It has been common for Baptists to describe what the church does on Sunday mornings at the customary hour of eleven as "worship." The gathering of the church at this hour is referred to as the "morning worship service." Baptists regard this ritual as one hour in the week that the church formally and corporately revers or pays homage to the deity,1 or as Gaines S. Dobbins, the imminent Baptist educator, said it is an hour the church recognizes the "worth-ship" of God. Be that as it may, whatever else this gathering is, it is clearly a Baptist ritual or rite. Ritual is defined as "any formal and customarily repeated act or series of acts." A rite is defined as "a prescribed form or manner governing the words or actions for a ceremony."2 The word that describes such rituals in the New Testament is sebomai, which means the expressing in gestures, rites, or ceremonies an allegiance or devotion to deity; that is to say worship in a corporate sense.3
In my experience virtually all protestant and catholic churches follow similar rituals (Quaker services, I have read, are more spontaneous4). Until recently the Baptist Church that I currently attend follows, in general, a basic ritual for Sunday morning worship that varies a bit depending on emphasis or the season. The following elements seem regularly standard, however:
Welcome; Call to worship; Hymn/Praise song; Opening prayer; Hymn/Praise song(s); Prayers of and for the people followed by the Lord's Prayer; Reading of the text for the day; Special Music; Preaching/Sermon/Lecture; Prayer; Song of Commitment/Dedication; Benediction, Postlude.
Ritualistic language introduces aspects of the various parts, particularly in the benediction. A short meditative video is generally used in various parts of the service.
Describing this Sunday morning ritual as "worship" led me to ponder two questions: (1) how does what Baptists do on Sunday morning compare to the earliest gatherings of Jesus followers? (2) how is it that corporate ritual can be construed as worship?
The early Jesus followers (not yet Christians) did gather together (1 Cor 11:17-33) for encouragement (Heb 10:25), to gather contributions for mission work (1 Cor 16:1-4) on the first day of the week (1 Cor 16:1-4; Acts 20:7). They also gathered to break bread (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 11:17-22). Music, teaching, admonishing one another, and giving thanks to the Lord were also a part of their gatherings (Eph 5:19-20; Col 3:16). The only extended passage I know, describing a gathering of Jesus followers, is 1 Cor 14:1-40. This passage is unlike gatherings in the mainstream churches that emerged from the Protestant Reformation (Anabaptist, Anglicanism, Lutheran, Reformed, Catholic, Orthodox). It focuses on speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues, and prophesying. None of which, in my experience, have been a part of Baptist gatherings for worship. Paul tried to order the confusion in the gathering with this comment: "When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification" (1 Cor 14:26). Yet he concedes that prophecy and tongues should continue to be a part of the Corinthians' gatherings (1 Cor 14:39-40). But I do not find in any of the passages I mentioned that these early followers of Jesus described their gatherings as worship.5 The word worship is derived from Old English and Middle English rather than from Greek. In the writings of the earliest New Testament writer (Paul) five words have been translated as worship in modern translations: proskuneō (1 Cor 14:25); latreuō (has the sense of carrying out of religious duties of a cultic nature; Rom 1:9, 25; Phil 3:3); sēbazomai (Rom 1:25); latreia (Rom 12:1; 9:4); leitourgeia (2 Cor 9:12; Phil 2:17, 30). The lexicon Danker-Bauer translates only three of these words using the English word worship: proskuneō, sebazomai, and latreia. It appears to me that Paul uses two of these words to describe individual worshippers (1 Cor 14:25; Rom 12:1; 9:4). He uses latreia once (Rom 9:4) describing worship in a corporate sense when writing of the worship of the ancient Israelites (as does Heb 9:1).6 In Romans 12:1 he appears to address my question when he describes worship as an individual act rather than a corporate act:
I therefore appeal to you, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your reasonable worship (logikēn latreian).
The heart of the issue seems to lie in the following question: are cultic acts to be considered worship or is worship only characterized by an inner attitude of awe? No doubt many Baptists on a Sunday morning only formally carry out cultic acts of a ritual nature, for who never dozes or finds their minds wandering during prayers or sermons. And if that is the case how can a corporate act be worship if all are not completely engaged?
Professor Emeritus
Missouri State University
1The deity that is the focus of the service is increasingly changing from God to Christ under the influence of the Trinitarian dogma, which is not reflected per se in the New Testament.
2Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, s. v., ritual, rite.
3F. C. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (3rd ed.; Chicago and London: University of Chicago, 2000).
5Except, perhaps, for Eph 5:19.
