Protestant

Free-Church Worship: Ascribing Worth to God

by

Free-church worship occupies a middle position between the liturgical/sacramental forms of worship and the informal worship of many charismatic churches. Whereas free churches may follow a formal order of service, their worship does not conform to historic Eucharist-centered liturgies. This worship has three objectives: to speak to God, to listen to God, and to respond to God—a sequence based on the ancient biblical structure of proclamation and response. This style of worship is found in evangelical and fundamental churches as well as in many mainline Protestant congregations. Many Pentecostal churches also use a free-church format in their Sunday morning services.

Worship is the ascription of worth to God for who he is and what he does—just as the psalmist expresses it:

Ascribe to the Lord, O families of nations, ascribe to the Lord glory and strength.
Ascribe to the Lord the glory due his name. (Psalm 96:7–8)

Ascribing to God the glory due his name—by our words and our deeds is basic to a Christian lifestyle. The first statement that should be made about worship is that it isn’t turned on and off when we enter the “worship center” each Sunday. We cannot compartmentalize our lives into a worship day and six others. Worship is, indeed, a way of life. Every word and every action of every day should bring glory to God. Despite imperfection, this should be our daily ambition.

Giving the Lord the glory due his name includes offering to him the sacrifice of praise—that is, the fruit of lips which acknowledge that he is Lord (Heb. 13:15). It also includes doing deeds of mercy and compassion in his Name (Heb. 13:16), presenting our bodies as living sacrifices (Rom. 12:1), having our minds renewed by the Word of God (Rom. 12:2), giving offerings of talents, time, and treasures (2 Cor. 8–9). These and other activities are actions that honor him and which happen throughout our days, not only in our public or corporate services of worship and instruction.

The Scriptures tell us (John 4:23–24) that God desires our honesty before him. He wants us to worship him with understanding (our intellect), and with the heart (loving him). But true worship includes actions as well as thoughts and emotions. We understand with our mind and heart, but we act by our will. Facts and feelings must come together resulting in actions that bring honor to our Lord. Of course, he already knows all there is to know, and he already sees our hearts; so it is not as if we could reveal to him anything that might surprise or enlighten him. Worship is really a spiritual exercise, our spirit to his; but it must also be expressed materially. A right heart-relationship with God brings about the right attitudes in the mind, resulting in activities that would please him and honor him.

The critical key to all this activity, word and deed, is a heart in tune with God, made righteous before him by the blood of the Lamb. Until a person has been reconciled to God through his Son, Jesus Christ, any words one might utter or deeds one might do in his name are as nothing to him—maybe noticeable by men and women, perhaps very good for the human race, but as far as God is concerned, “dead works.”

Gathering for Worship

If this is true of every aspect of daily life, it also holds true for our corporate times of worship when the body of Christ gathers to focus minds, hearts, and wills on God. Ascribing to God the glory due his name is basic to these experiences.

Many phrases have been used in defining this activity: admiring God’s character, delighting in God’s works, declaring God’s worth, celebrating God, responding to God, honoring him. All of these fall into the broad definition: worship is the ascription of worth to God for who he is and what he does. It is telling God what we think of him. It’s saying, “Thank you, Lord God, for who you are and the ways you show yourself real to me. I appreciate you.” It is honoring him by doing things that help us declare his worth: singing to him and of him, exalting his name and his character, praying, learning more about him as we read the Scriptures, recounting his works on behalf of his people throughout history, telling and celebrating the story of redemption, and so on.

As God’s truth is taught and Jesus Christ is lifted up to draw people to himself, even the sermon is an act of worship. In reading and understanding the Scriptures, we are taught how to honor God in our lives, and we learn more and more about who he is and what he has done—the proofs of his character. Although we learn of God primarily by our study of Scripture, we also find reinforcement of his eternal attributes in sharing with each other his activity in our own lives. Our contemporary experience affirms that he is the same God to whom the Bible testifies. For that, we praise and thank him. The more we learn about him and his works, the more we have for which to thank him, to sing his praises, and to declare his worth.

Worship Is Giving

Worship is God-oriented. He is the object of our affections. Our attitude should never be “what’s in this for me?” as it was in the case of the priests we read of in the book of Malachi, or the New Testament Pharisees. It must always be “What can I give you today, Lord? What can I do to please you?” It is the attitude of Mary, the friend of Jesus who even cleaned and anointed his dirty feet. We give to God the glory due his name. Are human needs met in so doing? Absolutely. God has always been known as the greatest giver, and he has promised to meet the needs of his people. In fact, he first gave, and our worship is a response to his activities on our behalf. Our communion with him always satisfies our basic human needs, but need-fulfillment should never be the primary motivation for worship.

To know God personally and actively to participate in adoring him are our two fundamental areas of need. As we grow in our knowledge of him and closeness to him, we find that our worship takes on new significance and meaning. Our worship is governed by what we believe about its object. We need to know him more. Then we can be more conscientiously involved in giving him the praise he deserves and desires. Worshipers cannot be mere spectators but must be participants. We need to ascribe worth to the God we know, because of who he is and what he has done. “To know him and to make him known”: may seem to some a rather trite and even “hyper-spiritual” phrase, but it is truth! (cf. John 4:22; Phil. 3:10; 1 Chron. 16:24; Ps. 105:1)

What Happens in Worship?

