THE DIVINE SERVICE AND THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH 



On February 7,1997, Opus Dei and Students in Mission sponsored a

Symposium on Worship and Mission on the campus of Concordia Seminary,

St. Louis. Speakers included Dr. David Luecke, Rev. Robert Scudieri,

and Logia book review editor, Rev. John Pless. The following is

Pr. Pless' opening statement in the dialogue. Cassette recordings of

the Symposium may be ordered from the media services department of

Concordia Seminary, 801 De Mun Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri 63105.

         



In addressing the topic "The Divine Service and the Mission of the

Church," I would suggest that we pay attention to three fundamental

questions (1) How is the liturgy understood theologically? (2) Are we

sufficiently attentive to the ecclesial culture of North America? and

finally (3) What is the character of the community into which we seek

to evangelize unbelievers?



First, How is the liturgy understood theologically? Augsburg VII

provides our starting point: "For it is sufficient for the true unity

of the Christian church that the Gospel be preached in conformity with

a pure understanding of it and that the sacraments be administered in

accordance with the divine Word." Note that the Confession does not

speak of a generic presence of Word and Sacrament as establishing the

unity of the church, but rather of "the Gospel being preached in

conformity with a pure understanding of it" and sacraments

administered in accordance with the divine Word. Preaching and

sacraments require form. Freedom from rites and ceremonies instituted

by men does not imply that the question of form is neutral. What Elert

says regarding Luther's liturgical thought is also applicable to the

Lutheran Symbols: "No matter how strongly he (Luther) emphasizes

Christian freedom in connection with the form of this rite (the

Sacrament of the Altar), no matter how much he deviates from the form

handed down at the end of the Middle Ages, no matter how earnestly he

warns against the belief that external customs could commend us to

God, still there are certain ceremonial elements that he, too,

regarded as indispensable" (The Structure of Lutheranism, 325).



Lutherans are concerned with the form of the liturgy from the

perspective of the confession of the Means of Grace. In contrast to

Rome's claim that liturgy is sacrifice, or more recently, "work of the

people," and the Reformed who understand liturgy as the vehicle for

the church to ascribe praise to the majesty of a sovereign God,

Lutherans see liturgy as God's work, Gottesdienst, divine

service. Thus Article XXIV of the Apology insists that the liturgy is

the Lord's public service to His people (AP XXIV:79-83) and that "the

term liturgy squares well with the ministry" (AP

XXIV:81). Essentially, liturgy is what the Lord does. Luther captures

this in his sermon on John 14 (1537-38): "Thus the apostles and

pastors are nothing but channels through which Christ leads and

transmits His Gospel from the Father to us. Therefore wherever you

hear the Gospel properly taught or see a person baptized, wherever you

see someone administer or receive the Sacrament, or wherever you

witness someone absolving another, there you may say without

hesitation: 'Today, I beheld God's Word and work. Yes, I saw and heard

God Himself preaching and baptizing.' To be sure, the tongue, the

voice, the hands etc. are those of a human being; but the Word and the

ministry are really those of the divine majesty Himself. Hence it must

be viewed and believed as though we were seeing Him administer Baptism

or the Sacrament with His own hands. Thus we do not separate, or

differentiate between God and His Word or ministry; nor do we seek God

in another way or view Him in a different light" (AE 24:67).



If the liturgy is the Lord's work, it cannot be made into an

adiaphoron, for the pure preaching of the Gospel and the evangelical

administration of the sacraments are hardly adiaphora.  To be sure,

certain rites and ceremonies embedded in the liturgy may be adiaphora,

but not the pure preaching of the Gospel and the right administration

of the sacraments.



At this point a few comments regarding Article X of the Formula of

Concord are in order as this text has come to be seen as something of

a declaration of liturgical independence. Article X makes a

distinction between that which is commanded by God and those items

which are neither commanded nor forbidden by the Word of God. Much is

often made of paragraph 9: "We further believe, teach, and confess

that the community of God in every place and at every time has the

right, authority, and power to reduce, or to increase ceremonies

according to the circumstances, as long as it does so without

frivolity and offense but in an orderly and appropriate way, as at any

time may seem to be most profitable, beneficial, and salutary for good

order, Christian discipline, evangelical decorum, and the edification

of the church." A careful reading of this paragraph in its historical

and doctrinal context makes it clear that the Formula is not

advocating liturgical autonomy but confessional consistency. The

church orders of Braunschweig, authored by Chemnitz, demonstrate that

"the community of God in every place" is not a local congregation but

a territorial church. These church orders bind pastors and

congregations to given rites and liturgical orders for the sake of

unity in confession. The theme of confessional consistency is placed

in the text of Article X itself as the point is made that in times of

confession, items which are in and of themselves adiaphora cease to be

matters of indifference. "We believe, teach, and confess that a time

of confession, as when enemies of the Word of God desire to suppress

the pure doctrine of the holy Gospel, the entire community of God,

yes, every individual Christian, especially the ministers of the Word

as the leaders of the community of God, are obligated to confess

openly, not only by words but also through their deeds and actions,

the true doctrine and all that pertains to it, according to the Word

of God" (FC-SD X:10). Is not confessional Lutheranism at such a point

over against the Baptistic denials of the Gospel in these closing

years of the twentieth century?



