Friday, March 30, 2012

The Word of the Lord - really?

Lately it has become apparent to me that using the designated liturgical response for the scripture readings in the newest Lutheran hymnal may actually be causing unnecessary confusion.  In Evangelical Lutheran Worship (ELW © 2006), the first and second lectionary readings are concluded with either “The word of the Lord” or “Word of God, word of life.”  Really?  Is everything we read in the Bible appropriate to refer to as “the word of the Lord” or as a “word of God”?  Such a reference is certainly appropriate for some readings from the Bible - such as when God gives Moses the ten great words, or when an angel delivers a message from God, or even when prophets speak a message from God, and certainly when referring to the words of Jesus.  Passages like these could clearly be called a “word of the Lord.”  But the content of the Bible is far more diverse than solely messages direct from God.

The Bible contains many genres, such as historical writings recounting the story of a people of faith. These passages can be considered words about God acting in history - words of people of faith describing how they understood God to be interacting in their own circumstances, but these are words of people, not a message directly from God.  There is poetry describing the wonders of God, or lamenting to God, prayers both individual and communal, and these could be understood as words directed to God, they are not intended to be understood as words from the Lord. The poems found in the Bible sometimes refer to promises or declarations of God, but for the most part are focused on the words of humans singing praises, or sobbing laments.

Consider the letters found in the New Testament - these are words most definitely from one person to another person or group of people.  Even the Apostle Paul makes a distinction between levels of value in his letters, in one place he writes Now concerning virgins, I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy.”  (1 Corinthians 7:25 NRSV)  Would it be accurate to call Paul’s opinions “the word of the Lord”?  This is not the only place Paul acknowledges writing that is opinion or advice, see also his second letter to the Corinthians 8:10 and 11:17.  Is Paul giving advice to be considered the same as “the word of God”?  I’m pretty sure Paul would not claim that.

Some might argue that 2 Timothy 3:16 tells us that “all scripture is inspired by God” and thus all scripture is the word of God.  But in my way of understanding, to say something is “inspired by,” and to say something is “direct from,” are two different things. To say “This is the word of God” is different from saying “This word is inspired by God.”  I do not believe that scripture being inspired is the same thing as being dictated.  (Pastor Rebecca Craig has written a good article on A Lutheran View of the Bible to read further on this subject.)  The other problem with quoting this passage is that Paul is only referring to the Hebrew scriptures, as the New Testament at that time had not yet been identified and canonized – so can we even claim that this passage is refers to the very letter that contains this quote?  Once again, I do not think Paul would claim that.

To respond to all scripture readings in worship with the phrase “The word of the Lord” encourages people to understand the Bible in a simplistic manner - to hear all parts of the scriptures as dictated by God, and thus of equal value.  To have the congregation say “Word of God, word of life” after every reading does not make room for distinctions of material, or encourage a more nuanced hearing of various passages.  For these reasons I am not always comfortable using the designated responses to the scripture readings indicated in Evangelical Lutheran Worship.

It was not always this way, the Lutheran Book of Worship (LBW © 1978) simply concluded each scripture passage with “Here ends the reading.”  Prior to that the Service Book and Hymnal (SBH © 1958) similarly had “Here endeth the Lesson.”  It was With One Voice (WOV © 1995) that changed the concluding statement following the first and second readings.  This was carried forward into the ELW.  I think I understand the intention behind this change, it was an attempt to involve the congregation as active listeners, rather than passive receivers.  However if one was to have a response of gratitude after the readings it might give the wrong impression and be the basis of a poor liturgical joke.  To end the scripture reading with the traditional phrase “Here ends the reading” and then have the congregation respond “Thanks be to God!” could be construed as “Thank God that reading is over!”  You can almost see the a couple of bored teenagers listening to, what seems to them, a lengthy and confusing scripture reading, turning to each other, rolling their eyes, and pronouncing with irreverent delight “Thanks be to God!” when it is finished.  That would never do, so a new ending for the scripture readings needed to be used, and thus the new phrases “The word of the Lord” or “Word of God, word of life” were introduced.

Normally I don’t mind changes in the language we use in worship, in fact I often welcome them.  For example, I prefer the wording of the new translation of the Lord’s Prayer, I think the newer version is less confusing. (Does God really lead us into temptation so that we need to pray that for that not to happen?  Far better is the translation “Save us from the time of trial.”)  However, due to the confusion the current responses to the readings can create, this is one time I think it would be better to revert to the earlier wording and simply end the scripture passages with “Here ends the reading.”  That, of course, would eliminate the congregational response if the response was “Thanks be to God.”  But what if a different congregational response could be agreed upon?

I have been trying out different possibilities in my head, and I am not totally satisfied I’ve found an ideal response.  What I do like is the initial phrase I’ve come up with: “Words of faith.”  But somehow that seems incomplete, and it doesn’t express any type of gratitude.  So I have tried many combination of words, here are some examples:
“Words of faith. Words of life!”
“Words of faith. All thanks to God!”
“Words of faith.  Thanks be to God!”
“Words of faith.  Glory to God!”
“For Words of faith we thank you God!”

None of these seem to work really well from my perspective.  I do like the idea of the congregation responding to “Here ends the reading” with the affirmation “Words of faith.”  That simple phrase describes the content of the Bible in all its forms, and isn’t nearly as misleading as always saying “the word of the Lord” or “Word of God.”  Perhaps some of you reading this blog entry will be inspired to suggest other possibilities, if so I’d love to see you leave your suggestions in the comment section below.

In the meantime I have chosen to end the first and second readings from the lectionary with the simple phrase “Here ends the reading.”  Perhaps one day I will have a new response to the scripture readings to introduce to the congregation, but for now I would rather lessen the confusion about how we should understand the content of the Bible.  And with that, here ends this reading.

  
The above picture of a Bible on the lectern in the Abbey on Iona, Scotland
was taken by myself in June 2009.

2 comments:

  1. One of my fav responses is one I've heard in United Church circles (although I'm sure others use it too) that ends the reading with these words: Hear what the Spirit is saying to the Church. As far as I can remember, there isn't a congregational response, but for me these words naturally invite a moment of silence following the readings. In my head, I'm responding as I ask myself: what is the Spirit saying to the Church? How does this text speak to our/my situation?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here is the congregational response to the first two scripture readings that I am trying out with my congregation: Reader "Here ends the reading" Congregation "Help our understanding, Spirit of God". Initial response is that people like it, we will see how well it wears.

    ReplyDelete