Online Articles
Three Songs and a Prayer
Three Songs and a Prayer
Today’s popular rebellion against “the establishment” has spawned both
good and bad elements. As might be expected, there are some who are
genuinely concerned that cold formalism and traditional bindings give way
to sincere, spontaneous worship of the true God. And there are those who
use current discussions to promote childish emotions and clap-trap
schemes to “improve the worship” – schemes as much or more mechanical
than those they seek to replace. (Stand in a circle, hold hands with your
neighbors, close your eyes, turn your faces to God, if you know the
direction, and sway gently as you pray. If that does not produce the “Spirit”
let me know, and I will change the recipe.)
There are many who accept the word of God as the means of determining
the proper concept of the church, its worship and work but recognize that
many details are left to judgment and expediency. They are re-examining
such practices to see if “better ways” can be found. We should never allow
“the way we have done it” to be accorded the status of divine law. And if
someone can find a better arrangement than three songs and a prayer, then
let us consider it. But don’t think a change is better, just because it is a
change, and if some are “tradition bound” surely the more mature,
“spiritually minded” will exercise great patience toward all.
Sometimes the changers are neophytes having zeal without knowledge or
experience, who cripple their own plans and the good they could do, by
their childishness. I heard of one fellow, who thought the contribution
should be more distinctly separated from the Lord’s Supper. This is good
thinking and is implemented in some churches by careful announcement,
or different time and ushers. But I was told that this fellow refused to give
unless they accepted his “reform.” In another place discussion of the
traditional nature of the “invitation song” led some to say that a service was
not “scriptural” unless it contained an “invitation song,” and others said
there was no authority for singing to sinners at any time.
The “traditional” expediency is often the fruit of years of testing by trial and
error and has endured, because it has proven to be workable and good.
Change, especially radical and abrupt change, may be distracting and
produce an effect the very opposite of that desired. It may open the way for
problems the “traditional” method was developed to solve, but of which
this generation knows nothing. There is no place in Christianity for
anarchic revolution.
And as regards “spontaneous” worship (“everyone hath a psalm, hath a
doctrine, hath a tongue” - 1Cor. 14) even when such signs were a part of
delivery and confirmation of the word of God, Paul called for order (v.40)
“let all things be done unto edifying” (v. 26), and said “the spirit of the
prophets are subject to the prophets,” (v. 32). Team effort (collective
action) is “opposed” to independent action (see dictionary), which means
that when the church worships together, there must be some regulation.
This will not restrict sincerity for those who are truly spiritual.
- Robert Turner
