Liturgical Worship

[alexandermsmith]

Maybe we should pay more heed to the fact the Reformed churches never implemented this.

Except for the fact that Reformed churches today are implementing it. And if antiquity, such as it is, is the authority, soon enough these practices will be established practices. I, for one, would want to eat with Jesus more than once a year.

And you think the state of the churches today provides a solid ground to make changes, do you? Do you know what's going on in the church today? When things change suddenly after over 300 years of pretty consistent practice it's rarely for the better. Another one who needs reminding that the Reformed church didn't start with Machen?

This has been the Scottish practice since the Reformation: for each congregation to have only one or two communion seasons a year but for different congregations to have their seasons in a staggered fashion to allow people to travel to other communion seasons. That, to me, seems the best approach. Allowing each congregation the time to hold the communion season as it should be, and allowing the people the opportunity for more frequent communion if they desire.

Where do we see communion seasons in the New Testament?

Communions seasons are a natural application of the teaching of Scripture on how to administer the Lord's Supper. Again, I would be more willing to trust previous generations whose godliness and intimacy with Scripture is famous compared with the bloggers of today.

As Nicholas Wolterstorff writes,

The Calvinist service was not anti-aesthetics. The Geneva gown, the congregational singing--everything breathes simplicity, sobriety, and measure (135).

~Until Justice and Peace Embrace.

Aesthetics doesn't mean flashy/pretty. Admittedly, nor is it the point of the NT worship, either. But the "reduce it down until it can't be reduced anymore" is a form of aesthetics.

Anti-aesthetics has its own aesthetics.

I don't even know what your point is here. Why are you bringing up aesthetics? I didn't say reduce things down until they can't be reduced further. What I said was that NT worship is meant to be simple. Congregational singing can be simple- unaccompanied Psalm singing; it can also be complicated. And considering most of the Reformed churches in America can't get this point right perhaps I won't be lectured to on how often the Lord's Supper should be administered. In my denomination if I wanted to observe the Supper every week I could. Could you?

 

[RamistThomist]

Maybe we should pay more heed to the fact the Reformed churches never implemented this.

Except for the fact that Reformed churches today are implementing it. And if antiquity, such as it is, is the authority, soon enough these practices will be established practices. I, for one, would want to eat with Jesus more than once a year.

And you think the state of the churches today provides a solid ground to make changes, do you? Do you know what's going on in the church today? When things change suddenly after over 300 years of pretty consistent practice it's rarely for the better. Another one who needs reminding that the Reformed church didn't start with Machen?

This has been the Scottish practice since the Reformation: for each congregation to have only one or two communion seasons a year but for different congregations to have their seasons in a staggered fashion to allow people to travel to other communion seasons. That, to me, seems the best approach. Allowing each congregation the time to hold the communion season as it should be, and allowing the people the opportunity for more frequent communion if they desire.

Where do we see communion seasons in the New Testament?

Communions seasons are a natural application of the teaching of Scripture on how to administer the Lord's Supper. Again, I would be more willing to trust previous generations whose godliness and intimacy with Scripture is famous compared with the bloggers of today.

As Nicholas Wolterstorff writes,

The Calvinist service was not anti-aesthetics. The Geneva gown, the congregational singing--everything breathes simplicity, sobriety, and measure (135).

~Until Justice and Peace Embrace.

Aesthetics doesn't mean flashy/pretty. Admittedly, nor is it the point of the NT worship, either. But the "reduce it down until it can't be reduced anymore" is a form of aesthetics.

Anti-aesthetics has its own aesthetics.

I don't even know what your point is here. Why are you bringing up aesthetics? I didn't say reduce things down until they can't be reduced further. What I said was that NT worship is meant to be simple. Congregational singing can be simple- unaccompanied Psalm singing; it can also be complicated. And considering most of the Reformed churches in America can't get this point right perhaps I won't be lectured to on how often the Lord's Supper should be administered. In my denomination if I wanted to observe the Supper every week I could. Could you?

So how's Christianity looking in Scotland these days?

 

[RamistThomist]

Maybe we should pay more heed to the fact the Reformed churches never implemented this.

Except for the fact that Reformed churches today are implementing it. And if antiquity, such as it is, is the authority, soon enough these practices will be established practices. I, for one, would want to eat with Jesus more than once a year.

And you think the state of the churches today provides a solid ground to make changes, do you? Do you know what's going on in the church today? When things change suddenly after over 300 years of pretty consistent practice it's rarely for the better. Another one who needs reminding that the Reformed church didn't start with Machen?

I get the impression you really don't expect an answer to these questions.

This has been the Scottish practice since the Reformation: for each congregation to have only one or two communion seasons a year but for different congregations to have their seasons in a staggered fashion to allow people to travel to other communion seasons. That, to me, seems the best approach. Allowing each congregation the time to hold the communion season as it should be, and allowing the people the opportunity for more frequent communion if they desire.

Where do we see communion seasons in the New Testament?

Communions seasons are a natural application of the teaching of Scripture on how to administer the Lord's Supper. Again, I would be more willing to trust previous generations whose godliness and intimacy with Scripture is famous compared with the bloggers of today.

If we shouldn't trust bloggers today, should we trust anyone who writes on the internet? Would you fall into that category. I don't doubt those men were godly. I am just not sure why it has to be either/or.

Further, you didn't answer my question.

I don't even know what your point is here. Why are you bringing up aesthetics? I didn't say reduce things down until they can't be reduced further. What I said was that NT worship is meant to be simple. Congregational singing can be simple- unaccompanied Psalm singing; it can also be complicated. And considering most of the Reformed churches in America can't get this point right perhaps I won't be lectured to on how often the Lord's Supper should be administered. In my denomination if I wanted to observe the Supper every week I could. Could you?

