The local Charlotte paper ran a short item about some church offering contemporary informal worship. The headline said it was an unorthodox service. Well the paper did not mean to communicate what was the literal meaning of the headline : that the service was heretical and outside the bounds of Christian faith. But hey ....
What the headline meant was that it was unusual and novel. But these days calling a contemporary service novel or unusual is really inaccurate. So many churches offer them and with such mind numbing sameness, we can hardly call them out of the ordinary. In fact, the liturgical, "traditional" services ought to now be called fresh and exciting and novel and different as they are increasingly rare.
So perhaps I will advertise the services at my congregation as contemporary services and maybe the Charlotte Observer will cover the fact that we sing the Kyrie and rise for the processional cross and the pastor wears vestments.
2 comments:
All worship is contemporary.
True. It is a bad word. But it is shorthand that is understood.
The better question is which worship is authentic, true to the full Biblical witness to what it means to be a Christian. I would submit the historic liturgy is the answer.
Post a Comment