Communication with almighty God is not the same as with humans. We could never reduce that spiritual union to the level of our finite understanding. Fortunately, God knows that! And because he designed us, he knew from the beginning that our communion with him would be very special to us and to him. God does not sit in heaven on a throne merely listening to people talk to him about their fears, desires, needs, wants, sins. He also answers. We speak, but so does he. He hears, and so must we.

Worship includes speaking, listening, and responding. We actively give God glory, telling him what we think of him; we listen to him speak to us—through the Word of God taught, but also by his Holy Spirit and at his discretion; and then we must respond to what has been said to us. Those are the rudiments of communication: speak, listen, respond. Often we speak too much and listen indifferently, and then we do nothing in response to what we hear because we really don’t care. In our worship, we must speak openly about our great God. We must hear what he has to say to us—as individuals and as a body, and we must then respond to whatever he told us. In planning a worship service, whether personal or corporate, those three elements must be present: Speak to God—we tell him how much we adore him; listen to God—we study the Word and do not harden our hearts to its truth; respond to God—we do whatever we must to fulfill his commands. Our response in worship can be both immediate and lasting. An immediate response at the close of a worship service might be a song, the giving of offerings, communion or baptism, or many other things planned as a specific response to what has already happened. But the key to living as God’s people is in the lasting response we make. “How do I live this out during the next week?” Every preacher should be prepared to offer suggestions on how this message from God can be followed up on Monday through Saturday, helping the people carry the beauty of Sunday’s fellowship and worship back to the workplace. The result will be evangelism and new souls in the kingdom. If God’s people will honestly continue to worship and serve him during the week, they will be noticed and believed, and God will be pleased and glorified.

A great example from Scripture of this immediate and lasting response is seen in the Israelites as they dedicated the temple in Jerusalem and invoked God’s presence and blessing (2 Chronicles 5–7). After the people lifted their voices to God in adoration—“You are great! Your love endures forever!” and after God visited his people and let them know he was pleased, the people responded by further praise, falling on their faces in awe and celebrating God’s presence with great joy. That was an immediate response to their encounter with him that day. But the listening response (cf. chapter 7) was that they went home rejoicing, sharing with others the good things they had experienced, living holy lives—changed people! Both in their public meeting and in their personal daily living they honored God, ascribing worth to him for his being and his works.

The Result of Worship: Changed Lives

A life of honest and true worship affects everyone: church leaders, laypersons, and even unbelievers. If we truly connect with God in times of corporate worship, not only will that aspect of our lives change, but so will our everyday activities with a freshness and vitality which transcend the mundane.

Here are just a few examples of how people were changed when they decided to worship God according to the pattern set forth here. Genesis 35 records that God told Jacob to take his people and move from Shechem to Bethel. Jacob informed the clan that they were to go together to worship the living God at Bethel—to build an altar and to settle there. The people agreed and when they realized they would be in God’s presence, they knew they had to mend their ways. So they brought to Jacob the many idols representing foreign gods that had crept into their lives along the way. Everyone renewed his or her vow to ‘El ‘Elohei Yisra‘el—the mighty God of Israel. Lives were changed.

More than four centuries later Moses informed the Israelites that God had decided to make a covenant with them and that he had invited Moses to the top of the mountain to receive the remaining details. The people decided that the Lord was indeed their God. Although they had faltered along the way, they responded with great determination, saying, “Everything the Lord has said we will do” (Exod. 24:3). Lives were changed.

Nehemiah 8 tells about the exiles who returned to Jerusalem from Babylon after the completion of the wall. Ezra took out the Book of the Law and read it in their hearing. All the people listened attentively, and when Ezra praised the Lord, the people lifted their hands and, shouted “Amen! Amen!” and then bowed down and worshiped the Lord with their faces to the ground (Neh. 8:5–6). Lives were changed.

After the dedication of the temple in Jerusalem (2 Chron. 5–7), the people returned to their home villages “joyful and glad in heart for the good things the Lord had done … ” (7:10). 1 Kings 8:66 adds that the people blessed the king as they left. The people had such an encounter with God that they responded in joyous praise and righteous living. Lives were changed.

Acts 4 says that Peter and John and their friends worshiped God by raising their voices to him in prayer, including praises and petition. After they prayed (verse 31), the place where they were meeting was shaken; they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the Word of God boldly. Because of a dynamic and meaningful connection with almighty God, lives were changed.

The real “bottom line” of worship is to know that God is pleased. But an important by-product is that in worshiping him “in spirit and in truth” we are affected and changed: we come to a better knowledge of who he is; we experience anew his love, grace, and power; we are renewed, refreshed, revived; we become doers of the Word, not just hearers; Christ’s church around the world is expanded because we serve him by sharing his love with others; we are gladly obedient to all he wants us to be and do, honoring him in all of life—ascribing to the Lord the glory due his name.

In summary, worship is the ascription of worth to God for who he is and what he has done.

God alone should be the object or focus of my praise and adoration.

My attitude is “I’m here to give myself to you, Lord.”

My most central needs are to get to know him better and then actively participate in telling him that I appreciate and adore him.

Although others will help me in this, the major responsibility is mine.

