Nielsen’s Nook

Webber, Robert E. Ancient-Future Worship : Proclaiming and Enacting God’s Narrative. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2008 $14.99 (paperback) 192 pages. “Worship does God’s story,” writes Robert Webber. Those four words are the rubric for the entire book published as the final volume of the Ancient-Future series. Written on the popular level, Webber argues for a return to the ancient paradigm for worship as the way forward.

Ancient-Future Worship is a decent introduction to the liturgical world. The book is directed to Evangelicals who are perhaps weary of over-programmed church-growth oriented church life. Its aim is to call Christians to a worship that “discloses the work of Jesus Christ.”[1]

The book is divided into two parts, preceded by an introduction that serves as a summary to the book as a whole. The first part, Rediscovering God’s Story in Worship, seeks to inform the reader of the scriptural and historical basis for the four pillars of worship in Webber’s paradigm. Worship is the reenactment of God’s redemptive work in space and time and in this sense worship does God’s story. Worship also remembers the past and anticipates the future works of God in the present. Consequently, the fullness of worship encompasses the fullness of the biblical witness in both the Old and New Testaments.

The second part of the book deals primarily with the application of the rediscovery of Part One to the tripartite transforming worship of the Christian Church (i.e., Word, Eucharist and Prayer). Webber explains that the role of the Word of God in worship is to transform participants by implicating them into the Divine Narrative in History. The Eucharist transforms worshipers as they participate in the presence of God. The section on prayer seeks to return the reader’s paradigm towards public prayer. “The story of God,” Webber writes, “is the substance of the inner content that shapes the outer form of public prayer. Worship prays God’s story.”[2]

In his conclusion, Webber informs the reader of the primary and secondary sources that have impacted him in his journey towards “Ancient-Future Worship.” Church Fathers such as Ignatius and Athanasius have composed the ancient component of Webber’s sources, while his contemporary influences are almost exclusively Eastern Orthodox. Last, the Appendix is a call to Evangelicals to turn away from the modern and cultural trappings that “camouflage God’s story or empty it of its cosmic and redemptive meaning.”

Each chapter employs a reader friendly layout, using headings and including summary sections at the conclusion of each chapter.

The recapitulation of redemptive history is set forth as a core purpose of worship. As such, an emphasis on Trinitarian worship comes to the fore. Redemptive history entails God’s work in the Garden of Eden to Christ Jesus’ Second Advent bringing Paradise with Him. Consequently, worship is the convergence of the past and the future into the present, concentering divine transcendence and immanence.

There is iterative concern for the fullness of God’s story being brought to bear upon Christian worship. Webber reflects on why congregants may struggle with liturgical worship saying, “one reason is because we tend to be New Testament Christians rather than Bible Christians.” [3] To put it another way, embracing the entire Christian metanarrative in Sunday worship is an exercise of implicating oneself (participating) in God’s story and shaping one’s worldview for worshiping the Lord in the mundane.

Related to the Christian metanarrative in Scripture is a welcomed emphasis on the objective nature of worship. This objective worship is embodied not merely propositional, a corporate endeavor not a private enterprise, a weighty calling not comfortable entertainment. “The primary focus of worship then and now is not me, the worshipper, but God, who redeems the world.”[4]

This reader deeply appreciates the concern given to the worship of God in Ancient-Future Worship. Webber circumscribes the liturgical question of how form relates to content and provides constructive avenues for Christians concerned about historical worship to traverse.

While the discussion and interaction with the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church is fruitful, Webber’s more or less exclusive commitment to the Eastern Liturgy seems arbitrary and at times dismissive of the Western Tradition, which ironically shares much of the same liturgical traditions. This is especially true in Western Rite Orthodox and Eastern Rite Catholics.

Evangelicals from a certain Reformed perspective more oriented to Redemptive History may inadvertently feel a bit slighted. The emphasis on the Christian metanarrative has historically been central to theologians like John Calvin, Gerhardus Vos, and more recently in the field of worship, Hughes Oliphant Old.

Overall, Ancient-Future Worship is worth the read. Its irenic tone will engage the reader in a much needed conversation with the self, the contemporary culture, and the Church as God’s people have worshiped the incarnate-risen-and-exalted Christ throughout the centuries.

