From
Living Theology in the Metropolitan Chicago Synod
Evangelical Lutheran Church In America
Volume 1, Number 2
Lent 1996
Worship and Evangelism
Worship and Evangelism: A
Connection of Power
James
M. Capers
Evangelism
and worship belong together in the life of the Church. To keep them together
Christians should freely use whatever forms will communicate the gospel
effectively for the local cultural context.
Evangelization
is clearly the one mission that the Church of Jesus Christ has all to its own.
There is no other organization on the face of the earth that has as its call to
proclaim, both in word and deed, that Jesus is Lord and Savior. The Church alone
has a mission to say that the reign of God has come in the person and work of
Jesus Christ.
Evangelism
comes from the Greek word euangelion
which simply means “good news.” For Christians the word specifically has to do
with the good news that God has come in the flesh to liberate, save, and fill
all things in Jesus of Nazareth. And so if any church says that it is
evangelical it confesses that it centers its witness on the biblical message
that God loved the world and demonstrated that love by coming to earth in Jesus
the Christ. To be evangelical also is to realize that God draws us into a
lifestyle of good news so that others may encounter Jesus in us and come to put
their absolute trust in him.
Worship,
on the other hand, is also central to what it is to be a Christian. Kennon L.
Callahan, in his Twelve Keys to An
Effective Church, names “corporate, dynamic worship” as his third central
characteristic of an effective church. For him worship is celebration of God
and God’s presence among the people.
For
the American church, which is in a missionary situation, it is a major concern
that worship is often the way people attach to the Body of Christ. It is the
central point of entry for people who are considering joining the fellowship of
the Church. If church leaders are going to reach the masses with the gospel
they must make worship a fit vehicle for that timeless message.
For
all believers it is apparent that worship is closely involved in the ministry of
evangelization. For them worship assumes submission. Only those who consider
themselves to be part of the family of God worship. To give “worth” to another
is done only by those who consider themselves to be subjects of the One to be
worshipped. In one sense when Christians gather on Sundays it is in the
progression of the liturgy that they declare that they love the Lord--that they
ascribe or give awe and majesty to this God. Worship, in other words, is
testimony to the greatness of God. The very fact that the people of God gather
is a way of testifying to the world that they have a particular God who should
be worshipped. For them this God has been revealed in the person and work of
Jesus Christ. And because of this and God’s greatness, in loving response, they
believe that this God deserves their worship and praise. Therefore they gather
to say to God “We love you. We magnify your name, we praise you.”
Worship
for God’s people also has a formative character. It is not only something they
do, it is also something that God does to them. All that happens when the
people of God get together is part of a process by which evangelists are
created and formed. The rites of Baptism and Eucharist contain in them the
message that God has given everything for us in Christ’s dying and rising. The
words of the liturgy shape and critique the consciousness of evangelists as
people who will “Go in Peace and serve the Lord.”
All
that we have said so far is the self-understanding of those who are part of the
community of faith. They are able to come from the inside with a liturgical
motivation as “God’s people doing the work of serving God.” But clearly there
are those who come to worship experiences who do not share that same sense of
relationship with God and the Church. Paul identifies these persons as
“outsiders and unbelievers.” Perhaps, in an evangelistic sense, these persons
are seekers. They are persons who have been invited by the Spirit of God and
the community of faith.
Seekers
are often people whose lives are being torn to shreds. They are people who are
hurting. Therefore, they must be able to enter into the experience from where
they are that they may more readily comprehend and appropriate for themselves
the gospel message. So worship in a missionary situation has an additional
responsibility. It gives the opportunity for the faithful community to give
praise and honor to God, but it also provides a context in which God speaks to
both the faithful and the stranger and inquirer. It is not a private event in the
catacombs but a public event in the marketplace.
Lutherans
and other liturgical churches have a challenge before them. When it comes to
evangelism, highly developed liturgical forms suffer from an inherent weakness:
they do not lend themselves well to initiating fellowship. To appreciate the
experience of God’s presence that is offered through those forms, participants
need to have extensive prior knowledge and training. The symbols themselves
usually have to be experienced over time before they become conveyers of deep
spiritual meaning. Unfortunately a high liturgical emphasis can drive a wedge
between the gathering of regulars who know, appreciate, and love this
communication, and an audience of uninformed visitors who have to struggle to
follow along, let alone feel included. Watching newcomers struggle with a
complicated service book is a sobering reminder that evangelism is at best a
secondary concern in this approach.