I must talk to God, listen to him, and respond to whatever he says.

The worship I give him with others on Sunday helps and motivates me to continue honoring him throughout the week. At the same time, the experiences I bring with me on Sunday from the week past become times to recount his blessings, his goodness, and his eternal faithfulness.

Modern Protestant Liturgical Renewal

by

Liturgical renewal among the ecumenical churches of mainline Protestantism has brought about a widespread consensus in worship style. In the spirit of the Reformation, not only the Scriptures but also the sacraments are being restored to a central position in worship. Protestant congregations are coming to a new appreciation of the importance of symbol and ceremony that allows all members to participate in the act of worship.

To describe the diverse worship practices of the many and varied Reformation churches is almost beyond possibility. Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Anglicans, Congregationalists, Pentecostals, the Society of Friends, and Baptists are only some of the multiplicity of denominations and sects that were spawned by the Reformation and by various revivals and splits since. An acknowledgment of diversity, then, is perhaps the first thing that has to be said about these churches before proceeding to talk about liturgical reform. The possibility of such diversity appears to have been a fundamental characteristic of the Reformation challenge to the authority of the Roman Catholic church in the sixteenth century.

A preliminary look at liturgical reform in the twentieth century, however, reveals a movement, not toward greater diversity, but rather toward ecumenical convergence in liturgy. This is seen in such achievements as the World Council of Churches’ document on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, with its accompanying consensus eucharistic service, the Lima liturgy. The convergence extends to almost all areas of liturgy, including the Eucharist, Christian initiation, calendar and lectionary, daily prayer, and other services such as ordination, marriage, the funeral, and a wide range of pastoral liturgies. A new generation of services has been emerging among the churches in the decades of the 1970s and 1980s that have in common a reform of worship in all these areas.

This convergence is far from being only a Protestant phenomenon. Much of its impetus has come from the liturgical movement in the Roman Catholic church earlier in this century that bore remarkable fruit in the Second Vatican Council. The reform also reaches out to embrace with new appreciation the worship of the Orthodox churches. And now new sources of challenge and renewal beyond the traditions of the West are emerging globally from newer churches in Asia and Africa. There is also increasing knowledge and appreciation of worship in other religions which were at one time dismissed as heathen. Furthermore, new voices calling for reform are emerging nearer at hand from the poor, the oppressed, and the generally disregarded ones in our midst, including women, native peoples, the physically challenged, and others.

The picture is exceedingly vast and difficult to comprehend. But we have still been looking only at the movement of ecumenical convergence that is happening primarily among those churches which are usually characterized as being more “liturgical” or “mainstream.” Other churches, which have identified themselves as “evangelical,” “fundamentalist,” or “charismatic,” have not participated as yet to any great extent in the ecumenical convergence. They indeed would probably regard their freedom for diversity to be truer to the Protestant ethos than is the movement of convergence.

The convergence in the mainstream churches, however, is not simply a recovery of a pre-Reformation uniformity. It is rather a movement toward unity that can embrace difference and indeed encourages new and creative responses in the liturgy through the charismatic and artistic gifts of the people. This openness is clearly indicated in the rubrics of many of the new service books. They ask their users not merely to follow a prescribed liturgy but to use the contents of the books—the prayers, responses, symbolic actions—as resources and samples to assist and guide the people’s own work and initiatives in the liturgy.

This recovery of the people’s participation in the liturgy is profoundly in keeping with the Reformation insistence on the priesthood of all believers. The Reformers sought to render the liturgy accessible to all the people through such means as a translation of the liturgical texts into the vernacular and the encouragement of congregational singing of psalms, hymns, and canticles. The recovery of the notion of the whole people of God as celebrants in liturgy may indeed be one of the greatest contributions of the Reformation to the modern climate of liturgical renewal. This remains a goal even if history has also shown the Reformation to unleash factions that disrupt the unity of Christ’s body.

Convergence, then, is a primary characteristic of the current movements of liturgical reform among the churches, Reformed, Orthodox, and Catholic alike. We need to consider what is at the root of this convergence and whether there is anything in the legacy of the Reformation, despite the diversity it unleashed, that has contributed to it. The modern liturgical convergence, it can be argued, has its source in a recovery of the biblical basis for Christian prayer and praise. The biblical witness to the saving acts of God in covenant with the people of Israel and culminating in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the source without equal of the Christian enactment of faith in the liturgy. Christians see all the events of their lives in the light of God’s illuminating Word, proclaimed and enacted in the liturgy. Our own stories, as is commonly said, belong in the larger context of the biblical story, and, together, these are celebrated week-by-week in the liturgy.

A unique place was given to the Scriptures as the primary authority for faith and worship in the Reformation principle of sola scriptura. The Scripture principle was enunciated by the Reformers in their conflict with the teaching authority of the Roman church with its claim of equality with the authority of Scripture. Whether that is a correct reading of the Catholic understanding of authority does not need to concern us here. Of continuing importance is the Reformers’ efforts to restore the Bible to the people and to reaffirm its authority for all matters of faith and life. But the Scripture principle did not ensure unity among the Reformation churches. Many of the churches differed in how they understood sola scriptura. Some, like the Puritans, maintained that worship ought to consist only of that which is directly authorized by the Scriptures. The consequence of the strict application of this criterion to worship was a drastic reduction of ceremonial practices and a focusing almost exclusively on the Scriptures read and preached and on prayer. Other churches of the Reformation, including those that followed Luther and Calvin most closely, regarded sola scriptura not as eliminating all other sources for liturgy, but rather placing Scripture in the position of being without equal beside all other sources. Both Luther and Calvin appealed often, for example, to the authority of the primitive churches and the church fathers. Their study of both the Scriptures and the early church led them to advocate a weekly celebration of the Eucharist with both bread and wine distributed among the people.

