It's amazing how the opponents of uniformity in worship are so predictable. Their tired arguments never change, which makes it all the more clear that they just aren't listening. They prate about legalism, complain that encouragement amounts to the use of a club, warn against compulsion, etc. The only sensible explanation I can muster for their contortions is that they are very urgently needing to shore up their rationalizations for their own departures from the common service, departures perhaps conscience is already telling them they shouldn't have made in the first place.
Anyhow, kudos for Fr. William Weedon for trying again, at the Southern Illinois District Convention, even though his resolution failed. To read all about the effort from his own helpful perspective, have a look the latest entry at his blog.
I find it fascinating how many of the arguments against uniformity in worship are unique to that specific context and are utterly lacking in discussions of any other matter. Some of the same folks who loudly decry the imposition of a particular style of worship (to use their language) have no qualms about legalistically imposing a particular style of governance, or leadership, or mission and vision statements, or fundraising, or any number of other issues that are far more adiaphoristic than worship.
ReplyDeleteThe district convention imposes all sorts of things on me in the name of our “life together.” Why is it that this one singular issue plays by an entirely different set of rules?
Perhaps I’ll try it out in the future… “Are you going to the district’s leadership seminar?” “No, I do not believe that you can impose one particular style of leadership on every pastor in the district. After all, leadership is a personal matter, and each pastor and congregation must have the right to determine what style suits them and their needs best, etc.”
I have been hearing about twice a year for as long as I have been in the ministry that attendance at district conferences "is required."
ReplyDelete