Few
Lutheran churches would ever change their style so much that the heritage of liturgical
worship is forgotten. Yet historically within Lutheranism there have been
periods of more or less emphasis on traditional structure and symbols. The kind
of liturgical renewal that has been totally reliant on traditional structure
and symbols has not led to church growth. Instead, growth has happened in those
places where leaders have dared to be creative and where they were not afraid
of stepping toward those who are outside the church.
Our
challenge is to come to grips with what is essentially Lutheran. Moving into
the twenty-first century we will need to keep our eyes and ears open to what is
happening in our culture, and our minds focused on the Scriptures. We must be
mindful of the words of biblical scholar
and theologian George Forell when he was asked some years ago what fears he had
for the future of the Lutheran Church.
His answer was: “That we are moving Lutheran practice to the same level
and place as doctrine . . . Some things are adiaphora [matters neither
commanded nor forbidden in Scripture or doctrine].” In other words, some things
are given over to freedom, not law.
If
the hallmark of the Reformation is the message of justification by grace
through faith, then what is of importance is that people hear that message. If
a principle of the Reformation is that communication be in the language of the
people, then everything we do, including worship, must communicate in the
people’s language. God’s message of grace and love is paramount to what happens
among us. Worship leaders cannot allow anything--liturgical form, style, or
cultural imperialism--to stand in the way of the sharing of the Gospel. That
which advances the propagation of the Gospel is the standard by which we judge
all things, including our liturgy.
I
suggest that within the Church today there are at least five models for dealing
with the encounter of diverse cultures within worshipping communities. Which
best describes the style of your congregation? Which might you use to best
communicate to the people you are called to serve?
·
Assimilation is the model that simply
uses the Mass as is. The structure, words and musical setting of the liturgy
are used without alteration no matter what the cultural background may be of
the seekers who may come to worship. This is the approach which says that not
only must all Lutherans use the same worship progression and words, but all
must also use traditionally Lutheran musical and liturgical styles as well in
order to be “Lutheran” by some arbitrary definition that has nothing to do with
our core theology.
·
Integration uses the basic shape of the
Mass, but intersperses within it songs and other actions more familiar to an
audience unfamiliar with liturgical traditions. Take for instance Bethel West
in Chicago. They use the second setting of the Lutheran Book of Worship in its fullness. However the choir
“integrates” the singing of African American gospel music between the lessons
for the day. An altar call is inserted after the sermon for a Prayer of the
Day. Hymnody that reflects the history and Christian experience of many African
Americans (from sources such as Lead Me,
Guide Me, The Broadman Hymnal, and Songs of Zion) is freely used in
worship. These songs and other actions are additions to the traditional
liturgy of the Mass.
·
Reluctant Integration is a take-off on the above
model. The traditional Mass is used in its totality, yet once or twice a year
something different might happen within worship that relates to the people
being served. Perhaps the solo “Mary Had a Baby” might be placed between gospel
and sermon to mark a special occasion. It even sometimes happens that the
people being served may have such low esteem regarding their own cultures that
they are not free to use their own styles, but they feel in their bones that
something must be done, so they choose to make a change, but very infrequently.
·
Inculturation uses all the parts of the
Mass but expresses them in the musical and artistic formats of the local
cultural context. Examples of this include “The Detroit Folk Mass,” John
Ylvisaker’s folk settings and “The Liturgy of Joy” which I wrote. Inculturation
is a term that Roman Catholics have used. For them it is a positive term. For
them it assumes the shape and words of
the “historic and catholic Mass” are set and not to be violated. But
they further believe it is up to each culture to subject the words to musical
adaptation so that style consistent with that culture can become a bridge to
receiving the catholic faith. The faith, as they understand it, is being
inculturated, yet the form of the Mass itself sets the standard.
·
Adaptation is the model which places
the central concern on communicating with people in terms of their local
cultural context. The forms of the traditional Mass are used sparingly if at
all. What is employed is that which will communicate the Gospel within the
local setting. For the sake of the Gospel this approach frees people to use
whatever is at their disposal so that the hearers hear it “in the language of
the people.”
I
am sure that others may come up with other models of coming together in praise
of God. But there is power in this connection between worship and evangelism.
What is of most importance is to take seriously both of these aspects of the
Church’s life.
James M. Capers
Pastor, St.
Paul, Decatur, Georgia