Worship Arguments

Like many other churches across the world, the one I attend is currently wrestling with "worship issues." The argument (at least among the leadership) is not over "Scriptural" or "unscriptural" matters. Rather, this argument is over what is appropriate or inappropriate.

The precursor to these discussions seems to be complaints from some members over what they deem is "inappropriate" activity during the worship assembly.

Churches, made up of people, tend to encompass a wide variety of opinions over a number of different issues. Attempts to please everyone will meet failure. Catering to one segment means alienating another segment. Because of this reality, it is imperative that decisions concerning worship practices NOT be made on the basis of what one particular group of people in a congregation prefer. Each congregation's mission must center around what God is calling each particular congregation to do. Closely related to mission is vision, which asks this question: "what is God calling this church to do next?"

Worship practices become issues when they change. Understanding this basic fundamental truth helps to better cope with critics of such changes. It helps both those who embrace the change and those who oppose it to gain a deeper understanding of the baggage we all bring to the table.

Lovett H. Weems, Jr. offers these Seven Unchangeable Rules of Change:

1) People do that they perceive to be in their best interest
2) Change must have a positive meaning for people
3) People thrive with creative challenge, but wilt under negative stress
4) People believe what they see and previous deceptions can lead to present suspicions
5) People are different, there is not one single key to all change
6) The way to effective long-term change is first to visualize where you want to go, and then go ahead and inhabit that vision till it comes true
7) Change is always an act of imagination

It is important to point out that if a church leadership is divided, then the critics of change will go unchecked and either: 1)hold the church hostage, or 2) turn the church into a legalistic sect.

Case in point: Church Member A does not like something the worship leader did the previous Sunday. Instead of going to the worship leader, he finds an elder and voices his complaint. If the eldership is not united on this matter, then that elder could very well voice his agreement with Church Member A. This conveys to the church member that the leadership is divided, and adds fuel to mounting criticisms. The end result of such action is the division of the church, most likely followed by a period of steep decline, and eventual death.

Who wins in such a worst case scenario?

Ponder that question.