Two-thousand Year Generation Gap?

What comes to mind when you hear words such as 'tradition' or 'tradtional'?  Especially in terms of culture and religion.  An optional style of worship or living?  A necessary and fundamental element of the duties of our lives and worship?  A ball-and-chain that has blinded and held us back for centuries, and that must finally be thrown off?



The word 'tradition', in religion, is often used to refer to the many rites, ceremonies, and doctrines that have been used and observed for countless years, and that have, during that time, been generally accepted and practiced by nearly all.  It has, in modern times, come to mean anything that is "older" or even for some "out of date."  Many churches, especially with larger congregations, now have separate services, one of which usually being the "traditional service" which will use hymns, liturgy, etc.

Liturgy is most certainly associated with tradition.  The term 'liturgy' refers to more formal or even ornate structure of service.  It is seen in Orthodox and Catholic churches as well as many Protestant denominations such as Lutheranism, Anglicanism, and Methodism.  One of the most prominent features common to liturgy is congregational readings, in which a scripture or prayer is said and the whole of the congregation will respond by repeating it or continuing with the next portion of the text; this can sometimes require alternating between kneeling, sitting, or standing.  Liturgical churches often pay a lot of attention to detail and make their services and even physical buildings very elaborate as is seen in the architecture of cathedrals and the structure of a mass.

Other things associated with religious tradition are sacraments.  Some of the more common sacraments are baptism, the Eucharist (communion), penance, and marriage.  Nearly all churches observe at least some of the sacraments in some form or another.

Not all tradition is strictly religious.  Tradition is linked with culture as well.  Different cultures have all sorts of festivals and practices unique to them alone.  Hanukkah is associated in our minds with Jewish tradition.  When we hear of Oktoberfest, we immediately think of Germanic culture.  Even Christmas is a tradition specific to Western culture.

In recent years, however, it has become popular in many circles of thought to disregard tradition as unnecessary and antiquated or even as a serious problem.  In religion, thousands of churches are throwing out hymnals and replacing them with Hillsong albums, or questioning the necessity of communion or baptism.  Culturally, many activities, festivals, and observances are deemed culturally exclusive or even accused of being racist solely on the grounds of being specific to one ethnic or religious group.

Christmas, especially in America (a country founded on the idea of being a home to people of any and every religious and ethnic persuasion), has come under heavy attack as being exclusive to Christians or even offensive to certain other groups.  "Merry Christmas" becomes the multi-culturally inclusive "happy holidays" or even simply "happy wintertime"; School holiday programmes sing not 'O Christmas Tree', but 'O Winter Tree'.  'Christmas' itself is shortened to 'Xmas'.

In America, nearly any society or group that refuses to admit certain people because of their ethnic background is bound to be attacked in some way.  Even in different countries with specific ethnic history and where certain traditions find their origins are beginning to bow to pressure to be more culturally inclusive and even frown upon the very traditions that have shaped their history.  Cultural traditions are an important part of what defines individual people and whole nations.  To disregard or oppose those traditions can threaten what makes that person or nation who they are.

In religion, many are beginning to dismiss tradition as stuffy or too much for the average person on the street (the person the Church is trying to reach out to and invite in) to take in or even to understand.  King James Version Bibles are for the older folks, but if we want to reach anyone under the age of seventy, we have every translation imaginable from the New International Version to the New American Standard Bible.  Hymns are irrelevant for today...and boring.  If there is no jumping, shouting, hand-raising, rhythm or beat, dancing, or yelling, then it cannot possibly be a true worship service.

It is even popular to preach and teach against religion itself.  "I don't have religion; I have a relationship," is the common phrase now.  Jesus just wants you to love Him and be in a "relationship" with Him, not observe a stuffy old religion about Him.  But does it occur to anyone that perhaps religion is one of the very ways we express our love for Him?  If you want to talk about dull, try being in a "relationship" with someone who talks of a love for you, but has no way of expressing that love!  One of the reasons why this way of thinking is so prevalent for many is because unfortunately some in the Church have tried to make religion stiff and impersonal; religion, as an expression of love, is meant to be deeply personal, but that does not mean it is up to you and you alone to decide what religion is.  Remember it is an expression of love which means it is meant to be two ways; Jesus has some say too! Remember also that the reason why religious activities and traditions were begun in the first place is because Jesus Himself prescribed them for us.



