So, I have been involved in a good discussion at the Gottesdienst Blog concerning, depending upon who you ask, the Confessions, Children's Sermons, Liturgical Innovation, and other various and sundry things. However, it has gotten me thinking on something.
Two frequent complaints leveled against children's sermons are that they are unnecessary innovations that don't fit in the service and that they disrupt the service.
Now, the point that they aren't "necessary" doesn't sway me much -- I'm more concerned with whether or not something may be freely done, not whether it *must* be done. However, it is a common concern for many, and I have been pondering it. Also, the idea that the 3 or 4 minutes a children's sermon takes also causes some consternation. Again, I'm not sold -- once any rite becomes established in a place, it becomes part of the flow of the service. I don't think my predecessor used the Gradual with regularity - I do. This was disruptive for a bit; now omitting the gradual would be disruptive. However, many people view the service as having a specific movement and flow that can be easily disrupted.
Offhandedly I had made a comment that, if we must eliminate anything that disrupts the service, we should remove the Offering, as this is an innovation that also disrupts the service. It was meant to be an argument... not of absurdity, but of comparison. There is no furor raised over the offering - it is accepted. Hence, something that is likewise disruptive could be accepted.
Then I saw a news promo this night. A Roman Catholic Parish in Oklahoma City was robbed -- and what does the promo show? Not offering plates, not a safe - but collection boxes.
Think about it. No break in the middle of the service. No pony show. No paying attention to what someone else might give - is it an envelop or just a few bucks from the wallet. No parade of cash to the front of the Church. Rather, when people give, quietly, out of the way, in the back of the Church, on their own time, with no one the wiser. No trumpets, no musical fanfare - when you give, let your giving be in secret.
And this is a new innovation - A Christianity Today article puts it really coming into vogue in the 19th Century. And mainly a protestant innovation (another bugaboo).
Why do we allow this? How is it beneficial? How does taking a collection in the middle of service support the idea that this is Divine Service, that worship is about the gifts that God gives us? We stop the service so everyone can see the money brought forward.
Now, I'm not going to say that have a collection for home mission work is wrong (although, when we have had special collections, we do just put a plate or basket in the back of the Church... and I don't do the LWML mite blessing - I think many would say that is uncouth). It really, though, when we think about it, seem odd. It seems much more odd to stop the flow of the service to focus on that old idol of cash than it does to pause to devote time to teaching children.
Yet the later raises fervor and fury among some as one of the signs of the utter decay of the Lutheran faith -- yet in nothing do we seem to borrow more from the reformed than when it comes to offering, tithing, and "stewardship" drives.
Just something to make one ponder.
Any thoughts from the Blackbirds? Have any of you had any qualms with our practice of the Offering?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
I'm not a "blackbird" per se, but a Lutheran church worker in Canada. :) I appreciate your thoughts on this. I have often thought that it would be better to have some kind of container where people could do their giving more quietly rather than having the "collection" be an element within the service.
In today's culture, I think the topic of online or automatic giving needs to factor in too. The arguments against this that I've witnessed are that people won't have something to do at the offering time, and will be robbed of an opportunity for an act of worship. (There are two other reasons I've heard, both more base in nature: 1. that they will "look bad" by not having anything to put in the plate when it comes around, and 2. if the plate isn't in front of people, people will forget about giving. All the better reason to break down the idol of showmanship and law-based giving, in my opinion.) My argument has been that sitting down, planning out your giving, and having it withdrawn is actually very faithful to an attitude of firstfruits giving. In addition, it goes to your point of giving in secret and not making a show of it.
I think the idea of a combination of automated giving (for those who choose it) with a discreet way of receiving offerings (for those who don't) is a very attractive one.
I visited an old Lutheran Church in Chicago a few years back with a member who used to attend there and it was interesting for they had those "boxes" you spoke of. They were affixed to the seat of the last pew, isle side and they were for members to place their tithes in. It was explained to me that the plates were passed for offerings to be made and that that was generally coins and small bills that people gave in addition to their tithe which they had already placed in the boxes.
As for the collection being a disruption, I would suggest that Paul might argue differently. The giving of gifts for the life and support of the Church has always been part of the life of the Church. Why change that now or remove what has been a part of the service for a long time (although length of time is not the reason to keep it.)
Children's sermons are a recent innovation and have had no place in the liturgy of the Church. Why do we presume that children cannot hear and understand what God gives via His Liturgy, readings, sermon and the like. More often than not these become mini entertainment events with hand outs to keep the kids quite for the duration of the service. And if the truth be told, those who really like them are the older folks because they say they can "understand" them and the like to see the children.
Children's sermons play right into the hands of those who say that we should not commune children at a younger age because they don't "Know" enough yet. As if somehow knowledge makes one worthy to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord.
By the same token, those who have "kids church" and take the children out to another area during the Divine Service are doing the Church and her children a great disservice as well.
As to Michael's comment about automatic giving, I believe that when we take thoughtful, weekly first fruits giving out of hand and make it an automated process, we loose some of who we are. Are you going to look at your bank statement and stop and pray when you get to that auto withdrawl, not likely. But maybe you will be more apt to do so as you write that check or insert that cash into an envelope and place it in the plate.
