Thursday night, July 9, I experienced one of the most encouraging events in the brief history of my tenure and First EPC’s pastor—the program bringing a week of Vacation Bible School to a close. What encouraged me most was not the number of kids (about 150) or the performance of the kids (stellar), but rather it was the complexion of the kids.
As each class took its turn on stage, the image that popped into my head was that of chocolate Skittles. If you open a bag of chocolate Skittles and poured it out, in front of you would be candies ranging in color from creamy-white to dark brown. This was the complexion of VBS. What should encourage us is that this is also the complexion of our neighborhood. What should challenge us is that this isn’t, for the most part, the complexion of our worship services.
Why do I bring this up? Is it the result of church-mandated sensitivity training? Absolutely not. It is the outworking of my calling. My job as the pastor, of this particular church in this particular place, is to lead this congregation up, toward God, and out, into our community and in the past few years our community (Kent/Renton) has changed dramatically.
Only a few weeks ago, the Seattle Times published a story that said, among other things, “Kent — the state's fourth-largest district — has undergone the most rapid change among Puget Sound districts, from about one-third minorities five years ago to about 51 percent this past school year.” Wow. If the complexion around our church is growing more diverse doesn’t it stand to reason that the complexion of our congregation should be changing as well? It must. If we are “gathering and growing” in accord with our vision as we move forward, into the future, we will look different than we do now.
The challenge here, of course, is that this means—here comes a dirty word—change. Since I’ve been the pastor here at First EPC, many things have changed. Did you expect something different? I recently heard, second-hand, someone say “Is everything we did before [as a church, I assume] bad?” The answer is, of course not.
On the other hand, everything First EPC did in the past she did in a radically different demographic and cultural context than the one in which we currently live. Thirty years ago, the neighborhood around us was predominantly, if not completely Anglo and people couldn’t Google us before they visited.
As I look back at the history of First EPC, it seems that each generation of this church (since 1893) has been faced with, and made, extremely difficult decisions as to how to “gather and grow” in their particular context. The last generation made the difficult decision to leave the PCUSA and join the EPC and those of us here now constantly reap the benefits of their sacrifice.
The decision of this generation is whether we will make the changes necessary in order to best communicate the gospel to those whom God has placed in our communities and neighborhoods. In fact, even if we never looked outside our doors, we’d still be faced with the question of whether we are willing to change in order to reach our own children. Are we?
One of the battle cries of the Protestant Reformation was “ecclesia reformata semper reformanda” (the Church reformed and always reforming). We tend to forget the second part of that statement—always reforming. The only other option it seems is: ecclesia reformata quod mortuus (the Church reformed...and dead). Which will it be?
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Preaching and Politics
Personally speaking, the most welcome day of 2008 was November 5th. Why? The fact that our country has gotten to the point that they would elect a black man as our President is momentous and a great encouragement. However that isn’t the reason I rejoiced to see the day. You see for me, a pastor, I longed to see that particular day is because it meant, finally, that the election process would be over. That’s it. I was tired of it.
More than a few times this last election season individuals became frustrated with me because of my unwillingness, from the pulpit, to advocate for one or the other (frankly, just one) of the presidential candidates. No doubt, the root of frustration has to do with the fact that these folks have assumed (and we know what happens when we “assume”) that either everyone in the body would welcome such “preaching” or that those in the “wrong” camp might be persuaded after hearing, from the preacher, that a certain politician is God’s obvious choice. My perspective (below) on these issues, obviously, is quite different—otherwise I’d be doing it.
While I consciously avoid, politically speaking, “showing my hat,” here’s a full-disclosure of where I am: realistic (although my family might argue that the phrase “paralyzingly cynical” might be more appropriate). I turned eighteen during Basic Training and, shortly thereafter, cast my first vote for Ronald Reagan. The primary motivator there wasn’t my “views” on taxes or government size, but rather the fact that I was a Ranger in the U.S. Army and Reagan, literally, took special care of us. In fact, I can still remember the portrait of him, wearing a black beret, hanging in our battalion headquarters. Since then, although I’ve always voted as part of my civic duty, each time I felt my options were always “the lesser of two evils.” This said, again in the name of disclosure, neither candidate in this past election cycle even remotely excited me.
