Posted by Terry George
From my observation, most contemporary church-goers has considered the church “sanctuary” or the place where the corporate worship is carried out to be some kind of “holy place” or a “temple” where they come into God’s presence to worship. Although not explicitly said, but I think many in the local church subconsciously treated the church service or prayer meeting as something more spiritual or sacred in comparison to other kinds of Christian meetings such as home meeting/cell group or Bible study meeting. No doubt that since a church service is obviously more formal and organized compared to the other meetings, then I guess naturally it will be more esteemed. However, have we as new covenant believers unconsciously (or ignorantly?) transferred the Old Testament paradigm of temple worship into our religious practices? Have we also unknowingly regarded pastor as the NT equivalent to the OT priests or the worship leader/team as Levites?
Therefore, I strongly feel that the contemporary church needs to be biblically educated in the theology of Christian worship since there are many elements/forms of worship found in the bible (that is in OT) that are not directly “transferable” into NT perspective. Since Christ has fulfilled the OT laws, under the terms of the new covenant, it is either only Jesus is our high priest (Heb) or we have the priesthood of all believers (1 Pet). Jesus himself becomes the temple (Jn 2:13-22) or the church as a whole or as individual Christian is the temple (1 Cor 3:16-17; 1 Cor 6:19). Even the language of worship which in OT is so bound up with the temple/holy place and sacrificial system has been radically transformed by what Christ has done (cf. Jn 4:19-26, Rom 12:1-2).
So what are we to make of the contemporary church service? How do we understand what it means to come together for corporate worship? Is the praise & worship part of the service becomes our “offerings of worship” unto the Lord? In what way (if any) individual Christian’s acts of worship different from the corporate worship of the church?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well there is much to be said about the similarities of the Tabernacle worship and the concept of the Church. But let's look at the there metaphors that Jesus himself used to describe the church.
ReplyDeleteIn John 15, he used the example that He is the Vine and we are the branches.
In Ephesians 5, he used the tie and bond of marriage, that we are the bride of Christ.
In Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12, he used the analogy of the Human body, Jesus being the head and we are the parts of the body.
In all three examples, there is a significant view of the interdependence of Jesus and the church. Jesus is our high priest and we are all priests that bring worship to God.
I don't think that we can completely negate the influence of Tabernacle worship, but remember that the temple curtain was torn into two at the ressurection of Jesus. We have access into the presence of God by virtue of Justification.
Church today is a congregation of saints and of the priesthood. Yet many still have the clergy in mind when they refer to priests...
Is this thought and perception being propagated by the church or is there a clear teaching on the matter?
I believe too that the Tabernacle worship translates a lot in understanding to how the church worships today. Of course we don't have all the curtains and altar and symbols as it would mean nothing to us. Yes, Jesus' death on the cross changed a lot of Tabernacle worship when we now have direct access (without the mediator). our worship today did stem from tabernacle worship after all. perhaps in fact we need to apply more of tabernacle worship concepts as many today come for 'feel-good factor' instead.
ReplyDeleteHowever, i understand your sentiments where a lot of congregations treat the pastor as sort of a priest as if the pastor's prayer will be heard while other members will not (thus asking pastor to pray for them). This we see more in certain church type than others.
Would it be fair to say that just like the doctrine of church, the theology or doctrine of worship also needs to be rooted in function and not form? Meaning, should the criteria of looking at which elements/forms of worship are "transferable" be determined by which forms allow us to fulfil the function of engaging and encountering God in a meaningful way. This includes extra-biblical practices of our modern church service. For instance, closing our eyes to pray is not found in the bible ("watch and pray" is) but we practice it as it somehow seems to fulfil the function of aiding our worship. I once heard a quote by the radical young generation along the lines of, "You worship God with your open hands lifted, but we express it by lifting up our fist". I think DA Carson's "Worship by the Book" will be helpful in shedding light on this area.
ReplyDeleteI've read "Worship by the Book" before. Totally agreed, it will be very helpful to exposed and challenge our understanding of worship. In many cases, like in the "worship wars" issue, it is the forms that are hotly contended but sadly the function is not clearly addressed. Again, pragmatism is the name of the (postmodern)game.
DeleteTerry... I understand the concept that we should not be bound by something that is of the past and the OT has no sway in the NT.
ReplyDeleteBut your understanding of the church has got to be broader. Where is the cultural understanding? The view you are holding is a narrowly casted view that in many ways negates our cultural reactions to places of worship. You are saving people steep in the concept of a Holy place with Mediators and sacraments. They come into the church knowing only that world view. How are you going to interact meaningfully to that?
Paul still had to use traditions that the Jews could understand to reach them. Where do you then teach the truth, slowly trim the faulty thinkings, yet embrace a world view and cultural understanding?
The negation of culture has been the weakest point in the church. And in Malaysia for a long while it was Bad... but honestly it has not changed much, we've just got more modernized people in... yet the traditional minded people are still turned off by this 'postmodern - white man - not cultural respecting religion'. How would you address the cultural mindset with the view you mentioned above?
Hi Lionel. You've made a logical point on interacting, correcting the misunderstanding & progressively educating the church-goers on the proper foundation pertaining to corporate worship. That's why I suggested earlier that there need to be a clear teaching on the theology of worship in the church.
DeleteYou correctly pointed out that consideration needed to be broaden to include cultural aspect. However, cultural element need to be filtered through the principle of worship according to Scripture. We better be careful not too quick to embrace cultural values in order to accommodate them into Christian practices. Whatever cultural negations that might be "redeemable" let's not forget that Scripture must be the ultimate yardstick and not people's sentiments or for the sake of contextualization.
We need to make people understand at the first place that many aspects of human worldview and culture are depraved although not necessarily totality contrary to the truth. There are of course God's "common grace" in the world. However, no matter to what extent the cultural elements is right or useful, they must function within the mandate of Scripture, not overshadowing it or simply mix over with it. Sometimes as 21st century generation, we are rather prone to be inclusive at the risk of syncretism. When Paul preached to the Athenian Gentiles in Acts 17, while he did started off by appealing to his audience's religious culture and even quoting their poet, yet he maneuvered it so drastically that he ended up confronting their understanding of reality. Did he actually accommodate people's culture into his teaching? It is more of using the culture as his stepping stone to challenge them with the gospel. When reaching to the Jews, Paul had every right to employ Jewish cultural aspect because the Jews themselves are aware of the OT Scripture (although they might understand them improperly), their culture is steep in it and because Paul was himself once a Pharisee. But when he reach out to the Gentiles, his approach is quite different isn't it?
Therefore I strongly think that the cultural aspect need to be deconstructed first as it come into contact with biblical teaching. Then after the congregation had been taught in the proper understanding of Christian worship, then we may safely reconstruct our respective cultural element but now through the filter of Scripture. In the end, people would have to face the truth that perhaps not all cultural elements is compatible with the gospel.