6It is worth mentioning that at least two of the prophets report that Yahweh was repulsed by the corporate worship of the ancient Israelites: Amos 5:21-24; Micah 6:6-8.
18 comments:
Hi Charlie,
No matter what form Christian worship takes there are two possible major foci: (1) the Lord Jesus Christ's gift of life after death and (2) Jesus' gift of de-escalating threat and promoting well-being in life.
I became so disenchanted in my circles (Protestant and Catholic) with the dominance of choice (1) and virtual disappearance of choice (2) that it's been quite a few years since I've attended worship except for an occasional obligatory circumstance.
I consider the loss of the human Jesus to be devastating, and most "followers" simply exist in blissful ignorance.
Examples of de-escalation of threat sermon topics:
1. Natural law does not make a distinction between enemy and friend: Luke 6:27, 35; Matthew 5:45.
2. Respond to a threat with non-violent generosity:
Luke 6:29; Matthew 5:41
3. You must include the out-group in your in-group:
Luke 6:32
4.Forgiveness is the most basic act of mutual safety:
Luke 6:37
5. Healing another depends on first healing oneself:
Luke 6:41-42
6. Try hard to head-off legal confrontation with negotiation:
Luke 12:58
7. Resist being complicit in the social injustice of ill-gained wealth: Matthew 25:14-30
8. Compassionate behavior breaks down cultural animosity:
Luke 10:25–37
9. All the gospels record that Jesus’ final action was to take a non-violent approach when eventually facing arrest by the Temple authorities and the Roman governor’s decision to crucify him.
Gene Stecher
Chambersburg, Pa.
Charlie,
It doesn’t sound like the worship tradition is set up to promote inner awe (a sense of wonder). The music connects with old memories and emotions in a detached (personal) way; a “sermon” reminds people of what they already know in a format that only engages auditory learners. In order to have the engagement of an audience, one must involve the audience, not merely go through the motions of the rituals of tradition. Still, though, I’m wondering what stimuli would provoke an inner awe in a church worship service. I have a sense of awe when in my garden, when walking through the woods... It is nothing that needs explaining and doesn’t need to be “pointed out.” I am engaged, stepping carefully around snakes to see the lady slippers blooming, avoiding ticks in low hanging branches to watch the hawk gliding overhead. I’ll quit before this becomes parable.
Dennis Dean Carpenter
Dahlonega, Ga.
Charlie, when I used to attend church, it didn't matter to me who was or was not engaged in the corporate act of worship. The bible doesn't exhort followers of Jesus to worry about the engagement of fellow churchgoers- but to focus on one's own engagement during the act of worship. What other people choose to do during that portion of the worship service is their own business. In fact, how can one be in a worshipful state of mind when one is distracted by noticing what everyone else is doing? If I'm not mistaken, scripture doesn't seem to encourage that type of busy-body mentality. I never paid attention to what other people did during worship. Elizabeth
Hi Charlie,
That individual/corporate thing is a puzzler. Generally I only think of worship as a shared experience designed to express thankfulness for the perceived attributes of whoever/whatever is in charge of the universe. An individual can also express thanks, of course, but in my opinion a human needs other humans to maximize experience. I can sit here and fervently sing my favorite anthem, The Holy City, with great joy and conviction, but something is missing without another to join in.
Gene Stecher
Chambersburg, Pa.
Charlie, Gene brought up a good term: shared experience. If you can't share an experience with someone else, it's not as meaningful in some cases. There's some things that one experiences in their own private place of stillness and solitude... Other times, we have a need for interpersonal connection with our fellow travelers. Worship can either be a private expression or a shared experience. If one is sharing the experience of worship with other people, that experience is more life-giving and fulfilling when one refrains from judging and critiquing those around them. You can't share a worship experience in a meaningful way if you're focused on who is or isn't worshipping "the right way." Elizabeth
Ch. 39 of Tertullian’s “Apology” has some interesting notes about his church services, I think in Carthage, which shows the involvement of the adherents around the end of the second century, Somewhere, I have a lost essay I wrote (easy to reconstruct) that looked at how second and third century Christians described services. It’s interesting that Tertullian finds it important to point out that they don’t get too drunk. I also find the individual participation within the “corporate” service interesting.
“The participants, before reclining, taste first of prayer to God. As much is eaten as satisfies the cravings of hunger; as much is drunk as befits the chaste. They say it is enough, as those who remember that even during the night they have to worship God; they talk as those who know that the Lord is one of their auditors. After manual ablution, and the bringing in of lights, each is asked to stand forth and sing, as he can, a hymn to God, either one from the holy Scriptures or one of his own composing,--a proof of the measure of our drinking. As the feast commenced with prayer, so with prayer it is closed. We go from it, not like troops of mischief-doers, nor bands of vagabonds, nor to break out into licentious acts, but to have as much care of our modesty and chastity as if we had been at a school of virtue rather than a banquet.”
