This month marks the beginning of Lent, which brings up the subject of liturgy. \u201cLiturgy\u201d is a dirty word to some people. They equate it with dead religion, rank liberalism, dry-as-dust theology, and something to steer clear from. Among avowed evangelicals, \u201cliturgy\u201d is somehow inseparable from \u201cCatholicism,\u201d and \u201choc est corpus,\u201d which is to say, it\u2019s just about anathema. Somewhere amidst the anachronisms of modern church history, we\u2019ve lost liturgy.<\/p>\n
Maybe it\u2019s time to bring it back.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Though most Lutherans, Episcopalians, and Catholics are aware of liturgy, there are vast swaths of American Christianity \u2014 largely evangelical \u2014 that are clueless about it. Ignorance of the liturgy has led to fear or rejection of the liturgy. Liturgy? That\u2019s something that the \u201cother\u201d people do \u2014 the libruls! Not us. No. Liturgy \u2014 <snicker, harumph> \u2014 what\u2019s that? Today\u2019s modern churches are much more relevant, passionate, lively, with-it, and correct about faith and practice. No dead liturgy here! Right?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
If we take the definition of \u201cliturgy,\u201d apart from its dirty-word connotations, we have this: \u201cA form or formulary according to which public religious worship, is conducted.\u201d<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Many of our historical Christian heroes \u2014 the likes of Martin Lloyd-Jones, John Calvin, John Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards and others \u2014 were practitioners of the liturgy. Anglicanism, which in large part gave birth to American Christianity, followed the Book of Common Prayer, a liturgical guidebook, as the formula for worship. Even the dissenting Baptists followed the pattern of the Book of Common Prayer. The \u201cchurch calendar\u201d wasn\u2019t just for Catholics. Protestants, too, followed a slightly reinvented church calendar<\/a>. Following the liturgy is what Christians have done for the majority of church history.<\/p>\n The liturgy is, quite simply, an agreed-upon way of Christian life and worship. It involves two main components \u2014 the public worship service (microcosm), and the liturgical year (macrocosm)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n What happens when we reject liturgy?<\/strong> <\/p>\n \u2022 We neglect a rich history. As mentioned above, there are thousands of our Christian predecessors \u2014 pioneers, missionaries, evangelists, theologians, reformers, martyrs, and unnumbered faithful \u2014 who followed the liturgy. The liturgy is centuries old, and therefore has a pretty good track record of aiding Christians in their faith through memory, celebration, and understanding. Christianity isn\u2019t about pursuing \u201crelevance.\u201d Christianity is a reality of eternity, rooted in millennia of God writing His story, guiding his people, and showing us the way ahead. A proper sense of the future is rooted in a proper perspective of history. This history includes the liturgy.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2022 We neglect anchor points in the year. The liturgical calendar <\/a>provides a way to organize the year in a beautiful way \u2014 providing moments of reflection, rejoicing, and renewal. It\u2019s organization provides specific times of year that help us to center ourselves upon Christ.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2022 We neglect reminders. Far from being a humdrum, here-we-go-again style of faith, the liturgy is actually a powerful form of reminding us of the importance of certain aspects of our faith and practice. Repetition aids learning and remembering. We could all afford to do more of that \u2014 remembering key aspects of our faith.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2022 We neglect the understanding of the life of Christ. The liturgical church calendar is organized around events in Christ\u2019s ministry \u2014 Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Holy Week, and Easter, and Pentecost. Even \u201cordinary time,\u201d the period of the year which focuses on various aspects of faith and practice, helps us to remember and celebrate Christ\u2019s commissioning.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n There are, of course, dangers in following the liturgical formula. It\u2019s not, after all, inspired. But, then again, there are dangers in not following the liturgy. It\u2019s not absolutely necessary for us to follow the liturgy, but it may be helpful.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Today\u2019s churches could use a little liturgy.<\/strong> <\/p>\n Perhaps liturgy is so appealing precisely because we have swung so far in the opposite direction. The timeline of history looks like a sequence of wavelengths \u2014 swinging from one extreme to another. The corrective to the casual, come-as-you-are, relevant-as-can-be, anything-goes tenor of the contemporary evangelical church may be a dose of the formal, the ancient, the ritual, the tradition of the liturgy.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Today\u2019s contemporary churches \u2014 to use broad brushstrokes \u2014 share some shortcomings that liturgy can help:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2022 Relevance is overrated. We\u2019ve wanted so badly to be relevant, that we\u2019ve given up important Christian distinctions and handed over our unique identity. What, really, has the craven clawing at relevance gained us? More world lookalikes? The liturgy provides a sharp distinction from the relevance-seeking posture of many Christians. Instead, it serves up a more meaningful style of \u2018relevance.\u2019 if you want to call it that.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
\nWhen we reject liturgy outright, we neglect valuable components of church life and the practice of our faith.<\/p>\n
\nThough liturgy has fallen out of modern favor, there are some Christian leaders and influencers who are calling for a renewal of the ancient practice. Along with the rise of the emergent church, came a renewed interest in liturgy. Calling it \u201ca deeper relevance,\u201d Christianity Today writer Mark Galli explained<\/a> that \u201cmany evangelicals are attracted to that strange thing called liturgy.\u201d<\/p>\n