I would suggest that Carter Lindberg is right; there is a continuum

from the Anabaptist Movement of the 16th century to Pietism to the

charismatic movement and church growth movements of this present

century. In one way or another, each of these movements run up against

the assertion of the Smalcald Articles "that God gives no one his

Spirit or grace except through or with the external Word" (SA

III:viii-3). Our concern for the liturgy is not fueled by romanticism

for the past but for the sake of the Gospel which is given by external

means, the Word rightly preached and the Sacraments administered in

accordance with our Lord's mandate.



Second, are we paying sufficient attention to the ecclesial culture of

North America? We need to recognize that the ecclesial culture of

North America is Evangelicalism. This culture has its roots first in

Puritanism, which is basically Calvinistic, and secondarily in the

great revival movements of the late 18th and l9th centuries,,

especially the awakening movement associated with Charles Grandison

Finney, an Arminian of the first order. The ethos of American

Evangelicalism is at home in North America. As Nathan Hatch has

pointed out in his book The Democratization of American Christianity,

the Jeffersonian ideas of individual freedom and equality are

congenial to Evangelicalism's emphasis on conversion as a personal

decision and the church as a spiritual democracy. Evangelicalism's

stress on the autonomy of the believer and the immediacy of spiritual

experience apart from sacramental means has shaped a religious culture

that accents an individualistic faith over churchly life and tends to

characterize Baptism, Absolution, and the Lord's Supper as externals

on the periphery of the Christian life, at best. Subjectivity coupled

with a suspicion of the intellect has produced a religious culture

that elevates heart over head, emotion over intellect.



Lutherans are being invited to embrace the culture of Evangelicalism

at a time when some of the brightest and best thinkers from within

Evangelicalism are lamenting the spiritual barrenness of this

culture. Witness the writings of David Wells, Michael Horton,

D.A. Carson, Os Guiness, Mark Noll, John MacArthur, and Eugene

Peterson to name but a few. This past April, the Alliance of

Confessing Evangelicals issued the Cambridge Declaration. Among other

things, the Cambridge Declaration makes the following assessment of

worship: "Wherever in the church biblical authority has been lost,

Christ has been displaced, the gospel has been distorted, or faith has

been perverted, it has always been for one reason: our interests have

displaced God's and we are doing his work in our own way. The loss of

God's centrality in the life of today's church is common and

lamentable. It is this loss that allows us to transform worship into

entertainment, gospel preaching into marketing, believing into

technique, being good into feeling good about ourselves, and

faithfulness into being successful. As a result, God, Christ, the

Bible have come to mean too little to us and rest too

inconsequentially upon us. God does not exist to satisfy human

ambitions, cravings, the appetite for consumption, or our own private

spiritual interests. We must focus on God in our worship, rather than

the satisfaction of our personal needs. God is sovereign in worship;

we are not. Our concern must be for God's kingdom, not our own

empires, popularity or success."



Third, what is the character of the community into which we are

evangelizing unbelievers?



We are not evangelizing unbelievers into a voluntary religious

organization but the Church, the body of Christ, the Bride of the

Lamb. The Church lives in many cultures, but is at home in none as our

citizenship is in heaven. In Revelation 7, John writes: "After these

things I looked and behold, a great multitude which no one could

number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before

the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands,

and crying out with a loud voice, saying: 'Salvation belongs to our

God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!" This is the culture,

yes, the cultus, of God's doing.



We may not drive a wedge between heaven and earth. The Lord Jesus

Christ "has ascended far above all heavens in order to fill all

things," says the Apostle Paul. Our Lord has crossed over from

eternity into time in His incarnation. He has given us the new birth

from above, the rebirth of Holy Baptism by which we are made heirs of

His heavenly kingdom. Baptism gives us birth into a new culture, the

culture of heaven. We do not have to wait until we die to have a share

in heaven.



"The Sacrament of the Altar," said Sasse, "is heaven on earth." That

is why we sing the Sanctus with "angels, and archangels, and the whole

company of heaven." That is why our liturgy is not and cannot be an

echo of the pop culture with its sound bytes and its exchange of

edification for entertainment. No, the liturgy is the repetition of

the heavenly song. Like Moses before the burning bush we are on holy

ground when we gather in the Lord's name around font, pulpit, and

altar. These are holy places, for here God is distributing His

gifts. Apart from these gifts the church has no mission. Far from

being detrimental to the church's mission, the liturgy is the source

and goal of all missionary activity.



John T. Pless

University Lutheran Chapel

Minneapolis, MN