to write a homily about about this 'ancient' tradition in his day to remind the people what that was about. What an incredible way to experience the communion of the saints, ESPECIALLY in the liturgy.
    In the end, Catholics and other 'liturgical Christians' have a right to a good liturgy, considering the history of the liturgy and the fact that liturgy has been the way we've gone about preserving the truth of the faith. There have been MANY converts to the Church and hearts won over to Jesus because of the beauty of the liturgy (I think Augustine himself was influenced as well by liturgy).
    And lastly I have to make this point clear: Matt Maher and the young growing Catholic crowd are loud and proud Catholics, no strings attached. Full fidelity to Jesus, full fidelity to his Church under our Pastor, the Pope. We pray the Rosary, go to confession FREQUENTLY, talk to our brothers and sisters who are in Heaven (the saints), and go to Mass, all out of love for Jesus. We love any music and music style SO LONG AS it points to Jesus and leads us back to the truth. My own parish has praise and worship (many Matt Maher music), as well as Latin songs, and even some Latin songs that are praise and worship! Its strange to see somebody worshiping Jesus with their hands up, in Latin, and wearing a veil, and even speaking in tongues! Haha!
    Me being out of the Lutheran Church for a bit, what is going on there in terms of young people (20s and 30s)? Are they typically more 'traditional' or not? Just curious.
  • Thanks so much for your comment Ryan! You offer a unique (to this blog anyway) perspective that I've not yet seen.

    As for your question about what's going on in the Lutheran Church with the 20s and 30s crowd, I'm not sure I'm the right person to answer that. I see very little of my own crowd in the Lutheran churches I've visited or joined. I get the impression that my demographic is represented better in the Lutheran church in other geographical locations. I'm stuck in the Southeast US and most Lutheran churches I find here are small, old, and pretty traditional... a deathknell to reaching most 20-30 somethings that I know.
  • Ryan
    But therein lies my point- and really, the point that you are making as well- that there are "Matt Mahers" out there who appreciate the tradition of the Church- like the liturgy- and find it as a means of experiencing Jesus. "Traditional" is really the best way to go. One can have GREAT liturgy (follow all the rubrics and the rules) but still have 'contemporary' music. The liturgy is really the only connection we really have with our brothers and sisters over the last 2,000 years. And the younger faithful are really discovering that (like Matt Maher and many, many more of us).
    I'm glad to be a part of the blog though! Great find! I hope to contribute so as to strengthen the grace that you and I share in our common Baptism!
  • chad_thompson
    So while I see that a non-liturgical church can miss some important aspects in the scriptures as they strive to maintain contextual relevance, I also find that the occasional lack of contextual relevance in a liturgical church seems to be missing something. Is it possible to get the best of both worlds?

    This also depends on a view of relevance - i.e. what really is relevant?

    For Lutherans, that answer has always been the proposition that you are justified by faith apart from the works of the law. Really - that's it. The liturgy contains the three main parts that reflect this concept of the Gospel:

    1) The Confession and Absolution - the pronouncement that "if we confess our sins, God who is faithful and just"... thats' it. Whatever you confess is forgiven in the eyes of God - even though we are "in bondage to sin"; only God can free us from that burden. The reminder that you have been baptized - claimed as a child of God and forgiven for your sins.

    2) The Proclamation of the Word, in both readings and preaching. A Lutheran sermon is rarely considered to be more than that; no advice on how to balance the checkbook, no advice on 'living a godly life', etc. - just the proclamation that all of your efforts, strivings and attempts at being 'Godly' have fallen short; the Law has condemned you to the grave you have earned. The Gospel, however, opens the door to new life - not one you created or earned, but one that has been created *for you*.

    (Lutherans also hold that this distinction between Law and Gospel is also the key to reading all of the Scriptures.)

    3) The Sacrament - the body and blood of Christ given and shed for you.

