Just got in from the Synodical Conference on Worship sponsored by the CTCR and COW. I'll write some more about my experiences in the next couple days, but for now just a few rather personal reflections:
1. This boy is not made to endure long conferences. I CAN'T SIT STILL. It slays me. Call it ADD or whatever, but physically enduring long bouts of "not moving" (and I mean more than "stand and stretch" for a few!) sends me round the bend. I start jiggling, shaking, fidgeting. It's awful.
2. The introvert factor - the need to be alone in order to get some energy and restoration? - there was NO time for it. Too much to do - with the conference, with visiting with friends both old and new. We're all aware that we are only together for a short time and so there's the need to squeeze so much out of it.
3. Seeing old friends was a treat indeed - folks I'd not had much contact with since seminary - and above all, my old college room mate, Pr. Gregory Walton. Pray that his house sells! I can't remember them all: today got to see Aaron and Dennis, Douglas and I caught up a bit yesterday, and had a nice conversation with Bruce the first day.
4. "Meeting" "new" friends - all those folks one's come to know and love through the net: was great to visit with Dan and Nathan and Mason.
5. And then there is the unspeakable treat of catching up with folk that I do get to visit with now and again: David and Ben and Paul (I was too tired to tell you, Paul, but you did a great job at the chanting in our little compline - beautiful) and Jon and Phil and all the rest.
6. Rachel was an angel and a half - she took care of low carb meals so that I didn't go off plan at all! Super. I love you, Rachel! And I look forward to thanking you by trouncing you at the next game of pinochle... ;)
7. I was very struck by an observation Phil made to me today over lunch: the difference between those who operate and are comfortable in the realm of ideas (again, the introvert often) and those for whom relational stuff is the absolute key (usually the extrovert). At the conference, we experienced time and again that there had to be a way for those two things to "meet" before you could hear or be heard.
8. Thoughts on the worship experiences:
a. I can watch a Latvian Divine Service and not understand a single word, and yet recognize and be at home with what's happening there. Same with a service from our sister church in Southern Africa. It's literally "home." In some of the worship at the conference, I was "at home." One particular service that was called Morning Prayer (second day), the only way I knew how to describe it would be to say: "it wasn't home." The Divine Service that evening, however, was "home" - even if I happen to think that the musical presentation was rather like being forced to listen to bad music blaring from the radio. Icky musical presentation aside, however, it was truly home. I just couldn't yell out: "Turn that dang thing off!" ;)
b. What does it mean, though, if we have two groups in our Synod who recognize two different "homes"?
c. I intend to write this up as a suggestion for improvement: it would have been MUCH more interesting to have had a traditional service observed entirely according to the rubrics with maximal ceremony and well done; and a full contemporary worship worship done with the maximal ceremonies used (which may be removal of all traditional ceremony, but it will be replaced with something - with what?) and according to those who would are experts in such things, well done - and then to have allowed a discussion about specifics based on that. The worship that we were given did NOT represent what I would call "traditional" and I heard numerous folks comment that it did not at all represent what they do as contemporary in their parishes.
That's it for the time being!
15 comments:
8b. It means either coming to common ground via talking and listening or recognizing those who wish to "do their own thing" in the Divine Service are of another spirit and, being faithful to the Word of God before congregation, district, or synod, leaving them behind to their own machinations.
I fear the latter might be the only option.
Listening to hierarchs' ideas about what people are doing out there is like listening to aging Boomers' ideas about what is relevant to youth is like listening to white people trying to talk "black".
I'd love to hear how Beecroft's presentation went. Oklahoma District Represent!
Looking forward to reading more of your posts about the Worship convo. Strength to you!
Jeremy
8a. As someone who grew up overseas, AMEN. If that doesn't argue for the vital importance of the liturgy, I don't know what does. It binds the universal church in a visible way, echoing the way we're all bound together in Christ in the invisible church.
