Equality (or "why doesn't everyone get to do stuff in church?")

[James Henley]

If we really believe that everyone is equal, then what huge effect would that have on the way we are and do "church"?

Talked a little about equality at the Lab last weekend, and this was the main question that hit me from the point of view of someone who has the privilege of leading and shaping our church community.

It would be silly to try and convince ourselves that every has the same level of skill and ability in every area - sure some people are better at speaking and some at playing instruments and some at making orange squash, but what if we really decided that everyone's contribution was of equal importance? How different would church look to the way it is now?

Rather than a worship gathering which is lead by and organised by a small number of people and presented to the masses, what if we could find a way where the whole church could contribute to our time spent worshipping together? Surely, that's what Paul is really getting at when he says "everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation."

If he was speaking to the church today, wouldn't he be telling us to produce worship times where the goal is for as many to contribute as possible in as many ways?

The old idea that if everyone was at the front then there would be in the congregation doesn't seem to wash - it misses the point. And you could argue that some people are called to the behind-the-scenes stuff - and technical stuff and cleaning and squash-making is important - but when Paul says hymns, instruction and revelation isn't he talking about the up-front stuff?

What does that kind of worship gathering look like?

Are we too far gone in the modern church to achieve it? Or does it just not apply anymore?

(written to The Album Leaf, which may explain the slightly depressing tone ;-)

From: jameshenley.typepad.co.uk

[C. Earl Mahan]

Indeed James, and this is exactly what I mean when I say that leaders have the most work to do. When in leadership roles, in a worship context especially, there's always the potential for our losing sight of why we're there in the first place and the inherent "organic" nature of the liturgy - the work of the people.

[James Henley]

"just human beings getting in the way of the Spirit" - isn't this the challenge to the organic emerging church leader? To educate, guide and empower others to use their leadership giftings to their full potential - but without still trying to hang onto control ourselves?

[C. Earl Mahan]

It has always been my feeling that the "beauty" in the liturgy has very little, if anything, to do with who leads or plans said liturgy, and everything to do with the Spirit working in and through the Body gathered around Word and Sacrament. I believe this is equally true of all worship experiences, highly structured (same or nearly the same worship leaders / planners each week), or highly "semi" extemporaneous (different worship leaders / planners each week). The beauty is in the Spirit and what the Spirit is doing. By the same token both forms of worship can just as easily be not so beautiful if what's happening under the guise of "worship" is, in fact, just human beings getting in the way of the Spirit. I agree with Thomas. Leader-led worship is part of our heritage, not only as Anglicans but as Christians. Perhaps those of us who have been identified as "leaders" have the most work to do to be faithful in this regard.

[Mike Croghan]

Hi Thomas,

I'm not sure anyone's arguing against leader-led worship, or even leader-designed worship - it's just that the leaders who lead and design don't need to be the same ones every week. When leadership in worship opens up to the gifts of the whole community, it is (in my experience) a beautiful thing.

[Heidi Clark]

The Rev. Caroline Fairless is a pioneer in all of this, and presented (in our Diocese Saturday) a brilliant model of how communities of faith can gather to plan worship. What if the altar guild wrote a gathering? The vestry responsible for fashioning the confession moment? What would that look like? Her stuff was originally called "Children at Worship" but it is really about all of the voices gathered "cracking open liturgy" in a way that speaks for, and to, everyone. Please do not stumble over the "child" look of the stuff. It is profound, and includes all worshipers. www.childrenatworship.org.

[Mike Croghan]

(Not in the details, but very much so in the gist): "Yeah, what she said". :-)

We try to do this too, and it is a thing of beauty. Even when (such as this morning) someone (such as yours truly) attempts to do something they're really not gifted for (deliver semi-extemporaneous "content" - which is what we call our sermons). I was, uh, ah, pretty, uh, bad. But I got good feedback and will probably try to work on turning this non-gift into at least a non-liability, and also stick closer to things I am somewhat gifted at (such as delivering word-for-word prepared content). Anyway, just by way of saying - this is being done, and it creates all sorts of interesting questions regarding gifting, calling, etc. - but those questions are 100% worth exploring.

[Karen Ward]

James, we are trying to do such gatherings, and they look 'beautiful,' as people sharing their gifts is beautiful to God.

Also, check out alternativeworship.org if you don't know the site, as the ethos of 'alt worship' gets at this.

In our community, anyone who shows up can help plan worship (even the priests) as a open group of people meet each Tuesday to plan services, based on our beloved BCP 'ordo' (outline) but with wild freedom to be creative and bring their culture, hopes, dreams, hurts and joys to God in worship that is the people's work.

Just the other day, a mid 20's aged women gave the 'reverb'(what we call our sermons). She had never spoken before. and it was brilliant.

I'm floored each week by the gifts and faith of God's people. I would not go back to priest-centric services for anything, as the body has so many more gifts to share.

Cheers.