    The Liturgy is used to preserve these three elements; not out of a requirement, but more out of the experience that the things we do in the liturgy are things that if you wish your service to be "Lutheran" (i.e. covering the three points) you'll end up doing anyway. Particularly because the words spoken during the liturgy are almost entirely Scriptural. The ELW did a rather poor job of pointing that out, where the LC-MS 'Lutheran Service Book' actually publishes the scriptural references next to every point in the liturgy.

    And agreeing upstream - the use of a lectionary also enforces a bit of discipline in preaching. Preaching must always accompany the Word, which can be a bit different that some of the evangelical (mostly E-Free, independent) sermons I've sat through where the "Word" was subservient to the message of the pastor - particularly when the proof-texting comes out and the pastor's point is backed up by various passages from books all over the Bible. The Lutheran interpretation depends on the concept that "Scripture interprets Scripture", which leads to a much different form of presenting and preaching.
  • Thanks for your comment!

    You make a good point about the Word being subservient to the message of the pastor. It's my personal feeling that there are risks to both approaches. I've read the Bible both ways in my personal reading. I've opened up to a passage randomly and asked myself "where is God?" and "where am I?" and prayed for God to speak through what I'm reading. This can create powerful and unexpected applications. Likewise, I've sought out passages specifically to support a particular problem or concern that I have and have indeed drawn from "various passages from books all over the Bible" in order to support my research (if you can call it that). I personally feel that both approaches are valuable, and Biblical. Writers of the New Testament often quote Old Testament passages because the content of those passages is contextually relevant to the topic the writer is addressing at that time. Are these writers using the Word in a subservient manner? Am I doing so when I seek out scriptures to address a topic that is on my heart? I've found myself "browsing" the Bible even during Lutheran sermons. A few weeks back when the pastor was preaching on the unclean woman touching the hem of Christ's robe for healing, I found myself reaching back to Old Testament passages to read about the laws of cleanliness to better understand the torment this woman had most likely endured during her life. I searched for other examples of power "leaving" Christ without any apparent effort on His part because I'm intrigued by this particular aspect of the passage.

    Perhaps both types of Bible study and preaching could learn from and support the other. I love the idea of generating discipline among pastors by recommending texts through the lectionary, I just fear that it stifles creativity and has the potential to function like blinders when pastors are writing their sermons. Likewise, pastors who tend to use the Word in a subservient manner could learn a lot by disciplining themselves to some degree and learning a bit of restraint.
  • ~PW
    I have just moved, and not all my Lutheran resources are at my fingertips. However you may be interested in some things I have purchased from Northwestern Publishing House, one of the Lutheran publishing houses. One is a small booklet about the ABC's of Lutheran worship, about 10 dollars or so, and explains the various elements of the Lutheran worship, building, service, liturgy, etc to newcomers such as yourself. I do apologize I can't get my hands on that right now for the correct title. As soon as I do, I'll come back and let you know. The other resource is a companion to the hymnals used in the WELS Lutheran churches: Christian Worship Manual. Their main hymnal is Christian Worship. This Manual has a LOT of background info, explaining the liturgy, history, and even the music. It is designed for pastors and those who lead worship. Though I don't personally fall into that category, I have found the info very helpful. That is also available at NPH~ Northwestern Publishing House.

    Have you asked your pastor for any other resources?
  • I've read through much of the Book of Concord and had numerous discussions with pastors and other Lutheran church members, most notably my wife, a \"lifetime Lutheran\". I'll definitely look into the resources you've identified here and welcome any others you may track down!
  • oldlutheran
    "Do you ever feel limited by the lectionary?" Wow, what a great question. I guess that I've never really thought about it like that before. I suppose that I would have to say, not so much "limited" as perhaps "challenged." There are certainly those times when the texts just don't speak to me (at least not in the way that I would like). I mean, after all, there is only so much that you can say about the beheading of John the Baptist. ;) But, to be honest, I can now say that I have preached on the 3-year lectionary cycle for a total of 8 times; and have never been tempted to preach the same sermon twice.