[1] Robert E. Webber, Ancient-Future Worship : Proclaiming and Enacting God’s Narrative (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2008), 108.

[2] Ibid., 151.

[3] Ibid., 67.

[4] Ibid., 97.

It occured to me this morning, while observing fellow parishoners receiving Holy Communion, that there seemed to be a distinct impression from the Reformation in the distribution of the elements. It is my understanding that in the period prior to the Reformation churches celebrated the Eucharist generally once a year and when it was celebrated laity received only the bread, never the wine.

One of the things the Reformation fought to recover in the Church Catholic was both the frequency and unity of the Eucharist that they perceived present in the Church Fathers. It is communion with the undivided Christ that is promised in the Eucharist. As such both kinds, bread and wine, which the Lord commissioned, should be used. Further, with such weighty thing as communion—communion with the Living and Incarnate Christ being offered—it made sense to incorporate the Eucharist back into the regular corporate worship of the Church.

I do not know at this point how this plays out in Roman or Eastern Orthodox churches (or for that matter churches outside of St. John’s Episcopal Church in Dallas); however, what I see at St. John’s is that it is the Lay Eucharistic Minister and the Sub-Deacon, both being laity, who serve the consecrated chalice to the parish during Holy Communion. Perhaps this is a visible reminder that the chalice has been returned to the people that they might celebrate their full and gracious bond to the undivided and perfect Christ.

Saint Gregory of Nazianzus (329 - January 25, 389), also known as Saint Gregory the Theologian or Saint Gregory Nazianzen, was a 4th-century Archbishop of Constantinople. He is widely considered the most accomplished rhetorical stylist of the patristic age. As a classically trained speaker and philosopher he infused Hellenism into the early church, establishing the paradigm of Byzantine theologians and church officials.
St Gregory made a significant impact on the shape of Trinitarian theology among both Greek-speaking and Latin-speaking theologians, and he is remembered as the “Trinitarian Theologian.” Much of his theological work continues to influence modern theologians, especially in regard to the relationship among the three Persons of the Trinity. Along with two brothers, Saint Basil the Great and Saint Gregory of Nyssa, he is known as one of the Cappadocian Fathers.
Gregory is venerated a saint in both Eastern and Western Christianity. In the Roman Catholic Church he is among the Doctors of the Church; in Eastern Orthodoxy and the Eastern Catholic Churches he is revered as one of the Three Holy Hierarchs along with Saint Basil the Great and Saint John Chrysostom.

View the rest of this Wikipedia article.

ChurchYear.net has put together what looks to be a very helpful reading plan for Lent, composed of readings from the Church Fathers. It is available for download.

Translation

4 [1]And from what has been previously written, [2] I Pionius wrote it down again, after searching for it (according to revelation made known to me from the blessed Polycarp, just as I will make clear in what follows) [3] after already gathering it together when it had nearly been worn out from time, that the Lord Jesus Christ might also gather me with his elect into his heavenly kingdom. Glory be to him with the Father and the Holy Spirit for ever and ever. [4] Amen.

[1] It is unclear to us why Lightfoot’s Greek text has vv 3-4 where this same passage (vv 3-4) in Lake and Holmes is conflated into a single verse 3. Again, since this project is to translate from Lightfoot’s Greek text, we are following that versification.

[2] προγεγραμμένου what is written before in an older document (BAGD, 704).

[3] ἐν τῷ καθεξῆς in what follows (BAGD, 388). This apparently refers to some sort of sequel to Pionius’ work here. Lake comments, “No explanation is given : probably because the ‘Pionian’ text was part of a larger ‘Acts of Polycarp.’ Either these Acts have entirely disappeared except for this letter of the church of Smyrna, or a fragment preserved in p may perhaps belong to them.” (The Apostolic Fathers, vol 2, 341).

[4] εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων lit. into the ages from ages, i.e., eternity, for ever.

Translation

3 And I, Socrates, in Corinth wrote from Gaius’ compilation. [1] The grace [2] of the Lord be with you all.

[1] ἀντιγράφων a transcript, copy, counterpart (Abridged LSJ, 77).

[2] ἡ χάρις is articular speaking about a specific type or instance of grace, conceptually assuming the grace of the Lord.