The controversial Oscar-nominated docu-drama “No End in Sight” by film director Charles Ferguson on the Iraq War will be posted in its entirety on YouTube starting Monday and running through Nov 5. You can view it for free. The film is a sharp critique of the war and the Bush handling of the war. Ferguson is upset that the Iraq War has faded as an issue in the current election campaigns. He had to adjust his contract with the movie’s original distributors costing him some decent money. If you haven’t seen it, take a look for it tomorrow. The trailer can be found here. If anyone has seen it, and has opinions on this film, let me know (via the comments here).

Also, I hope to respond in a couple of days, to the posts by Anthony Smith on Emergent Village’s Blog and Brian McLaren on Sojourners’ blog concerning “Not-Voting” and the questions they raise regarding my post on “Not Voting” from earlier this summer.

Let’s pray for the good people of New Orleans and their struggles to survive the storms that potentially lie ahead.

I am a strong advocate of liturgical worship as the centerpiece for spiritual formation for missional communities. (As I wrote in the Great Giveaway) Over against the lecture hall or the feel-good pep-rally worship that has driven so much of Christendom evangelicalism, we gather to worship God as a holy transformative immersive engagement with God that shapes us for life with God and Mission.

Sometimes however, there is a danger in liturgy that must be discerned. We realize the inadequacies of modern evangelical worship practices for our day, and then we go immediately to high church practices (Anglican/Roman Catholic) and adopt high church liturgy as it is and impose it on a bunch of people who have no idea what we’re doing. In the process, our liturgy becomes inaccessible, foreign and imposed (in a Constantianian way which I will explain in a minute). And this is where I think most people get turned off to liturgy. This is why liturgy is incomprehensible to so many emerging types and they just reject it. Or, even worse, in a reaction to its imposed and inaccessible forms as found for instance sometimes in Roman Catholicism, emerging folk turn liturgy into trite new age experiential exercises. This is a problem for those of us who desire to go beyond lecture hall-ism and feel-good pep-rally-ism and proceed into the depths of encounter made possible via liturgical formation.

This problem of imposed liturgy has become more and more apparent to me when I see younger educated-type leaders in low church traditions don the robes and impose “all in one day” a liturgical tradition upon their low church folk (I had a friend say this to me about a group within the Church of the Nazarenes just recently). They too quickly claim ressourcement, discounting the insights from their own free church history: doing in essence to their own free church history what they have accused their free church of doing to the prior high church traditions that preceded them. A new liturgical fundamentalism has replaced a Biblicist fundamentalism, neither of which I am happy about.

All of this is to put forth my thesis: We should avoid Constantinian liturgy in a post-Constantian world. Let me try to unpack this statement in a blog-like fashion.

“Constantinian” refers generally to the conditions of Christendom beginning in the 4th century where through the edicts of the emperor Constantine the church joined hands with the worldly powers to become ensconced into a position of power and influence in Roman society. The church became the official religion and (eventually) the sanctioned culture of society. Yoderians (appreciators of John Howard Yoder like myself) see this as a mistake. Yet beyond Yoder, practically speaking, many of us see the days of Christendom here in the 21st century as long gone (and we say “good riddens”). It therefore makes no sense to carry out systems of liturgy which depend upon Christendom in a post-Christendom context.

Therefore I urge us involved in liturgical renewal to be aware of some Roman assumptions concerning liturgy which we simply cannot depend upon in today’s post Constantinian age:

1.) Everyone is catechesized. Constantinian liturgy assumes that everyone is catechesized: baptized as an infant, and basically enforced into a system of catechesis and confirmation. These people therefore have intensive training for what’s going on in this liturgy on Sunday morning. Today, we cannot assume anything of the sort. Indeed, it will take great effort to get anyone to come out to even a few sessions that teach on what we are doing at our worship gathering.
2.) Everyone is shaped elsewhere towards this end. Constantinian liturgy can assume that society as a whole is ordered towards Christian purposes. At the very least it is not hostile. The streets lead to the church, the festivals celebrate God, the market place is subordinate to Christ and His gifts, etc. This was Christendom. Therefore, the worship gathering under Christendom is in some sense a continuation in a sense of everyday life as opposed to an act of resistance. Today, in post-Christendom, we are shaped (the other six days of the week) in ways that are directly hostile to what happens at the Sunday morning gathering. Worship that assumes Christendom in these ways (as even evangelical worship forms do) can become quickly enclosed off from anyone who is not already initiated. I believe liturgy therefore must have a “resistance” quality to it. This often makes the community function central. Liturgy must have a binding effect that binds a community together in a Reality (trans)forming event in ways not as necessary in Christendom.
3.) Everyone speaks the same language. Constantinian liturgy assumes the language of thanksgiving and praise, Creator and Redeemer make sense to those in the gathering. These words are so rarely heard today that we cannot possibly assume to just say them and expect people to enter in and make sense. Today, liturgy must be sufficiently translated, with explanatory helps, all which do not depend upon too high expectations that people will devote themselves to elongated catechesis.
4.) The church is in a position of power. Constantinian liturgy makes assumptions about power. I believe the priestly prayer, where the priest takes on symbolism to the point of representing Christ at the Eucharist, has a Constantinian element to it. The way it possibly allows the priest to be separated from the congregation and elevated over the community smacks of a concentration of power that makes no sense via the communal programs of 1 Cor 12, Rom 6 and Eph 4. Here is where I have to move very cautiously here remembering the lessons of previous corruptions of the liturgy that happened here in prior centuries. To me this has Constantinian impulses to it. I see it having the potential to override the community forming-constituting dimension of the Eucharist.

In summary, when liturgy does not take into account the post-Constantinian nature of our situation in the world, it can become separatist, elitist, off putting, and inhospitable. Liturgy can go bad.

Now let me put forth a caveat here. I am NOT A LITURGICAL THEOLOGIAN. So I am looking to learn from others here.

Yet I nonetheless put forth this argument because I believe finding our liturgical way in worship is a challenge in our post Christendom context. It is a crucial and important challenge. We’re dealing with it at the Vine regularly. I believe the worship (liturgy) of God’s church must be driven by Scripture and historical wisdom. I believe some of our problems in evangelicalism today have been because we rejected history and thereby became Scripturally dubious as well. We cannot and should not invent liturgy. Neither should we explain it to death. We (that see the indispensability of liturgical worship and spiritual formation practices) must avoid both the trite liturgical exercises devoid of Scripture and historical integrity as well as high church liturgical “orthodoxy” that is too Constantinian to be workable for those of us who wish to engage a post Constantinian world.

P.S. For an example of spiritual practices (liturgy) engaged in post Constantinian fashion with both Scriptural and historical integrity, see Mark Van Steenwyk’s Missio dei Brevary. Also check out the classic Simon Chan’s Liturgical Theology for more help here.

Is anyone else out there dealing with these liturgical issues? Any resources you’ve fund helpful?

I just cannot let today pass by without acknowledging the passing of David Scholer a few days ago. Dr. David Scholer taught New Testament at Gordon-Conwell Seminary, then became Dean at Northern Baptist Seminary as well as taught New Testament. He later taught at North Park Seminary and since 1992 was at Fuller Seminary.

David had a profound impact on me. I was a questioning naive 22 year-old ministry student at Gordon Conwell when I took NT Exegesis with David. I remember being upset with some of the things he was saying about the New Testament in class. I made an appointment to see him. I walked into his office and mumbled a few things about not agreeing with him on something. He asked why? What was the question I was asking him? I said something about one of the other professors disagreed with him. He said “so?” He suggested that I needed to quit wasting his time and come back when I had thought a little more carefully about what I believed and why. He suggested I return when I could articulate some serious questions for him. I went back, read and thought. I wrote down carefully three objections to one of his lectures. I went back. He took time and care to answer, engage me and encourage me in all the questions I had. That moment challenged me.

Dave Scholer set me on a journey of learning, searching and loving the Scriptures and the work of the church. I moved on to Northern Seminary the next year and he followed shortly thereafter as Dean. He remained an advisor to me. He applauded my Masters Thesis announcing often that it was the best NT Masters thesis he had the priviledge to read. He latter wrote a recommendation letter for me to enter my PhD program at Northwestern U.

I finished seminary and moved to Miami (before I did my PhD), discouraged about ministry. 6 months later my father was killed in a car crash. There were hundreds at the funeral. When I got in the car with my family to drive my dad’s casket to the cemetary, Dave Scholer ran to the car, reached out to comfort me. I don’t know how he found out about the accident.

