Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of scripture, to preaching and to teaching. 1Timothy 4:13
There have been times when I have sat in church and been more than usually gripped by what was going on up front. A particularly powerful sermon? Yes, of course, that sometimes happens; but that’s not what I’m thinking of. Music of exceptional quality? Yes, that too; but that also isn’t what I’m thinking of. A specially Spirit-led prayer? Again, yes; but...
No: what I’m thinking of is something so routine and ordinary that we hardly even think about it: what Paul calls “the public reading of scripture”. (Actually, to be strictly accurate, he simply wrote “reading”, and so could possibly be encouraging Timothy to take study seriously; but it’s pretty certain that he is talking in the context of corporate worship.)
I remember one occasion when the reading was delivered with such clarity, understanding and penetration that I would almost say that I was transfixed as I listened; the hair on the back of my neck went prickly.
An obvious question arises: do we take seriously the fact that the Bible is God’s word to us, and that therefore the reading of it should be treated as a key element in our worship services? Putting it in a more negative way, do we, perhaps subconsciously, regard it as just something we need to “do” in the service, almost as a duty? Have we let it become little more than a preliminary to the real business, the meaty stuff: what Paul calls the “preaching and teaching”?
I fear we have. So I want to remind us that the simple reading of God’s word has power to change lives; just by listening we can be instructed, comforted, challenged, rebuked, scolded, and plenty more besides.
To me this seems obvious. But it raises a slightly delicate question: who should be invited to read the scriptures in our services? Is it something anyone who can read should be encouraged to do? Or should it be kept for those with a special gift for it?
Over my many years as a pastor there has been a trend against the idea of the minister as a “one-man band” - that is (in the context of worship) that only he or she is qualified to lift up their voice to lead the congregation (apart, of course, from the notices; mustn’t forget that...).
I think this trend is, in essence, good: surely we want to encourage participation as much as we can.
But it can raise problems. The fact is that not everybody has the ability to read in the kind of way I have been suggesting. They may be perfectly literate, indeed, very intelligent; but for various reasons they just don’t have what it takes to put the reading across convincingly. In such circumstances a vital opportunity to hear God’s word is simply lost - the Bible passage might just as well not have been read at all, and so the living word is reduced to a dead letter.
Yes, it’s good to encourage participation in every aspect of church life; but, quite sensibly, we do look for certain “qualifications” before anyone is let loose, so to speak.
Or we should...
Many years ago I got involved with a church which didn’t have a minister. The music was led by a small and enthusiastic singing group, which sounds great. But unfortunately one of its members simply couldn’t sing. Oh yes, she was enthusiastic all right; ten out of ten for that. It wasn’t only that she didn’t have a particularly good voice; no, she just couldn’t sing in tune - and of course she was blissfully unaware of the fact and belted it out at top volume. It made your toes curl, like when someone runs their finger-nail up a blackboard. And everybody was so wonderfully Christian that they couldn’t bear to take her aside... Oh dear...
Something hinges on how we view our Sunday gatherings. If we see them as, in essence, “in house” occasions designed for those of us who “belong”, no major problem. As in any healthy family, we cheerfully accept and tolerate one another’s foibles.
But if we see them as “public” events - as, in effect, the church’s shop window for the world outside, the occasion when we are likely to welcome outsiders, unbelievers, perhaps even sceptics - then that’s rather different.
When we read Paul telling Timothy to “devote himself to the public reading of scripture” we certainly get the impression that he expected this particular component of worship to be done with great care and - dare I say it? - even expertise.
Now, how we translate that to our particular circumstances I’m really not sure. But is it something we need to think about?
Let’s take the public reading of scripture with real seriousness!
Lord God, help me to see in a new way the value of your written word - whether studied in private or read in public. Amen.
There have been times when I have sat in church and been more than usually gripped by what was going on up front. A particularly powerful sermon? Yes, of course, that sometimes happens; but that’s not what I’m thinking of. Music of exceptional quality? Yes, that too; but that also isn’t what I’m thinking of. A specially Spirit-led prayer? Again, yes; but...
No: what I’m thinking of is something so routine and ordinary that we hardly even think about it: what Paul calls “the public reading of scripture”. (Actually, to be strictly accurate, he simply wrote “reading”, and so could possibly be encouraging Timothy to take study seriously; but it’s pretty certain that he is talking in the context of corporate worship.)
I remember one occasion when the reading was delivered with such clarity, understanding and penetration that I would almost say that I was transfixed as I listened; the hair on the back of my neck went prickly.
An obvious question arises: do we take seriously the fact that the Bible is God’s word to us, and that therefore the reading of it should be treated as a key element in our worship services? Putting it in a more negative way, do we, perhaps subconsciously, regard it as just something we need to “do” in the service, almost as a duty? Have we let it become little more than a preliminary to the real business, the meaty stuff: what Paul calls the “preaching and teaching”?
I fear we have. So I want to remind us that the simple reading of God’s word has power to change lives; just by listening we can be instructed, comforted, challenged, rebuked, scolded, and plenty more besides.
To me this seems obvious. But it raises a slightly delicate question: who should be invited to read the scriptures in our services? Is it something anyone who can read should be encouraged to do? Or should it be kept for those with a special gift for it?
Over my many years as a pastor there has been a trend against the idea of the minister as a “one-man band” - that is (in the context of worship) that only he or she is qualified to lift up their voice to lead the congregation (apart, of course, from the notices; mustn’t forget that...).
I think this trend is, in essence, good: surely we want to encourage participation as much as we can.
But it can raise problems. The fact is that not everybody has the ability to read in the kind of way I have been suggesting. They may be perfectly literate, indeed, very intelligent; but for various reasons they just don’t have what it takes to put the reading across convincingly. In such circumstances a vital opportunity to hear God’s word is simply lost - the Bible passage might just as well not have been read at all, and so the living word is reduced to a dead letter.
Yes, it’s good to encourage participation in every aspect of church life; but, quite sensibly, we do look for certain “qualifications” before anyone is let loose, so to speak.
Or we should...
Many years ago I got involved with a church which didn’t have a minister. The music was led by a small and enthusiastic singing group, which sounds great. But unfortunately one of its members simply couldn’t sing. Oh yes, she was enthusiastic all right; ten out of ten for that. It wasn’t only that she didn’t have a particularly good voice; no, she just couldn’t sing in tune - and of course she was blissfully unaware of the fact and belted it out at top volume. It made your toes curl, like when someone runs their finger-nail up a blackboard. And everybody was so wonderfully Christian that they couldn’t bear to take her aside... Oh dear...
Something hinges on how we view our Sunday gatherings. If we see them as, in essence, “in house” occasions designed for those of us who “belong”, no major problem. As in any healthy family, we cheerfully accept and tolerate one another’s foibles.
But if we see them as “public” events - as, in effect, the church’s shop window for the world outside, the occasion when we are likely to welcome outsiders, unbelievers, perhaps even sceptics - then that’s rather different.
When we read Paul telling Timothy to “devote himself to the public reading of scripture” we certainly get the impression that he expected this particular component of worship to be done with great care and - dare I say it? - even expertise.
Now, how we translate that to our particular circumstances I’m really not sure. But is it something we need to think about?
Let’s take the public reading of scripture with real seriousness!
Lord God, help me to see in a new way the value of your written word - whether studied in private or read in public. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment