Author: Robert Arakaki (Page 38 of 89)

Standing During Liturgy Could Lead To Better Worship

July 6, 2014 / Robert Arakaki / 15 Comments

“We did know whether we were in heaven or on earth.” Source

Traditionally Christians stood to worship God. This has been the historic practice of the Christian Church. This began to change during the 1200s when backless stone benches appeared in English churches. Then in the 1300s and 1400s they were replaced with wooden benches.

Churches were not commonly furnished with permanent pews prior to the Protestant Reformation. With the rise of the sermon as the high point of the Sunday morning worship pews became a standard part of Protestant architecture. What many Protestants and Evangelicals are not aware of is the fact that there was a time when pews were rented out to families, and that some church pews became inheritable family property! That is how the Free Methodist church got their name. In addition to being opposed to slavery, they were also in favor of free pews!

Another interesting fact to consider is that churches that claim to hew to the regulative principle of worship, e.g., Reformed churches, have pews in their sanctuaries despite the fact that there is no biblical warrant for pews in places of worship!

Pews are more than trivial adiaphora, they shape our worship significantly. Pews bolted to the floor in neat rows create a lecture hall atmosphere where the lecture is the principle activity. The practice of having pulpits, often two pulpits, underscored the importance of the teaching aspects of worship. Protestant worship is very concerned with facilitating information transfer and cognitive teaching. One has to wonder if any of these churches ever attempted to go back to the more historic style of worship where people stood in the Liturgy.

Protestant worship is quite different from historic Christian worship where the Liturgy of the Word (the Scripture reading followed by the homily) was preparatory to the Eucharist. In the Orthodox Church the priest reads the Gospel, not from the pulpit on the side, but at the entrance to the Altar area. This symbolizes the New Law (Gospel) going forth from Mount Zion in the last days to all nations (Isaiah 2:2-5) Following that, in the Eucharist the Christian goes up to commune with Christ, to receive His Body and His Blood “for the remission of sins and everlasting life.”

Converts to Orthodoxy often find themselves adjusting to a “new” style of worship, standing throughout the entire Liturgy. This “new” style is actually the worship style of the ancient Church. Some Orthodox jurisdictions allow for pews, while others prefer the more traditional practice of no pews with exceptions made for the infirm and elderly. When I first started attending the Orthodox Church on a regular basis I found that standing in the Liturgy made a lot of sense. Standing for extended periods of time facilitated a state of attentiveness and inner stillness. I also learned how to deal with the discomfort of standing for extended periods.

As a former Protestant I know that Protestants do not sit throughout the entire worship service. Instead, there is a constant shifting from sitting to standing back to sitting. This is not bad, but I found that it gave the worship service a certain kinetic quality. I noticed this kinetic quality in both ‘traditional’ Protestant services and contemporary praise services. Orthodox worship, on the other hand, inculcates an inner stillness that allows one to reflect on the words being sung or chanted. This inner stillness also allows for the Holy Spirit to speak to my heart.

So when I read how recent article “Standing During Meetings Could Lead To Better Work” about how secular research found that standing during meetings can boost attentiveness and group productivity, I was reminded of the similar benefits of standing during the Divine Liturgy. This makes sense in light of the fact that the word “Liturgy” comes from the Greek “leitourgeia” which means “work of the people.”

“Standing During Meetings Could Lead To Better Work ” Source

Will there be pews in heaven? Consider the passage from Revelation 7:9:

After this I looked and there before me was

a great multitude that no one could count,

from every nation, tribe, people and language,

standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. (NIV)

Worship in Ancient House Churches

June 28, 2014 / Robert Arakaki / 2 Comments

Folks,

Did you ever wonder how the early Christians worshiped? As a follow up to “Jurassic Park and the Protestant Quest for the Early Church,” I am reposting Gabe Martini’s “The Eucharistic Liturgy in Ancient House Churches.”

Robert Arakaki

The Eucharistic Liturgy in Ancient House Churches

by Gabe Martini

Many evangelical groups today are proposing that we abandon traditional models of doing the Church, instead replacing that presumed stodginess with what is—they claim—a more “New Testament” model: the “house church” or “cell” church models.

Essentially, they are promoting that the local church be a de-centralized assembly, meeting in the homes of various individuals and proportionally scattered throughout a city (or town or region). The presumption is that this is the Biblical model for both fellowship and discipleship, derived from the New Testament itself.

While we certainly read of house Churches in the New Testament (e.g. 1 Cor. 1:11,16;Rom. 16:5; Col. 4:15), usually being the homes of wealthy individuals with enough room for a large assembly of people, the house/cell churches of the modern day do not actually resemble the worship or piety associated with such New Testament prototypes.

Additionally, the house Churches of the New Testament developed into the basilicas of the post-Constantine Roman empire, when the faith was no longer forced underground as a result of both imperial and Judaic persecution. The same elements present in the earlier house Churches found their way into the more established basilicas and temples of the fourth century and beyond—they were just given a newer and freer context within which to thrive.

Dura Church Diagram

Two distinct features of the most ancient house churches—and in fact, of the most ancient churches that archaeology has unveiled—are that of the baptistry and the place of the Eucharistic sacrifice.

When discussing the Eucharistic controversy at Corinth, Jerome Kodell describes a typical, first century Christian house Church:

Archaeology has shown that the typical large home of the period could accomodate about fifty people for a meal, ten in the triclinium (dining room), where the guests reclined on couches, and forty in the atrium(courtyard), where the guests sat around a central pool.
—The Eucharist in the New Testament, p. 75

This description corresponds with that of the two oldest archaeological finds of ancient house churches—those at Megiddo (Palestine) and Dura Europos (Syria), which both date to the third century A.D. (early or mid-200s). Both house churches have a place for baptism (like the central pool mentioned above), an area for the general assembly of laity, and a small area for the Eucharistic celebration (often an elevated platform with a table or altar). A large, mosaic inscription in Greek at the Megiddo house church reads: “The God-loving Aketous has offered this table to the God Jesus Christ, as a memorial,” a seemingly obvious reference to the Eucharist, given both the words “table” and “memorial.”

These substantial structures were not simple homes with simple services, lacking any notion of adornment or beauty. In fact, Hugh Wybrew notes:

Even if worship took place in a domestic setting, it was not necessarily lacking in a certain splendor. Paul, Bishop of Samosata in the sixties of the third century, had a lofty throne erected on a dais in the meeting-hall. Attached to it was an audience chamber. When he entered the room for services he was acclaimed by the congregation like a Roman magistrate . . . The congregation at Cirta, a small town in North Africa, met in an ordinary house. But it possessed a rich collection of gold and silver vessels, and bronze lamps and candlesticks.

Despite occasional persecutions, the Church was growing rapidly in strength throughout the third century, laying the foundation for its remarkable expansion in the next. —The Orthodox Liturgy, p. 22

This church at Cirta, worshipping during the rule of the emperor Diocletian—one of the most ruthless persecutors of the Christians in Roman history—was raided by imperial authorities. In the official records kept by the pagan Roman officials (written by the hand of one Munatius Felix), an inventory of the church is given:

Victor, son of Aufidius, made the following brief record: two gold cups, also six silver cups, six silver jugs, a silver vessel, seven silver lamps, two candlesticks, seven small bronze candelabra with their lamps, also eleven bronze lamps with their chains, eighty-two women’s tunics, thirty-eight cloaks, sixteen men’s tunics, thirteen pairs of men’s shoes, forty-seven pairs of women’s shoes, nineteen rustic belts. —Beard et al., Religions of Rome: Volume 2, A Sourcebook, p. 112

It is even more interesting at Dura Europos, where the extensive discovery has yielded not only abundant examples of iconography throughout the house church structure (e.g. frescoes of Christ as the Good Shepherd, him walking on water, the Samaritan woman at the well, and the myrrh-bearing women at the empty tomb), but also some fragmentary manuscripts in the Hebrew language that show a continuity between the Eucharistic liturgy of the first century Didache and the more developed (fourth century) Apostolic Constitutions. A Greek-language harmony of the Gospels (in fragments), which is distinct from the Diatessaron of Tatian, has also been found at this site.

The Eucharistic anaphora in the Didache (ch. 10), which has been dated as early as AD 50–60, reads:

Thou, O Lord, Almighty, hast created all things for the sake of Thy name, hast given food and drink to the children of men for enjoyment, but to us Thou hast granted spiritual food and drink for eternal life through Jesus, Thy servant.

