tmitchellmusic

Today this blog becomes very personal because I am going to begin the process of telling my own story. I am starting at the beginning because I have known many people in many different situations and locations over many years – after all I am now officially chronologically gifted – 66 years. It has been – and continues to be an interesting and wonderful journey.

I was born in the parsonage next door to the little white frame church where my grandparents served as Methodist missionaries to the Cherokee peoples in northeastern Oklahoma – technically in the little town of Bunch. We moved from Oklahoma to Kansas during the summer prior to my sixth grade year so my mother could accept a position as a second grade teacher in Augusta, Kansas – just east of Wichita. I pursued an undergraduate degree in piano performance at Friends University in Wichita, then enjoyed four marvelous years in the band program of the United States Air Force including an opportunity to see the world as part of the United States Air Force European Command Band in Wiesbaden, Germany. Following my adventure in the Air Force I completed a Master of Music degree in Choral Conducting and Literature at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana. Later I completed all of the classwork for a Doctor of Musical Arts in Conducting and Composition at the University of Oklahoma in Norman. In September, 2005 I entered the Master of Divinity degree program at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, graduating in May, 2008 and being ordained and installed as Associate Pastor for Discipleship at Covenant Presbyterian Church in Austin, Texas in March, 2009. I retired at the beginning of 2013 and then accepted my current part-time position as Director of Music Ministries for St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church also here in Austin, Texas.

During my more than 30 years as a musician I served Presbyterian congregations in Houston and Austin in Texas, in Nashville, Tennessee, and my first position as a part-time musician at Westwood Presbyterian Church in Wichita, Kansas. I also served congregations that are part of the Disciples of Christ, United Methodist, and United Church of Christ, and was an active participant and volunteer director during my Air Force years at the Hainerberg Chapel in Wiesbaden, Germany. In addition to my service to the church I have also been active in professional musical theatre, symphonic work, and as a published and recorded composer and arranger.

I relate this history to let you know that my journey through the language of arts and the language of arts in worship has been as varied as the positions and situations that I have served – some large congregations and some small congregations – some very traditional congregations and some very non-traditional – some very concerned about being inclusive and many who have had little if any concern for inclusivity. However, without any question the two congregations that are part of my experience that were the most inclusive were College Hill United Methodist Church in Wichita, and the congregation I presently serve – St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) here in Austin, Texas.

It is also important for you to know that along with increased age and experience the matter of inclusiveness has become more and more important to me. I have also done a significant amount of work with people along the road to recovery from substance abuse, and I have been horrified to hear the stories that almmost all of them have told about the judgements of guilt that were placed on them by churches in earlier times. When I have spoken of the importance of the spiritual element of recovery – many have responded that if I expect them to embrace a God like the one they were taught – or observed by example in the way that they were treated by other “Christians” then I could just forget it. Sadly, when they described those situations I knew that I could never believe in a God or follow a God who clearly was not a God of love and compassion. The God I follow is much much larger than that and completely filled with infinite love, mercy, and grace.

All of this is to set the stage for my current situation and to try to express why I know that I am being called to contribute my thoughts, experience, and, hopefully, vision by writing about these matters – and by inviting others to join the community conversation.

I encourage you to visit the website for St. Andrew’s – http://www.staopen.org – to take the time to become acquainted with who we are, and then, to read the congregation’s stated policy concerning inclusive language. (When you are at the St. Andrew’s website home page – click on the tab to the far right – About Us – which will open a drop down menu – click on Philosophy and Mission and then follow the link to Inclusive Language). I am honored to serve with a congregation who has taken the time to prayerfully discern who they are and then are continually striving to become who God is calling us to be as we move together into the future.

This information will provide the basis for my coming posts and I very much hope you will join our community conversation. Grace and peace

Inclusive language has been a point of much discussion for many many years – and – continues to provide opportunities for animated and passionate conversation.

Today I want to point you to a couple of superb articles from the current issue of The Christian Century – both written by Mary Louise Bingle.

The first, “Singing from one book: Why hymnals matter” may be found at http://www.christiancentury.org/article/2013-04/singing-one-book – and – the second, “Debating hymns” which may be retrieved at http://www.christiancentury.org/article/2013-04/debating-hymns. Both articles offer an excellent information source about the current state of hymnody in this country and beyond.

Following is an excerpt from the second which describes a portion of the process and work of the committee preparing the new Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) hymnal Glory to God:

“Two examples of theological in-group disagreements stand out. The committee debated a long time over whether to include in Glory to God the American folk hymn ‘Jesus Walked This Lonesome Valley.’ The hymn does appear in the Lent section of the 1990 Presbyterian Hymnal, as well as in hymnals and supplements of several other bodies (such as the Disciples of Christ, Roman Catholics, Mennonites, United Methodists and Society of Friends). Yet opponents of inclusion argued that the text makes statements that are theologically questionable. How can Christians sing that ‘nobody else’ can walk the lonesome valley with us or that we have to stand our trial ‘by ourselves,’ when the very heart of the crucifixion narrative holds that Jesus walked—and continues to walk—alongside those who suffer and that he went on trial for our sakes?

Proponents of inclusion argued that the folk text is making an experiential rather than a theological claim: there are times when we feel as if we are starkly alone and to voice such a lament resonates with cries of forsakenness going back at least as far as the Psalms. Opponents of inclusion won (both on a first vote and on a later call for reconsideration), and the hymn will not appear in the 2013 song collection.

Even more sustained theological debate occurred after the conclusion of the committee’s three-and-a-half years of quarterly meetings in January 2012. We had voted for a song from the contemporary Christian canon, Keith Getty and Stuart Townend’s ‘In Christ Alone.’ The text agreed upon was one we had found by studying materials in other recently published hymnals. Its second stanza contained the lines, ‘Till on that cross as Jesus died / the love of God was magnified.’ In the process of clearing copyrights for the hymnal we discovered that this version of the text would not be approved by the authors, as it was considered too great a departure from their original words: ‘as Jesus died / the wrath of God was satisfied.’ We were faced, then, with a choice: to include the hymn with the authors’ original language or to remove it from our list.

Because we were no longer meeting as a committee, our discussions had to occur through e-mail; this may explain why the ‘In Christ Alone’ example stands out in my mind — the final arguments for and against its inclusion are preserved in writing. People making a case to retain the text with the authors’ original lines spoke of the fact that the words expressed one view of God’s saving work in Christ that has been prevalent in Christian history: the view of Anselm and Calvin, among others, that God’s honor was violated by human sin and that God’s justice could only be satisfied by the atoning death of a sinless victim. While this might not be our personal view, it was argued, it is nonetheless a view held by some members of our family of faith; the hymnal is not a vehicle for one group’s perspective but rather a collection for use by a diverse body.

Arguments on the other side pointed out that a hymnal does not simply collect diverse views, but also selects to emphasize some over others as part of its mission to form the faith of coming generations; it would do a disservice to this educational mission, the argument ran, to perpetuate by way of a new (second) text the view that the cross is primarily about God’s need to assuage God’s anger. The final vote was six in favor of inclusion and nine against, giving the requisite two-thirds majority (which we required of all our decisions) to the no votes. The song has been removed from our contents list, with deep regret over losing its otherwise poignant and powerful witness.”

Again – this represents the proverbial tip of the iceberg. In the next post I will begin to speak to the inclusive language policy that has been approved and is in place for the particular congregation where I am presently serving as Director of Music Ministries.

Grace and peace

It has been said, “If you remember the 1960s then you weren’t there. Yes I was there – and – I do remember. Maybe that in itself is some sort of commentary on who I was during my high school and undergraduate college years. I graduated from high school in 1965 and received my undergraduate degree in 1969. My draft lottery number was 27 – so – when I received my undergraduate degree I was well aware that some sort of military service awaited me in the not too distant future – more about that later because it also relates to the subject matter at hand.

I vividly remember sitting in American History class in the eleventh grade when the news broke that President Kennedy had been shot. The news that Neil Armstrong had stepped on the surface of the moon happened during a matinee performance of the musical “George M” – the producer stopped tha performance for the announcement and led us all in the singing of George M. Cohan’s “You’re a Grand Old Flag.”

I was very much a part of the “hootenanny generation” and learned to play three or four chords on my inexpensive guitar so I could be an active participant. Years later when I conducted The Nashville Symphony in a Pops Concert with The Kingston Trio it was a real treat – I already knew all of the songs!

