Thanks for the feedback on my last post. The logical question to ask is ‘if not that then what?’
When you look at different churches, styles and traditions of gathered worship, they are largely variations on a theme. Modern contemporary music, well aged hymns or great choral works, set liturgy or the preacher’s extempore prayers.... They are still essentially the same offering of sit, stand and listen, and I am equally frustrated by them all. It doesn’t scratch where I spiritually itch, and as a minister, supposed to help others scratch their itches, I feel I am not serving as I should, or could.
Consider the person who loves food, in all its richness and variety, and lives off nutritionally limited basics. Or the trained chef who finds themselves frustrated by the tiny budget or kitchen that means they dish up food that is so much less than it could be.
The problem is that I have always eaten this way, this is what I grew up with. I look through the window and dream of something more, but am so conditioned that I struggle to see what that looks like.
I think that is the difficulty for all who dare to think differently – how quickly the radical idea drifts back to the norm. Does that suggest that maybe thousands of years of worldwide tradition have it right? Who am I to assume I know better? Yet feedback from just the tiny group reading my last post shows I am not alone within the church, and the decline in most churches around us suggests that in this corner of the world at least plenty of others vote with their feet.
So if not that then what? I don’t know. And some will enjoy the basic diet – my Dad doesn’t want any of these ‘modern’ or ‘foreign’ foods, he wants the familiar meat and 2 veg, bangers and mash etc. As a minister serving up traditional church for those who want it, who enjoy it, is important whatever my own tastes, but what of those who want to explore more spices and flavours to there faith?
