NB*** - Look further down for photos. Because I post in chronological order, the posts are displayed in reverse order. Ish. This is a reflective "what's on John's mind these days" piece. Read on if that sounds like fun to you. I make no apologies for my long-windedness. Part of the appeal of blogging is the creeping sense that no one really reads what you write anyway.
A while back, at an NCCF winter retreat, a speaker (and I'm ashamed I don't remember which one or which year. My 2nd or 3rd year of Uni, I think. Maybe the one who brought the cup of drink downstairs and broke the rules) had us look through a survey or something, but with the goal of talking about our preferred worship and discipleship styles. I came out strongly "traditionalist". I wasn't sure exactly what this meant but the only other person in my group was Evan and so we chatted about our roots; mine Anglican and his Presbyterian. Supposedly we found meaning in being connected to other believers around the world and in time by tradition, and that the structure and ritual of liturgy was a useful way for us to experience God. At the time it settled on me a little uncomfortably, but the more time I put between then and now the more I think I understand.
Being in London, attending a COE (albeit a mite unconventional) church and seeing some of the oldest places and practices in English Christianity has been exposing me to something I never really got or saw back home: traditionalism. Feeling like you're a part of the body of Christ not just all over the world but in 2000 years of Church history, each era like its own distinct member of the body of Christ as much as the regions of the world in this one moment. I've been reflecting on this a lot, especially this morning (as you can likely tell from the timestamp, I finally got a day off) and I would submit that I am coming to recognize a number of benefits I've been gleaning from this way of relating to God, but also a couple distinct dangers and weaknesses of traditionalism.
Before I really get going, I should clarify. There are a couple things I think of when I refer to traditional Christianity. One is structured liturgy, especially the oft-maligned 'stand-up, sit-down, repeat after me' service structure found often in the Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Presbyterian... the list goes on. Lets just say 'old' denominations. Along with this comes something quite foreign to my evangelical protestant and baptist experiences: written and composed prayers. Recitation of certain prayers, be they the Lord's Prayer, Eucharistic Prayers, The Magnificat and Nunc et Dimitis, Hail Mary, etc. And finally, it's mostly safe to add aesthetics to the list: robes, candles, incense, icons, stained glass, organs, cloisters, flying buttresses and the like.
I think, especially among young evangelicals like the people I went to school and youth group with, the reasons they find it harder to worship in these kinds of traditions are fairly obvious. The rigidity of the liturgy can make it difficult to express your worship more personally. Or maybe it's better to say that the uniformity of the structure makes it difficult to internalize and personalize your worship. Some have gone so far as to tell me that they think it's easier to play church and religion in a more structured denomination than in less-controlled ones. I'm afraid our Catholic brothers and sisters usually end up on the receiving end of these kinds of observations, and that hurts my heart a bit. I understand it, but it hurts.
When I first started steeping myself in this long-dormant side of my worship life (which wasn't as deliberate as you may think, and just sorta happened where God planted us), I felt myself growing more and more disquieted by that kind of thinking I'd heard all too much. I confess I even entertained the very uncharitable thought that this line of thinking was arrogant and sinful. I repent of this thinking now; knowing that it's just as prideful if not more so for me to pass judgement on those who I think are judgemental. I'm growing to believe quite strongly that the road to intellectual and spiritual maturity in this area is about balance and openness; not finding the correct entrenchment so much as realizing the trenches aren't important.
Thus, I've been reaping some really unexpected benefits from throwing myself, albeit cautiously, into more traditional worship forms. I think I've already detailed in a previous post the experience Alyssa and I had going to an choral evensong service at Westminster Abbey. Standing in that place that's housed 1000 years of praise to God, and listening to the beautifully orchestrated voices of the choir rising unamplified into the great stone arching ceiling made me feel a kinship with the medieval peasants and nobles who have stood in the same place, looking up into the same ceiling, trying to look through it to the majesty of God and listening to the same lilting song. It was something else. I had a similar feeling this past trip; we stepped into a small Byzantine Church in the northwest corner of the Agora. For around 700 years that little chapel had been there; the worship space only big enough for a few people at a time to come in, kneel and pray in front of the painted icons and pictures of Christ, using his image and other imagery to help them draw more tangibly into God's presence as they prayed.