Given these facts, I felt (and feel) that the best thing I could do is that which I always do—preach the gospel. Not only can you not save yourself, but neither can the “right” candidate save you. Added to this, if you are a Christian, I assume (and we know what happens when we “assume”) that you need to hear, not which candidate to vote for, but rather the fact that God is sovereign over all our affairs, including, and even specifically, government affairs.
Consider Paul’s words to the Romans, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God”(Romans 13:1 ESV). Peter echoes these thoughts as well, saying, “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people”(1 Peter 2:13-15 ESV).
What was the context into which both these Apostles wrote? In short, it was a government structure (Rome) which, at the time, wasn’t particularly friendly to Christians or their causes. Instead of telling their audiences (including us) “fight the power” or “stick it to the Man,” they tell us to embrace the political situation(s) in which we find ourselves. How do we affect change? At least according to these passages, we affect change by doing good.
In fact, Peter seems to acknowledge the problems of most governments and even sounds a bit...cynical realistic. However, he advocates that the way to address the situation and, what he calls ignorance of foolish people, is by doing good. Christians do an incredible amount of good. In fact, when is the last time you’ve ever seen a hospital, orphanage, or homeless shelter named for an atheist? It just doesn’t happen. On the other hand, if Christians do so much good, why then do Christians not have this reputation? I’m afraid, no matter how much good we do, our words are actually louder.
What do people hear us say? Among other things, they hear us criticizing and complaining about those whom God has ordained to lead us. Honestly, one of the things that bothered me most during the Bush presidency was to hear left-leaning Christians publicly run him down and call him names. Already, I hear right-leaning Christians criticize Obama. While you may disagree with the policies of either man, does that necessarily mean they are “stupid,” “idiots,” or “godless?” Besides a sense of self-righteous satisfaction, do those words do anything to “silence the ignorant” or advance the kingdom of God? In my experience, the answer is no.
Why won’t I ever tell you for whom you should vote? The answer is simple: it’s not my job. Moreover, I assume (and we know what happens...) that instead of scorning and/or complaining about “right-wing nuts” or “left-wing socialists” that you are actually befriending, loving, and bringing them to church. This being the case, I am loathe to have inappropriate political statements become a stumbling block for those desperately in need of another kind of news—Good News.
More than a few times this last election season individuals became frustrated with me because of my unwillingness, from the pulpit, to advocate for one or the other (frankly, just one) of the presidential candidates. No doubt, the root of frustration has to do with the fact that these folks have assumed (and we know what happens when we “assume”) that either everyone in the body would welcome such “preaching” or that those in the “wrong” camp might be persuaded after hearing, from the preacher, that a certain politician is God’s obvious choice. My perspective (below) on these issues, obviously, is quite different—otherwise I’d be doing it.
While I consciously avoid, politically speaking, “showing my hat,” here’s a full-disclosure of where I am: realistic (although my family might argue that the phrase “paralyzingly cynical” might be more appropriate). I turned eighteen during Basic Training and, shortly thereafter, cast my first vote for Ronald Reagan. The primary motivator there wasn’t my “views” on taxes or government size, but rather the fact that I was a Ranger in the U.S. Army and Reagan, literally, took special care of us. In fact, I can still remember the portrait of him, wearing a black beret, hanging in our battalion headquarters. Since then, although I’ve always voted as part of my civic duty, each time I felt my options were always “the lesser of two evils.” This said, again in the name of disclosure, neither candidate in this past election cycle even remotely excited me.
