Startling Contrasts
Sunday in Melbourne I went to St. Michael’s Uniting Church. It is a congregation of the Uniting Church of Australia, formed in 1977 of the Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregational churches, much as The United Church of Canada was formed in 1925. The “Executive Minister”, the Rev. Dr. Frances McNab, is a scholar of the Jesus Seminar. I met him in 2004 at meetings of the Seminar in California. The preacher on Sunday was the Rev. Dr. Louise Harms. Her manner as a liturgist was respectful and honourable.
The organ, while plodding for the hymns (are there no organists out there who can play with vivre????) was wonderful. I know all of the church development gurus say that the organ is history, but I love a pipe organ!!! The hymns were from a 1977 Australian hymnbook and not inclusive in either its language about God or about people. The liturgy seemed disjointed, not integrated, something important to me as a liturgist.
Louise’s sermon was about soul-enhancing and soul-depleting experiences. She worked primarily with the older testament reading of the two mothers with new-born children (1 Kings 3). The first mishappenly rolls onto and smothers her child in their sleep. What a horror! In her grief she takes the living new born of another mother and places her dead child in its place. A dispute arises over the parentage of the living child. The king is asked to resolve the matter. Instead he decrees that it be cut in two. When the birth mother of the child says, “No! Give her the child.” he declares her the mother.
The soul-depleting experience of the first woman spiraled her into further soul-depleting actions. The second woman acted to preserve life, regardless. She enhances life, even if it is not as she would have had it be.
Exhaustion, grief, trauma can so deplete the soul that one can no longer hold life. One often is led to actions that actually destroy life. It is a spiral. How often does an abused become an abuser? Soul-enhancing decisions and actions have a very different impact upon us. And upon others. They build up life and instill in us capacities to live.
After the service at St. Michael’s I made my way to Federation Square, an architecturally hostile environment ala the Libeskin design for the Royal Ontario Museum. The doors to St. Paul’s Anglican Cathedral, opposite the Square, were open so I went in. The morning liturgy was in progress.
I love Gothic cathedrals. I love organ music. I love classical English choral music soaring up into the stone-arched heights (a few alterations at St. Mark’s and . . . )
I arrived just as the Eucharistic (Communion) liturgy was beginning. Vested priests behind railings at the high altar were intoning the traditional words of institution . . . “Lamb of God who takest away the sins of the world . . . . Lord, I am not worthy to receive you . . . . Lamb of God have mercy upon us . . . .“ We sang, “Let all mortal flesh keep silence and with fear and trembling stand . . . . “
The language and symbol of the liturgy spoke of subjugation and supplication. It lauded suffering and implied the necessity of fear of the Lord and sacrifice to appease this One.
As the early Church institutionalized and developed its dogmas around Paul’s focus on Jesus’ death and resurrection, orthodox Christian practice evolved much more into a memorial feast focused upon suffering and death. This traditional liturgy at St. Paul’s struck me as blatantly soul-depleting, demeaning us and our place in God’s realm, insisting that we are worthless beings unto ourselves, unworthy but for the sacrifice of Christ’s body and blood.
Contrast this with the word and gesture at St. Michael’s which opened to worshippers the opportunity for and privilege of enhancing life and soul. It affirmed life, our life, lived in gracious and generous ways as we have seen in Jesus’ life.
Over the last two years, through conversations with St. Mark’s leaders and Faith Formation participants, in discussions with Fellows of The Jesus Seminar, and with readings of progressive Christian thought, I have moved our Communion liturgies towards a more life-enhancing affirmation and away from the orthodox death memorial language and symbol. I’ve seen this as a subtle evolution until Sunday. Experiencing the two traditions side by side I felt smacked by the stark contrast.
I’d welcome your thoughts on this. Have you noticed the change in emphasis? How have you experienced it? How does this shape our evolution as a worshipping community? If it is not about Jesus dying to save us from our sins, is it Christian?
The organ, while plodding for the hymns (are there no organists out there who can play with vivre????) was wonderful. I know all of the church development gurus say that the organ is history, but I love a pipe organ!!! The hymns were from a 1977 Australian hymnbook and not inclusive in either its language about God or about people. The liturgy seemed disjointed, not integrated, something important to me as a liturgist.
Louise’s sermon was about soul-enhancing and soul-depleting experiences. She worked primarily with the older testament reading of the two mothers with new-born children (1 Kings 3). The first mishappenly rolls onto and smothers her child in their sleep. What a horror! In her grief she takes the living new born of another mother and places her dead child in its place. A dispute arises over the parentage of the living child. The king is asked to resolve the matter. Instead he decrees that it be cut in two. When the birth mother of the child says, “No! Give her the child.” he declares her the mother.
The soul-depleting experience of the first woman spiraled her into further soul-depleting actions. The second woman acted to preserve life, regardless. She enhances life, even if it is not as she would have had it be.