You can read a recap of his presentation on Necessary Roughness blog - Dan summarized very well. Mason was, of course, outstanding. Lively and energetic, scholarly and profound. Eric,
Mason spoke what needed to be spoken and, as one participant said to be me, "with an edge." And it was a needed edge. I really wish he could have had longer for his presentation - both he and Just. Mason drove home the physicality - the actual presence in our midst of Christ in His true body and blood and what this does for our worship and what worship practices confess this and what worship practices, if they do not deny it explicitly, at the very least implicitly do so.
Jeremy,
Definitely check Dan's blog. He's done some excellent summarizing.
8c
I made a similar observation and asked some questions about that over at Fine Tuning and so sent those questions to David Johnson & Jon Vieker. I hope they will share some of the reasons behind this. In light of the survey we are asked to fill out, I think it would be helpful to learn more about this.
I can watch a Latvian Divine Service and not understand a single word, and yet recognize and be at home with what's happening there. Same with a service from our sister church in Southern Africa. It's literally "home."
Yes. That's catholic worship.
What does it mean, though, if we have two groups in our Synod who recognize two different "homes"?
. . .
The worship that we were given did NOT represent what I would call "traditional" and I heard numerous folks comment that it did not at all represent what they do as contemporary in their parishes.
It means that there is an intentional agenda to reconfigure what Lutherans have traditionally understood liturgical worship to be, IMHO.
Christine
I'd be interested to hear more about Dr. Dien Ashley Taylor's presentation (his is the church I attend when I am in NYC for conferences, etc.). His is both the highest church I've ever attended (of any theological tradition) and also includes stereotypically "low" elements like liturgical dance, choice in chancel, etc. Also features a female "catechist" leading parts of worship and female "Eucharistic ministers" in a post-Vatican II sense. So there's something to annoy or please everyone. It's a great church thought.
Bethany Kilcrease
Oops - lots of typos in that post. Should be choir, not choice, and though, not thought. Arg.
One of the most grievous situations that exist today is the confusion it sows among faithful Lutherans when they walk into a "Lutheran" church and see beautiful vestments, rich ecclesiastical appointments, "high" liturgy, etc. only to discover that what they hear from the pulpit is as heterodox as can be.
Describes my sister's ELCA parish to a tee and it's numbing how they've managed to give it an authentic patina that even fools the people in the pews.
Christine
It was wonderful to meet Pastors Weedon, Peters, Beecroft, Ball, Petersen, Schlueter, Harrison, and Cain; Professors Grime, Just, and Gibbs; and musicians Magness, Beethe, Powers, and my old church's organist, Brad Hall.
And I know I've left people out. Forgive me. I'm still processing.
It was an awesome privilege to pray Compline with some of these men, and it was nice that I didn't have to lead it myself!
I could have gone all week. We'd actually have to identify problems and get some work done, but it would be worth it to keep learning as much as I have over the last three days.
Thank God, and thank you all.
Dan
Just to be clear, I've never heard Pastor Taylor say anything "heterodox." He's as orthodox as they come I'm sure.
Bethany Kilcrease
Bill, I was wondering what you would post and how your reflections would compare to mine. With the crisis in Haiti and WR-HC's work in the Synod's disaster response underway, my time for reflection has been cut short.
However, one brief comment. I, too, noticed the difference between a "relational" approach to worship and what I was contemplating calling a "theological' approach to worship. "Relational" being focused on such things as being "welcoming" or "hospitable" to worshipers (one cannot say: visitors or guests or non-members simply, because unlike what one has become accustomed to from the Church Growth Movement -- a focus on seekers or visitors -- this conference truly did not emphasize that much) and how the worshipper would "experience" the service. Of course, this emphasis on "relational" aspects has theological impact. Nor am I saying that "theology" is unimportant to people taking a "relational" approach -- just that it seems to be the driving emphasis.
What I had not considered until you said it was a connection between "people comfortable with ideas" being introverted and "relational" being extroverted. There might be a psychological factor in this. Not sure... interesting to think about...
Thanks for the post.
Thank you for sharing you experience. Personally I don't understand why each and every gathering of the saint isn't around the Eucharist and receiving ALL his gifts. I say full blast Jesus giving back our very best in the Lutheran Mass all the time. My prayers for faithful pastors such as yourself.
Post a Comment