|
Southwest
Minnesota |
I C M |
||
     |
|||
|
Newsletter |
|||
|
Confessional Confusion in Worship
The current confessional confusion that characterizing the ELCA started when so many people in our predecessor bodies adopted so enthusiastically the “Four Action Shape” (an explanation of which can be found in Torgersen’s article in the Winter 2004 issue of I.C.M.) of the Liturgy and the idea of the Lord’s Supper as Eucharist rather than Holy Communion. Both of these are confessionally faulty. This is the judgment of Oliver Olson based on a comment he cites from Theodore Tappert:
“For him (Luther) worship was not action of the congregation, but was based on God’s initiative… the proposed liturgy built around the Four-Action Shape, which undoes Luther’s liturgical reforms. Dr. Theodore Tappert observed shortly before his death that were it to be adopted, one would have to fight the Reformation all over again,” (see Endnote #1).
This problem extends to all areas of worship. It marks what Dr. Steven Paulson, refers to as “The Great Sacramental Reversal.” Paulson reminds us of how Luther defined Evangelical worship:
“Christian worship that is evangelical is nothing but ‘that our dear lord speaks to us through his Holy Word and we respond to him through prayer and praise… Nothing else should ever transpire there,’” (see Endnote #2).
Direction is a central issue in worship. For example:
“God’s own direction for worship follows the line of the incarnation – from heaven down to you while you are yet sinners. Lutherans are meant to help the whole world (ecumene) get the worship direction right by hanging tightly to God’s preached words: God comes down to us in his Son, then by sending his preacher – we don’t go up to him. So we are to distinguish what religions constantly confused: Proclamation is not prayer; faith is not love, gospel is not law, a gift cannot be both given and received at the same time – yet the churches and the world are all tangled up in confusion over these by pursuing their own words in worship,” (see Endnote #3).
When worship confusion occurs, we end up blessing everything in sight, including some things that ought not to be blessed. A good example is the article that appeared in January 2004 edition of “The Lutheran” entitled “Every Day Blessings,” (pages 15-17). The author writes about a “croning” ritual to mark her entry into the menopausal stage of life. The issue raises serious concerns because “crone” and “croning” comes directly out of the “Wiccan” or modern witchcraft tradition.”
“Crone is a term used to describe an ancient archetype, an aspect of the triple goddess (maiden, mother, crone), and the third phrase of a woman’s life. When a woman is near, in, or past menopause, she is potentially a crone. The designation refers to a perspective or point of view rather than age or biological change…” (see Endnote #4).
This is an implied violation of the second commandment, as it is understood in Luther’s Small Catechism. It results in “using God’s name to practice magic.”
I wrote to The Lutheran magazine with my concern and the author of the article, Sonia C. Solomonson (managing editor for The Lutheran), responded. She claims that she is utilizing the term, “crone,” in an original sense that is not linked to witchcraft. In spite of her denial, the most common understanding of this term is inseparably connected to the witchcraft movement, old & new.
A new hymnal is going to be published. A number of theologians are warning us that many of the presuppositions to that hymnal contradict important confessional understandings. I recommend that people read Dr. Olson’s address “What Word Alone Must Do to Preserve Lutheran Worship,” (see Endnote #5). In that address he makes the following sensible recommendation:
“If All Else Fails, Boycott!
Boycott! If admonitions are ignored, we are still free to buy what we want. Word Alone should in that case officially adopt a Lutheran hymnal!
Having examined most of them, I recommend the Lutheran Hymnary, an updating of the Lutheran hymnary beloved in the old ELC. In the venerable tradition of the old Lutheran hymnary, and because it was mandated to conform to the A.D. 1640 order of the Church of Denmark, it retains the Communion Admonition [p. 31], the Catechism and the Augsburg Confession – abolished by the committee for the red book… And it faithfully supplies the order for communion from Luther’s reform of the mass,” (see Endnote #6).
This new hymnal will do much more to shape the theology of the next two generations of Lutheran laity than reams of theological statements, no matter how correct those statements may be.
ENDNOTES:
1. Olson, Oliver K. “Liturgy as Action,” Dialog, Volume 14, Spring of 1975, p. 113
2. Luther, Martin, “Sermon on the Dedication of the Castle Church at Torgau, Oct. 5. 1544, The American Edition of Luther’s Works, vol. 51, p. 333
3. Paulson, Steven D., “Christian Evangelical Worship: The Great Sacramental Reversal,” Address given at The Reclaiming Evangelical Worship Conference, Nov. 16-18, 2003 in Anoka MN, p. 2; at http://www.wordalone.org/conferences/theo2003/Paulson_keynote.htm
4. http://www.croning.org/pages/534083/index.htm
5. Olson, Oliver K., “What Word Alone Must Do to Preserve Lutheran Worship,” Address given at The Reclaiming Evangelical Worship Conference, Nov. 16-18, 2003 in Anoka MN, at http://www.wordalone.org/conferences/theo2003/Olson_transcript.htm
6. Ibid.