For all these things we thankfully praise Thee, because Thou art powerful. Thine is the glory forever. Amen.

The Hebraic fragment uncovered at Dura Europos also includes an anaphora, and it has a strikingly similar composition:

Blessed be the Lord, King of the Universe, who created All things, apportioned food, appointed drink for all the children of flesh with which they shall be satisfied; But granted to us, human beings, to partake of the food of the myriads of his angelic bodies. For all this we have to bless with songs in the gatherings of [the] people. —Fragment A, Dura Europos (ca. A.D. 235)

Despite being separated by at least two centuries, the anaphoras of both the apostolic Church in the first century, and that of this Syrian house church in the 3rd century share a number of similarities. They certainly reflect the same tradition of the Eucharist, and, as St. Irenaeus has asserted, the Eucharist is the heart of where our faith and theology both begins and ends. Similarities between these and the Judaic blessings for food and wine should be noted, as well. The Christians of both the Didache and third century were certainly assembling in the large homes of wealthy believers, but the detailed instructions for the rites of Baptism and the Eucharist in both sources indicates a community gathering for a purpose that is quite distinct from a simple Bible study, lecture, and sing-along.

So while evangelical groups in our present day might be attempting to emulate the house churches of the so-called New Testament era, it can be demonstrated with great clarity that these ancient Christian communities were gathered together primarily for the celebration of the sacred mysteries of Christ: Baptism and the Eucharist. I wouldn’t expect to find much in the way of iconography in a present-day house church, either.

If a Christian today wants to assemble in a way that is comparable to these ancient and New Testament-era house churches, the best way to do so is within the apostolic Church itself. A Church within which these venerable traditions have been preserved for centuries. And that church is the Orthodox Church.

Jurassic Park and the Protestant Quest for the Early Church

June 19, 2014 / Robert Arakaki / 13 Comments

In the movie Jurassic Park is an unforgettable scene where a group of humans see living breathing dinosaurs towering over them, munching on leaves on the tree tops. The dinosaurs were the product of careful biological engineering. Scientists extracted DNA from dinosaur fossils, reconstructed the original DNA strand, inserted the reconstructed DNA into egg embryos, and then hatched the eggs.

Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park is an apt metaphor of the recent quest among Protestant for the ancient Church. Examples of this yearning include: Robert Webber’s ancient-future faith network, Peter Leithart’s Reformational catholicism, and the convergence church movement. These recent movements have earlier precedents in the 1800s, e.g., Mercersburg Theology and the Oxford Movement. The Protestant quest for the ancient Church is similar to the paleontologists’ fascination with the lost past of dinosaurs. Having broken away from the corruptions of Roman Catholicism, Protestants asserted they were now in a position to return to the purity and simplicity of ancient Christianity.

The desire to reconnect with the past is a natural one. It is like an adopted child wanting to learn about his or her birth parents. This interest in antiquity is also biblical. The prophet Jeremiah wrote about seeking after the good way, the ancient paths (Jeremiah 6:16). The book of Proverbs talked about respecting the “ancient boundary stone” put in place by the forefathers (Proverbs 22:28).

Reconstructing the Past

Extracting dinosaur DNA

The novel Jurassic Park can be seen as a metaphor of the flaws within Protestant ecclesiology. If one pays close attention to the story line of Jurassic Park one becomes aware that the dinosaurs are not real dinosaurs in the sense of being identical to those that existed in the Mesozoic era. The dinosaurs of Jurassic Park were laboratory creations, the product of careful scientific research. In the same way there is a certain artificiality in the Protestant quest for the early Church. Where the scientists in the laboratories of Jurassic Park worked from DNA extracted from dinosaur fossils, Nevin and Schaff worked in seminary libraries seeking to excavate ancient church texts. More recently, Webber and Leithart used the same methods attempting to renew the church by selectively drawing on the church fathers and early liturgies.

Within Jurassic Park are nuggets of fascinating philosophical questions. One fundamental problem was that the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park were artificial creatures. They are artificial because of modifications made to their bodies. This gave rise to all sorts of problems and made them inherently unstable.