Whereas the Reformers are noted for their efforts to restore the Scriptures to the people, it is less known that they sought, albeit unsuccessfully, to do the same for the sacraments. Calvin’s efforts to establish the Eucharist every Sunday in Geneva, for example, were stymied by a ruling of the city magistrates, who favored the practice of four times a year that was already the rule in Zwingli’s church in Zurich. This rule has been, with some exceptions, the practice in most Reformation churches until the recent liturgical reform. Perhaps the failure of the Reformation to fully restore the sacraments has to be understood in relation to their application of the Scripture principle. Whether sola scriptura was applied strictly or more broadly, it served to cleanse the liturgy of what the Reformers regarded as human inventions and accretions. Only baptism and the Lord’s Supper, for example, of the seven sacraments designated by the church of the Middle Ages, had the required dominical institution for acceptance as sacraments in the Reformation churches.

In the Eucharist Luther also almost totally eliminated the Roman canon because of its unbiblical emphasis on sacrifice. According to his understanding, to make the Mass into a sacrifice that could be repeated was a denial of what God had done once-for-all in the sacrifice of Christ. The biblical notion of justification by faith in this once-for-all sacrifice of Christ became a criterion for rejecting any worship that became a pious work rather than a response in thanksgiving to God’s work of grace. The Reformers regarded much of the ceremonial practices and private acts of devotion in the Roman church as pious works designed to win God’s favor rather than to express joyful thanksgiving for that favor already bestowed. This Reformation insight into the biblical doctrine of grace has had immense significance for the modern understanding of the true motivation for prayer and worship.

The Reformers, however, did not recover, as have modern churches in their eucharistic renewal, the biblical understanding of bƒrakah, or blessing God, as an act of praise for God’s saving acts. The worship of the Reformation churches tended to retain the penitential note of medieval piety. To that they added a strong note of moral exhortation and didacticism, partly because of the emphasis on word as opposed to symbol and ritual. The Hebrew understanding of bƒrakah was missed by the Reformers largely because the Scriptures were not fully accessible to them in their attempts to reform the liturgy. Greater accessibility has come only with the development of the modern discipline of historical-critical study of the Scriptures. Paradoxically, this approach arose in large measure out of the empiricism and historicity of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment period with its rejection of metaphysics and faith as giving access to truth that is beyond ordinary human sense experience. Because the churches for long regarded the atheistic tendencies of the philosophy of the Enlightenment as antagonistic to religion and worship they tended also to reject the historical-critical study of the Scriptures. The acceptance of the value of this study for greater discernment of the truth of the Scriptures in many modern churches, both Reformation and Catholic, is a prime factor, I believe, in the present liturgical convergence.

Because Protestant scholars generally have been, until recently, in the vanguard of scriptural study, Catholics have regarded their work as one of the greatest contributions of the Reformation churches to liturgical reform. At the same time, the Reformation churches have been able to see more clearly the value of the great liturgical heritage of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches, particularly as those churches have been rediscovering through critical study their roots in the churches of the first few centuries. Inquiring behind the circumstances of the beginning of Christendom in the establishment of Christianity as the favored religion of the Roman Empire is being seen by many Christians today as an important source for renewal. The Reformation churches have been quick to appropriate such historical discoveries as the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, among other early sources, for the structure and content of the eucharistic prayer. Early baptismal practices that were the sole rite of membership in the church, following an extensive catechumenate, combined with ample use of water, anointing with oil, and the laying on of hands with prayer for the Holy Spirit, are seen as essential in this era of the recovery of the ministry of the whole people of God. Discoveries pertaining to the liturgy of time, including the calendar and lectionary and the liturgy of the hours or daily prayer, are being acknowledged also as critical to living in a secular realm by the rhythm of the gospel.

This appropriation of liturgical practices by the Reformation churches has been made both possible and necessary because of a new appreciation of the nature and function of symbol and ritual. The modern study of language is revealing the dynamic nature of both words and symbols. Liturgy comprises both word-events and sign-acts. And both are means by which God can communicate and be present with human beings and human beings with God and one another. Liturgy that seeks to embrace the whole of reality, as revealed by a God who acts in incarnational ways, must be an embodied liturgy, appealing to all the senses of the body. Symbolic liturgy that includes sights as well as sounds, actions and gestures, the movements of procession and dance, and a renewed appreciation of the sacraments, opens up new possibilities for all to participate as they are able. For many Protestants, with their suspicion of ritual and symbol, the discovery by anthropologists that human beings are, by nature, ritual-making creatures has been an important one. It is through their rituals that human beings can come together in a community around the apprehension of a deeper reality. Symbols and rituals are means by which reality is communicated and people are enabled to participate.

