Interlacing Gathered and Scattered Worship as an Evangelistic Enterprise

Alongside the issue of developing an understanding of interlacing worship between gathered and scattered worlds is the issue of whether gathered worship embraces the people variously noted as “seeker,” “non-believer, “ or “first-time worship attendee.” Discussing what has sometimes been called the “target” group for ministry is an on-going issue in the life of many local congregations.

Also to be considered is the importance of using clear and inclusive words versus ambiguous and exclusive language in the Church, another issue that is discussed in many Church and academy circles. Like target groups, such discussion has been heard within the Church Growth movement gatherings and writings, particularly when it has talked about barriers that the local church either consciously or non-consciously creates when it uses a too highly developed “church language-speak” in its worship services. Such barrier language uses words that often are unfamiliar to those outside the church, words which remain ambiguous unless someone at some point provides clear definitions of those words.

Now if words like sanctuary, pulpit, hymnal, and the like are the issue, little is lost if the words remain somewhat ambiguous, at least for a time. Besides, those are relatively easy to explain and can been seen physically. However, if the words are the words that are often heard in worship, words like grace, sin, communion, and the like, those new ones who have gathered for worship and now knowingly or not are hearing the story of God and the response of God’s people are without the ability to understand how important such words are to the gathered worship of God. These newly gathered people remain outside the gathered experience spiritually, even though they may be present physically.

As a side note, it is interesting to me, in this day of general biblical ignorance on the part of some members of many congregations, that the stories of Scripture, the very stories which over the years have done much to shape the Christian faith – stories which now are often unknown by those members – themselves present a hurdle for relating concepts of worship like community, covenant, faith, sin, grace, etc. within the gathered community! Such concepts cannot be adequately understood apart from telling and re-telling the story of God and God’s people. Thus, a narrative theology approaches the Scripture itself in ways that re-tell the story. This is likely more useful in conveying the meaning of concepts like Trinity, sin, human depravity, etc., than the creeds of history, unless of course the creed becomes a launching point for relating these beliefs to the stories of Scripture. Another plus is that stories are just plain more interesting and inviting than dogma. Perhaps it is because people can often find themselves within a story. This moves them toward feelings of connection (or disconnection) versus only toward a mental assent of spiritual concepts.

Larry Hurtado has written along similar lines in considering how to deal in a university setting with students of various faiths. He notes: “I propose as a good test of clear thinking by religions is whether they can present their beliefs and practices with clarity and some cogency to interested non-adherents” (Larry Hurtado, 1999. At the Origins of Christian Worship: The Context and Character of earliest Christian Devotion. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., p. 99). Though his focus in this telling regards the community that is found within the academy, and though he is focused here in dealing with non-Christian religions (Islam and Buddhism, for example), this is not too terribly different from reaching and integrating people who are new to gathered worship. Some church leaders begin to ask questions like: How do we worship with these people present apart from telling the rather exclusive story of God and risk alienating them? Or, what words should we use that will be understandable to all?

Also, there are competing worship issues that lie between groups, groups sometimes identified with markers like “mainline” denominations and “free” denominations, or Reformed groups and Holiness groups, and other such divisions. Belief issues developed within these rather closed communities sometimes (often?) draw various conclusions, which lead to the development of different expectations and practices. For example, something as central to gathered worship as to who its leadership should be (ordained or lay, male and female, etc.) can create walls of separation not only between these various groups, but also within local congregations, and can unintentionally create a dense mystery for those who find themselves outside those walls. More than one member of some Christian denominations has jokingly asserted that it is often harder to join their particular denomination than it is to become a Christian.

To think of such issues and now to add what is seemingly another concept of worship, a worship that is practiced both inside the walls and is interlaced with worship that is practiced outside the walls may be just too much to consider. Even more, such a concept could be an obstacle for some denominational groups or local churches. That may be true unless this lifestyle of worship can be seen not as some innovation, but as a stream the roots itself in harmony with the practices of the early Church.

Being able to clearly delineate the distinctions and cogently apply theological/Scriptural bases for a practice of interlacing gathered and scattered worship is essential. Hurtado has suggested an important ingredient for such conversations: “[I]t is good for religions to conduct their reflections on their beliefs and practices ‘out in the open’ so to speak, inviting auditors and visitors as well as adherents to respond” (99). This is right thinking. However, even more important than “inviting” people to come to this conversation is to hold this conversation in the world where people live, and to hold it in a manner which invites all people to join in the conversation. It is essential for Christian worship to be a living entity among those who are being invited to join in it, to be “enfleshed” so that it can be seen as well as heard. This worship in the world, this scattered worship, provides a great invitation for investigators and investigations everywhere and at all times. Alongside this daily living out of the worship of God comes the extending of intentional, living words of invitation. Words like those of early believers in Jesus who invited people to “Come and see” (John 4:29), and then began to tell the story of what they had both seen and heard. These are spoken words. These remind me of the words 13th century Francis of Assissi, “Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words.”

Such a scattered worship practice invites an investigation of the daily lives of those who live this worship life. It opens doors of opportunities for members of a congregation to speak of their belief(s) about God and God’s work in the world, and most importantly, to not only believe and speak of these things about God but to live them and to do them in their everyday, ordinary lives.

Many members of congregations feel inadequate to join in the evangelistic task of the Church, so they simply don’t do it. Why is that? Is it because they believe only “gifted” people do such things? Is it that they believe that they do not possess such gifts? More importantly, do they believe, or has current worship practice taught, that daily worship is optional, since they do their worship “at the church?” What if they were taught that evangelism is not so much a set of prescribed words and a prepared methodology as it is the extension of the worship that they share each time they gather with their spiritual brothers and sisters at the local congregation? What if they were told that all they need to do in order to be an evangelistic force is to live out the pattern of responding to the call of the Holy Spirit in worship, a pattern that many of many of them have been following for many years?

As far as developing church outreach ministry goes, wouldn’t it be a better approach to have living worship be the invitation for people to “Come and see” than spending so much time dreaming up and empowering events that the Church imagines may be interesting to people outside the life of the Church, events that the Church often creates so that it can invite people to come join in the life of the Church, events which often remain the exclusive possession and experience of those who are already gathered in the Church?

The interlacing of gathered and scattered worship is based, in part, on a presupposition that people who see something interesting, something inviting, something of which they would like to be part, something that arouses awareness of need in them, something which can meet that need, something that they might just seek out, something which they may very well respond to (and note here that such response lives in the world of worship!), something that might allow for a “Yes” to bound from their lips when the question is actually asked in words, “Won’t you come and see?”