Letter from Florida (5); More on Worship
Jennifer quotes Barbara Brown Taylor saying worship is not something that “people cook up by themselves.” And Luke suggests among other things that worship is a dialogue. Both suggest that God, the Spirit, makes worship happen. Of course as Ron notes, when one actually takes on Christ with the Eucharist, that’s everything. That seems to be the Catholic position, but does that mean fellowship with other believers is not a part of worship? Or exegesis of the word?
My little screed of several days ago came out of a frustrating worship service that had way too much of the preacher’s personal opinion and not nearly enough of the word of God. That happened again this Sunday. It disturbs me. But suppose it was the word of God that was upsetting me? What if I heard strong Biblical preaching that was so radical it upset my comfortable life. That would be a good thing, right?
I have been reading a collection of essays by Smith (The Devil Reads Derrida) and in a short piece on worship he says this:
“What is worship for? What does worship do? While God’s glory is the central aspect of worship, its principle effect is the formation of the body of Christ into the image of Christ. It is in full-orbed worship (Word and sacrament) that we are formed as subjects of the King. It is in worship that our allegiance is molded and directed to Christ. So Christian worship is the school of the Spirit. But given what we’ve learned in Paul’s engagements in Philippi, we could also say that Christian worship is a kind of civics class: it is where we are shaped into “Messiah people,” who pledge allegiance to the ascended King-in-waiting, and learn the counter-imperial measures of love, justice and mercy. The goal of worship is not a private refueling but a public disturbance—to create subversive ambassadors of the coming King.”
This is the concluding paragraph of an essay about Paul’s preaching in Phillipi, especially the incident of casting demons out of young girl—an act which angered the authorities because it took a source of revenue from them. Smith suggests that perhaps the best kind of political action we can take is to worship in a way that calls the corruption of government and business and media to account—in other words, create a public disturbance.
I like this kind of talk because I believe we have compromised far too much with the powers of the world, but I know that this language—subversive, counter-imperial—frightens some people. And I suppose –to go back to my original remarks about the preacher who shut off my worship by political remarks—subversive worship services might also turn people off. But if it is solidly Biblical, let it.
My little screed of several days ago came out of a frustrating worship service that had way too much of the preacher’s personal opinion and not nearly enough of the word of God. That happened again this Sunday. It disturbs me. But suppose it was the word of God that was upsetting me? What if I heard strong Biblical preaching that was so radical it upset my comfortable life. That would be a good thing, right?
I have been reading a collection of essays by Smith (The Devil Reads Derrida) and in a short piece on worship he says this:
“What is worship for? What does worship do? While God’s glory is the central aspect of worship, its principle effect is the formation of the body of Christ into the image of Christ. It is in full-orbed worship (Word and sacrament) that we are formed as subjects of the King. It is in worship that our allegiance is molded and directed to Christ. So Christian worship is the school of the Spirit. But given what we’ve learned in Paul’s engagements in Philippi, we could also say that Christian worship is a kind of civics class: it is where we are shaped into “Messiah people,” who pledge allegiance to the ascended King-in-waiting, and learn the counter-imperial measures of love, justice and mercy. The goal of worship is not a private refueling but a public disturbance—to create subversive ambassadors of the coming King.”
This is the concluding paragraph of an essay about Paul’s preaching in Phillipi, especially the incident of casting demons out of young girl—an act which angered the authorities because it took a source of revenue from them. Smith suggests that perhaps the best kind of political action we can take is to worship in a way that calls the corruption of government and business and media to account—in other words, create a public disturbance.
I like this kind of talk because I believe we have compromised far too much with the powers of the world, but I know that this language—subversive, counter-imperial—frightens some people. And I suppose –to go back to my original remarks about the preacher who shut off my worship by political remarks—subversive worship services might also turn people off. But if it is solidly Biblical, let it.
You should read Smith's _Desiring the Kingdom_ where he fleshes some of this out more.
ReplyDelete