I get that not everyone in Westminster has gone there with an open heart to praise God in spirit and truth. I really do. But If I was there to do it, then someone else must have been, and the numbers of people who had been over the building's history begins to stagger the imagination. In a big way, I think common liturgy and ancient practice isn't about clinging to tradition. It's about connecting us in the atemporal body of Christ. Keeping perspective. Today is not more important than yesterday or tomorrow. Sure, it can create a culture less responsive to change and it also makes its fair share of entrenched and stubborn older folks who refuse to let young and zealous Christians change anything. As the old joke goes: "how many Anglicans does it take to change a Lightbulb? Change? Change!? My grandfather installed the lightbulb 63 years ago and I won't let you trod on his legacy by undoing his labours!" But I think this is a side effect of some really useful medicine.
Also, I've been experimenting with ancient prayers and meditative practice. Everyone goes through spells where regular bible reading and prayer is difficult. Sometimes I feel like I go through more spells than non-spells. This is why people pray a rosary. Turns out that someone ran into the same problem 800 years ago. I don't use a rosary, but I've been trying to open my morning prayer time reading through Mary's song of praise: the Magnificat. Like a front door to time with God. It helps bring my sleepy and unwilling mind and heart into a place of focus. It helps. It's a tool. I know it's not magic, and I'd never say someone was less holy for not doing it. That's the overextension of the practice. But it helps. Take a careful look at the words:
My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour,
for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant.
From now on all generations will call me blessed;
for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
And his mercy is for those who fear him
from generation to generation.
he has shown strength with his arm;
he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts;
he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent away empty.
he has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his offspring forever.
Isn't it something else? It gets me in a different way each time I read it. It's honest and it's praise. It gives all the glory to God but it includes us in the action. That was the bit that got me the first time. "my soul", "my spirit", "call me blessed", and "great things for me,". I need this in the mornings. I need to know that not only is God great and the God with a plan much bigger than me, but that He in His inscrutable benevolence and care chooses to include me in His plan. He is faithful in the big and the small. And He is just as well as loving.
And then, in mid day when I can or on the train, I try to meditate and read slowly through Zechariah's prophecy right in the same chapter; remembering God's covenant and its fulfillment in Christ. Uniting my prayers and praise with this holy man of God and this holy woman who both loved Him so much. Protestants get a bit down on mary because we think catholics are a little intense about her, but this lady was a big deal. And her song is like a model. Is it the entirety of my worship and prayer and study? No. But it's a front door. It's a tool to bring me into focus and to connect myself to the bigger story.
Now, for every good idea that a man comes up with, and that's what liturgy is, there's a way it can be corrupted and misapplied. Sure. The newsflash, and I think this is especially important for those of us who like to hero-worship the Puritans, is that men cannot create the kingdom of God on Earth. We cannot make a church or a society or a country whose systems are sufficiently well-governed, benevolent, straight-forward, adaptable, or whatever that they cannot and will not be used for spiritual harm. I started my morning watching an old Mark Driscoll sermon from 2009 (I'm really behind on my podcasts) where he stands on the temple steps in Jerusalem and finished with a blow that caught me in the gut. Why did Jesus prophecy and then allow/effect the destruction of the temple? Why? It was an idol. It was the biggest idol of them all. And when we look at the Dome of the Roc or the Jews at the wailing wall, we see it, don't we? The temple of God is now in the people of God. Our great high priest is Jesus, and he fulfills every purpose that the temple once did. The space isn't magical. The space helps, but a prayer from my little flat carries the same power and promise as one uttered on the mount of Olives. And the moment that we allow the structure and place and ritual and tool - that a caring and God-fearing person once designed to help us into His presence - to become the object and not the tool or our praise, we become idolaters, too. The moment we let a creed or doctrine, which though abstract are still created things, become a block in our praise for God, it is an idol. An old-old podcast from Bruxy Cavey I heard last week said the same thing. It doesn't matter if you are a Calvinist or an Armenian (what he was talking about). It really doesn't. The moment you allow a created thing, even if that created thing is a logically consistent systematic theology, to occupy the space that god is supposed to occupy, you are in error. If we attach what we build to the gospel like it's a package deal, we are idolaters, we are in sin and we need a rebuke.
To make a very long story short:
When we come home I fully expect to return to contemporary worship, evangelical churches and likely a baptist/pentecostal/gospel - ish denomination. I have not been re-converted to Anglicanism. But I will be coming home with some perspective and some new tools to try. And truth be told, if someone had told me those were the kinds of souvenirs I could expect to bring home from my travels, I'd have been very pleasantly surprised. They sure beat the heck out of the fluffy pom-pom slippers I got in Athens.
