Liturgy is a word used in more formally ritualistic churches and in academic circles to describe what actually takes place in worship, particularly the words spoken, actions taken, songs sung, etc. It is really all-inclusive of what happens in worship, however, the word carries with it a "higher" church meaning. I put "higher" in quotations because very few people who use the term "High Church" use it properly.
"Higher" church simply means churches that advocate and implement a more formal ritual versus informal ritual. For example, the typical Roman Catholic Church uses a more formal, deliberate order of worship; and the typical Baptist Church uses a more informal order of worship, though BOTH use an order of worship, whether it is written or not. EVERY church uses some form, whether they call it liturgy or not.
For example, at Whites Chapel United Methodist Church, in rural Warren County, Kentucky, I used to show up at about 9:00 a.m. to make sure the heat was on and turn on the lights, then at around 9:15 a.m. Evelyn White, the song leader, would show up and say, "Whatcha preachin' on today?" I would tell her the text and theme for the sermon and she would commence to picking out hymns. Every week, at 9:30 a.m. we sang some hymns, took up an offering, I would lead a prayer, the "choir" would sing a special, and I would preach, then we'd sing a hymn and I would leave to go to the other church on the charge. We only had a written order of worship one time, on Christmas one year. Otherwise, this was our order of worship every Sunday. Whites Chapel would consider themselves a "Low" Church, but they still had a liturgy, an order.
Now, about this word, "liturgy." Liturgical types, meaning folks who are part of lower church traditions who are advocating for higher church practices, almost always out of a sense of impoverishment in their own tradition, say that the word liturgy means "work of the people," meaning, the actions of the whole people in worship. These actions, according to higher church advocates, ought to be more in line with traditional Western (i.e. Roman Catholic) forms of worship, more formal, more uniform. Whether or not one agrees with the assessment, in my research, liturgy does not mean "work of the people." It actually means "work on behalf of the people."
Originally, liturgy comes from secular usage, when a benefactor would sponsor some public work on behalf of his or her community, like the building of an aqueduct. It became associated with the priestly function in worship, later, meaning the work of the priest on behalf of the people. It is used in Luke 1:23 when speaking of the "service" that Zecheriah, John the Baptizer's father, completed at the Temple (he was a priest). So, etymologically, at least, liturgy has to do with the activity of the priest, not the people. The people were primarily bystanders watching the priest do the work, participating on a limited basis.
Now, liturgy, in modern times, has come to be associated with the broader acts of worship of not only the priest, but all the people, and that is fine. However, I do not think it is appropriate to translate the Greek original, leitorgia, as "the work of the people," when in fact it is the "work on behalf of the people."
To me, it is much more helpful, to simply talk about worship. Worship is what we do, primarily as a gathered community, to glorify God. There is a great diversity in Christian worship, from the three hour long "Divine Liturgy" of the Eastern Orthodox tradition, to the three hour long Pentecostal throw down of inner city African-American experience. I simply do not see a reason for the attempt to homogenize worship. Instead, all Chist-followers everywhere ought to examine their own worship customs and think about breathing new life into them that is appropriate to their particular context. The Bible says that on the Last Day, every tribe, every tongue, and every nation (people group), will praise God. I believe that prophecy is pointing to diversity, not uniformity.
Comments