Given these facts, I felt (and feel) that the best thing I could do is that which I always do—preach the gospel. Not only can you not save yourself, but neither can the “right” candidate save you. Added to this, if you are a Christian, I assume (and we know what happens when we “assume”) that you need to hear, not which candidate to vote for, but rather the fact that God is sovereign over all our affairs, including, and even specifically, government affairs.
Consider Paul’s words to the Romans, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God”(Romans 13:1 ESV). Peter echoes these thoughts as well, saying, “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people”(1 Peter 2:13-15 ESV).
What was the context into which both these Apostles wrote? In short, it was a government structure (Rome) which, at the time, wasn’t particularly friendly to Christians or their causes. Instead of telling their audiences (including us) “fight the power” or “stick it to the Man,” they tell us to embrace the political situation(s) in which we find ourselves. How do we affect change? At least according to these passages, we affect change by doing good.
In fact, Peter seems to acknowledge the problems of most governments and even sounds a bit...cynical realistic. However, he advocates that the way to address the situation and, what he calls ignorance of foolish people, is by doing good. Christians do an incredible amount of good. In fact, when is the last time you’ve ever seen a hospital, orphanage, or homeless shelter named for an atheist? It just doesn’t happen. On the other hand, if Christians do so much good, why then do Christians not have this reputation? I’m afraid, no matter how much good we do, our words are actually louder.
What do people hear us say? Among other things, they hear us criticizing and complaining about those whom God has ordained to lead us. Honestly, one of the things that bothered me most during the Bush presidency was to hear left-leaning Christians publicly run him down and call him names. Already, I hear right-leaning Christians criticize Obama. While you may disagree with the policies of either man, does that necessarily mean they are “stupid,” “idiots,” or “godless?” Besides a sense of self-righteous satisfaction, do those words do anything to “silence the ignorant” or advance the kingdom of God? In my experience, the answer is no.
Why won’t I ever tell you for whom you should vote? The answer is simple: it’s not my job. Moreover, I assume (and we know what happens...) that instead of scorning and/or complaining about “right-wing nuts” or “left-wing socialists” that you are actually befriending, loving, and bringing them to church. This being the case, I am loathe to have inappropriate political statements become a stumbling block for those desperately in need of another kind of news—Good News.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
What's Your Ebenezer?
Like many folks, I’ve got several “favorite” hymns. However, some are more favorite than others. Among that group, “Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing” is close to the top of my list. My favorite line, from this hymn—
First of all, what’s an Ebenezer? To the naked eye an Ebenezer is nothing more, literally, than a big rock or a pile of rocks. To the heart’s eye it is a reminder of God’s faithfulness in the past. For example, in the book of 1 Samuel, after God gives Israel victory over the Philistines, the prophet Samuel raises the first Ebenezer.
“Then Samuel took a stone and set it up between Mizpah and Shen and called its name Ebenezer; for he said, “Till now the LORD has helped us”” (1 Samuel 7:12 ESV).
Why do this? The answer is quite simple. Israel (and we) had a tendency to be forgetful. Samuel knew this and so, he sets up an Ebenezer and says, implicitly, “Every time you see this rock, remember. Remember that up to this point, God has honored his promises toward us. Every time you are worried about the future, look at the rock. Be reminded that God has taken care of you in the past and have confidence that he’ll do so in the future.”
What are some of your Ebenezers? As you look over the past year, can you see those situations or events in which God helped and sustained you or through which he delivered you? Were you or loved ones healed from some illness or malady? Or, perhaps you saw a relationship reconciled or found some new encouraging friendships? This list could be endless. Can you think of anything? If not, you’re not trying hard enough.
One way to facilitate the process of remembering, ironically, is to plan ahead. At the beginning of last year, my small group shared what we called our “Ebenezer prayers”—big things that we believed could only be accomplished by God. At the end of the year, we would look back and see if and how God had answered those prayers. Besides keeping us focused on prayer for one another, these Ebenezer prayers have given us the opportunity to rejoice as we’ve seen God work.
