Chapter three in Dawn's "How Shall We Worship?" gets to another important question that, like chapter two, takes greater precedence over chapter one's "What Kind of Music Should We Use?" Granted, Dawn moves through this book asking questions as they appear in Psalm 96, so no claims are made about a relationship between the importance of a question and where the question appears in a book. This question of how we can worship God, the One whom chapter two rightly told us is the object of worship, sets the tone for people who worship daily. It should also set the tone for our Sunday gatherings, seemingly Dawn's primary focus so far.
Dawn has one simple response to the question, "How Do We Worship God?" She asserts that to worship God is to bless God's name (25). This response comes directly from Psalm 96:2, so it gets no biblical argument from me. Furthermore, it reiterates the concept that God is the object of worship, which I also like. The importance Dawn places on God's name is insightful because it helps shape our worship choices. It helps us choose prayers, music, drama, art forms, lessons, etc., based on God's name. The explanation she gives is also helpful: to bless God's name is to honor God's character, God's nature, God's being, all of which are captured in God's name. Those of us who have done much Bible reading know that God has several names throughout the Scriptures, all based on some attribute or characteristic of God. There are a great many ways to bless God's name, as we "bow down before the mystery and wonder of the incarnation" (26).
We can likely all assent to blessing God's name as part of worship, but I am stricken by Dawn's perspective that our worship is useless, in a sense (27). Understand here that Dawn does not think worship has no point; rather, she states that God doesn't actually need our blessing. After all, God is the one who blesses us. God is self-sufficient. God made everything, owns everything, and is over everything. Therefore, our blessing doesn't give something to God that God does not already have. Instead, "the verb calling us to bless God's name is an imperative urging us to kneel, to adore the Lord with bended knee...because God deserves our gratitude" (27). Again, "It is actually unproductive to bless God - God doesn't need it, and it won't change God's opinion about us one whit. Moreover, if we are selfless enough truly to sing to or of [God], it might not even make us feel any better. But we will be changed by it if we respond earnestly and wholeheartedly to all that God is" (27).
It is easy to see, then, that God, our object of worship, is the one who should receive blessing in worship. We ought to choose worship activities that seek to bless God, not to bless us. Our blessing may come from God, but worship is not about us or our blessing. Dawn nails several churches that have nice worship times, called "nice" because of what we feel when we're there. God is gracious enough to welcome us into what God feels sometimes, but she rightly calls our attention away from ourselves and back onto God.
That being said, I have two critiques of this chapter that I'd like to address. First, Dawn seems often to respond unfavorably to churches who take people into consideration in planning their worship services. She seemingly has little time for people who want to "attract" people to their churches with worship (27). That makes sense in that worship is about God and not about people. Trying to attract people who don't believe with a spectacle of our blessing God is foolhardy. On the other hand, I certainly hope that Dawn takes time later in the book to talk about worship tools and modes of communication. I belong to a movement that highly respects worship being done in the language of the people. While that movement originally wanted people to be able to speak in their native tongues, I am convinced that we face a similar decision today in terms of worship approaches. While I agree all musical forms should be used and never dictated by an effort to attract people, I strongly feel that music is a mode of communication. I am convinced that communicating through irrelevant music presents worshipers with a choice between music and worship. Relevant music (of which there are many styles - not just the common pop music with Jesus themes that churches like ours use so frequently) enables worship. When worship is done well with relevance to its people and their community, then music is less likely to overshadow worship. Music fades into the background, allowing worshipers to connect to lyrics, to emotions, to thoughts, and to other ways to bless God. A psalm, hymn, or spiritual song done well in a way that communicates in the "language" of the people present helps keep God in God's proper place. So, if we reject music simply because it seems attractive or is more appealing to unchurched people, then we run the risk of not communicating to some people. Let's not attempt to attract people with church music and worship, nor let us maintain dull, mediocre music so we can say we're not trying to attract others. (Note: any music style done poorly will be a distraction, so assume nothing about music. Hymns can be quite relevant, as can psalms and spiritual songs, if they are communicated well and with relevance. Is the trick for your worship ministry to get rid of the hymns? To abolish new spiritual songs? To step beyond the psalter to more contemporary thoughts? If so, then beware imminent irrelevance.)
I hesitate briefly to offer my second critique, which regards the church calendar. I am a big believer in using the church calendar for worship. It was designed in such a way that we trace the life of Christ throughout the year and are more likely to worship God more thoroughly when we look at all the stages of Christ's life and ministry. Furthermore, I couldn't agree more with Dawn, who indicates that using the church calendar for worship also helps us offer ourselves more fully to God. Much of the church year deals with topics and emotions that we don't often offer to God in our Sunday gatherings. Lent is likely the best example because it helps us to identify with Christ's time in the wilderness and helps us bring our emotions of sadness, disappointment, exhaustion, and apprehension to God. We are able to worship a more complete picture of God, and we're able to offer more of ourselves. Our services cannot always look the same if we're worshiping God for all God is with all that we are (30). Where I struggle with Dawn, then, is not with the concept that the church calendar is a valuable tool. Rather, the way she put this into her chapter reinforces my perception that this book is not entirely exegetical. Putting the church calendar in this chapter seemed sudden, as if Dawn had an agenda running parallel to her BIble study. She's completely biblical about worshipers blessing God's name, but can we honestly say that the Bible wants us to worship through the church calendar? Surely, this tool makes it easier to see more of God's attributes and character, and it requires more thought and feeling from worshipers, but is it really necessary for adequate worship? Can people not bless God's name without something like the church calendar? I suspect Dawn would assent that we can bless God without the church calendar, but I feel bothered that this agenda was put on the same level as exegesis. It seems Dawn saw an opportunity to include her own opinion in the Bible study and she took it. Fortunately, it's a helpful opinion, but reader, beware that we don't assume that the church calendar has anything to do with Psalm 96.
LE
No comments:
Post a Comment