Over the years I also have collected numerous remembrances of the changes in the language used for hymn texts. Some wonderful – some laughable – some valiant in purpose but horrible in reality due to the lack of expertise of the createds who were manipulating the beautiful poetic language of the past to honor an agenda of correctness for the then present.

I openly admit – I object to singing “Good Christian friends rejoice” when it is so obvious – at least to me – that “Good Christians all rejoice” is such a better choice. One of the coming posts will include my journey with “Let There Be Peace on Earth” and the textual changes that were embraced by the authors.

And I will never forget the time when “Rise up, O men of God” seemed to be the perfect choice to follow the sermon on the coming Sunday. I said to the pastor, “Don’t worry – we will sing “Rise up, O saints of God” and was then surprised when the pastor responded, “Please no!” – and then explained that the problem was with one of the interior stanzas – “Rise up, O saints of God, the church for you doth wait . . . rise up and make her great.” He quickly followed with, “Only God is able to make the church great.” I understand this much better now that I have studied the writing of Karl Barth – yes, my pastor friend and colleague had studied as a student of Barth in Basel, Switzerland.

To this day I make sure I am looking at the text on Christmas Eve for “It Came Upon The Midnight Clear” – because I know I will sing “Peace on the earth, good will to men” rather than “good will to all” because that is how I learned it as a child. That is not an excuse it is just the reality when you are chronologically gifted enough to sing most of the familiar hymns without looking at text while you sing

And for me it is not just the hymns – every time we pray the prayer that Jesus taught – especially at memorial services – when apparently I am not sure whether I am a debtor or a trespasser I often seem to end up being a debt-passer.

This is just part of my story – and – of course there is much much more to consider – which will be our focus in the coming days.

The B – I – B – L – E,
Yes that’s the book for me.
I stand alone on the Word of God
The B – I – B – L – E.

It is my guess that most of the people who read this blog have sung this song at some point in their life – I certainly have – and – in the past, I have also asked others to sing it – including young children – and therein is the problem.

Ask any young child to explain the meaning of the third line of the song: “I stand alone on the Word of God.”

YES – I have also done that.

Possible explanations –

I stand on my Bible

I stand on my Bible by myself – my Bible is not large enough to hold more than one person.

OR

I stand alone – no one is with me – I am alone.

With all due respect I am aware that none of these statements capture the intent of those who wrote this song – but – those are the words – and – most young children will not grasp the actual intent – most who sing this song will not receive an explanation of the intended meaning of the text – but they WILL remember the text.

I hear some of you saying, “Oh, come on, it is an innocent harmless little children’s song.” Maybe – maybe not – but – we do learn what we sing.

However – many many songs have been composed that are more appropriate for young children – both text and music. This is certainly one instance when just because we have always done it in the past does not mean that we must continue to do it in the future.

Just some of my thoughts for our consideration and community conversation.

In the next post we will begin to consider the matter of inclusive language in hymn texts – almost always a superb way to generate interesting and lively conversation.

Several years ago I spent some of my continuing education allowance to attend an event that taught me a lesson that I will never forget – one that continues to teach me day after day after day. I am sad to report that I do not remember the who, the what, the when, or the where of this important event – but – to this day I continue to benefit from the lesson I learned that day.

The person presenting began with a very simple question: “How many of you, from your childhood, remember a complete sermon – verbatim?” Much to our surprise – one person raised a hand. Following some further inquiry the person explained: “Yes, my father served as a supply preacher when I was growing up. I heard him preach each and every week – in a different location – the same sermon.”

Second question: “How many of you, from your childhood, remember a complete Church School lesson – verbatim?” This time no one raised a hand – but – we immediately started to exchange memories of wonderful and less-than-wonderful teachers and events in our lives. My memories took me to Mr. Warner – who taught my Sunday class at the local United Methodist congregation when I was in the sixth grade. Mr. Warner also happened to be the principal of the school I was attending at the time. We was a wonderful teacher – both on Sundays and during the week – he taught reading to sixth graders at our school. However, my vivid memory of him was the number of perfect attendance Sunday School pins that he wore on the lapel of his suit jacket – so many that he surely titled to the side where they were displayed. But – no one could remember a complete lesson – verbatim.