Last year, when I was at Fuller, I stopped by and gave him a copy of the Great Giveaway thanking him for being such a great teacher to me.

Many know how he walked through his final struggle with cancer and what an outstanding teacher he was. Many might not know what kind of person this guy was. Some might think that I had an unusual relationship with Dave Scholer. Not so. I could tell you of countless students/friends he has ministered to in ways that would blow your mind. He’d fly across the country to be with a student in despair. He’d stop his busy schedule for breakfast, lunch or a coffee. He’d open his home regulary, especially at Christmas time. He has challenged, cared for and loved so many students, spurred on so many in powerful integrity filled ministry.

Every one needs teachers and mentors who profoundly influence their lives. I lost one last year. I lose another today.

Thank-you Dave Scholer and thank-you Lord for this extraordinary life you’ve blessed us with. Blessings to Jeanette and all my prayers to her and their daughters/family during this time.

David Fitch

I am on a short vacation (too short) in Canada. I love reading books on vacation. Here’s a list of the books I am reading this week and a quick comment. To my pleasant surprise, some of these books will greatly improve my courses at Northern Seminary.

William Cavanaugh Being Consumed:Economics and Christian Desire
Since writing The Great Giveaway, my own critique of capitalism has sometimes been poorly received, i.e. people think I’m a socialist. No so. This book explains why. This concise book encapsulates many of the critiques towards late capitalism that have emerged in the last twenty five years and lead us towards why the ekklesia must be the central socializing force of those who name Jesus as Lord. To me, one of the biggest gaps in evangelical Christian thinking in North America is a naivety towards capitalism and the ways it shapes us in ways catastrophic for our relationship with God. I therefore declare this book a must read in order to understand the postmodern theorists of desire, and the postmodern critique of capitalism and a Christian response to it that is not socialist. I’ll be using it in my Church and Society classes on the week we deal with capitalism and democracy.

Amos Yong. Theology and Down Syndrome:Reimagining Disability in Late Modernity
It floors me to think of the way we evangelicals have no way to think about disability in the church, especially in regards to children (this goes for adoption as well). We biologize the idolatry of our children is ways subtle yet so American. This book helps us reimagine life as a community of Christ where even those unable to participate in the Enlightenment esteemed skills of cognitive speech, have a whole world of seeing God to offer and bless the community with. This book is so good I’ll be using it in my Medical Ethics and the Pastor class.

J. Kameron Carter. Race: A Theological Account
I am regularly frustrated with evangelical mega churched PromiseKeeper like uncritical engagements with the problem of racism based largely in strategies born out of the proliferation of Western democratic creation of rights and equal opportunity. In these existing political arrangements, we organize ourselves around social relationships which separate us and encode us into competitors over against one another. These strategies have accomplished little other than the achievements won by the early civil rights movement (which I argue were more due to the church and M L King than Western democratic ideals). Today, what we have is a racism without racists: a much more subtle and insidious form of racisim.

A second aspect to this phenomenon is that Christianity has accommodated itself to these same strategies of justice and racial reconciliation. We see it all the time in the ways evangelicals/mainline protestants engage racial reconciliation. We do not see how these modes of justice are the encoded languages of white supremacy. We do not see how Western Christianity (rationalist Christianity) became detachd from its rootage as the extension of the people of Israel, God’s people for the world (His Mission), thereby opening up space for Christianity to become the property of the European West. In so doing, Western European Christianity (rationalist Christianity) became the religion of whiteness. Race became part of the Christian imagination. This is part of J Kameron Carter’s argument in his book Theology and Race. This book is so rich. It is too expensive to require it in a class. But I will be drawing upon it in my Church and Society Class the week we deal with the church and racisim.

Other books I’m trying to fit in this week.

Cornel West Race Matters A older quick Cornel West read. I’m trying to tune up on West to better understand Carter’s critique and appropriation of him in Theology and Race.

Slavoj Zizek The Sublime Object of Ideology Zizek is important for my work on evangelicalism fortcoming. I’m always trying to read this book again and again for each time it builds upon thicker ways to examine the cultural ideologies we all live under.

C. S. Lewis The Weight of Glory My friend Gordon told me to read this in order to improve my own writing. Thanks Gordon. So true.