WORSHIP NOTES
Volume 20, No. 2 (February 2025)
Broad Movements
This is a period with a great deal of different developments (including the modern missionary movement and the enormous expansion of Christianity worldwide); this chart below traces some of the broader historical trends and compares their tendencies (chart adapted in part from Marva Dawn, How Shall We Worship?, 108–13):
This period is characterized by the multiplication of Protestant confessions and denominations (there are at least nine major branches, and hundreds of distinct groups). The disunity, factionalism, and divisions among Protestants has not always been honoring to Christ (who, after all, prayed “that they may be one” [John 17:11]), but we find different distinguishing characteristics and emphases in different groups. Some are more “left-wing”: that is, more radical in their departure from the practices of the church of the Middle Ages; some are more “right-wing” or conservative: hence, closer to the medieval model. In the early centuries of this period, the Anabaptists and the Quakers were the most extreme; Reformed and Methodist groups were more middle-of-the-road; and Lutherans and Anglicans were more conservative, preserving some of the more ceremonial aspects such as found in Roman Catholic worship. And in the later centuries, frontier worship and later Pentecostal worship differ greatly from the more formal expressions.
Broad Trends and Developments
In this very quick flyover of a big expanse of history, we want to highlight just a few of the important trends and developments in the area of worship (which will necessarily be broad generalizations with notable exceptions).
Ascendancy of Preaching, Decline of Worship
The reaction of the Reformers to the Middle Ages’ neglect of the word and preaching in worship (and overemphasis on the Mass) led to a healthy reemphasis on the centrality of the Scriptures and their exposition in public worship. The resultant pendulum swing also led to downplaying in many traditions the importance of worship and the frequency of the Lord’s Supper (which until the Reformation was practiced in some form in virtually every church gathering).
Differing Views on “Biblical” Worship
Every Christian group seeks to be biblical in its worship practices,4 but there have been divergent historical streams concerning just what biblical worship entails. The view of Calvin, and those who follow him in what has become known as the regulative principle of worship (especially Presbyterians and other Reformed groups) was that only what the Bible specifically mentions in precept or example should be allowed in public worship. Luther and his heirs (Lutherans, Anglicans, etc.) preferred what is known as the normative principle of worship: that anything that is not specifically forbidden in Scripture is allowable in worship.
These views have serious implications for what finds its way into corporate worship: such things as drama, videos, dance, etc. Obviously, those who adhere to the normative principle would make allowance for such practices, whereas those who follow the regulative principle would not. (Monte Wilson caricatures the extreme regulative principle thus: “Do they use art? It must be a sin. Do they utilize ceremony? Ceremonies are evil. Do they light candles? Candles are of the devil” [“Church-o-Rama or Corporate Worship,” 74].)
In fact, on more than one occasion this author has heard or read an impassioned defense of the regulative principle, only for the speaker or writer to then quote not from the Bible, but from the Westminster Confession of Faith to illustrate just what those biblically regulated principles are supposed to be! (For a balanced treatment of this issue from an insider to the Reformed/regulative perspective, see A. J. Gore, Covenantal Worship.)
And yet even supporters of the regulative principle are faced with the stark truth that the New Testament has very, very little to say about the specifics of worship in the church. All kinds of decisions must be made on grounds other than simply what the Bible lays out. (In fact, on more than one occasion this author has heard or read an impassioned defense of the regulative principle, only for the speaker or writer to then quote not from the Bible, but from the Westminster Confession of Faith to illustrate just what those biblically regulated principles are supposed to be! For a balanced treatment of this issue from an insider to the Reformed/regulative perspective, see Gore, Covenantal Worship.)
There is no one set form in the New Testament that we can just take and apply. So, the regulative principle still leaves a lot of things open to debate and wise judgment (service times, service length, place and form and length of the preaching, music, frequency and mode of communion, etc., etc.).
The Development of Hymnody
After the Reformers reintroduced congregational singing to the church, succeeding centuries saw rich traditions of songs for worship develop. The priestly chanting of the Middle Ages was replaced by Scripture-based hymns; and, as we have seen, Luther made a notable contribution to this corpus.
Metrical versions of the psalms were encouraged by Calvin and had a far-reaching influence,7 until Isaac Watts (1674–1748) broke the mold: he rightly observed that if only the psalms were sung, then the person of Christ and his work would never come to expression in the people’s song. Watts composed richly lyrical hymn texts that celebrated the work of God and of his Son. Charles Wesley (1707–1788) and others followed in his wake.