Exhaustion, grief, trauma can so deplete the soul that one can no longer hold life. One often is led to actions that actually destroy life. It is a spiral. How often does an abused become an abuser? Soul-enhancing decisions and actions have a very different impact upon us. And upon others. They build up life and instill in us capacities to live.
After the service at St. Michael’s I made my way to Federation Square, an architecturally hostile environment ala the Libeskin design for the Royal Ontario Museum. The doors to St. Paul’s Anglican Cathedral, opposite the Square, were open so I went in. The morning liturgy was in progress.
I love Gothic cathedrals. I love organ music. I love classical English choral music soaring up into the stone-arched heights (a few alterations at St. Mark’s and . . . )
I arrived just as the Eucharistic (Communion) liturgy was beginning. Vested priests behind railings at the high altar were intoning the traditional words of institution . . . “Lamb of God who takest away the sins of the world . . . . Lord, I am not worthy to receive you . . . . Lamb of God have mercy upon us . . . .“ We sang, “Let all mortal flesh keep silence and with fear and trembling stand . . . . “
The language and symbol of the liturgy spoke of subjugation and supplication. It lauded suffering and implied the necessity of fear of the Lord and sacrifice to appease this One.
As the early Church institutionalized and developed its dogmas around Paul’s focus on Jesus’ death and resurrection, orthodox Christian practice evolved much more into a memorial feast focused upon suffering and death. This traditional liturgy at St. Paul’s struck me as blatantly soul-depleting, demeaning us and our place in God’s realm, insisting that we are worthless beings unto ourselves, unworthy but for the sacrifice of Christ’s body and blood.
Contrast this with the word and gesture at St. Michael’s which opened to worshippers the opportunity for and privilege of enhancing life and soul. It affirmed life, our life, lived in gracious and generous ways as we have seen in Jesus’ life.
Over the last two years, through conversations with St. Mark’s leaders and Faith Formation participants, in discussions with Fellows of The Jesus Seminar, and with readings of progressive Christian thought, I have moved our Communion liturgies towards a more life-enhancing affirmation and away from the orthodox death memorial language and symbol. I’ve seen this as a subtle evolution until Sunday. Experiencing the two traditions side by side I felt smacked by the stark contrast.
I’d welcome your thoughts on this. Have you noticed the change in emphasis? How have you experienced it? How does this shape our evolution as a worshipping community? If it is not about Jesus dying to save us from our sins, is it Christian?
posted by He's Not Home (again) at 8:00 am
5 Comments:
So! This is the way you relax?
I, for one, appreciate the change in emphasis in our communion liturgy. It was this very thing that separated me from my Anglican background (another St. Paul's!). I felt that there had to be something more positive for me in my religious beliefs, and it ended up separating me from "church" for too many years. I believe this thinking has shaped our evolution, and I think that this is what a lot of people are looking for -something a little "modernized", something they can identify more readily with.
Blessings to you my friend for keeping us all thinking & questioning.
Hey, Alan, loving this blog. You're such a good writer that we could almost be there...except it is not 41 here!
I believe that Jesus' comments at the Last Supper were not about "fear and trembling", but, rather about our remembering Him and continuing to carry out his work. Our communion liturgy leaves me with a positive feeling, and reminds me to strive to live my life in the way he recommended -the Christian way (hands-on, peace and love). Blessings.
Was it Brenda who was sure that she didn't like inclusive language until she attending a service elsewhere where she discovered that she was offended by the exclusive language used? You're right - We assume that the changes that have been made at SM have been subtle, until we're confronted with an alternative. A couple of years ago, I was a visitor at a United Church where communion was served in a traditonal style and children were nowhere to be seen during that part of the service. It was a friendly and welcoming congregation, but I was keenly aware that it was not a place where I would be comfortable as a member.
I agree with mm who says that our liturgy is postive. It challenges, reassures, and unites us as part of a Christian family. Keep pushing!
Yes I have noticed. I have also noticed as I have read the Bible how many life enhancing affirmations there are. Perhaps I have noticed because I wanted to know that God was really with us in our trials and tribulations, [and in our joyful times,] I believe God wants us to live a life of joy and abundance [not material,], to see the light and to have the light shine through our words and deed. Here are several passages that I have marked in my own experience;
joshua 1; 5-9
Ps 34; 4-8, 17-22
ps 37; 3-6
ps 55;22
ps 91; various verses
mattew 6; last several verses
Of course there are a lot more, [esp psalms.]Anyway, I think its great that you do this Alan, how can we be salt of the earth unless we really believe that we can be like that.
I enjoy the blog. Stay well.
GG
What is it about organ music? Before I went to Richmond Hill I disliked the "slow" music that most musicians seemed to drag out of those reluctant instruments. Now, however, after hearing the instrument played by a skilled musician, and backed up by a 26 - 28 voice talented choir, there are Sundays when I'd appreciate hearing that anthem again. What is it that organ music can do to a reluctant ear? Allan
Post a Comment
<< Home