Scot McKnight has gone and done it again… he’s poking around with one of the evangelical church’s sacred cow’s – worship.
Here’s what he says about what we typically do on Sunday morning:
“Let’s call this was it is: spiritual eroticism. And those who are good at it can be called spiritual erotics.”
That’s kind of audacious!
Check it out over at CT’s OutofUr Blog: http://blog.christianitytoday.com/outofur/archives/2009/05/scot_mcknight_c.html
Randy,
I think he may have used some strong words (“Spiritual Eorticism”) but that the intent of the blog may have been dead on. I do think that often people look to sunday mornings to see what they get out of it. Will it be a good speaker? Good Music? Who can I bump into and catch up?
On the positive side of those thoughts is the possibility that they love to fellowship with others, they love to share an experience, an idea, a challenge. They like being with like minded people do like minded activities. My question is if they have the same enthusiasm for witnessing or serving or personal prayer and devotion. Are they looking at their walk as a tool for giving to others (service, witnessing, comfort, etc.) and giving to God (time, talents, praise, reflection etc.).
So, if the article causes one more person to ask themselves prior to Sunday morning, “What can I give out of me today at church (to God or others)?” than “What will I get out of church today?” then his article may have done some good.
Even Jesus walked into temple one day and shook things up by physically throwing out the money changers.
Thanks for linking to Scot’s article, Randy. I didn’t know about it until I saw your post.
I thought it was a good article. It seems like we are easily tempted to evaluate an experience (like worship) based on our feelings about it. So, “that was great worship” sometimes means “I enjoyed the emotional experience of it” without also meaning “it changed me/my relationship with God/how I will serve God when I leave this place”.
I’m more concerned about the Christian or religious person who wrings hands and points fingers at others’ preferences, styles or outward affection in worship. I cannot help but think of Mary Magdalene at Jesus’ feet, whose behavior and emotions embarrassed many, including Jesus’ own disciples – especially Judas, who basically accused Mary of being so heavenly minded that she was no earthly good.
There are many like McKnight who seek to ridicule or downplay the importance of emotions or experience in worship. Would McKnight join with others who scorned Mary’s “intoxicating” impulses? This essay makes me think of the ascetics, who believed that the denial of human passions and desires makes one more spiritual (an idea based on Greek philosophy, not Scripture). It was Paul who summarized what our response to them should be, in Colossians 2:
Derek wrote: There are many like McKnight who seek to ridicule or downplay the importance of emotions or experience in worship.
Derek, it didn’t seem to me that Scot’s doing that. What he’s doing is saying don’t make the emotional experience of worship an end in itself, because that downplays God, the object of worship, and subverts what worship is.
Would McKnight join with others who scorned Mary’s “intoxicating” impulses?
I think that’s very unlikely because Mary’s focus was on Jesus, not on how wonderful it was to get so emotional about Jesus. Also, she was doing something sacrificial, rather than having an experience centered around herself and her emotions – she gave up some expensive oil for Jesus. I think Scot appreciates worship which leads people into loving God and loving others in demonstrable practical ways.
Why don’t you post what you think on Scot’s blog where he reposted the article? (here: http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/2009/05/courtly-love-in-the-courts-of_comments.html) He seems to read all the comments on his blog and often responds to people whose comments are directed to him and are other than “Wonderful post, Scot – I completely agree”.