A while back, at an NCCF winter retreat, a speaker (and I'm ashamed I don't remember which one or which year. My 2nd or 3rd year of Uni, I think. Maybe the one who brought the cup of drink downstairs and broke the rules) had us look through a survey or something, but with the goal of talking about our preferred worship and discipleship styles. I came out strongly "traditionalist". I wasn't sure exactly what this meant but the only other person in my group was Evan and so we chatted about our roots; mine Anglican and his Presbyterian. Supposedly we found meaning in being connected to other believers around the world and in time by tradition, and that the structure and ritual of liturgy was a useful way for us to experience God. At the time it settled on me a little uncomfortably, but the more time I put between then and now the more I think I understand.
Being in London, attending a COE (albeit a mite unconventional) church and seeing some of the oldest places and practices in English Christianity has been exposing me to something I never really got or saw back home: traditionalism. Feeling like you're a part of the body of Christ not just all over the world but in 2000 years of Church history, each era like its own distinct member of the body of Christ as much as the regions of the world in this one moment. I've been reflecting on this a lot, especially this morning (as you can likely tell from the timestamp, I finally got a day off) and I would submit that I am coming to recognize a number of benefits I've been gleaning from this way of relating to God, but also a couple distinct dangers and weaknesses of traditionalism.
Before I really get going, I should clarify. There are a couple things I think of when I refer to traditional Christianity. One is structured liturgy, especially the oft-maligned 'stand-up, sit-down, repeat after me' service structure found often in the Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Presbyterian... the list goes on. Lets just say 'old' denominations. Along with this comes something quite foreign to my evangelical protestant and baptist experiences: written and composed prayers. Recitation of certain prayers, be they the Lord's Prayer, Eucharistic Prayers, The Magnificat and Nunc et Dimitis, Hail Mary, etc. And finally, it's mostly safe to add aesthetics to the list: robes, candles, incense, icons, stained glass, organs, cloisters, flying buttresses and the like.
I think, especially among young evangelicals like the people I went to school and youth group with, the reasons they find it harder to worship in these kinds of traditions are fairly obvious. The rigidity of the liturgy can make it difficult to express your worship more personally. Or maybe it's better to say that the uniformity of the structure makes it difficult to internalize and personalize your worship. Some have gone so far as to tell me that they think it's easier to play church and religion in a more structured denomination than in less-controlled ones. I'm afraid our Catholic brothers and sisters usually end up on the receiving end of these kinds of observations, and that hurts my heart a bit. I understand it, but it hurts.
When I first started steeping myself in this long-dormant side of my worship life (which wasn't as deliberate as you may think, and just sorta happened where God planted us), I felt myself growing more and more disquieted by that kind of thinking I'd heard all too much. I confess I even entertained the very uncharitable thought that this line of thinking was arrogant and sinful. I repent of this thinking now; knowing that it's just as prideful if not more so for me to pass judgement on those who I think are judgemental. I'm growing to believe quite strongly that the road to intellectual and spiritual maturity in this area is about balance and openness; not finding the correct entrenchment so much as realizing the trenches aren't important.
Thus, I've been reaping some really unexpected benefits from throwing myself, albeit cautiously, into more traditional worship forms. I think I've already detailed in a previous post the experience Alyssa and I had going to an choral evensong service at Westminster Abbey. Standing in that place that's housed 1000 years of praise to God, and listening to the beautifully orchestrated voices of the choir rising unamplified into the great stone arching ceiling made me feel a kinship with the medieval peasants and nobles who have stood in the same place, looking up into the same ceiling, trying to look through it to the majesty of God and listening to the same lilting song. It was something else. I had a similar feeling this past trip; we stepped into a small Byzantine Church in the northwest corner of the Agora. For around 700 years that little chapel had been there; the worship space only big enough for a few people at a time to come in, kneel and pray in front of the painted icons and pictures of Christ, using his image and other imagery to help them draw more tangibly into God's presence as they prayed.