Third question: “How many of you, from your childhood, remember songs that you learned in worship and Sunday School?” We started singing – and continued singing – and continued singing – for at least the next 30 minutes before the person presenting the event asked us to stop – even though we were no where near finishing the list of songs that we ALL knew and could still sing.

Fourth and final question: “Where did you learn your earliest lessons of the faith, of theology, of God, of Jesus?” We ALL knew the answer – from the faith that we were taught through our singing as children.

The presenter made one final point – “So be careful what you sing in worship – because that is what you are teaching – that is what people will remember – that is what people will use as the basic understanding of life – that is the language of faith they are learning.”

Naturally, in the days, weeks, months, and years before I was ordained as a pastor I told this story as often as possible to help people understand the importance of music in a community of faith. I was fortunate to work with a number of pastors who completely understood and agreed with the lesson I learned from this event. Following my ordination I still remember that same lesson – there is a great likelihood that people will learn more from the songs we sing in worship than from any sermon that I might ever have the opportunity to deliver.

In the next post I will tell the story of the final portion of this continuing education event and the importance of being very intentional about the way that we assist people in learning the language.

It is time to move from language in general to the specific language of the arts – and – particularly the language of the arts in worship – and more particularly – the language of the art of music in worship.

The next several posts will focus on the following two sections from the “Directory of Worship” –

When these artistic creations awaken us to God’s presence, they are appropriate for worship. When they call attention to themselves, or are present for their beauty as an end in itself, they are idolatrous (W-1.3034(2)).

In worship, music is not to be for entertainment or artistic display. Care should be taken that it not be used as merely as a cover for silence. Music as prayer is to be a worthy offering to God on behalf of the people (W-2.1004).

Who determines what is appropriate and what is not appropriate? Are their standards that can be agreeable to everyone? Is it possible to set standards that exceed the geographic and theological limitations of a single or particular congregation? After all isn’t one person’s art another person’s idolatry?

It seems appropriate to begin with some thoughts by Robert Shaw (what a surprise!):

“Music is great because it carries something so native and true to the human spirit that not even sophisticated intellectuality can deny or destroy its miracle.

It is not primarily a matter of raising the standards of musical taste. It is primarily a matter of providing adequate opportunity for the exercise of inherent taste. One falls in love by being at the right place at the right time for long enough. If there is no place where people can meet Bach or Beethoven, how can the people be expected to love them? If Bach is not sung, he is not met.” (351)

“The Arts exist to convey that which cannot be otherwise conveyed . . . but, to our shame, the Church named after the ‘Good Shepherd’ and ‘Holy Comforter’ has had a history of persecutions, inquisitions and crusades – in just one of which, in the year of our Lord 1212, and in a much smaller world, fifty thousand innocent children were ‘shepherded’ to their deaths by sword, starvation and pestilence, and the few fortunate survivors ‘comforted’ by being sold into slavery.

The arts may indeed be not the luxury of the few but the last best hope of humanity – to inhabit with joy this planet.” (360)

The Robert Shaw Reader. Edited by Robert Blocker. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004.

“The church shall strive in worship to use languae about God wich is intentionally as diverse and varied as the Bible and our theological traditions. The church is committed to using language in such a way that all members of the community of faith may recognize themselves to be included, addressed, and equally cherished before God. Seeking to bear witness to the whole world, the church struggles to use language which is faithful to biblical truth and which neither purposely nor inadvertently excludes people because of gender, color, or other circumstance in life.” Section W-1.2006b – “Directory for Worship” – The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Part II, Book of Order, 2011-2013. Louisville: Office of the General Assembly, 2011. – bold emphasis is mine.

Two sections from the Book of Order have a direct impact on our consideration of the above words.

1. The following is from the introductory section to the Book of Order and offers interpretive instruction concerning the intention of wording throughout the book:

“In this Book of Order

(1) SHALL and IS TO BE/ARE TO BE signify practice that is mandated,
(2) SHOULD signifies practice that is strongly recommended,
(3) IS APPROPRIATE signifies practice that is commended as suitable,
(4) MAY signifies practice that is permissible but not required.
(5) ADVISORY HANDBOOK signifies a handbook produced by agencies of the
General Assembly to guide synods and presbyteries in procedures related to the
oversight of ministry. Such handbooks suggest procedures that are commended,
but not required.”

