Novelty

A worship service works best when, through long familiarity, we don’t have to think about it… The perfect church service would be the one we were almost unaware of; our attention would have been on God. But every novelty prevents this. It fixes our attention on the service itself; and thinking about worship is a different thing from worshipping… Tis mad idolatry that makes the service greater than the god. A still worse thing may happen. Novelty may fix our attention not even on the service but on the celebrant…There is really some excuse for the man who said, ‘I wish they’d remember that the chart to Peter was ‘Feed my sheep’; not ‘Try experiments on my rats’, or even ‘Teach my performing dogs new tricks.’

~ C. S. Lewis

The above quote by C. S. Lewis was introduced to me during seminary by my friend JD Walt. Although Lewis wasn't around to observe the contemporary mess that is protestant worship he hits the nail right on the head. I do believe that Novelty is the destroyer of meaningful worship services. As long as worship leaders and planners seek first creativity, uniqueness, and that which is novel, protestant worship services will continue to leave masses of Christian unfulfilled and longing for something deeper...something divine. My friend JD has been having this conversation over at his blog for as long as I've known him so if you're interested in this Protestant dialogue I'd encourage you to take a look over there because I want to take a step out of the world of worship and apply this quote to something completely different - Fantasy Football.

Just as novelty is the killer of liturgy and worship so it is also the destroyer of fantasy football drafts. In preparing for fantasy football one can find himself or herself wrapped up in an endless maze of stats and strategies. In this maze one can quickly lose sight of the practicality of it all and end up over-thinking every draft move. Sure there is advantage in having a well thought out strategy and plan for your draft but when these plans turn to trying to be sneaky, creative, and novel then one's team will quickly turn into a bag of sleeper picks that never materialize.

I speak these words from experience. About a week ago our HAG fantasy football league had our draft and at some points I succumbed to the draft death that is novelty. The desire to outthink everyone lead to me using my first round pick on a QB instead of taking a solid RB or WR. In an attempt to defend myself a little bit let me state a few things. First you should know that our league is a 12 team keeper league so all of top RBs were off the board by the time I got my first pick (#5 via trade). Secondly because of our scoring system QBs far outscore every other position in our league. For example the top QB in our league last year scored 452 fantasy points while the top RB only scored 335. Despite the difference in value the perceived value of RBs is much greater in our league and thus it was my attempt to outthink everyone that caused me to overvalue a QB and destroy my draft with novel thinking.

There is one thing that I neglected to take into account on draft day that would have saved me from succumbing to this novelty - ADP. ADP or average draft position helps people like me, who arrogantly think they can outwit everyone in their league, stay grounded and know when they should draft certain players according to the general consensus value. Sure you'll always have that person who doesn't follow the plan and takes a Defense or Kicker in the 6th round, but if I would have utilized ADP I think it would have checked my novel thinking and enabled me to get a better second string RB (aside from my keeper) and still have a great starting QB. All in all my team isn't totally destroyed but it's surely not as good as it could have been.

So there you have my thoughts on why novelty is not only a killer of worship but also a plague upon fantasy football drafts. Hopefully if you haven't drafted yet you can learn from my mistakes and use average draft position states to help you truly out-draft your opponents.

- Ben

Saints and the Prosperity Gospel

I just got back from attending St. Athanasias Orthodox Church today and while I was there I had a few thoughts that I thought I'd write about. Yes, I haven't been as committed to posting as I should be, I do have some thoughts that I've been meaning to post, but they'll have to wait for now. On to the issue at hand.

After the first hour or so of the liturgy the Priest (who is married, by the way) gave the sermon from the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. As he spoke about this he talked about joy in giving and blessing, specifically stating that he is not proclaiming to us some health and prosperity/name it claim it gospel. A little while later the priest mentioned something about a saint and my friend Nathaniel leaned over to me and told me about a saint of the Orthodox Church that lived in Siberia, who would go walk through the towns and as he saw beggars in need he would give his shoes and coat to the beggars and walk back to his home without shoes and a coat (remember Siberia is mostly cold, very cold).