“You don’t know for sure?” Malcolm said, affecting astonishment.

Wu smiled, “I stopped counting,” he said, “after the first dozen. And you have to realize that sometimes we think we have an animal correctly made—from the standpoint of the DNA, which is our basic work—and the animal grows for six months and then something untoward happens. And we realize there is some error. A releaser gene isn’t operating. A hormone not being released. Or some other problem in the developmental sequence. So we have to go back to the drawing board with that animal so to speak.” (Jurassic Park p. 111)

One example of genetic modifications built into the recent ancient-future and reformational-catholic churches is the absence of the episcopacy. This is no mistake. To adopt an episcopal structure would mean surrendering congregational autonomy so precious to so much of Evangelicalism. In this sense they are still genetically Protestant. Their clinging to Protestant church structures fundamentally separates them from the early Church founded by the Apostles. The bishop was integral and fundamental to the early Church. Ignatius of Antioch, a student of John the Apostle and the third bishop of Antioch, stressed the importance of obeying the bishop (see Letter to the Smyrneans VIII, IX).

Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Without the bishop’s supervision, no baptisms or love feasts are permitted.

Yet the libertarian strand in Protestant theology will not allow for bishops in the historic sense. Many Protestants by reading only the Bible and ignoring the early church fathers end up projecting their Protestant bias onto church history. But such an omission would be like a historian writing a book about ancient Rome with no mention of the Caesars! Or a law professor teaching a course on American jurisprudence with hardly a mention of the Supreme Court.

Another quandary in the Protestant quest for the early Church is whether one could actually bring it back or just end up with a caricature. A similar quandary existed for the scientists in Jurassic Park who had never seen a living dinosaur from the Mesozoic era.

Grant said, “How do you know if it’s developing correctly? No one has ever seen these animals before.”

Wu smiled. “I have often thought about that. I suppose it is a bit of a paradox. Eventually, I hope, paleontologists such as yourself will compare our animals with the fossil record to verify the developmental sequence.” (Jurassic Park p. 114).

The paradox here is whether these reconstructed dinosaurs were really dinosaurs or something else. All that the scientists had to go by were fossils, not actual living dinosaurs from the Mesozoic era. Similarly, for Protestants all they had to go by were ancient patristic texts but no living church tradition that goes back to the early Church. This leaves them guessing as to what the early Church must have been like.

Similarly, there is a tension between people who have little patience for the deep questions and just want to get things done.

Hammond sighed. “Now, Henry, are we going to have another one of those abstract discussions? You know I like to keep it simple. The dinosaurs we have now are real and—“

“Well, not exactly,” Wu said. He paced the living room, pointed to the monitors. “I don’t think we should kid ourselves. We haven’t re-created the past here. The past is gone. It can never be re-created. What we’ve done is reconstruct the past—or at least a version of the past.” (Jurassic Park pp. 121-122)

Lacking a living tradition that goes back to the Apostolic Church, Protestants end up having to reconstruct the early Church as they best understood it to have been. The Jesus Movement of the 1970s had house churches where people sat on the floor, played guitars and sang praise songs, and everyone with a Bible in their hands. More recently, Evangelicals have discovered the writings of the early church fathers and are seeking to incorporate these discoveries into their congregations: reciting the Nicene Creed, celebrating the Eucharist weekly, vestments for the clergy, candles and incense. Not being part of a living tradition they end up creating a “version of the past” trusting God to bless their sincere efforts to return to the early Church. It is like lost travelers seeking to find their way home without knowing where home is on the map.

The Lost World

The Lost World Scenario

An alternative scenario can be found in another book written by Michael Crichton, The Lost World.

“No, no,” Levine said earnestly. “I’m quite serious. What if the dinosaurs did not become extinct? What if they still exist? Somewhere in an isolated spot on the planet.” (Lost World p. 5)

The Protestant view of history assumes that there once was an apostolic Church but it no longer exists today. But Protestants and Evangelicals need to ask the question: What if the apostolic Church still exists today? What if there was a church where the errors of the papacy were avoided? What if that church was within driving distance today?