2. The following section “defines” a congregation – often referred to as a particular church:

G-1.0101 The Mission of the Congregation

The congregation is the church engaged in the mission of God in its particular context.
The triune God gives to the congregation all the gifts of the gospel necessary to being
the Church. The congregation is the basic form of the church, but it is not of itself a
sufficient form of the church. Thus congregations are bound together in communion with
one another, united in relationships of accountability and responsibility, contributing their
strengths to the benefit of the whole, and are called, collectively, the church.

The section of the “Directory for Worship” – W-1.2006b – which provides the focus for our thoughts today invokes the mandated language of shall at the opening of the section.

Also – this section specifies that “The church shall” – not just a particular congregation – be mandated to use language “which is intentionally as diverse and varied as the Bible and our theological traditions“. Each of our particular congregations are mandated to intentionally utilize language that is as diverse and varied as the Bible and our theological traditions – not language that is descriptive of our particular congregation as it is or as we might like for it to be – remembering that most of our individual communities of faith are not diverse and varied – but – we are mandated to use language and take actions that are beyond the boundaries of our geographic and demographic limitations as well as more extensive than our limited understandings and practices.

At a time when many are lamenting the decline of our denomination and other denominations, I believe that we would be well served – and more faithful to our calling to expand beyond our boundaries and comfort levels – moving toward the radical practices that we have been taught by Jesus and our theological traditions – rather than striving to solve our difficulties by finding novel ways to do things the way we have always done them.

Anyone who has known me – or read much of what I have written – is aware of my fondness for the hymn text of Fred Kaan’s Help Us Accept Each Other – particularly in the concluding lines of the second stanza:

Teach us to care for people, for all, not just for some, to love them as we find them, or as they may become. (Copyright © 1975 by Hope Publishing Company)

Section W-1.2006a of the “Directory for Worship” – The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Part II, Book of Order, 2011-2013 states (bold emphasis is mine):

Since the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is a family of peoples united in Jesus Christ appropriate language for its worship should display the rich variety of these peoples. To the extent that forms, actions, languages, or settings of worship exclude the expression of diverse cultures represented in the church or deny emerging needs and identities of believers, that worship is not faithful to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

A number of years ago I attended a seminar on inclusive language in Nashville, Tennessee that was presented by Brian Wren (see below). When Dr. Wren was introduced to those of us who were attending the seminar it was hard to miss that he was wearing a t-shirt that carried the message, “God is not a boy’s name.” Almost immediately, however, Brian Wren made it very clear that this seminar was going to be about much much more that just the gender of pronouns in the language of hymns and worship. He taught us that inclusive includes many different things – not the least of which was verbal communication – but also hospitality to people with a handicapping condition – something that has become part of my life during the last couple of years. I can assure you that just meeting the minimum standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act is not the same as inclusive hospitality. For instance, I am now aware that automatic doors which are set to remain open for just a few seconds often do not meet the needs of a person in a power wheel chair – especially on rainy days. And – when those accessible doors are not located anywhere near to the “blue tag” handicapped parking – even if the vehicle is parked by someone travelling with the person in the power wheel chair – words about hospitality quickly turn to the realization that genuine hospitality is not primary in the considerations of reality for some. And it is not just for people with a handicapping condition. I will never forget the sign on a restroom in a church building that read “Women and other handicapped” – and – I will also never forget how quickly that sign was changed to read “Handicapped and other women” once the mistaken verbage was pointed out to those who had ordered the sign.

Changing the focus – I was born in a parsonage next door to a small white frame church where my grandparents served as Methodist missionaries to the Cherokee peoples in northeastern Oklahoma. This has always been a part of my heritage that gives me great satisfaction and pride. I also will tell anyone who shows any interest at all in listening that my grandmother appears to be the first woman ever licensed to preach by the Oklahoma Conference of the Methodist Church in the early to mid 1950s – truly amazing!! So, naturally, I was thrilled to connect with Dr. George E. “Tink” Tinker, Professor of American Indian Cultures and Religious Traditions at Iliff School of Theology in Denver, and an enrolled member of the Osage Nation, just a few years ago. His book Spirit and Resistance: Political Theology and American Indian Liberation should be required reading for anyone who genuinely cares about matters of inclusivity. I conclude today’s post with his words that open Chapter 3 of this valuable book:

“Turning inside out the insistence of missionaries of a scant generation ago, a radical American Indian activist instructed a young christian Indian on a critical issue of Indian identity and religious affiliation: ‘You have to choose. You are either Indian or christian. You can’t be both!” (37) What a sad commentary on inclusive welcome and hospitality.