The nineteenth century saw the rise of gospel hymnody, focused on an experiential response to the saving work of Christ, which found its way out of evangelistic tent meetings and into the church. And the late twentieth saw the development, parallel to the meteoric rise of contemporary praise and worship choruses and songs, of a more traditionally structured sort of modern hymnody from such songwriters as Keith and Kristyn Getty.
The Enlightenment/Rationalism/Liberalism
The Enlightenment of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries emphasized reason over faith, and led to a general skepticism about the supernatural aspects of the Christian faith. This led to the German philosophical rationalism of the nineteenth century, which in turn spawned theological liberalism with its denial of miracles, the inspiration of Scripture, and the deity of Christ. This liberalism infected young North American theologians studying in German universities, who then became faculty members at American seminaries and trained future pastors in this way of thinking. Then, as pastors, they brought this teaching to the people in the churches where they ministered.
Fundamentalism, Evangelicalism, Free Churches
As a reaction to these widespread trends early in the twentieth century, there was the rise of fundamentalism (defending the “fundamentals” of the faith—the virgin birth, inspiration of Scripture, miracles, etc.—from liberal attacks), which in turn became evangelicalism, with its emphasis on the Scriptures and the gospel in contrast to the social issues that predominated in liberal churches. (Of course, the reaction to liberalism, which often tended to focus only on social issues, led evangelicalism to ignore social issues for a long time; thankfully, a more biblical balance seems to be slowly developing.)
Theologically orthodox faculty left liberal seminaries and founded competing institutions of a more evangelical persuasion. Many believers left the theologically corrupt “mainline” churches and started new evangelical denominations or independent churches.
The Neglect of Worship
Evangelicalism’s reaction to theological liberalism led to a greater emphasis on Bible teaching and preaching in the churches. But this necessary reemphasis was another pendulum swing that resulted in again downplaying the importance of worship in many churches. That was the situation that A. W. Tozer was addressing in 1961 (as we saw in the preface) when he called worship “the missing jewel” in modern evangelicalism.
The “Reformation” of Worship
Since Tozer wrote in 1961, there has been a tremendous surge in interest in, attention to, and development of worship in the evangelical world. God has moved to restore the proper place of worship in Christ’s body.
One major influence was the charismatic movement of the 1960s and beyond. The movement’s emphasis on heartfelt and emotional engagement with God in worship helped to reawaken an appreciation for this aspect of worship even in non-charismatic churches (especially in contrast to the pedantic nature of much traditional worship at the time).
The charismatic movement’s musical evolution greatly influenced the rise of contemporary worship music, often called “praise and worship music” (this nomenclature itself owing its origins to a characteristic sharp distinction made in charismatic worship between “praise” and “worship”). This distinction is artificial, in this writer’s opinion. Biblically, worship is a broad, overarching concept (as we have seen in this study), and praise is one aspect or subset of worship.
The so-called worship wars of the 1980s and 1990s were basically fought over issues of musical style and instruments in worship, as the new contemporary worship music movement collided with bastions of traditional church music and worship styles. Often the battle lines were drawn between traditional (usually older) adherents and those (usually the young) who preferred the newer contemporary styles. Sadly, these conflicts led to much division and dissent in churches, even leading to church splits in some instances. More recently, many churches have sought to make peace with the new realities by seeking to blend traditional and contemporary elements, as a way to honor and satisfy all the generations represented in the church and to foster unity by being together in worship, in spite of all the differences in preference. Other churches have chosen to provide separate traditional and contemporary services, largely along generational lines.
The issue of church music continues to be a hot-button issue. In fact, it has been suggested that many evangelicals choose a local church to attend based on its musical offerings, rather than because of the church’s preaching or doctrinal stance. All the more reason for churches and their leaders to diligently study what the Bible teaches on worship (and what it leaves open), as a way forward.
Looking to the Future: A Need for Balance
Too often the increased appreciation for and emphasis on worship in our day has led to a softening commitment to the reading and exposition of the word in corporate worship. We have just observed other pendulum swings, overreactions, and overcorrections of this sort.
As we see Heb 2:12, Jesus himself considers both the proclamation of God’s word and the praises of the people to be so important that he has committed himself to mediating both of those activities in the assembly; so, a balance is called for (though, sadly, too seldom achieved in practice): a balance of revelation and response, theology and doxology, preaching and music; “completing the cycle” in worship; seeing the entire service as indeed an offering of worship: worship through singing, praying, giving, Scripture reading, preaching, partaking at the table.
God has been doing great things in these last decades in restoring the importance of worship to the church of Jesus Christ. Let us continue to strive for the kind of balance that will truly give him “glory in the church and in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:21).
| There is a continuing need to balance revelation and response, theology and doxology, preaching and corporate praise. |