Paul Zahl writes the opening essay in Exploring the Worship Spectrum arguing for the use of formal-liturgical Worship. Zahl makes several excellent points in the chapter, but, oddly enough, none of them is exclusive to formal-liturgical worship. In fact, on that front, Zahl does a relatively good job at describing formal-liturgical worship but a poor job at proving why we should subscribe to it. His best paragraph in support of his thoughts comes early in the chapter:
Formal worship means dignified service that is not governed by the spontaneity of the moment or the spontaneity of the officiant. It means service in a form, within a mold. It is not off the cuff or as mood would govern. Rather, it accepts the constraints of a consistent and predictable pattern.
Worship Should Not Be “Off the Cuff”
I agree that at no point should worship be “off the cuff or as mood would govern.” Too often, we who lead worship in some of the more free traditions are guilty of using the Holy Spirit as our clean up agent. I participated in a service a few years ago where one of the guest preachers came to the pulpit and began, “I was sitting there in the pew and deciding what I should say.” I remember thinking, “If you haven’t given it any thought before now, that’s a shame.” I’ve come to know and love that preacher now, but I would still disagree with his “seat-of-the-pants” preparation.
Zahl makes a peculiar statement that I am almost certain is based on assumption rather than on empirical data: “It is true that a high percentage of nonliturgical, nonformal churches ad-lib from Sunday to Sunday.” That statement is neither true nor fair. The church I serve is neither liturgical nor formal and we most certainly do not make it up as we go along. In fact, I don’t know of many churches that literally do such a thing.
From my experience (admittedly anecdotal), if I were familiar with their service, I could drive to any number of churches, park in their parking lot and stay in the car and give you an accurate minute-by-minute account of what is going on inside. (I’m not saying that’s a good thing, but it shows that rather than making it up from week to week, many “free-worship” churches are in a creative rut.) And Zahl counters his own argument that nonformal churches make it up as they go along by making a rather peculiar statement: “Human sin is able to create out of free worship some set and predictable forms of worship of a different kind.” May I play the role of devil’s advocate here? It is not human sin that creates the liturgy by which formal-liturgical churches function but it is human sin that creates predictable patterns in the more free worship traditions?
Worship is Word-centered
Zahl states that as we are concerned with formal and liturgical worship, “we are thereby concerned with vertical worship. . . . This means that it is not pastor- or preacher-centered. It is, or ought to be, Word-centered.” I couldn’t agree more; in fact, I wrote an article to that end several months ago and posted it here at IsaiahSix. But that shouldn’t be exclusive to formal worship; it should be the golden thread that binds all styles of worship together. It should be the common factor that allows us to use varying styles of worship and know that we are still being biblically faithful. Word-centered worship should be that ideal which allows me to know that my brother who leads worship across the street is no less and no more a pastor or worship leader than I am. Word-centered worship isn’t just for the high church.
Is Formal Worship Too Cold?
One of the most often used arguments against formal-liturgical worship is that it is too stiff, too cold, too intellectual. Zahl acknowledges this is true to some degree. “We ought to admit the aptness of this [objection]. Liturgical worship can easily come across as chilly and alienating.” I suspect this is due in part to one of the underlying aspects of formal-liturgical worship—it is scripted from beginning to end.
Zahl further admits:
It can become the coded signals of those alone who know and understand. We winced in the American Episcopal context when the Reverend Joel Pugh asked why it is that more Episcopalians know the reason why the color purple is proper for Lent than know the reason why Christ died upon the cross.
To be fair, I’m sure the same concern could be leveled at most worshipers in any form of church or denomination across the globe.
Summary
I have had the blessing of serving a church whose worship style is formal-liturgical. And I’ve participated in more worship services at other formal-liturgical churches than I could possibly count. I’ve seen the benefits of this method and I’ve seen the downfalls. Taking nothing away from those who participate in the formal-liturgical tradition, I still can’t help thinking that Christ commanded us to love God with our heart and mind. Formal-liturgical worship does a fine job at representing the intellectual side of worship. While I believe that’s where we should start (intellect feeds the emotion rather than the other way around), I haven’t found too many (any?) formal-liturgical churches that really get close enough to allowing worshipers to worship with their hearts, too. I think there are better ways to offer a more biblically complete corporate worship tradition than a solely formal-liturgical format allows.
Impacting the Kingdom through Worship,
Thanks for stopping by, Joan! And thanks for taking the time to comment.
Yes, I absolutely agree. It is entirely possible to incorporate modern music into a formal setting. I would venture to guess, though, that those who are given to formal worship probably wouldn't lean that direction. I think what we'll see through the course of looking at this book is that biblically-faithful worship, regardless of its style, transcends denominational differences.
When considering music, I think it's important to understand that what we hear on the radio isn't necessarily intended to serve as material for corporate worship, but it ends up there any way. There are some theologically-rich authors of worship music out there today. Stuart Townend's and Keith Getty's music will be around for decades—if not centuries. The music from Sovereign Grace Ministries, while not necessarily able to fit in everyone's worship service, is rock solid in its theological depth.
So the tide is turning, I believe, in the quality of usefulness of what we consider worship music.
Wonderful post, although it is possible to amalgamate praise-and-worship style adoration of God into a liturgical tradition; likewise I have friends who are in an Assembly of God pastorate who are quite intellectual and their worship is quite biblical and God-centered. (Meaning, the songs are often hymns or psalms in the P&W style and the preaching is often on the Reformed end of the spectrum — sans the label)
One thing I consider is music…. the lyrics of some of today’s popular worship songs are often banal, boring, and quite theologically dumbed-down compared to hymnody. The decibel level and repetition of choruses seem to want to incite mindlessness, giving ones’ self over to the Lord in praise, perhaps?
The authentic worship should be simple and sincere, just as the Gospel is.