This post may contain affiliate links. Please read our Disclosure Policy for more information.
(This post was written prior to 2016, in a blog entitled “Jubal’s Jottings.”)
I go back and forth…there is the proven strength of liturgical forms – of various kinds, and there are the free forms that offer flexible worship expressions. On one hand, the formal liturgy provides a type of glue that ensures the message of God and His work among creation will be heard…that story needs to be told over and over. Then again, the freedom of the non-liturgical format gives great latitude for whatever story a church desires to tell at any time.
What I really think is that both are good and elements of each end of the spectrum would be well-used…one with the other. Why is it that they have become so mutually exclusive? The “freedom people” never seem to use creeds and other historical resources, while the liturgical side stays away from any creative expression not prescribed by liturgical patterns. Both sides tend to end up being rather bland and predictable inside their own comfortable shells.
You know the seven last words of the church, right? “We’ve never done it that way before!” I say to both sides of the spectrum, “Come on, try a new expression of your faith!” The church could use just a little meaningful creativity!
Jubal, could you whip up another instrument of some kind so we could use it in church next week? Thanks a lot!