About
Search
Subscribe (RSS)
Subscribe to Church Planting Updates

Subscribe to Blog by Email

Enter your email address:

Recent Comments
Twitter
Reading
  • The Power of Uniqueness: Why You Can't Be Anything You Want To Be
    The Power of Uniqueness: Why You Can't Be Anything You Want To Be
    by Arthur F Miller, William D Hendricks
« The Work of the People | Main | Spurgeon on Liturgy »
Wednesday
Oct072009

Evaluating Spurgeon's Criticisms of Liturgy

When I'm in Toronto and not at Richview on a Sunday, I often find myself attending an evangelical Anglican church. It's not high church, but there is some liturgy in the service. I love the flow of the liturgy. The written prayers and confessions fill a hunger in my soul. Every time I walk away feeling grateful for the type of corporate worship I just experienced.

I am a closet liturgist.

That's why I struggle a little with Spurgeon's dismissal of liturgy. Here's where I think he's right, and here's where I think he's wrong.

He's right: Liturgy can be a poor substitute for Spirit-empowered worship. I attended a liturgical service once with a friend. Afterwards I discovered that the service brought back memories of his childhood, in which he attended a church in which, at least for him, the liturgy was dead. Just words. Spurgeon is right to warn us that the liturgy can substitute for the real thing. Fair point.

But Spurgeon is wrong on a number of counts.

  • "Where in the writings of the apostles meet we with the bare idea of a liturgy?" he asks. Well, they prayed at certain hours. They celebrated the Jewish feasts. And the New Testament contains what may be hymn fragments or even confessions used by the early church, and they also used the psalms. These certainly hint at what some may call liturgy.
  • "Rather than be dependent upon the Spirit of God, they will pray by a book!" I think Spurgeon is guilty of creating a false dichotomy here. He seems to equate extemporaneous with Spirit-filled. I value the extemporaneous, but I don't see why I can't read a prayer that's been saturated in Scripture and shaped through the ages. Why should a written confession be any different than, say, a written hymn? They can be used mindlessly or they can engage and shape the soul and lead us into worship.
  • "If I cannot pray, I would rather know it, and groan over my soul’s barrenness till the Lord shall again visit me with fruit-fulness of devotion." Barrenness is not the only problem. Skill is also needed, and not everyone has it. Some need to prepare and labor over words even though their hearts are full of devotion. The written prayers of others may express their heart better than their own words. Anyone who's listened to homemade wedding vows can tell you: there's value in meaningfully reading words that are beyond our skill to write. I've never listened to traditional vows and thought that the groom must not love the bride. I have thought that the groom is probably incapable of improving on the traditional vows. The same can apply with liturgy.

So Spurgeon may have gone a bit too far in his criticisms. Litrugy can slip into empty formality, but there's no reason it has to.

One more thing: the liturgy recites the gospel for us in a way that other services don't. Bryan Chapell writes about this in Christ-Centered Worship, which I have on my desk. More on that later.

I'm interested in your thoughts. What do you think?

Reader Comments (5)

I agree with you Darryl. I can understand Spurgeon's concerns but I believe with what you cited he threw the baby out with the bath water. I am a closet liturgist too and really appreciate what you have written here. It can have a tendency toward formalism but non-liturgical worship can have a tendency toward disorganization and have people in a million different directions. The liturgy can help to focus our minds and hearts and prepare us for the hearing of God's Word.I mentioned in my new church I am a little liturgical and mentioned I would love to sing the doxology. I didn't get too terribly a positive response. :)

October 7, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterAllen Mickle

I'm at a nine year old church plant steeped in the very non-liturgical, pseudo contemporary, informal tradition of the 80s and 90s. I've faced some theological tension between those rooted in "B"aptist tradition at our church because my theology (while consistent with the FEBCC statement of faith) isn't really in line with many of the unwritten mores that have been a part of the Fellowship's past.On Sunday morning I was preaching on worship and I said that we can learn from our liturgical brethren (I mentioned Catholics, Anglicans, Lutheran, Methodist) with their emphasis on the centrality of scripture in the worship gatherings through the public reading of the word. I further mentioned that we could learn from both them and the brethren movement and the emphasis on being God/Christ centred in their worship as evidenced by their participation in communion every week. (I did note that the centrality of scripture and Christ centredness can be lost despite the practice, but that doesn't condemn the practice.)I haven't been fired yet! I was surprised at how many people in the church really resonated with what I was saying--older people who miss the sense of transcendent in the worship (some of whom come from liturgical backgrounds, but didn't appreciate the power of the liturgy until they weren't experiencing on a regular basis) and younger people who have this stirring in them that our worship gathering should be more than in is, but have never tasted anything else.

October 7, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterJon

D3 ... it was the summer between years 2-3 at seminary when i first heard the Apostle's Creed recited, while interning in an evangelical Presbyterian church plant ( and if she had known about me serving in a PCCanada, my wonderful godly grandmother might have rolled over in her you know what ). i must admit i was frustrated to find that at 24! my lo-church tradition hadn't prepared me at all in this regard ... and neither did the churches/traditions i served over the next 10-15 years.it wasn't until arriving on the west coast in '99 and hanging with some, uh, emerging type leaders ( nothing particular about west coast or the leaders ) who were open to exploring past practices with an open mind that i began to experience the value, and think about it productively. for years i'd thought Dr. Robert Webber was off on a tangential rabbit trail with his ancient-future worship writings ... i think i was v. wrong.not sure about Spurgeon, but i wonder sometimes if North Americans' fascination with the 'new' precludes us from valuing the old? or at least from evaluating the 'old' and sifting through to find the best of that?our church's journey has been slow, and cautious, with regard to the liturgical components, but over the past 3-4 years many introductions have become esp. meaningful around there ... Psalms of the Day, real intention around Lent, better thinking/planning for Advent, etc. my sense is that if those things were to disappear now? there'd be a hole, and people who 5-10 years ago would have fought some of it would be missing some of it. Edna Grenz @ First Baptist Vancouver was at one point a few years ago working on a thesis around introducing liturgy to the free or low(er) church traditions. maybe we should check up on her, eh?dlc

October 7, 2009 | Unregistered Commenterdon

I grew up attending Anglican services as a kid on Air Force bases in Canada and Europe. The creeds, the prayers, the Scripture readings, the hymns all played a role in my spiritual formation - well before I came to faith. My then girl friend was shocked at how much I understood of my faith when I became a believer 25 days before my 27th birthday. (Good Baptist girl that she was, she only became my GF after I professed my faith.)We spent years as a family in Bapticostal evangelicalism where the poor liturgy was three "contemporary" songs, perhaps a scripture reading (before or after the announcements), the offering, the sermon - a closing tune and then some bad coffee.Now in our 50's (though Imbi has just crossed that line and doesn't want to talk about it), we find ourselves back in the liturgical world of the Anglican church - and love it.And I'm now using words and phrases like catechism and spiritual formation - that have not been a part of my evangelical experience to its detriment.Gr8 post Triple D.

October 7, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterBill Kinnon

I've found people can lose sight of God in all sorts of churches. And they can find him and be found by him in all sorts of churches. I have deep appreciation for traditional liturgy. But I also like to rock out.

October 8, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterCaedmon

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>