    For me the lectionary is more of a "tool" than a "rule." It was set up to cover the major themes of scripture within a 3-year period. "Are there times when you wish you could pick a different scripture to preach on for a given Sunday?" Sure, There are a lot of great Old Testament stories that never made it into the lectionary (at least not in their full context). However, that doesn't mean that I don't ever use them, or preach about them from time to time. Just because I choose to use a lectionary text doesn't mean the rest of the Bible is off limits. The truly wonder thing about God's word is that it's "living" and always has something new to reveal.

    I guess that might also explain another reason why I choose to incorporate the lectionary into my preaching. It is because I know that when I use it, I can be fairly certain that at least the main themes in the Bible have all been explored. My guess is that If it were just left up to me to pick out the texts I wanted to preach on, a whole lot of the Bible would never get covered.
  • Your comment about the beheading of John the Baptist is exactly what I was thinking about when I talk about the limitations of the lectionary. What do you do when you come up on a week where that's the suggested scripture, but you discern the Holy Spirit leading you toward a theme that doesn't fit naturally to this subset of scripture? However, you clear things up a bit when you talk about how the lectionary is a tool rather than a rule.

    Is it possible that having this "tool" might create a risk of Holy Spirit laziness? What I mean is, if you can easily narrow your search for sermon topics by using the lectionary, isn't it easier to close yourself off to other scriptures or themes the Holy Spirit may be trying to communicate to your congregation?

    I only ask because I found this happening to myself as a youth leader at one of my previous churches. I basically got tired and a little burned out serving as both worship leader for the contemporary service as well as youth leader for the high school youth group. When I got tired, I leaned on books that mapped out week after week of content for me. I made adjustments and tried to fit the material into the context of the group's needs, but found myself trying to force the material to conform to what I felt the Holy Spirit was wanting to communicate to them. Sometimes it worked well. I managed to turn "Duct Tape Night" into a pretty heated discussion about fulfilling God's purposes (I could write a whole post just on that). Sometimes it worked horribly, and I'm sure the youth picked up on it. If I hadn't had such "tools" at my disposal, I would have been "forced" to search the scriptures myself to address the promptings of the Holy Spirit. I wonder if this dynamic occurs on Sunday mornings.

    Do pastors ever use the lectionary as an "easy way out"?
  • oldlutheran
    "Is it possible that having this 'tool' might create a risk of Holy Spirit laziness?" Certainly that can happen. I would suppose, however, that this is a risk that all pastors at times face. The same case could be made for those who pick and choose their own texts to preach on, while avoiding some of the "harder" passages of scripture.

    As I mentioned earlier, I understand the lectionary to be a "tool" to aid and assist me in recognizing some of the major themes that run through the Old Testament and New Testament. This doesn't mean, however, that other texts can not also be used. Just because the lectionary presents a series of readings for a given Sunday is no reason that other scripture cannot also support the same theme. Often when I preach, I will draw in a host of other texts (not a part of the lectionary) that can contextually support the same biblical theme.

    Even the story about the beheading of John the Baptist can draw in a number of possible sermon images, such as "how do we deal with the violent death of someone close to us" (John was Jesus' cousin) or "how can political power lead to political corruption" (Herod's desire to silence his critics) or "how do we respond to God's prophetic message, especially if that message is contrary to our own will or desires."

    Certainly one can make a case that a restrictive use of the lectionary might give some pastor's an "easy way out." But an equally valid argument can be made for those who choose not to deal with some of the "harder" passages of scripture (which can and often do come up in the lectionary cycle).
  • Ahhh, that's a great point that you end with. So you're saying that the lectionary helps create discipline among pastors in the hopes that they don't purposefully evade difficult topics?