Didn't think I was lecturing you. And yes, I could/do eat with Jesus every week. Not really sure why you brought that up.

 

[KeithW]

I think a lot of the interest in "liturgy" amongst Reformed folks nowadays is the same as the renewed interest in Lent: it's being used as a substitute for real, experiential religion. People seem to think if they fill their services with stuff- calls to prayer, confessions of sin, recitation of creeds, specific prayers for this and for that (instead of just actual prayer)- they can make up for a lack of vital religion. It won't work. I looked at the order of service of an OPC church the other day and there were 18 separate and different items on it! (And that's not including the intimations and the "prelude" and "postlude".) Christian worship is meant to be simple, pure. 18 separate parts to a service is not that.

I am with Alexander on this part. The danger in attending any church is believing that attending and being surrounded by liturgy is enough to make you a good Christian. For me personally, a complicated service gets in the way of me submitting my heart and mind to God.

 

[RamistThomist]

I think a lot of the interest in "liturgy" amongst Reformed folks nowadays is the same as the renewed interest in Lent: it's being used as a substitute for real, experiential religion. People seem to think if they fill their services with stuff- calls to prayer, confessions of sin, recitation of creeds, specific prayers for this and for that (instead of just actual prayer)- they can make up for a lack of vital religion. It won't work. I looked at the order of service of an OPC church the other day and there were 18 separate and different items on it! (And that's not including the intimations and the "prelude" and "postlude".) Christian worship is meant to be simple, pure. 18 separate parts to a service is not that.

I am with Alexander on this part. The danger in attending any church is believing that attending and being surrounded by liturgy is enough to make you a good Christian. For me personally, a complicated service gets in the way of me submitting my heart and mind to God.

Except that liturgy is a biblical word (Acts 13:2) and everyone has a set liturgy. 3 hymns and a lecture, 3 points and a poem is just as much a certain liturgy as the Book of Common Prayers. Further, who argued that we should "just be surrounded" by liturgy? I don't know a Reformed person who thinks that way. Whether Rome or EO do, bully for them but they aren't in the discussion right now.

 

[MW]

Except that liturgy is a biblical word (Acts 13:2)

The meaning of that word is restricted by its context and it does not refer to "liturgical worship" as it is being discussed in this thread.

Yes, everyone has a liturgy in the broader sense of the term; but not everyone engages in liturgical worship. The reformed distinction between "parts" and "circumstances" of worship is important to bear in mind. Sacred significance should not be vested in the order or the details. Drawing near to God and honouring Him by the appointed means is worship in the proper sense.

 

[RamistThomist]

Except that liturgy is a biblical word (Acts 13:2)

The meaning of that word is restricted by its context and it does not refer to "liturgical worship" as it is being discussed in this thread.

Yes, everyone has a liturgy in the broader sense of the term; but not everyone engages in liturgical worship. The reformed distinction between "parts" and "circumstances" of worship is important to bear in mind. Sacred significance should not be vested in the order or the details. Drawing near to God and honouring Him by the appointed means is worship in the proper sense.

Right, and I am not using "liturgy" in Acts 13 to sneak in smells and bells. I was seeing a knee-jerk reaction by some against anything "liturgical," with liturgical never being defined.

It appears that this thread is reacting to the "smells and bells" liturgy but are given examples of what is more or less Reformed liturgy.

 

[alexandermsmith]

Liturgy has a certain meaning in discussion. I get that liturgy has a very general meaning which would include any worship done in a particular order, but that's not what we're talking about here. The conversation in this thread clearly illustrates that. And I haven't said anything about "smells and bells". It's the same with the discussion on creeds and confessions when debating those who don't subscribe to these. Yes it's true to say to them that they do, in fact, have a creed because "no creed" is still a creed of sorts. And it's fun and it scores a point but it still doesn't get one anywhere. And it also ignores the simple fact that there is a significant difference between a "no creed" creed and the Westminster Confession of Faith. Just as there is a significant difference between an order which is followed every week in the public worship and a formal liturgy.

ReformedReidian: Christianity in Scotland's pretty low these days. Certainly we are under judgment: the entire nation is having restraining grace taken away and the people are indulging their most base instincts and they're encouraged by the government. A low day indeed. But there are pockets where true, vital religion can still be found; there is still fellowship in the Spirit amongst the Lord's people; the Gospel is still preached; the regulative principle is still adhered to and sinners are being converted. It may only be happening in small pockets here and there but the Spirit has not left us completely, despite our unfaithfulness.

Internet discussions can be very beneficial but they have their limit. I, however, am not a high-profile Reformed celebrity with a platform and influence and I am not proposing changes.

I brought up the weekly communion because that's one of the issues under discussion. One of the arguments made by weekly communionists is that believers should be able to commune with Christ often and that their proposal would rectify what they see as a failing in the church. I was making the point that just because a congregation only administers communion once or twice a year doesn't mean believers are denied the opportunity to commune more often. I think it's a sign of the individualist tendency that has taken over even Reformed churches that looks at this issue only from the perspective of the local congregation. There's also a denomination. With a communion season practice the custom of visiting other churches in one's denomination, spending the season amongst the people, having fellowship with them over the course of a long weekend allows one to partake in the supper more often and it also encourages fellowship and unity within the denomination. Which in turn maintains unity and uniformity throughout the denomination. The more we think of our own congregations as isolated, individual churches the more likely we are to, for example, deviate from other churches within our denomination.

 

[RamistThomist]

I understand that liturgy usually connotes smells, bells, and icons. However, that is not what liturgy denotes. And the examples of liturgy weren't in the same realm as kissing an icon or burning incense. Especially the claim that eating with Jesus every week is too liturgical. The idea of communion seasons, for example, while maybe wise in some areas, is just as much an instance of man-made tradition than is the idea of eating with Jesus every week.