Pastor's Perspective
by Terry L. Johnson
During the Reformation era, debates raged over what things must be
considered crucial to Christian faith and practice, and what could be
considered adiaphora (Latin for "things indifferent"). All
sides agreed that the doctrines of the Trinity, the atonement, and
justification were central. But what about worship issues? What about
the elements of worship, sacramental theology, church architecture,
and furnishings?
Theological considerations drove the Reformers to insist upon biblical
preaching, congregational singing, vernacular Bible readings and
services, and sacramental practices that were consistent with their
rejection of a sacrificial understanding of the Eucharist. The
Reformers did not always agree on the details, but the principle was
clear: "Let us, therefore, repudiate everything that smacks of
sacrifice," said Luther in his Formula Missae
(1523). One could argue (I wouldn't, but one could) that there is
nothing wrong with a minister standing in front of the table, with
turning his back on the people as he mumbles the words of institution,
with elevating the host, with fencing the altar with a rail that keeps
the laity at a distance, with serving a communion wafer that won't
crumble. All of these could perhaps be justified with reference to
reverence for the eucharistic service, with the aim of maintaining
dignity and order. One could argue that they are adiaphora. However, to many Protestants they were not adiaphora,
because, they argued, these practices grew out of the doctrine of
transubstantiation and implied a sacrificial understanding of the mass.
Is the sacramental host a sacrificial offering of Christ's flesh and
blood placed by a priest on an altar that satisfies, even propitiates a
holy God? Yes, said the medieval church, Tridentine, and even
post-Vatican II (1960s) Roman Catholicism. If so, then of course one
should perform the miracle of the mass at a distance from carnal
curiosity seekers; of course the host should be elevated and adored --
it is, after all, the actual body of Christ; of course great pains
should be taken to prevent clumsy or careless lay people from spilling
the wine (so deny them the cup) or dropping crumbs of Christ's flesh
(hence wafers).
But since (in a Protestant understanding of things) none of these
things is true, language, gestures, and furnishings that imply that
they are true cannot be regarded as adiaphora.
They must be purged from the church's eucharistic practices. Priests
must be called "ministers" or "pastors," and altars must be replaced
with tables. As Luther put it: "everything that smacks of sacrifice"
must be repudiated. Everything that implies sacrifice must be removed.
Calvin summarized: "[The Lord] has given us a table at which to feast,
not an altar on which a victim is to be offered; he has not consecrated
priests to make sacrifice, but servants [ministros] to distribute the sacred feast" (Institutes,
4.18.12). Neo-medievalists in conservative evangelical circles would do
well to learn the language of church architecture, furnishings, and
gestures, and not naively reinstate that which we theologically reject.
But the real point of this article is not the Lord's Supper. We regard
as axiomatic the principle that worship cannot be entertainment.
Worship as entertainment is idolatry. By definition  worship must be
about God, not my amusement. Here is where disagreement exists: stages,
theater-lighting, bands, dancers, dramatists, hand-held microphones,
all up front, the service performed on behalf of an audience relaxing
in theater-style seating. Is this adiaphora?
Normally, issues of seating, lighting, placement of musicians, style of
platform might have qualified as things indifferent, just as the
elevation and adoration of the host might have been considered adiaphora.
But a line has been crossed in our generation. Much of what passes for
worship today is nothing more than lightly baptized entertainment, and
therefore is idolatrous. It is idolatry from which serious churches
must distance themselves. Our principle must be (with apologies to
Luther): "Let us, therefore, repudiate everything that smacks of
entertainment."
Has the time come when the sanctuaries of evangelical Protestantism
must be cleansed of everything that reflects the world of
entertainment? Our Reformed forefathers took axes to the altars, and
they whitewashed the walls of medieval churches. If our analysis of
worship that entertains is correct, similar iconoclastic fury must be
shown, and soon, in our houses of worship lest they become houses of
mirth: theater seats pulled out; stages broken up; dancers and actors
banished; musicians' and choirs' roles redefined as that of simply
supporting and enhancing congregational singing; pulpit, table, and
font restored to their proper places; pastors moved back behind
pulpits; and simple services of the Word read, preached, sung, prayed,
and seen (in the sacraments) reestablished. What was once indifferent
can be considered indifferent no more, not if Reformed Protestantism is
to continue to practice purity in its worship and avoid idolatry.
"Little children," says the apostle John, "keep yourselves from idols"
(1 John 5:21).
*****
Rev. Terry L. Johnson is senior minster of Independent Presbyterian Church in Savannah, Georgia, and is author of The Family Worship Book.
Read select Tabletalk columns from the June edition here.
|
Respond to this Blog
Though we do not post comments, we would like to hear from you and may take your comments into consideration in a future article.