For Evangelicals Eastern Orthodoxy is a Lost World. Many Protestants and Evangelicals drive by these funny looking ethnic churches with strange names unaware of these churches’ connection to the early Church. The estrangement of the Great Schism of 1054 resulted in Western Christians, both Roman Catholics and Protestants, not being aware of Orthodoxy’s existence and its distinctive approach to doctrine and worship. The Protestant Reformers’ bitter struggle against medieval Catholicism gave Protestants a severe astigmatism that skewed their understanding of church history. Protestants came to view the early Church through the prism of Catholicism imagining the Apostolic Church to be part a lost past. But while the Protestants of the 1500s can be excused for having a distorted perspective on church history, the situation is quite different today. Many Protestants in recent years are learning about the early church fathers and are having a firsthand encounter with Orthodoxy.

This is why the first visit to an Orthodox Church is often such a surprise for many Evangelicals. Orthodoxy represents what many Protestants are seeking after, the early Church before Roman Catholicism. The Orthodox Liturgy is part of living tradition that goes back to the days of the Apostles. At first glance many would find this hard to accept especially the icons, the elaborate liturgical ceremonies, and ornate vestments worn by priests. All these are so radically different from the austere minimalism that mark Reformed, and especially, Puritan worship, or the exuberant expressiveness of charismatic worship.

Images in Dura Europos Synagogue 3rd century

But when approached from the standpoint of the Old Testament pattern of worship transformed by the New Covenant of Jesus Christ, the Divine Liturgy makes perfectly good sense. The vestments worn by Orthodox priests are patterned after those worn by the Old Testament priests. If Jesus Christ is the Passover Lamb who takes away the sins of the world then it makes sense to view the Eucharist as the culmination of the Old Testament sacrificial system. A careful reading shows that icons have a biblical basis in the Old Testament (Exodus 26, 2 Chronicles 3). Recent archaeological findings have shown that early Jewish synagogues had images on their walls. All this explains why a conscientious re-reading of Scripture and an open minded study of church history have led thousands of Protestants: pastors, professors, devout laymen to the conclusion that the Orthodox Church is indeed what it claims to be: the very Church founded by Christ himself, not some later knock off imitation. Visit Journey to Orthodoxy.com

Testing the Lost World Hypothesis

Protestant ecclesiology assumes a major discontinuity in history. Protestant church history is based on the idea that there once was a pure and apostolic Church but that early Church fell into spiritual darkness. It was not until the Reformation that Martin Luther recovered the Gospel and spiritual light returned to Europe. Protestants believe that using the principle of the “Bible alone” they will be able to reform (reconstruct) the Church as it was meant to be. These assumptions are foundational to defining Protestant identity. The Protestant view of history is crucial for explaining why Protestants are different from Roman Catholics (they follow the ‘Bible alone’) and why they remain separate from Roman Catholics (they have Gospel in the pure form of justification by ‘faith alone’).

Orthodoxy presents a significant challenge to the Protestant paradigm of church history. It is the Lost World that did not become extinct. Orthodoxy claims a historical continuity that goes back to the first century but it looks so different from what Evangelicals imagine the early Church to have been like. Evangelicals can test Orthodoxy’s claim to historical continuity by studying the church of Antioch.

Many Evangelicals greatly admire the Apostle Paul the great missionary but only a few know the name of his home church. Every missionary has a home church from which they were sent. According to Acts 13:1-3, Paul received his missionary calling at the church of Antioch. In this brief passage we learn during the Liturgy the Holy Spirit directed that Paul and Barnabas be set aside for missionary work. The Church of Antioch – the Apostle Paul’s home church — continues to exist to this day. The current Patriarch of Antioch, John X, can trace his apostolic succession back to the first century. The Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America, which received two thousand Evangelicals into Orthodoxy in 1987, has direct ties with the Apostle Paul’s home church. This is a spiritual lineage that any Evangelical would be proud to have!

