Worship As Theology: Foretaste of Glory Divine

Rating:
Summary: Deeper connections...
Review: 'Theology cannot guarantee the grace of God.' (p. 74)

This statement stayed with me more than any other in the book 'Worship as Theology' by Don Saliers, perhaps because I fancy myself a theologian-in-training. One of the issues strongest for me in this class (and indeed, in all my studies) is that of the connection of liturgy and theology, having a church background strong in emphasising liturgy, and having an academic background strong in theological inquiry.

Does anything guarantee the grace of God? If the answer to this 'no' (apart from God's own self-giving and gracious gift of Godself to us), then why set 'theology' apart for a particular 'no'? Indeed, theology seems to me to be often considered either the poor stepchild of the church, or the distant rich relative we never see, but rarely a full partner in the worship process. People recite creeds and follow models without great (or sometimes without any) reflection upon what they're saying or doing. To what extent does the above statement serve to undermine theological thinking and reflection as a worshipful practice?

I am building more of a case around this than perhaps the statement deserves. Certainly Saliers is not saying that theological reflection is unimportant (in fact, just the opposite). Also, rarely will the kind of person likely to read this kind of book go looking inside for justifications for not doing theology. However, I am aware (both in my church and among the student body at CTS) that there is a suspicion of theology - sometimes an open hostility toward it - and this causes me to pause over a statement such as this and reflect.

I am also aware that there is a subtle temptation, particularly among some academics, to see theology as more important than worship and liturgy. While theological thinking and reflection can be a worshipful practice, perhaps what is at the heart of this statement is the argument that such cannot be the only practice. How many theologians (and indeed seminary students) stop going to church? I must confess during my first year of seminary I too was without a church, and while I was looking, I was tempted by the notion that my academic pursuits were sufficient worship practice. I was aware of something missing from this.

Saliers writes, 'Worship in the gathered community takes the form of enactment.' (p. 85) It was precisely this kind of enactment that was lacking in the 'academic' approach. While I might be included in a community of scholars and thinkers, that community is of a very different character, and the enactment of the active remembering and reaching toward God in community was missing. There is something fundamentally profound about the way worship reorders the world. 'This reordering of relations we find most intensely sounded in the texts of eucharistic prayers.' (p. 89) People of differing theological doctrines can often gather around the Table and join together in a fuller expression of faith than any discourse or treatise could give. 'In the very activity of representing and rehearsing features of existence described in the Scriptures, worshipers articulate their fundamental relations to one another and to the world.' (Liturgy and the Moral Self (see my review, also on Amazon), p. 18)

Certainly theology is a central part of worship (whether acknowledged or not). Worship can shape theology, and theology can shape worship, and in a healthy church this relationship will be open and acknowledged so that the community can grow in its relationship to God and toward each other.

This book requires some theological sophistication on the part of the reader. However, it can be used to deepen connections between theology, worship, liturgy, and life generally, largely by showing the connections that are often missed when these facets are artificially separated.

Don Saliers is a professor of great influence on Ron Anderson, who is a professor of great influence upon me in my seminary training.

Rating:
Summary: Deeper connections...
Review: `Theology cannot guarantee the grace of God.' (p. 74)

This statement stayed with me more than any other in the book 'Worship as Theology' by Don Saliers, perhaps because I fancy myself a theologian-in-training. One of the issues strongest for me in this class (and indeed, in all my studies) is that of the connection of liturgy and theology, having a church background strong in emphasising liturgy, and having an academic background strong in theological inquiry.

Does anything guarantee the grace of God? If the answer to this `no' (apart from God's own self-giving and gracious gift of Godself to us), then why set `theology' apart for a particular `no'? Indeed, theology seems to me to be often considered either the poor stepchild of the church, or the distant rich relative we never see, but rarely a full partner in the worship process. People recite creeds and follow models without great (or sometimes without any) reflection upon what they're saying or doing. To what extent does the above statement serve to undermine theological thinking and reflection as a worshipful practice?

I am building more of a case around this than perhaps the statement deserves. Certainly Saliers is not saying that theological reflection is unimportant (in fact, just the opposite). Also, rarely will the kind of person likely to read this kind of book go looking inside for justifications for not doing theology. However, I am aware (both in my church and among the student body at CTS) that there is a suspicion of theology - sometimes an open hostility toward it - and this causes me to pause over a statement such as this and reflect.

I am also aware that there is a subtle temptation, particularly among some academics, to see theology as more important than worship and liturgy. While theological thinking and reflection can be a worshipful practice, perhaps what is at the heart of this statement is the argument that such cannot be the only practice. How many theologians (and indeed seminary students) stop going to church? I must confess during my first year of seminary I too was without a church, and while I was looking, I was tempted by the notion that my academic pursuits were sufficient worship practice. I was aware of something missing from this.

Saliers writes, `Worship in the gathered community takes the form of enactment.' (p. 85) It was precisely this kind of enactment that was lacking in the `academic' approach. While I might be included in a community of scholars and thinkers, that community is of a very different character, and the enactment of the active remembering and reaching toward God in community was missing. There is something fundamentally profound about the way worship reorders the world. `This reordering of relations we find most intensely sounded in the texts of eucharistic prayers.' (p. 89) People of differing theological doctrines can often gather around the Table and join together in a fuller expression of faith than any discourse or treatise could give. `In the very activity of representing and rehearsing features of existence described in the Scriptures, worshipers articulate their fundamental relations to one another and to the world.' (Liturgy and the Moral Self (see my review, also on Amazon), p. 18)

Certainly theology is a central part of worship (whether acknowledged or not). Worship can shape theology, and theology can shape worship, and in a healthy church this relationship will be open and acknowledged so that the community can grow in its relationship to God and toward each other.

This book requires some theological sophistication on the part of the reader. However, it can be used to deepen connections between theology, worship, liturgy, and life generally, largely by showing the connections that are often missed when these facets are artificially separated.

Don Saliers is a professor of great influence on Ron Anderson, who is a professor of great influence upon me in my seminary training.