It is also common for people to try to "dumb-down" church to make it more applicable for the average man on the street.  But it is nearly impossible to do so without robbing the Church experience of much of its flavour and richness.  For two thousand years these "high-church" traditions have brought in this average man and defined his view of God, the world, and himself.  I cannot help but notice that it is not until recent time (after we have tried to alter the Church to be more "accommodating" to the man on the street) that the Church has more trouble than any time in its history getting the man on the street to come inside. 


The teaching of Church history and formal doctrine are often neglected in Sunday School and in the Christian family as well.  It is tempting to think that history is not important in the Church and that more spiritual things should have more priority.  But without a proper understanding of our history, we become detached and isolated from the wisdom of ages past and even from our brothers in other denominations living today, and we begin to have no idea why we believe what we believe and why we do what we do.  Martin Luther lived 500 years ago...what bearing does he have on my life today?? Well for starters, if it had not been for his influence on Church and culture, you would not have your seats in church and would be standing the entirety of the Sunday service!  Traditional Catholic and Lutheran churches take a lot of criticism from some for putting so much emphasis on catechisms (fundamental truths or sayings in the form of questions and answers) and other theological training, but the result should not be dismissed.  I once filled in for a devotion leader on Wednesday night and in the group of young boys I was working with, there happened to be a visitor from a Catholic church, and who was in the sixth grade.  I was trying to explain the first catechism (Q: What is the chief end or purpose of man? A: To glorify God), and he could immediately spit out the first catechism before I even said it.  The rest of the boys, most of them older, didn't even know what a catechism was, let alone what the first one was or what it was about.  This is why so often the moment many Christians are asked a basic question about their faith, they are incapable to answer, much less defend their faith against a more studied opponent.


Music is another big issue.  I have been to churches where they outright will not allow anything more than fifteen years old to be played.  A lot of churches do not consider hymns to be appealing to a certain demographic, and therefore dismiss them completely.  Worship services must have new and loud music, especially for youth groups, and if the older folks want to have some of the songs they grew up with, they can go to their own separate service. The younger generation doesn't "feel God's presence" if there is no dancing or jumping and such; if they cannot dance to it, they cannot worship to it.  But if you were to take a random, non-Christian person off the street and present them with both a worship service at any typical youth convention and then a secular concert, could they honestly tell the difference?  Remember that God tells us to "shout/dance/jump around and feel that I am God"...no, He says "be still and know that I am God."

So what is it that makes a worship service a worship service? God calls us to worship Him in "spirit and in Truth"; even if we have the spirit part down, what about truth?  Are we learning valuable truth from the songs we sing in Church?  A lot (definitely not all, but still many) of modern "worship" songs are really quite shallow and are little more than fluff; "cotton candy for the soul" songs, as I like to call some of them, lack the deep spiritual weight of the countless hymns which are full of meaning and valuable truth.  A lot of hymns, however, really are difficult for many to understand, thus completely ruining the whole point of the hymn in the first place.  During one of the best worship services with hymns I've ever been to, the worship leader would stop and explain what the hymn was saying and how it added to the service, giving everyone a thorough understanding of the meaning of the words they were singing while still being able to enjoy the beauty of the ancient words.  So we know that worship, from what God has told us, involves the ability to be still and to learn.  Is it really a matter of "this isn't relevant to me," or more of "this isn't my personal preference of style"?  There is a vast difference.

It is the time-tested traditions, hymns, etc. that have defined the Church and nurtured its people since its humble yet powerful beginnings two-thousand years ago.  I find comfort in knowing that when I sing this hymn or that hymn, I am singing the same truths and words that shaped the thought and lives of men like St. Polycarp and Martin Luther.  These hymns link us to the strength of faith that has stood the test of time, and in fact link us to the time of Christ Himself!  In fact, Jesus Himself, when He worshipped in a religious service, did so in a liturgical manner!  And it isn't just the ancient heroes of the faith to whom we lose our connection; what about the elders in our own churches today?  How can we learn from their wealth of wisdom and experience if we want to create this gap between generations?  Is it not a bit arrogant to think thatwe're the ones who finally got it right and to call the faith of centuries of saints, martyrs, and history-makers "boring"?  I would go so far as to say that it goes beyond arrogant and deeply into the realm of dangerous. 

We already begin to see the deadly consequences of throwing off our history and our traditions.  We forget the hundreds of years of history that form the roots of the many different denominations currently existing and wonder why we so often see other denominations as completely removed from our own and why they cannot cooperate with each other.  There have even been pastors who, because of the antiquity of Scripture, have said to their congregation, "take out your Bible, now put it away; it has nothing to say to you." 

When we abandon time-tested doctrine we lose our ability to discern truth from shallow and even dangerous fads and often put "personal revelation" over the Word of God which has withstood everything time has thrown at it.  The Charismatic and Pentecostal churches especially seems to struggle with this (I am certainly not anti-Pentecostal or anti-Charismatic; I was in fact raised Pentecostal, often attend a Pentecostal church, and both my parents, from whom I often seek guidance, are ordained ministers in the Pentecostal church).  It is typically the churches that focus almost exclusively on the Holy Spirit over any other aspect of God or even any other subject that seem to be most susceptible to new movements that end in scandal.  Some famous examples are the "laughing revival", the Todd Bentley revival, and other movements that have led church leaders to, instead of teaching the Word of God, do absurd things such as getting down on all fours and making animal noises in front of their congregations for an hour.  When confronted with the questionableness or even absurdity of a lot of new movements, a common response is to accuse those doing the confronting of having the "spirit of doubt" or "disbelief" and tell them not to question the work of God with suppressive doctrinal testing, despite the Bible clearly telling us to be discerning and to test each spirit.  An Assembly of God pastor in Brownsville told his congregation one Sunday that he could feel the devil had sent "analysers" to the service, that analysis in church was dangerous, and to, "Let yourselves go: don't even think about what you are doing."  Is it not likely that if we stop checking ID's at the door, anyone with any dangerous lies and a desire to deceive can and will gain easy access???


Am I saying we need to scrap our drums for a pipe organ, delete Big Daddy Weave's 'Fields of Grace' from out Sunday morning powerpoint song-service and replace it with 'A Mighty Fortress Is Our God', teach the choir Latin chants, and ban any translation of the Bible outside of that authorised by King James I in 1604?  Nope.  I merely wish to encourage us all, myself included, to remember that chronological snobbery works both ways, and to broaden what we do in our life and worship of God.  Many of my favourite songs to sing to God were, in fact, written within the last ten years.  I in no way mean to say dancing, jumping, shouting, etc. should be prohibited from worship, but to encourage us to learn to worship in any environment or manner God leads us to, and not limit ourselves to worshipping only when the music is loud and rhythmic.  When deciding what to include in a service (or anything really), try not to think, "what is most popular or trendy?" but instead, "what will best contribute to and emphasise what I want to do?" and let that take you wherever it leads; if it you realise something more traditional best ties in, go with it! if something popular fits best, go with it! Basically, balance is the key; but that can be more easily said than done since we all, myself included, have our own personal tastes and preferences that can cloud our judgement.  Church leaders need to ask God for His wisdom and for eyes to see beyond just what they feel like doing, and what is needed to bring everyone in closer to Christ!  It is when we allow Christ to stretch us, bringing us out of our comfort zone that we are most effective in our calling and when Christ shows His glory through us best!  Allow God to expand your taste and ability, and to lead you wherever He wants to lead you, and you will be amazed at all the wonders He has in store for you!


(P.S.  I myself find it easy to limit myself and refuse to get in a true spirit of worship because I don't like this or that song for being too loud or even just because it isn't a hymn, but God has taught me so much and I have learned to grow through new things as well as tradition....though I believe I shall always despise the song 'Fields of Grace' :-)