Many of the earlier debates between Protestants and Roman Catholics concerning the mode of God’s presence in the sacraments are being superseded by a new language that speaks of God’s presence in the symbolic action of the liturgy. The discovery of the biblical notion of the eschatological nature of the gospel has provided a new understanding of God’s presence both within and beyond history. The words and symbols of the liturgy express both the “now” and the “not yet” of the reign of God that was proclaimed by Jesus and inaugurated in his ministry. Liturgy can be experienced as a foretaste of the future God has in store for the world. To participate in this anticipatory event is to commit oneself to working toward the justice, peace, and love to which God is beckoning the whole world.

Puritan Worship in the Post-Reformation Period

by

A number of Protestant churches trace their descent from the Puritan heritage. In their worship, these groups share a commitment to a common principle: worship must be ordered according to the Word of God alone. Puritan worship is also characterized by covenant theology and an emphasis on prayer.

The American Puritans provide a seemingly inexhaustible mine from which historians continue to quarry their writings. Any attempt, therefore, to provide an overview of Puritan thought and practice in so short a space will be found wanting. Our emphasis, then, will be to highlight a few themes which characterize the Puritan outlook, and which are played out in their corporate worship activities.

The reasons for the establishment of the Church of England under Henry VIII were more political and personal than theological. The Thirty-Nine Articles, which form the stated doctrinal confession of the Church of England, were drawn up by Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury from 1532–1553. Puritans affirmed the Reformed content of the Articles, but they did not tolerate the way in which the English faith was practiced in the churches.

To the Puritans, the English Reformers had not gone far enough. The Puritans sought to reform the Reformation, or, more specifically, to carry the Reformation further, to fully purify the church of what they regarded as the malignant influence of Roman Catholic tradition. The English Puritans were a varied group, rather than a well-defined religious bloc. An entire spectrum of Puritan attitudes has been noted, ranging from those with moderate reforming intentions, who desired to remain within the Church of England, to those of more radical bent who separated themselves from what they perceived to be dead orthodoxy (at best) or, in some cases, apostasy. The label “Puritan” was originally applied derisively, mocking the scrupulous attitude of these reformers. The Puritans, as the epithet implies, sought a pure church, free from either secular or “popish” influence, beholden only to the Scriptures.

Some American Puritans, known to us as the Pilgrims, are of the latter variety—the separatists. Others retained official ties to the English church but were no less zealous in their desire for change. Sincere and pious, the American Puritans came to the colonies to worship God apart from the forced constraints of the established hierarchy. Their hard-line Calvinism would not allow them to accept and work within the more broadly conceived English system. Areas of concern that directly affected liturgical practice include:

Sola Scriptura. Understanding this Reformation tenet in its most literal fashion, the Puritans sought to use the Bible as their only source and guide in both worship and daily life. For them, the thorough study and application of the Scriptures was the cornerstone of life. In Puritan worship we can see this belief exhibited in the extended portions of the Bible read aloud at each service, interspersed with illuminating commentary from a deacon, and in lengthy sermons which were the focus of the Puritan liturgy.

Further, the influence of Scripture on the liturgical practices of the Puritans is evident in their rejection of the “popish” and human traditions remaining in Anglican practice. The drab garb of everyday life befits the minister rather than ornate vestments; metrical psalms sung by the congregation replaced chanting. Puritan worship stressed both head and heart knowledge of the Word: truth imparted in worship was lived out in daily life. Congregants took copious notes on the sermon, and the head of the household frequently quizzed his children and servants to ascertain their attentiveness to the sermon—their spiritual well-being was his responsibility.

Covenant Theology. The doctrine of election, as developed by Calvin, states that God elects persons through no merit, work, or choice on their part, and covenants with them to be their God. While the Thirty-Nine Articles affirmed this understanding the English church of the seventeenth century did not uphold it in practice. Similar to the children of Israel in the Old Testament, with whom many parallels were made, the Puritans viewed themselves as a holy people, set apart by and for God: a people for his name. This covenant is evidenced in two directions: between God and man, both individually and corporately, in God’s redemptive and providential action; and among the individual members of the covenant community, in their mutual commitment to one another.

Ecclesiology. The church is comprised of those persons who have been elected by God to the covenant community. The question then arises: How can one determine who has, and who has not, been elected? First, an individual must have had a definite conversion experience—a work of saving grace—which imparts a confirming knowledge of one’s salvation. Second, the veracity of this new life in an individual is confirmed through the witness of the community through observation of an individual’s life. One cannot be saved by good works or pious acts, but such evidence will surely follow in the life of one who is truly of the elect.

In worship, this aspect of covenant theology became most apparent in the administration of the sacraments, baptism, and the Lord’s Supper. The word “sacrament” itself, although employed by the Puritans, is problematic. No divine grace is mediated in the sacraments, but rather they are “seals” of the Lord’s covenant. They are the marks whereby God identifies his covenant with his people through visible, tangible means.

Baptism. The Puritans practiced infant baptism. Although not believing that any grace was mediated through this activity, they recognized that baptism denotes the parents’ membership in the community and their commitment to nurturing the child in the ways of God. Important as well is the trust that God has also predestined these infants to eternal election. Baptism, then, is both a sign of commitment and a step of faith on the part of the parents regarding the future of the child. In order for the child to become a fully participating member of the community in adulthood, evidence of election would have to be demonstrated as he or she matured.