I get that not everyone in Westminster has gone there with an open heart to praise God in spirit and truth. I really do. But If I was there to do it, then someone else must have been, and the numbers of people who had been over the building's history begins to stagger the imagination. In a big way, I think common liturgy and ancient practice isn't about clinging to tradition. It's about connecting us in the atemporal body of Christ. Keeping perspective. Today is not more important than yesterday or tomorrow. Sure, it can create a culture less responsive to change and it also makes its fair share of entrenched and stubborn older folks who refuse to let young and zealous Christians change anything. As the old joke goes: "how many Anglicans does it take to change a Lightbulb? Change? Change!? My grandfather installed the lightbulb 63 years ago and I won't let you trod on his legacy by undoing his labours!" But I think this is a side effect of some really useful medicine.
Also, I've been experimenting with ancient prayers and meditative practice. Everyone goes through spells where regular bible reading and prayer is difficult. Sometimes I feel like I go through more spells than non-spells. This is why people pray a rosary. Turns out that someone ran into the same problem 800 years ago. I don't use a rosary, but I've been trying to open my morning prayer time reading through Mary's song of praise: the Magnificat. Like a front door to time with God. It helps bring my sleepy and unwilling mind and heart into a place of focus. It helps. It's a tool. I know it's not magic, and I'd never say someone was less holy for not doing it. That's the overextension of the practice. But it helps. Take a careful look at the words:
My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour,
for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant.
From now on all generations will call me blessed;
for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
And his mercy is for those who fear him
from generation to generation.
he has shown strength with his arm;
he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts;
he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent away empty.
he has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his offspring forever.
Isn't it something else? It gets me in a different way each time I read it. It's honest and it's praise. It gives all the glory to God but it includes us in the action. That was the bit that got me the first time. "my soul", "my spirit", "call me blessed", and "great things for me,". I need this in the mornings. I need to know that not only is God great and the God with a plan much bigger than me, but that He in His inscrutable benevolence and care chooses to include me in His plan. He is faithful in the big and the small. And He is just as well as loving.
And then, in mid day when I can or on the train, I try to meditate and read slowly through Zechariah's prophecy right in the same chapter; remembering God's covenant and its fulfillment in Christ. Uniting my prayers and praise with this holy man of God and this holy woman who both loved Him so much. Protestants get a bit down on mary because we think catholics are a little intense about her, but this lady was a big deal. And her song is like a model. Is it the entirety of my worship and prayer and study? No. But it's a front door. It's a tool to bring me into focus and to connect myself to the bigger story.
Now, for every good idea that a man comes up with, and that's what liturgy is, there's a way it can be corrupted and misapplied. Sure. The newsflash, and I think this is especially important for those of us who like to hero-worship the Puritans, is that men cannot create the kingdom of God on Earth. We cannot make a church or a society or a country whose systems are sufficiently well-governed, benevolent, straight-forward, adaptable, or whatever that they cannot and will not be used for spiritual harm. I started my morning watching an old Mark Driscoll sermon from 2009 (I'm really behind on my podcasts) where he stands on the temple steps in Jerusalem and finished with a blow that caught me in the gut. Why did Jesus prophecy and then allow/effect the destruction of the temple? Why? It was an idol. It was the biggest idol of them all. And when we look at the Dome of the Roc or the Jews at the wailing wall, we see it, don't we? The temple of God is now in the people of God. Our great high priest is Jesus, and he fulfills every purpose that the temple once did. The space isn't magical. The space helps, but a prayer from my little flat carries the same power and promise as one uttered on the mount of Olives. And the moment that we allow the structure and place and ritual and tool - that a caring and God-fearing person once designed to help us into His presence - to become the object and not the tool or our praise, we become idolaters, too. The moment we let a creed or doctrine, which though abstract are still created things, become a block in our praise for God, it is an idol. An old-old podcast from Bruxy Cavey I heard last week said the same thing. It doesn't matter if you are a Calvinist or an Armenian (what he was talking about). It really doesn't. The moment you allow a created thing, even if that created thing is a logically consistent systematic theology, to occupy the space that god is supposed to occupy, you are in error. If we attach what we build to the gospel like it's a package deal, we are idolaters, we are in sin and we need a rebuke.
To make a very long story short:
When we come home I fully expect to return to contemporary worship, evangelical churches and likely a baptist/pentecostal/gospel - ish denomination. I have not been re-converted to Anglicanism. But I will be coming home with some perspective and some new tools to try. And truth be told, if someone had told me those were the kinds of souvenirs I could expect to bring home from my travels, I'd have been very pleasantly surprised. They sure beat the heck out of the fluffy pom-pom slippers I got in Athens.

