Of course the above offers only a couple of examples of how many communities of faith do not respond to the divine initiative of continuing creation by using language and taking actions that do not display the rich variety of all peoples. How are we able to say that all are welcome when, clearly, that is not true!! It is time for all Christians to offer the radical hospitality taught by Jesus!!

BRIAN WREN (b. 1936) is an internationally published hymn-poet whose work appears in hymnals from all denominations and traditions. Ordained in Britain’s United Reformed Church, he lives in Decatur, Georgia, where he serves as the first holder of the John and Miriam Conant Professorship in Worship at Columbia Theological Seminary. A Fellow of the Hymn Society in the U.S. and Canada, Brian holds B.A. and D.Phil (= Ph.D.) degrees from Oxford University and an Honorary Doctorate in Humane Letters from Christian Theological Seminary, Indianapolis. He is the author of PRAYING TWICE, the music and words of congregational song (Westminster John Knox Press, 2000), WHAT LANGUAGE SHALL I BORROW? (Crossroad, 1989 – now out of print), PIECE TOGETHER PRAISE: A THEOLOGICAL JOURNEY (1996), an anthology of his hymn poems (Code No. 1884), and six words-and-music hymn collections, of which the most recent are VISIONS AND REVISIONS (1998) (CODE No. 1590) and CHRIST OUR HOPE (2004) [Book Code No. 8222; CD Code No. 8222C]. Brian lives with his partner in marriage and ministry, Rev. Susan Heafield (“Hayfield”), a United Methodist Pastor and composer. Together they have published two worship song collections, WE CAN BE MESSENGERS [Book Code No. 8149, CD Code No. 8150] and TELL THE GOOD NEWS (Book Code No. 8171, CD Code No. 8172) distributed in the USA by Hope Publishing Company. Brian Wren’s hymn collections are published by Hope Publishing Company, which represents all his hymns in the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Twenty five Brian Wren hymns appear in Hope’s new hymnal WORSHIP & REJOICE (2001).
(http://www.hopepublishing.com/html/main.isx?sub=307&search=107)

Tinker, George E. Spirit and Resistance: Political Theology and American Indian Liberation. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004.

With this post I begin a series that considers a number of statements from the blog that was posted on April 26, 2013.

In this post we give further consideration to these words: God brings all things into being by the Word . . . people respond to that divine initiative through the language of worship.

I admit that I have very much enjoyed my study of the writings of Karl Barth (1886-1968 – see information below). As complicated complex as Barth’s writing may be, I know that this is partly true due to the close relationship that Barth had with the music of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (more about that in a later post) – and – partly as a result that one of my primary mentors was a student of Barth in Basel, Switzerland – (somehow, I guess, it sort of made me feel like a grand-student). Barth did not believe that it was proper for people to say, “I wonder what questions I should ask God” – stating that this expression of the relationship between God and the human creature moved in the wrong direction. Barth insisted that everything begins with God – and – until God reveals some of Godself the human creature does not possess enough information to even pose a question. Barth believed that the order is as follows – God reveals and THEN and only THEN the information that God reveals provokes the human questions. Barth would say, “It all begins with God!”

In my opinion Robert Shaw said it as well as anyone (surely that is not a surprise to anyone who reads this blog) when he observed that we say we believe in an omnipotent, omniscient Creator but have not allowed God to do anything since day six!

There are many things that I am uncertain about but one of the is not this – I believe with all that I am that God offers infinite love, grace, and mercy – and – continuing creation!!

As a result – our language about God – including the language of worship – is a language of response. Further, our language of response is not appropriate when it seems to place limits on or around God – that is why the language of worship must display the rich variety of all peoples. That will be the focus of the our next post – please join in our community conversation and make others aware of http://www.humanbeingsanon.com so they may join the conversation as well.