The Lord’s Supper. Limited only to members of the covenant community, the Lord’s Supper provides the means of continuing identification with that community. Before the Sunday on which the sacrament was observed, members had to examine themselves, make amends for any wrongs, make apologies for offenses, and ask forgiveness for any sins. Both the bread and the cup were given to eligible communicants, served first by the minister to the deacons, then by the deacons to the members.

Prayer. One last aspect of worship which must be noted is that of prayer. Prayers often continued for lengthy periods of time, even hours, with the congregation standing. While spoken by the minister, the prayers should be considered an aspect of worship in which the congregation actively participated. Although we have no record of any audible response given by the congregation to the prayers, their participation came through the substance of the prayers: in them, the needs and burdens of the people were lifted to God. Prior to the service prayer requests were given to the minister who, presumably, elaborated according to his knowledge of the persons or situations involved.

We must not harbor the impression of Puritan worship as a dry, staid affair. Sober attitudes, lengthy, content-oriented sermons, and extended prayers, while incongruous in our fast-paced twentieth-century world, provided a means of touching and reaching the religious needs of the people of the early seventeenth century. Indeed, the Puritan vision did sustain serious blows in the last half of the century; these developments are beyond our discussion here. Yet, for a few brief, shining decades, the Puritans began to realize their dream of establishing a truly Christian community on earth. Their legacy has left an indelible mark on American worship and religious life in the centuries since.

Three Protestant Concerns with Imagination

by

Despite the marvelous assets God gave to humans through imagination, Protestants historically manifest three concerns with the human capacity to imagine. One challenge is that this term can be used to underscore wrong or evil imaginations. For example, in Gen 8:21, “the imagination of man’s heart (is) evil,” or “I know there (evil or disobedient) imaginations even before I bring them into the land . . .” (Dt. 31:21). So apparently, Protestants have often thought about this term with negative feelings, unfortunately.

A second challenge imagination seems to bring before Protestants is that in passages where this term is used positively the translators use other English renderings which do not pick up the attribute of imagination. For example, the King James Version translates in Isaiah 26:3 with the term mind, instead of the term imagination: “Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee . . .” The term is actually imagination, not mind. Note the thrust of the passage if the term mind were rendered more correctly, as imagination: “Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose imagination is stayed on thee . . .” Clearly, when the verse uses imagination there is far more mystery in this prophetic affirmation.

Given the orientation Protestant theologians have concerning the mind, the characteristics of the imaginal capacity of human intellect are sometimes lost. It seems that the Protestant community somehow takes a one-dimension view of that the human mind is only given to rational and information ideal. Certainly, a life of faith will often move on past what seems rational to the “average person.” And, even the thoughts and mental engagement involved in worship itself encompasses much more than rational exercise or information.

A third challenge is the tendency to think of God’s attribute (or perfection) of creativity in terms of His POWER and disregard the aspect of His own imagination. That is, God has the power to create (bara) all things from nothing. But here Scripture is emphasizing his power to make all things. This reality of His power is true, and the Hebrew term bara seems only to be used for God, suggesting that this bara-power is reserved only for God. But God’s power to create also includes God’s yatsar-power—the ability to imagine—which, in Scripture, is not solely reserved for God. One sees this yatsar-power attributed to man as well (e.g. Is 26:3). So, if man is made in His imagine, God has given this power to people. Although Protestants seem to discount imagination, the God-given human capacity of imagination is perhaps one of the most important characteristics distinguishing people from lower animal life.

God is Transcendent. He is powerful, mighty and beyond our understanding. But, he is also imminent. God is also personal, loving and he chooses to live in the hearts of men and women. The very fact that He has superintended for us a method to see Him as or father, friend, companion, and comforter demonstrates His own ability to exercise imagination. And, He gives people the ability to imagine as they worship. Why? This is because God is both the object and the subject of human worship. Worship demands that humans enter a proximity with God they can neither completely understand or control. God allows imagination in worship so that we be engaged with the true God who is fully real and beyond all that could be imagined.

God directed Old Testament Israel to use metaphor and symbols and ritual activities as human aids to direct their faith into the realities of Himself. This God is beyond the metaphors and symbols. Ultimately, as Christians look at these Old Testament metaphors and symbols (types), a clear picture of the role Christ played in redemption is seen. This is the principle that the writer infers to in the Hebrew epistle:

11 When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, . . . (Hebrews 9:11-12 NIV).

In summary, one can see that in the Old Testament, and in the Hebrew world view in general, God engages humans through all three dynamics of human intelligence—the rational (information, first spoken, then written in propositional form), the imaginal (metaphors, symbols and multi-sense expressions), and the emotional (the heart,[1] the core or center of a person’s self).

Imagination, as revealed in the Bible, is two-fold: First, humans have the capacity to invent things. This is the capacity to see what could be but is not yet. Second, humans have a capacity, through the working of the Holy Spirit, to interact with transcendence—including the ability to engage with God. This is the capacity to see through what is known into the realities beyond what is known.