My Ebenezer prayer at the beginning of this year was simple. I asked for stability and clarity of call. In other words, while I enjoyed me time as the [practical] interim at First EPC, my prayer was that God would either make things permanent or call me to another ministry. Needless to say, I’m still here—with a clear call. God is faithful.
If you are a Christian, the Cross is the ultimate Ebenezer. Are you concerned about the future? Look backward. Gaze upon the Cross . This is where God “made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21 ESV). Do you feel guilty? Look to the Cross and hear the words of the Apostle Paul, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1 ESV).
As you gather with family and friends during this Advent season, take some time to share your Ebenezers. You will be pleasantly surprised to see how much of God’s faithfulness you’ve overlooked. Added to this, you will be greatly encouraged as you move forward into a new year, more watchful for new signs of God’s goodness.
Here I raise my Ebenezer;
Hither by Thy help I'm come;
And I hope, by Thy good pleasure,
Safely to arrive at home.
Jesus sought me when a stranger,
Wandering from the fold of God;
He, to rescue me from danger,
Interposed His precious blood.
—is informative as we head into a new year not because it calls us to look forward, but rather because it calls us to look backward.First of all, what’s an Ebenezer? To the naked eye an Ebenezer is nothing more, literally, than a big rock or a pile of rocks. To the heart’s eye it is a reminder of God’s faithfulness in the past. For example, in the book of 1 Samuel, after God gives Israel victory over the Philistines, the prophet Samuel raises the first Ebenezer.
“Then Samuel took a stone and set it up between Mizpah and Shen and called its name Ebenezer; for he said, “Till now the LORD has helped us”” (1 Samuel 7:12 ESV).
Why do this? The answer is quite simple. Israel (and we) had a tendency to be forgetful. Samuel knew this and so, he sets up an Ebenezer and says, implicitly, “Every time you see this rock, remember. Remember that up to this point, God has honored his promises toward us. Every time you are worried about the future, look at the rock. Be reminded that God has taken care of you in the past and have confidence that he’ll do so in the future.”
What are some of your Ebenezers? As you look over the past year, can you see those situations or events in which God helped and sustained you or through which he delivered you? Were you or loved ones healed from some illness or malady? Or, perhaps you saw a relationship reconciled or found some new encouraging friendships? This list could be endless. Can you think of anything? If not, you’re not trying hard enough.
One way to facilitate the process of remembering, ironically, is to plan ahead. At the beginning of last year, my small group shared what we called our “Ebenezer prayers”—big things that we believed could only be accomplished by God. At the end of the year, we would look back and see if and how God had answered those prayers. Besides keeping us focused on prayer for one another, these Ebenezer prayers have given us the opportunity to rejoice as we’ve seen God work.
My Ebenezer prayer at the beginning of this year was simple. I asked for stability and clarity of call. In other words, while I enjoyed me time as the [practical] interim at First EPC, my prayer was that God would either make things permanent or call me to another ministry. Needless to say, I’m still here—with a clear call. God is faithful.
If you are a Christian, the Cross is the ultimate Ebenezer. Are you concerned about the future? Look backward. Gaze upon the Cross . This is where God “made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21 ESV). Do you feel guilty? Look to the Cross and hear the words of the Apostle Paul, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1 ESV).
As you gather with family and friends during this Advent season, take some time to share your Ebenezers. You will be pleasantly surprised to see how much of God’s faithfulness you’ve overlooked. Added to this, you will be greatly encouraged as you move forward into a new year, more watchful for new signs of God’s goodness.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Dude, Where's My Flag?
For nearly a year, during worship services, our flag has been missing. I know. I took it...sort of. Here’s what happened. As a team put the sanctuary back together after our Christmas programs, I made the decision (at the time, as the interim pastor), not to replace the U.S. flag or the Christian flag to their former positions of prominence. Why?