Another way an Evangelical can test the Lost World hypothesis is by tracing the form of worship used in the church of Antioch. We learn from that same passage (Acts 13:1-3) that the worship in Antioch was liturgical worship. The Greek word for “worshiping the Lord” (NIV) or “ministered to the Lord” (KJV) is “leitourgounton” from which we get “liturgy.” This is why Orthodox Christians refer to their Sunday worship as “the Liturgy.” The worship of the first Christians in Jerusalem was liturgical. This can be seen in Acts 2:42 which referred to the Liturgy of the Word (the Apostles’ teaching) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist (the breaking of bread). On most Sundays we use the fifth century Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and about ten times a year we use the fourth century Liturgy of St. Basil the Great. These liturgies which were inherited or passed on from the bishops before them are part of the Tradition of the ancient Church. In October we use the first century Liturgy of St. James. The liturgy was named after the Lord’s brother who served as bishop of Jerusalem and in that capacity presided over the first church council recorded in Acts 15. This historical continuity in Orthodox worship stands in stark contrast with the rapidly evolving forms of worship in Protestantism and Evangelicalism. The historic pattern of worship is pretty much lost in much of Evangelicalism. In the more progressive churches the order of worship changes from week to week depending on the decisions made by the praise and worship team. In the more ‘traditional’ Protestant churches the order of worship found in the back of the hymnal is never used by the congregation.

A third way an Evangelical can test the Lost World hypothesis is by tracing the form of church government. The early form of church government was episcopal – rule by bishop. Ignatius of Antioch, the third bishop of Antioch and a disciple of the Apostle John, wrote a series of letters on his way to martyrdom in Rome in 98 or 117 about the importance of obeying the bishop. In his letters he exhorted people not to celebrate the Eucharist (Lord’s Supper) apart from the bishop (Letter to the Smyrneans VIII and IX). All this is so different from Evangelicalism which favors congregational autonomy or the Presbyterian classis. Protestants may be averse to the episcopacy due to their opposition to the Roman Catholic Church but the fact remains that the episcopacy was the norm in the early Church. The notion of a universal papal supremacy was a distortion that Protestants rightly objected to. Orthodoxy also object on the basis that papal supremacy is contrary to Tradition. This supports the Lost World hypothesis that the Orthodox Church is the same church as the early Church.

Jurassic Park

GMO Churches?

Robert Webber’s ancient-future worship movement and Peter Leithart’s reformational-catholicism are examples of a GMO churches. “GMO” refers to “genetically modified organism.” Like the Jurassic Park scientists working to re-create dinosaurs, contemporary theologians and pastors are seeking to re-create the ancient Church based on their research. Their motives may be sincere but the means they used are highly problematic. Sola Scriptura, because it denies Holy Tradition a regulative function in the interpretation of Scripture, has given rise to all sorts of novel doctrines and worship practices resulting in ever multiplying church divisions. As a result there is no integrating center for Protestantism despite their longing for the unity of the ancient Church.

A carefully guarded and transmitted Holy Tradition gives Orthodoxy doctrinal stability and historical continuity that Protestantism never had. The transmission of Holy Tradition is done through apostolic succession, one bishop passing on the Faith to his successor. Another significant factor has been Orthodoxy’s practice of closed communion — only those who are Orthodox and in good standing can partake of the Eucharist. The Eucharist in addition to being the source of unity for Orthodoxy also protects the Orthodox against heterodox innovations. To use an analogy from biology, closed communion prevents unchecked interchange of unwarranted ideas and practices.

All this confronts sincere and serious Evangelicals with a profound question: Is the early Church of the Apostles really gone for good or is it still alive here and now in the Orthodox Church? This in turn presents them with a crucial choice: Do I place myself within the life and communion of the Church that has roots going back to the Apostles – or do I persist in the quest to reconstruct the early Church? In recent years thousands of Protestants and Evangelicals have completed their quest for the ancient Church by taking the bold step of joining the Orthodox Church. Interested readers can learn more about these journeys to Orthodoxy by checking out the titles and links recommended below. The ancient Church founded by the Apostles has never gone away, it is here in the Orthodox Church. By the mercies of God, we bid you: “Come and see.”

Robert Arakaki

Recommendations

Becoming Orthodox by Peter Gillquist

Thirsting for God in a Land of Shallow Wells by Matthew Gallatin

Facing East by Frederica Mathewes-Green

Orthodox Worship: A Living Continuity With the Temple, the Synagogue and the Early Church by Benjamin Williams

The Orthodox Church by Kallistos (Timothy) Ware

The Orthodox Way by Kallistos (Timothy) Ware

Blog: Journey to Orthodoxy

Blog: Letters on Orthodoxy

Blog: Liturgica