Once the Biblical concept (and definition) of imagination is seen in context with the biblical definition of the artist as a craftsman, the connection between God’s plan for worship and mankind’s ability for expression can be seen.  First, it affirms the way God has made humankind. Second, moves Christians to reject the notion that the arts and artists are simply elitist and somehow disconnect-from-main-stream-culture. Third presses Christians to seek out and include artists, creativity, and beauty as mainstays in the life and worship of the Church.

Throughout Scripture[2] one sees that God has directed His people to be engaged in a holistic, multi-sensory assortment of imaginative and emotional expressions to engage Him in worship—a worship-way-of-life. Dr. Ronald Allen, professor of Old Testament and Hebrew Languages at Dallas Theological Seminary addresses this issue:

Many Christians who cherish the bible for its teaching about Christ and about the nature of salvation have yet to learn to experience the Bible itself . . . We (must) learn how to develop the discipline of imagination from the Scripture in two ways. First, we must recognize the role of imagination in the very process of writing the bible. Second, we must exercise our own imagination in developing the art of creatively reading the Scriptures. . . . Many evangelical bible readers . . . read the Bible for its content, but we rarely linger over its style. We read for doctrine, but we miss its art.[3]

God has created humans and human community to engage Him through the fullness of the mind: the imaginal dynamic of intelligence, the emotional dynamic of intelligence, and the intellectual dynamic of the intelligence. God designed man to enjoy all three dynamics in worship.

[1] Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Word defines the Hebrew term, Lebab, rendered HEART in English, as follows: Lebab is often compounded with “soul” for emphasis, as in 2 Chron 15:12, which reads, “And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul” (cf. 2 Chron 15:15). Also see, “…man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” 1 Sam 16:7. From Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright © 1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Electronic Database © 1996 by Biblesoft.

[2] Other Scripture passages that reveal both, God interacting with believers, and directing believers to interact with Him, in multi-sensory ways are: The Three Visitors appear to Abraham, Gen 18:1-33; the ram in the bush and the voice of God for Abraham to substitute for Isaac, Gen 22: 1-14; Jacob wrestles with God, Gen 32: 22-32; Moses and the burning bush, Ex 3:1-22; Moses, Pharaoh and the ten plagues, Ex. 6-12; Moses and the Red Sea crossing, Ex. 13:17-14:31; God’s directions to build the Tabernacle Worship Center, Ex. 25-50; Joshua and the Jericho Battle, Josh 6:1-21; The Singers in Solomon’s Temple, 1 Chron. 25; Solomon, the Temple, and Huram-Abi, Solomon’s Temple Designer, 2 Chron. 2:13-5:1; Isaiah’s Vision, Is. 6:1-8; Ezekiel’s call, Ez. 1:2-29; King Belshazzar, Daniel and the Hand writing on the wall, Dan 5:1-30; Jesus’ Birth, Lk 1:26ff; Jesus’ baptism, Mt 3:13-17; Jesus’ Transfiguration, Mk 9:1-12; Paul’s conversion, Acts 9:1-19; John’s Revelation, Rev. 1:9-19; The New Heaven and Earth, Rev. 21-22.

[3] Allen, Ronald Barclay. Imagination: God’s Gift of Wonder. Portland, OR: Multnomah Press, 1985, p. 9.

What Makes an Artistic Minister?

by

The Christian Arts community—I’m clearly convinced—is often clearly confused about what ministry is. Not that other parts of the Christian community aren’t confused—they are. But Christians out of arts backgrounds oftentimes certainly face confusion when it comes to ministry.

Why are Christian Artists Confused about Ministry? Cutting to the chase, it’s at least because of three reasons.

First, human beings in Western civilization began to think of “the arts” the way we do—abstract objects and activities of creativity created as ends in themselves having no or little tie to everyday life and living other than their artistic value—during the 1500’s or so; mostly apart from the community of true believers in Jesus. This is a time when “secularism” began to take hold in the thinking of normal “marketplace” people; people who were separating themselves from any “religious” involvement, Catholic or Protestant. Why? Because the “protesting” church backed away from the “religious humanism” of the Catholic church (a form of religion with no connection to a “regenerated personal relationship with Jesus”—remember: Martin Luther was just trying to be a good Catholic believer, getting back to the Word of God and a vibrant personal walk with Jesus; he was not trying to cause a fuss).

Second, as the “protesting” (Protestant) church separated itself from both the Catholic church and the “secular society, in the process of backing away from the human corruption of the Church and the community, it backed away from a lot of the creative art that played a role in the Church, and it backed away from the entertainment art and the art-of-the-elite that was being developed in the “secular” market place (a “throwing out the baby with the bathwater” sort of thing).

Third, the “protesting” church (most of the Reformers, with the exception of Martin Luther and a few others) seemed to buy into a non-biblical view that there exist “things secular and things sacred”; and “the arts,” which already had prominence in the Catholic church and were gaining prominence in what they were beginning to view as “secular” society, were therefore seen more and more as worldly and thus inappropriate for “sacred” life, living and worship.

