A couple of Sundays ago at church, the Gospel lesson was a familiar story from Matthew 4:
"As [Jesus] walked by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea – for they were fishermen. And he said to them, ‘Follow me, and I will make you fish for people.’"
Wait a minute, I thought to myself. "I will make you fish for people"? That’s not right. It’s "I will make you fishers of men". Why the change?*
Of course, this is not the only change. At Christmas, we sing "Good Christian Friends Rejoice." On Reformation Sunday "A Mighty Fortress" now talks about losing your "house" and "spouse" instead of you "wife" and "life".
Some of the changes seem to be the result of a political correctness that has gone overboard, at least in my opinion. Other changes may be an attempt to make the church more open and inviting – or at least what those in charge would find more open and inviting if they were looking for a church, which of course, they aren’t since they already have one.
Apparently, to make the church more open and inviting you have to "update" things. So we sing new hymns, instead of the old ones that we remember from when we were young.** The Bible has been translated to bring the language up-to-date, which is why Jesus now says, when Satan tempts him after 40 days in the wilderness, that "one does not live by bread alone" instead of "man shall not live by bread alone." It is also the reason that just about the only place I can hear the King James Version of the nativity story in Luke 2 is on "A Charlie Brown Christmas."
Other changes seem to be the personal preference of those in charge. For example, when our minister came back from a three-month sabbatical, we switched to having communion every Sunday, instead of, in effect, every other Sunday. But what bothered me the most was the rationale he gave for the change. Instead of just saying he personally thought this was better, he quoted things Martin Luther said almost 500 years ago to show why it was theologically right to have communion every Sunday. We had been doing it the other way for years, but now, all of a sudden, what we had been doing was wrong and we had to change. But if it was so obvious that what we had been doing was wrong, why didn’t somebody else figure it out a long time ago? While I didn’t like the change, I don’t think it would have bothered me as much if it hadn’t been for the argument that this new way was the right way and, in effect, that what we had been doing for all those years was wrong.
As church leaders change things in ways that they think will make the church more up-to-date and welcoming and inclusive, what they risk is those who liked the old way. While church membership is mostly about faith in God, some part of it is about a feeling of comfort and belonging. Singing the songs we have sung for years. Hearing the Scripture readings we heard when we were young. These give us a feeling of comfort and security – and belonging. I do not mean to be irreligious, but it is like being a fan of a sports team. Being a fan gives you a chance to be part of a group, to be part of something bigger than yourself, all rooting for the same thing. It gives you a shared history with other people, even people you do not know. They may be strangers, but when you root for the same team, they are no longer strangers. They are just friends you haven’t met.
Part of belonging to a church is like that, too. But when things are constantly being changed, that feeling isn’t there as much. When the Bible readings jar you because of the way they have been reworded, when the songs you loved as a child aren’t sung as often any more, your feeling of connectedness is lessened. You don’t feel a part of it in the way you used to. The ties that bind seem to loosen.
I understand it is difficult for church leaders. They want to bring new people in. That is, after all, one of our charges from Jesus. They hope that if they change things to stay up-to-date, more people will come. For many people, the changes won’t matter. Either they like them or they have been members for so long that they will keep coming because their connectedness will always be there. For others, however, that is not so true. The quandary then is how to stay connected with those people who don’t like the changes while still changing things to try to stay up-to-date and attract new people.
----------------
* Not only does the new wording sound stilted, at least to me, it also seems to have a different meaning. When Jesus said that he would make Peter and Andrew "fishers of men," he was saying he would change them; he would make them into something better than they were before. But when Jesus says that he will "make [them] fish for people," it sounds like he is going to force them to do something instead of changing them into something better.
** I do not know if the decision to sing new songs instead of the old ones is because of a desire for variety, an attempt to broaden our musical tastes, or an effort to attract new people. A couple of years ago, our church was trying out a new liturgy. We were sort of a beta site for a new liturgy the national group was considering. The very first Sunday we tried it, every hymn we sang was an old favorite. I commented on this to our minister, saying that we could keep using the new liturgy as long as we got to sing the old songs. He said they deliberately sang the old songs because the liturgy was new. Unfortunately, as we learned the new liturgy, and later when we stopped using it because the test period was over, the number of old songs was cut back to what it was before.
Recent Comments