Let me begin, first explaining what the reason is not. The reason is not because I don’t care about or respect the U.S. flag. In fact, I’ve fought proudly to defend it. Humanly speaking, I’m much more proud of the four years spent in a Ranger Battalion (1st Bn/75th Infantry) than I am of my diploma from Florida State. In fact, while I would have to root through old files to find my FSU diploma, a copy of Rogers’ Standing Orders hangs over my desk.
This said, then what is the reason? There are two aspects to my rationale. The first has to do with our calling as a church. The second has to do with our own government’s directives as to how the U.S. flag ought to be displayed.
As a church, most would agree that our calling is the “gathering and perfecting” of the saints. To this end, those whom we are most likely to gather are those in our neighborhoods and who live close to First EPC. This includes not only the majority “white” population and the minority “black” population, but also the eighty or so “shades” (i.e. ethnicities) in between. In other words, in the providence of God, our church is in the midst of the most ethnically diverse community in the state of Washington.
Each week, more and more immigrants from places as distant as Africa, India, and Europe visit our services. While my sincere hope is that they respect the laws of our country and become fruitful, productive U. S. citizens, I have a greater hope for them. I want them to know Jesus. Until they are clear on that fact, I don’t want them to confuse his gospel with being an American. While being a Christian and being a U.S. citizen are not, by any means, mutually exclusive, neither are they necessarily bound together. By not displaying the U.S. flag during worship, confusing Christianity with citizenship or patriotism is much harder.
The second reason for not displaying the flag during worship has to do with our government’s own directives as to its display in public places. According to the directives passed and published by the U.S House of Representatives:
when displayed from a staff in a church or public auditorium, the flag of the United States of America should hold the position of superior prominence, in advance of the audience, and in the position of honor at the clergyman's or speaker's right as he faces the audience. Any other flag so displayed should be placed on the left of the clergyman or speaker or to the right of the audience.
Put differently, according to “the law of the land,” when displayed in any context, including church, the flag is to have the position of superior prominence. Do you see the inherent problem of displaying a flag in a worship service? In our tradition, the cross holds superior prominence. To this end, removing the flag from the context of worship is, practically speaking, the most respectful course to take.
Is the issue completely settled in my own mind? Not completely. On the other hand, if you’re ever in the neighborhood and have an urge to see a flag, stop by my office.
Shalom,
TA
*For a more thorough, ecumenical treatment of the “flag question,” a good place to start is “Should We Have Flags in Church?: The Christian Flag and the American Flag” by Methodist pastor Hoyt Hickman.
Let me begin, first explaining what the reason is not. The reason is not because I don’t care about or respect the U.S. flag. In fact, I’ve fought proudly to defend it. Humanly speaking, I’m much more proud of the four years spent in a Ranger Battalion (1st Bn/75th Infantry) than I am of my diploma from Florida State. In fact, while I would have to root through old files to find my FSU diploma, a copy of Rogers’ Standing Orders hangs over my desk.
This said, then what is the reason? There are two aspects to my rationale. The first has to do with our calling as a church. The second has to do with our own government’s directives as to how the U.S. flag ought to be displayed.
As a church, most would agree that our calling is the “gathering and perfecting” of the saints. To this end, those whom we are most likely to gather are those in our neighborhoods and who live close to First EPC. This includes not only the majority “white” population and the minority “black” population, but also the eighty or so “shades” (i.e. ethnicities) in between. In other words, in the providence of God, our church is in the midst of the most ethnically diverse community in the state of Washington.
Each week, more and more immigrants from places as distant as Africa, India, and Europe visit our services. While my sincere hope is that they respect the laws of our country and become fruitful, productive U. S. citizens, I have a greater hope for them. I want them to know Jesus. Until they are clear on that fact, I don’t want them to confuse his gospel with being an American. While being a Christian and being a U.S. citizen are not, by any means, mutually exclusive, neither are they necessarily bound together. By not displaying the U.S. flag during worship, confusing Christianity with citizenship or patriotism is much harder.