With these three reasons in mind, it’s time we got back to the Bible, and God’s perspective on things. God wants creativity and artistic expression. He designed it into the fabric of the human species. Our ability to imagine and to “recreate” reflects His image (His perfection of creativity) in us. Animals possess instincts. People possess imagination, a much more god-like capacity. People, not animals, are made in God’s image (Genesis 1: 26). When those creative and imaginative endowments are under the redeemed Lordship of Jesus, God’s Messiah, they are “sanctified”—set apart for special service unto His glory and purposes.

Do not see artistic expression as “secular.” Don’t consider artistic expression as “worldly.” As God created them they are reflections of His image in us; and in fact, it is our duty to dedicate them—all our imaginative expressions and efforts—to His glory and for His purposes . . . of reflecting His truth, and beauty, and reconciliation in Jesus!! (1 Cor. 10:31)

Now, seeing a bit not why we are confused, what is Ministry? Simply defined, it’s . . . serving God; serving His purposes and others on His behalf. In other words, ministry is . . . Dealing with God about people, and dealing with people about God. That is it. Anything else beyond that, and it gets too complicated.

Ministry practices seem to be five (5) simple things: 1) assuming God works supernaturally (in and through the fullness of His triune Self). (Humans can’t initiate the supernatural work of salvation, or the miraculous working of God for conviction, enlightenment, forgiveness, healing, change, etc.; the supernatural part of ministry is only and always effected by God Himself. We, the humans, are simply pots. He’s the Potter and the Water, so to speak.); 2) praying for and with people. 3) caring for people in the Name of Jesus (not just doing good in some abstract way—but intentionally doing the good because of your life from, in and through Jesus’ work in you!); 4) guiding people for help into God’s Word, the Bible; 5) sharing your faith simply when the time is right. That’s it. No matter what your title or education is or is not if you do these things you are ministering. If you do NOT do these things—no matter what your title or education is or is not, you are not doing ministry.

Ministry price? Ministry is always FREE. payment related to the doing of ministry is technically something else—ministry support, or occupation, or business—but don’t get confused; ministry is always FREE.

How is Ministry supported? The Bible (OT or NT) only shows two ways of ministry support: a) support from the believing community, or b) a side job. Yes I know the Levites were allegedly full time. But they were supported by the tithes and offerings of the believing community. Yes I know Paul defended the right for full-focused ministry workers to be supported full time (e.g. 1 Corinthians 9 l& 2 Thessalonians 3). But he modeled that it was not always tactically wise to exercise that right. And, yes I know it is assumed that ministry-related products were sold at the Temple; and that folks like May and Joseph at Jesus’ circumcision would bring or buy doves at the Temple to use as offerings (e.g. Luke 2:21-24).

But there is absolutely no place in the Scriptures where an indication is given that the Temple ministry was supported by sales of ministry products as a major source of ministry funding, not is there any assumptions or direction that believers should support ministry through the sale of ministry products. Sales are related to business (which almost every believer is to be in—e.g. 2 Thessalonians 3:10. And though ministry ought to happen in every business context (because we never stop being believers, ministry is categorically different than ministry.

Keep these definitions in mind: Business is the sale (or exchange) of products, performances or services in exchange for value in return: Ministry is serving God; and His purposes and others on His behalf. Occupation is where you get your money. In a fallen world rarely is your ministry assignment the same as your occupation; and never is business—strictly speaking—ministry.

When am I in ministry? Because you are a believer priest (1 Peter 2: 9-10) no matter what your occupation is or isn’t, you ARE in ministry full time. If your business furthers ministry, praise God; but if it doesn’t, you are still in ministry, and responsible for ministering in that context.

When does ministry happen?  When three intentions actually occur: 1) when you intend to engage people about the purposes of God; 2) when you are consciously faithing that God is at work (where there is no faithing going on, generally speaking no supernaturally initiated transaction goes on); 3) when you actually make contact with people about God and His purposes. That means that, at a Christian concert where none or few of these things are intentionally going on, event though it’s a concert of “Christian songs” there will generally be no or little actual ministry effected . .. or affected.

Summary: Do not define ministry as occupation. If you do you are Biblically incorrect!! Ministry is NOT occupation; it is simply something else—that often happens in the context of occupation. Do not define ministry as business. If you do you are Biblically incorrect!! Ministry is NOT business; it is simply something else—that sometimes, the income from which the mature believer often very generously invests into ministry—via donations, offerings and tithes. You will know you are in business, if when it does poorly or fails you think you no longer have a ministry.

Also, do not buy into the strategy of trying to fund ministry by business income. Only a few have done this, and it’s only worked because they have not let the business tail wag the ministry dog; and they are still confused about what business is, and about what ministry isn’t. Jesus said that we cannot serve God and mammon (Mt. 6:24; Lk 16:13-15).

If you try to tie ministry to business . . . and fail at business, you may think you’ve failed at ministry, when in fact your business failure may produce a context for great ministry in your life and lives of others. Or on the other hand, if you succeed business selling Christian things (and still have not been doing the five things I listed above), you may think you have ministered when all you’ve done is the natural function of selling Christian things while in substance seen no spiritual transaction moving through your efforts..

If you try to tie ministry to occupation and for some reason your occupation ends, you may mistakenly think your ministry has ended. If you keep the simple definitions in mind I’ve suggested while continuing to do ministry (which is always free), you’ll be certain to progress in fruitful ministry—whether or not the Lord releases you to earn your living through the doing of ministry.