Recent Church Musings: Part Two, Paschal Lamb

Read Part One.

I must first express my sorrow at being unable to attend church during Lent (that blasted film) and how I forgot in my busy-ness to observe Lent at all. I felt it deeply when Easter arrived and the celebration of the Glorious Resurrection lacked without a Lenten preparation in my life. Now that I have experienced Easter with Lent, I can't stand going back to a life without it.

I went to Santa Barbara for Good Friday. Partly to get out of the Valley and partly because I was interested to know more about the Orthodox Church. St Athanasius thus became my destination. My interest was peaked mostly because I was curious what was drawing Zak and Kellie. I also wanted a more somber Good Friday service. I am tired of Good Fridays that are happy peppy and the like because the churches want to give a good impression to the people who don't come to church that often. Let us feel deeply the grief of Christ's death, so we may celebrate his Resurrection all the more on Sunday morning.

The Orthodox Church, to say the least, is quite foreign to me. I don't know what the symbolism is or why they venerate and kiss the scriptures and the burial cloth. I did not know that the entre service was sung. I'm still contemplating these things and wishing that the History of World Christianity class I took at Westmont would have covered the Eastern tradition as well. In fact, they should rename the class History of Western Christianity.

But that is a tangent. Orthodoxy on Good Friday. I had trouble following the liturgy and learning the tunes and finding meaning in the icons. The part of the service that impacted me most was when we walked in a circle around the sanctuary chanting "Holy Mighty God" and some other lines that I can't remember now before walking under a cloth and back to our places. This time and the chanting was a time for meditation on the prayers and the incense and the death. I forgot about my insecurities in such a new environment. Despite this, I felt very confused about what I had witnessed as I left the church. It was a humbling experience because it forced me to recognize that I'm not a big know it all. I am left with more questions than answers, and that fact can be a little frightening.

Easter morning was spent at St. Stephen's Episcopal. The choir director chose a mix of traditional organ-led hymns and piano-led praise songs including a favorite of mine written by the Gettys: The Power of the Cross. It is a favorite because of my association to having first heard it at Westmont. And because I believe the Gettys' music reflect what I wish for in the church: a blend of the old and new. New music with old hymnal structure.

Incense and female priests and gender-inclusive language and real wine for Communion. All things that I love to discover in churches. Yet, the sermon was boring. Even though Easter was only a week or so ago, I don't even remember what he said he thought Easter was about. In fact, I probably forgot it that afternoon.

Here is a question I've been considering: what is the purpose of the sermon? Is it to evangelize, condemn, question, exhort, teach? What is it? How should a pastor or priest address a congregation? Should they only say things the congregation agrees with? Do we really need someone to validate pre-conceived notions about the world? Do we really need someone to condemn all our sins so the people wallow in a guilty shameful penitence? Can't we just speak the Truth?

This is why I enjoy listening to Rob Bell's podcasted sermons from Mars Hill Bible Church. He engages his audience in the fantastic narrative of God relating to his creation. I believe he speaks the Truth. And the Truth is compelling because it questions, it condemns, it exhorts, it teaches, it evangelizes all at once. I think a sermon should focus on speaking the Truth of the Gospel to a people and the rest will follow.

I had an argument/discussion with my ex-boyfriend some months ago about the presentation of a sermon. He preferred the logical explanation of points and that using emotionally engaging rhetoric cheapened the sermon and its speaker. While I understand the criticism, I cannot agree. As sermon needs more life and blood than simply a logical checklist. But it does not follow that a sermon lacks logic. Didn't the Apostles speak in Acts with the intent to engage people in a life with God? Where down the line did the sermon become something boring that must be endured? God is bigger than both logic and emotion. He is bigger than sermons.

I also appreciate Cornerstone for similar reasons to Rob Bell. This brings me to last Sunday.

Part Three is to come.