Grace and peace

Karl Barth, (born May 10, 1886, Basel, Switzerland—died December 9/10, 1968, Basel), Swiss Protestant theologian, probably the most influential of the 20th century. Closely supported by his lifelong friend and colleague, the theologian Eduard Thurneysen, he initiated a radical change in Protestant thought, stressing the “wholly otherness of God” over the anthropocentrism of 19th-century liberal theology. Barth recovered the centrality of the doctrine of the Trinity within the dynamic and rational structure of Christian dogmatics; of particular importance was his reappropriation of the Christology of the ancient church. His vigorous opposition to German National Socialism led to his suspension as professor of theology at the University of Bonn. Subsequently, at Basel, he continued work on his monumental Church Dogmatics (completing four volumes) and delivered more than 500 sermons. (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/54293/Karl-Barth)

One subject that seems to always be part of discussion in a congregation is language. What sort of language is appropriate, what are the boundaries of language, is it appropriate to use language that is not inclusive , is music an appropriate language for worship – what about instrumental music/music without words, and are the arts offered in worship performance or prayer?

The following selections are from the “Directory for Worship” – The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Part II, Book of Order, 2011-2013. Louisville: The Office of the General Assembly, 2011. Section designations follow each reference. I use the Presbyterian “directory” in this discussion since I serve in a Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) community of faith – however, many of these items are common to multiple faith traditions.

I have taken the liberty to highlight some sections in bold – these are sections that speak in a special way to me and will be the focus of several coming posts on this blog.

God brings all things into being by the Word. God offers the Word of grace, and people respond to that divine initiative through the language of worship. They call God by name, invoke God’s presence, beseech God in prayer, and stand before God in silence and contemplation. They bow before God, lift hands and voices in praise, sing, make music, and dance. Heart, soul, strength, and mind, with one accord, they join in the language, drama, and pageantry of worship. (W-1.2001)

Since the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is a family of peoples united in Jesus Christ, appropriate language for its worship should display the rich variety of these peoples. To the extent that forms, actions, languages, or settings of worship exclude the expression of diverse cultures represented in the church or deny emerging needs and identities of believers, that worship is not faithful to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. (W-1.2006a)

The church shall (NOTE: When the word “shall,” or “is to be” is used in this document it points to an action that is mandatory – other words “may,” “is appropriate,” and others describe practices that are appropriate but not mandatory) strive in its worship to use language about God which is intentionally as diverse and varied as the Bible and our theological traditions. The church is committed to using language in such a way that all members of the community of faith may recognize themselves to be included, addressed, and equally cherished before God. Seeking to bear witness to the whole world, the church struggles to use language which is faithful to biblical truth and which neither purposely nor inadvertently excludes people because of gender, color, or other circumstance in life. (W-1.2006b)

The Reformed heritage has called upon people to bring to worship material offerings which in their simplicity of form and function direct attention to what God has done and to the claim that God makes upon human life. The people of God have responded through creative expressions in architecture, furnishings, appointments, vestments, music, drama, language, and movement. When these artistic creations awaken us to God’s presence, they are appropriate for worship. When they call attention to themselves, or are present for their beauty as an end in itself, they are idolatrous. Artistic expressions should evoke, edify, enhance, and expand worshipers’ consciousness of the reality and grace of God. (W-1.3034(2))

To lead the congregation in the singing of prayer is a primary role of the choir and the other musicians. They also may pray on behalf of the congregation . . . Instrumental music may be a form of prayer since words are not essential to prayer. In worship, music is not to be for entertainment or artistic display. Care should be taken that it not be used merely as a cover for silence. Music as prayer is to be a worthy offering to God on behalf of the people. (W-2.1004)

In the Old and New Testaments and through the ages, the people of God expressed prayer through actions as well as speech and song. So in worship today it is appropriate a.) to kneel, to bow, to stand, to lift hands in prayer, b.) to dance, to clap, to embrace in joy and praise, c.) to anoint and to lay hands in intercession and supplication, commissioning and ordination. (W-2.1005)

The next post will focus on “God brings all things into being by the Word – people respond to that divine initiative through the language of worship” I welcome and invite your thoughts on these words – please join in our community discussion as we continue our journey.