The second reason for not displaying the flag during worship has to do with our government’s own directives as to its display in public places. According to the directives passed and published by the U.S House of Representatives:
when displayed from a staff in a church or public auditorium, the flag of the United States of America should hold the position of superior prominence, in advance of the audience, and in the position of honor at the clergyman's or speaker's right as he faces the audience. Any other flag so displayed should be placed on the left of the clergyman or speaker or to the right of the audience.
Put differently, according to “the law of the land,” when displayed in any context, including church, the flag is to have the position of superior prominence. Do you see the inherent problem of displaying a flag in a worship service? In our tradition, the cross holds superior prominence. To this end, removing the flag from the context of worship is, practically speaking, the most respectful course to take.
Is the issue completely settled in my own mind? Not completely. On the other hand, if you’re ever in the neighborhood and have an urge to see a flag, stop by my office.
Shalom,
TA
*For a more thorough, ecumenical treatment of the “flag question,” a good place to start is “Should We Have Flags in Church?: The Christian Flag and the American Flag” by Methodist pastor Hoyt Hickman.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Why New Hymnals?
In his book, The Deliberate Church, Mark Dever comments that for a young pastor of an older church, the biggest mistake he can make is to “assume the gospel rather than clarify it.” In other words, before moving forward with ministry plans or even BHAGs (big, hairy, audacious goals), make sure that, among the members, the gospel and its implications are clear. I agree.
I’ve been clarifying the gospel since my days as a lay Sunday School teacher and, frankly, can’t imagine a time when I will cease to do it. On the other hand, now that I am officially the Sr. Pastor here at First EPC, I’m finding that there are lots of other things that need clarification as well. Among these things is our philosophy and practice of worship.
Over the years, our church’s Session has dealt at length with the question of philosophy and, put simply, has determined that the most appropriate style for our congregation should be “blended.” What does “blended” mean? It depends whom you ask! The spirit of the decision, no doubt, refers to a blend of “traditional” and “contemporary.” What do traditional and contemporary mean? It depends whom you ask!
Given the ambiguity of these terms (contemporary, traditional, etc.), more helpful descriptors might be ancient and indigenous. Our worship should be ancient, using Scripture and the rich, historical hymns, liturgies, and forms of the the universal Church. On the other hand, our worship should be indigenous, communicating to our congregation in hymns, liturgies, forms that are, at some level, in “the vernacular.” If you read the Bible in any language but Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic you’re already doing this.
Accomplishing “blended” worship was the goal of our most recent hymnals and, for this reason, frankly, they fell a bit short. You see, the old hymnal tried to accomplish the impossible. It tried to combine, in one place, the best of “traditional” and “contemporary.” The problem, however, is that by the time a song is old enough to make it into a book, chances are that it is no longer contemporary (i.e. current). Additionally, given the limited number of pages in any hymnal, for every contemporary song that is added, a traditional hymn is excluded. I’d hate to be on the editorial team that had to make those decisions!
The beauty of the Trinity Hymnal (the new one) is that it is primarily “old-school.” In other words, the new hymnal’s strength is the fact that it is full, for the most part, of traditional hymns with the traditional words. Having the Trinity Hymnal as a foundation, we can experiment with newer music by either projecting it or using bulletin inserts.
Another reason for the switch has to do with my responsibility as the Sr. Pastor. According to the EPC’s Book of Worship:
The Pastor, while advised to consult with the Church Session, has the duty and responsibility to determine the order, sequence, elements, and proportion of the service that each shall have in public worship. In making those decisions about worship, the Pastor shall be reminded of guidance for worship given in Scripture, the Reformed heritage in which we stand, of the customs, circumstances, and particular needs of the congregation, as well as the admonitions and limitations set by the Book of Worship (2.4.A).