With that as the foundation let me share my thoughts. I have lamented the lack of recognition of Church history and lack of saints in the Protestant Church for some while now. I'm not necessarily arguing that we need to pray to saints, but our neglect of those who have gone before us in the Protestant tradition is absolutly dreadful, if not in fact sinful (and I do believe one could make a case for that). We as protestants like to recognize a select few (like an occasional missionary or Billy Graham) but primarily they are individuals who lived in relatively recently (or are still alive) and will soon be forgotten. Most of protestantism today barely knows who Wesley, Asbury, Calvin etc are, let alone Ignatius, Irenaus, Athanasias, etc are. We tend to exalt those in the Protestant tradition who do great things, rather than those who live lives of sainthood.

As I was thinking about all this I began to wonder what would have happened if the Protestant Church had maintained the use of saints? Could the prosperity gospel exist? It seems to me that I have to allow that it could exist; but that it would be considerably hard for it to exist in as wide spread state as it does. Why is this you may ask. Well it seems to me that only those who live saintly lives are canonized as saints. I don't know of any saints who are lifted up because of the life of affluence they lived. Saints are canonized because they model Christ's teachings, they give completely of themselves, they are an example to all believers. With a strong tradition of recognizing this life of sacrifice in men and women throughout church history, I would say that it would be hard for a teaching that proclaims something completely contrary to this (and Christ's teachings) to take root and become widespread.

The problem with the protestant church is that people who live these lives of sacrifice often fall through the cracks. We don't remember them becuase we view them as insignificant in our individualized self/purpose driven world. We don't look at ourselves as living in a tradition that starts at creation, proceeds through the Old Testament, to the New, through the church of the ages and finally to us. This is who we are and it is good to remember those who came before us (cf: Hebrews 11).

We also have a skewed view of the incarnation. We have allowed dualism to tarnish our worldview. We view the incarnation as a past event. As John Madden would say: "Boom!" it happened. We tend to view life as something that means little except for a time where we made decisions that affect where we go in the end. We don't view all of life as a being an incarnation of Christ to the world. I get so frustrated every time I see the stupid (and dare I say heretical) bumper sticker: "I'm not a physical being having a spiritual experience, I"m a spiritual being having a physical experience." It is this garbage theology that has allowed the Protestant Church to neglect the poor, to abuse the helpless and live in some bastardized state between orthodoxy and gnosticism. We think that we only need to worship God with our minds and our hearts, how much more should we engage all that God gave us, our mind, heart, and body (including all the sense)!

All that to say that we should be lifting up examples of men and women who have gone before us in the faith and have lived lives that are true incarnations of Christ. They teach us that it's not enough to think right, but to act and live right as well. Live and act, not in my own personal/individualistic sphere, but with in a community, within the whole world.

Why should we not celebrate the saints of the Church? Why should we not have aids to remember them and allow our hearts to be drawn closer to the Trinity through the example of their lives? Should we not allow their example to point us toward Christ and to the life that he commanded and lived himself?

To get back to the point, it seems to me that this strong emphasis would have helped the Protestant Church to see the health and wealth/prosperity gospel for what it truly is, namely a heresy that is not in line with what the church has believed and taught throughout the ages. That's what we are, we are bearers of the faith that has been handed to us. How dare we think that this is something new we are a part of! How dare we believe that we're starting something original! As A. W. Tozer says: "if the reader should discover here anythign really new he is conscience bound to reject it, for whatever in religion is new is by the same token false." (Pursuit of God, xiii). Or as C. S. Lewis (held as a 'saint' by some protestants) states: "if any parts of the book are 'original', in the sense of being novel...they are so against my will...I have tried to assume nothing that is not professed by all baptised and communicating Christians" (The Problem of Pain, xii)

I guess my ranting has started again and my point is now lost in the plethora of words. To summarize, it seems to me that if we, as protestants, hadn't rejected all church history prior to the reformation, and had continued to hold up examples of those who lived incarnationally in line with the words of Jesus, we would be having less of a problem now with false doctrines such as the prosperity gospel and the like. We desperately need to recapture our roots (not of protestantism, but of Christianity) and learn from our Orthodox and Catholic brothers and sisters. We dont' have to assimilate everthing they do (although it would be great to see the church whole again) but we do have to accept them as sharing our baptism in the name of the Trinity, and thus they are by nature Christians - our brothers and sisters.