Alcohol and good food, as well as individual performances would probably be good “old” additions to services, both which would help to bring out the individual wonder or awe during corporate worship. Seriously. The scamp Tertullian eventually turned to a very strict form of Christianity (Montanism, “New Prophecy”), which was a movement of ecstatic prophets/prophetesses (see Against Praxeas for his look at prophets).
Dennis Dean Carpenter
Dahlonega, Ga.
Thanks Dennis,
Your cite from Tertullian is an interesting discussion. If you can find that paper on worship in the 2nd and 3rd centuries I would be interested in reading it.
Charlie
Charlie,
I'll start looking again. I must not have printed it. I can't remember the name or whether it is in one of my monthly files, which run 35-50 pages (9 pt.) or attached it to an older file otherwise irrelevant. It was in the last year or so, so I can limit to that. I started with Pliny Younger and ended in the third century. Can't remember if I included Acts of the Apostles. If I could remember what prompted it, I could probably find it.
Dennis
Dennis
Charlie and Dennis,
There's a scholar named Roger Pearse who has a website called Tertullian.org... Very well constructed in my opinion. However, Pearse has a vendetta against any claim that Mithras was on the scene prior to Jesus and he vehemently opposes any questions about its origins... He sees himself as the sole authority on that subject.
"It appears to me that Paul uses two of these words to describe individual worshippers (1 Cor 14:25; Rom 12:1; 9:4). He uses latreia once (Rom 9:4) describing worship in a corporate sense when writing of the worship of the ancient Israelites (as does Heb 9:1).6 In Romans 12:1 he appears to address my question when he describes worship as an individual act rather than a corporate act:
I therefore appeal to you, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your reasonable worship (logikēn latreian).
The heart of the issue seems to lie in the following question: are cultic acts to be considered worship or is worship only characterized by an inner attitude of awe?"
Rock of Ages sung at Prestonwood Baptist Church at 10:00 am Sunday morning is hardly a cultic act. Furthermore, Paul's views on worship are as irrelevant as his views on women preaching in the pulpit. Just ask Beth Moore, Joyce Meyer, or Anne Graham Lotz. The act of worship is no more cultic than TM (transcendental meditation) or secular outpourings of singing and dancing at various festivals celebrating life in all its glory. It's just creative expression, full stop. How today's worship services compare to early Christian gatherings is a "fun fact" but nothing more than that. Elizabeth
Inasmuch one definition of "cult" is "a system of religious worship esp. as expressed in ritual," music expression in a worship service fits that. In fact, the ritual music at the altar call (if that’s what it’s called) at the end of the Baptist services I remember as a kid was specifically chosen to promote a cathartic act. Puritans and others sang Psalms in the past. (I have a German Lutheran song book from around 1840 with all the Psalms put to music.) The evangelicals’ lyrics and tunes of the 18th and 19th c. promoted a two-fold outcome. They reinforced individual faith that cohered with the rest of the community and they were meant to stir the emotions. This was and still is part of the ritual of worship, thus cultic. And, certainly secular events are cultic to fans (fanatics), whether music, sports, movies or other events. Another definition of “cult” is “a devotion or homage to a person or thing.”
“Rock of Ages, Cleft for Me,” an 18th century composition, is a good example of the cultic nature of church music. Since I parodied that song a few years ago, thus have the original lyrics, here’s the first verse: “Rock of Ages, cleft for me, let me hide myself in thee; let the water and the blood, from thy wounded side which flowed, be of sin the double cure; save from wrath and make me pure.” That could as well be chanted or prayed. Noting that this “rock of ages,” which I figure is from 1 Cor. 10.4, is the ultimate “cleft,” (which I reckon could be a verb or noun), the blood and water from Jesus (on John’s cross) is the “cure” that saved one from sin and the wrath of God, purifying. (The wrath of God was a primary sermon topic in the 18th c.) The second verse reinforces the view that “works” don’t matter, only salvation, verse three that one is helpless, will die without this. The fourth verse gives hope of heavenly reward. It is essential a sermon (or a prayer) in verse and song. It is ritual that reinforces belief, and more than that, affirms it for all singing together that they are a part of the same view. Unlike a sermon, music such as this sung as a group is participatory, thus probably more effective than a sermon, personally and collectively. That doesn’t touch the element of memories well-known melodies contain that spark emotions or the effect of archaic pronouns in the promotion of a feeling of “solemnity.”
Dennis Dean Carpenter
Dahlonega, Ga.
In my opinion, the discussion so far has vastly over complicated the idea of worship which can simply be thought of as words and acts of unselfish thankfulness directed toward the power of the universe. Beginning with Charlie's essay, I don't see that any of the cultic acts, individual or corporate, described by Paul, or a contemporary Baptist, for that matter, necessarily lead to the conclusion that thankfulness is the driving force of the behavior, not anymore than a professional sports event would be considered acts of thankfulness to the power of the universe for the skills of the players. Actually, the worship practices of thankfulness that do exist are often expressed in such selfish terms that it hardly seems to be admirable behavior.
Gene Stecher
Chambersburg, Pa.
Gene makes a good point about thankfulness. I haven't found a single blog entry about the importance of thankfulness- and I rarely if ever have seen that word printed here. Nor gratitude, nor appreciation. The emphasis is focused upon who is or isn't worshipping the right way, who is or isn't behaving the right way, who is or isn't a lesser human. Having a negative focus doesn't appear to foster an atmosphere of worship whether it's cultic, mystical, voodoo, yoga, Doxology, Amazing Grace, or otherwise. Elizabeth
Don’t “charis” & “eucharistia” (as well as other cognates of “charō”) generally convey a thankfulness, Gene? If, as some suspect, the Paulines were read to worshipping groups, wouldn’t that have been a part of the worship? There is a lot of “thanks” to God, as well as “blessings” or “grace” of God. He loved the word “charis.”
Dennis Dean Carpenter
Dahlonega, Ga.
There's a documentary on TCM right now about a Gospel singer from the 1980's named Willie Mae Ford Smith... I never heard of her, but the worship services have a lot of "charis" in them... No one asking questions about "Are we doing this the right way? Do we have enough inner awe going on? Are we fully engaged in a corporate act of worship or not? Let's check our references and footnotes." None of that- just pure spontaneous joy and celebration from the heart... Clapping, dancing, singing, laughing... Living in the moment, everyone uplifting one another with songs of praise and thanksgiving- not worried about protocol. Love it.
Elizabeth Holmes
St. Louis MO
Hi Dennis,
I think that you're referring to passages like Colossians 3:12ff.
"As God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience. Bear with one another...forgive each other. Above all, clothe yourselves with love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, two which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful...teach and admonish one another in all wisdom, and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to God...do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him." (NRSV)
On the face of it the passage is extremely impressive. I have a problem, however, with its idealization of an in-group (chosen ones). I am not thankful for any in-group that claims special status.
Gene Stecher
Chambersburg, Pa.
Good afternoon all,
It is an interesting discussion and you all have given me food for thought. Here I take a second bite at the apple. I have come to think of what the church does in the 11:am hour on Sunday in the sense of proskuneo, a "bending of the knee," a word that appears so often in the gospels with respect to Jesus. It is a movement of the body made in token of respect or submission to.
The gathering at the 11:am hour is the public face of the community showing honor or respect to God (or Jesus--it depends on what the individual in thinking). In the public venue it has the added function of soliciting new members for the community. It is certainly not "worship" in the Pauline sense but is more akin to what Gaines Dobbins called recognizing the worth-ship of God (or Jesus).
Cordially,
Charlie
"In the public venue it has the added function of soliciting new members for the community. It is certainly not "worship" in the Pauline sense but is more akin to what Gaines Dobbins called recognizing the worth-ship of God (or Jesus)."
Recognizing the 'worth' of God is indeed the Pauline sense of worship... how could it be otherwise? Be that as it may, puzzling over what is or isn't true worship can be an interesting way to spend one's Sunday morning. Elizabeth
PS: The documentary about Wilie Mae Ford Smith is called "Say Amen Somebody!" and it is a gem... Available on YouTube only, no DVD's exist.
Hi Charlie
Thanks for the reminder about proskuneo, hadn't thought about it for a long time - bending of the knee acknowledges worth.
Even so, I would still select unselfish thankfulness as the best understanding of worship. First of all, proskuneo sounds a little like buttering-up God; it's a bit silly, manipulative, and self-serving to tell God that he/she is worthy, as if God's self-worth needs to be reinforced. Rather, expressing thankfulness, for example, for God's gifts of the strength to de-escalate threat (see the 1st post) seems to me to represent the true character of worship.
Gene Stecher
Chambersburg, Pa.
Post a Comment