    This notion actually struck me a few Sundays back during Trinity Sunday. The Pastor mentioned that if he could choose a Sunday to have off every year, it would be that one. He doesn't like preaching on the Trinity because it can be a difficult concept to grasp. He went through the Athanasian Creed. It was my first time hearing it, and I can understand why he'd want to avoid it. Frankly, I thought I understood the concept of the Holy Trinity pretty well before he read through that creed. I think I may actually be more confused now. :-)

    I do see that churches without a lectionary may water-down their teaching by evading difficult subjects or scriptures. I've visited a few churches that seemed to hit the congregation with "kid gloves" and never challenge the church body. I guess it could be pretty easy to preach on love and hope every week.
  • oldlutheran
    I am by all accounts an "old Lutheran" but with an ear to your generation. I appreciate your questions, because my generation (baby boomers) left the church in droves without asking a whole lot of questions. They just quit coming. I was the oddball who decided to stick it out. Now I've been a pastor in the Lutheran Church for nearly 25 years.

    I'm happy to try and respond to some of your questions, although I will be the first one to admit that I'm probably not speaking for all Lutheran pastors or congregations. Again, consider me to be the oddball in the group. Let me just comment on the first question you asked in your post: "how can the church ensure contextual relevance if it is locked into a set path through the scriptures?"

    In my humble opinion, this question may have more to do with the church itself, then with the use of a particular liturgy or lectionary (assigned texts). The challenge of good preaching is to always make God's word contextually relevant. If this doesn't happen, then it's the fault of the preacher.

    As someone who often uses one or more of the assigned texts for my sermon, I have found this to be a valuable spiritual discipline in my own ministry. First, it challenges me to look at how the scripture is been used in it's original context. This is call exegesis. The danger of having a particular topic or subject already in mind, and then trying to pick out or choose a scripture text in order to support that position, runs the risk of missing the true meaning of what is being said. I think that a good preacher should always ask the questions of the text: "who's saying it," "who's hearing it," and "what's the story, or context (before and after) it's being said?"

    As you correctly point out, there are times when a particular issue or topic may need to be addressed within the context of the congregation. And there are certainly pastors out there who can properly interpret scripture and adapt it into a particular topic that may seem relevant to the issue, which leads me to my other reason for preaching from the assigned texts...and that is a reliance upon the Holy Spirit.

    For as well as I might think that I know the people in my congregation, I do not always know what God wants them to know. So when I spend time studying and praying over these texts, and allow the Holy Spirit to work through me, these texts take on a life all their own - apart from me. I am constantly amazed (and humbled) each week as people come up to me and say things like "how did you know what was going on in my life right now?" Sometimes we preachers are not the best judges of what our congregations need to hear.

    I hope some of this helps to answer some of your questions.
  • Excellent points, thanks so much for your input!

    I've seen my share of people leaving without asking questions. I wonder sometimes if they feel like nobody cares about their questions.

    I definitely recognize that it's always important to make God's word contextually relevant. I guess my question is more about the limitation the lectionary creates. As a pastor, you're a great target for my question. Do you ever feel limited by the lectionary? Are there times where you wish you could pick a different scripture to preach on for a given Sunday? What do you do in these cases?

    I agree that the Holy Spirit should always play a huge role in the discernment a pastor users to select his sermon theme and content. It's interesting that you bring this up. You're trusting the Holy Spirit to reveal truth to you through the lectionary each week, but I imagine non-liturgical church pastors are trusting the Holy Spirit to reveal truth through the scriptures as well as what scriptures to actually use. Which approach reveals more of a reliance on the Holy Spirit? Are we limiting the work of the Holy Spirit by boxing pastors into a subset of scriptures available to him for any given week?
  • ~PW
    See my comment on How Old is Old? Yes, I do believe (still working it out for myself, though) that liturgy is important and very needed.
  • So you think it's actually *needed*? I'm not sure I'd agree with you on this. Liturgy was created by the church and I have no doubt that a church could function (because they do) without a liturgy. I can see the benefits of a liturgy, but I feel like it's just another tool in a much larger toolbox. It's not necessary to the church, but it has developed out of a need to study the Bible.

    I see the liturgy in a similar light to a daily devotion book or a daily Bible reading schedule. These are simply organized means to consume the entire Bible. Likewise, the liturgy seems to be an organized means to study the entire life of Christ throughout the year. Couldn't this be done without a scheduled liturgy?
blog comments powered by Disqus