Trust me, I am all for shaking up the status quo when needs be and getting back to what is good and faithful practice but these are two areas that at least for me are not needing any change. No kids sermons, weekly collection of the offering.
By the way, a plug for a very good book - The New Testament in His Blood, A study of the Holy Liturgy of the Christian Church by Fr. Burnell Eckardt. I commend it to all of you, pastors and laity. Get it through Gottesdienst Books.
I visited an only Lutheran Church in Chicago a few years back with a member who used to attend there and it was interesting for they had those "boxes" you spoke of. They were affixed to the seat of the last pew, isle side and they were for members to place their tithes in. It was explained to me that the plates were passed for offerings to be made and that that was generally coins and small bills that people gave in addition to their tithe which they had already placed in the boxes.
As for the collection being a disruption, I would suggest that Paul might argue differently. The giving of gifts for the life and support of the Church has always been part of the life of the Church. Why change that now or remove what has been a part of the service for a long time (although length of time is not the reason to keep it.)
Children's sermons are a recent innovation and have had no place in the liturgy of the Church. Why do we presume that children cannot hear and understand what God gives via His Liturgy, readings, sermon and the like. More often than not these become mini entertainment events with hand outs to keep the kids quite for the duration of the service. And if the truth be told, those who really like them are the older folks because they say they can "understand" them and the like to see the children.
Children's sermons plays right into the hands of those who say that we should not commune children at a younger age because they don't "Know" enough yet. As if somehow knowledge makes one worthy to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord.
By the same token, those who have "kids church" and take the children out to another area during the Divine Service are doing the Church and her children a great disservice as well.
As to Michael's comment about automatic giving, I believe that when we take thoughtful, weekly firstfruits giving out a hand and make it an automated process, we loose some of who we are. Are you going to look at your bank statement and stop and pray when you get to that auto withdrawl, not likely. But maybe you will be more apt to do so as you write that check or insert that cash into an envelope and place it in the plate.
Trust me, I am all for shaking up the status quo when needs be and getting back to what is good and faithful practice but these are two areas that at least for me are not needing any change. No kids sermons, weekly collection of the offering.
By the way, a plug for a very good book - The New Testament in His Blood, A study of the Holy Liturgy of the Christian Church by Fr. Burnell Eckardt. I commend it to all of you, pastors and laity. Get it through Gottesdienst Books.
I visited an only Lutheran Church in Chicago a few years back with a member who used to attend there and it was interesting for they had those "boxes" you spoke of. They were affixed to the seat of the last pew, isle side and they were for members to place their tithes in. It was explained to me that the plates were passed for offerings to be made and that that was generally coins and small bills that people gave in addition to their tithe which they had already placed in the boxes.
As for the collection being a disruption, I would suggest that Paul might argue differently. The giving of gifts for the life and support of the Church has always been part of the life of the Church. Why change that now or remove what has been a part of the service for a long time (although length of time is not the reason to keep it.)
Children's sermons are a recent innovation and have had no place in the liturgy of the Church. Why do we presume that children cannot hear and understand what God gives via His Liturgy, readings, sermon and the like. More often than not these become mini entertainment events with hand outs to keep the kids quite for the duration of the service. And if the truth be told, those who really like them are the older folks because they say they can "understand" them and the like to see the children.
Children's sermons plays right into the hands of those who say that we should not commune children at a younger age because they don't "Know" enough yet. As if somehow knowledge makes one worthy to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord.
By the same token, those who have "kids church" and take the children out to another area during the Divine Service are doing the Church and her children a great disservice as well.
Sorry about multiple posts, receive error message that asked I wanted to try again and of course I clicked yes. Not trying to emphasize my points.
Hi Bill.
Hi Bill.
Hi Bill. =o)
Just one quick note: you say, "Why change that now or remove what has been a part of the service for a long time?"
Part of my point is that the in-the-middle-of-the-service collection *isn't* something that has really been part of the service for that long of a time. That's the second link.
I wonder what was said when that was introduced. Just pondering, mainly about what ends up counting as an interruption.
I would consider the collection in the middle of the service to be what remains of the ancient practice of bringing forward the gifts. After the sermon, the early church would collect gifts of money, food, etc. that would support the ministry of the congregation, INCLUDING the bread and wine for the Eucharist; the gifts would be placed on the table in front of the president (I'm thinking Justin Martyr here), and the Eucharistic prayer would be part of the following prayer of thanksgiving. The Romans, the Anglicans, and the ELCA have tried to bring this idea back since Vatican II by having laypeople bring forward the elements to be consecrated in the Eucharist following the sermon. Of course, because the elements are provided by the church budget and are sitting on a table at the back of the nave before the service begins, and hence they are not really gifts from the congregation to the church, it's not exactly the same. Nevertheless, this is the practice I see as the forerunner of the collection of the offering.
Also worth noting, and perhaps an idea worth reviving, is the antiquated notion of the "pew tax." Up until a couple centuries ago, or even more recently than that, congregation members would pay a pew tax each year; that money would go to support the minister's salary and the church's operation. The money that was collected in the offering each Sunday would then be given to the poor and used in other forms of ministry that didn't involve church operations. Under this system, the liturgy is not interrupted in order to create income for the church or its pastor.
Post a Comment