Let me summarize. At the end of the day, the Pastor bears the ultimate responsibility for what happens in the context of a church’s worship. Note, also, that he is “advised to consult with the Church Session.” I couldn’t agree more. While I didn’t mandate that we switch hymnals, I am more comfortable and familiar with the Trinity, and therefore suggested its consideration. After consulting with the leadership of our music ministries, gaining approval by our Session, and receiving a generous (anonymous) offer of funding, we ordered 500 hymnals.
If you are interested in finding out more about the Trinity Hymnal please check out its page on Wikipedia. There you will find information on its history as well as links to such things as an online database of hymn numbers and even audio of most of its hymns.
I’ve been clarifying the gospel since my days as a lay Sunday School teacher and, frankly, can’t imagine a time when I will cease to do it. On the other hand, now that I am officially the Sr. Pastor here at First EPC, I’m finding that there are lots of other things that need clarification as well. Among these things is our philosophy and practice of worship.
Over the years, our church’s Session has dealt at length with the question of philosophy and, put simply, has determined that the most appropriate style for our congregation should be “blended.” What does “blended” mean? It depends whom you ask! The spirit of the decision, no doubt, refers to a blend of “traditional” and “contemporary.” What do traditional and contemporary mean? It depends whom you ask!
Given the ambiguity of these terms (contemporary, traditional, etc.), more helpful descriptors might be ancient and indigenous. Our worship should be ancient, using Scripture and the rich, historical hymns, liturgies, and forms of the the universal Church. On the other hand, our worship should be indigenous, communicating to our congregation in hymns, liturgies, forms that are, at some level, in “the vernacular.” If you read the Bible in any language but Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic you’re already doing this.
Accomplishing “blended” worship was the goal of our most recent hymnals and, for this reason, frankly, they fell a bit short. You see, the old hymnal tried to accomplish the impossible. It tried to combine, in one place, the best of “traditional” and “contemporary.” The problem, however, is that by the time a song is old enough to make it into a book, chances are that it is no longer contemporary (i.e. current). Additionally, given the limited number of pages in any hymnal, for every contemporary song that is added, a traditional hymn is excluded. I’d hate to be on the editorial team that had to make those decisions!
The beauty of the Trinity Hymnal (the new one) is that it is primarily “old-school.” In other words, the new hymnal’s strength is the fact that it is full, for the most part, of traditional hymns with the traditional words. Having the Trinity Hymnal as a foundation, we can experiment with newer music by either projecting it or using bulletin inserts.
Another reason for the switch has to do with my responsibility as the Sr. Pastor. According to the EPC’s Book of Worship:
The Pastor, while advised to consult with the Church Session, has the duty and responsibility to determine the order, sequence, elements, and proportion of the service that each shall have in public worship. In making those decisions about worship, the Pastor shall be reminded of guidance for worship given in Scripture, the Reformed heritage in which we stand, of the customs, circumstances, and particular needs of the congregation, as well as the admonitions and limitations set by the Book of Worship (2.4.A).
Let me summarize. At the end of the day, the Pastor bears the ultimate responsibility for what happens in the context of a church’s worship. Note, also, that he is “advised to consult with the Church Session.” I couldn’t agree more. While I didn’t mandate that we switch hymnals, I am more comfortable and familiar with the Trinity, and therefore suggested its consideration. After consulting with the leadership of our music ministries, gaining approval by our Session, and receiving a generous (anonymous) offer of funding, we ordered 500 hymnals.
If you are interested in finding out more about the Trinity Hymnal please check out its page on Wikipedia. There you will find information on its history as well as links to such things as an online database of hymn numbers and even audio of most of its hymns.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
What is he thinking?
One of the biggest issues for our, and any, congregation is communication. Among the most common questions, I imagine, when it comes to the pastor is: What is he thinking? Or, the corollary question: What is he not thinking?
This blog will attempt to answer that question and many more...stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)