Is there or should there be common ground?

Within America's prominent religious scene, the pattern of worship seems to flow either out of the free worship more of the Pentecostal tradition or the non-liturgical worship of Protestantism in general than it does a liturgical and confession form.  As Missouri Synod Lutherans we feel the pain -- having tried to become all things to all people for a while now.  Some would suggest that we ought to find an accommodation between these and the liturgical pattern of worship presumed and confessed by our Lutheran Confessions.  Is there a way to reconcile or merge or even coexist at the same time and in the same place either the freer worship of the Pentecostal tradition or the non-liturgical worship formally identified with Protestantism in general?  I do not believe there is.  In fact, I would suggest that the presumption of some common ground has been both the weakness of Missouri and its preoccupation over time.  There is no common ground.  Lutheran worship is inherently not free worship as in the Pentecostals nor is it anything remotely resembling American Protestantism.   Lutheran worship is by nature liturgical and confessional.  Those who would try to find some sort of peaceful accommodation between free or the generic form of worship well known to Protestantism AND the liturgical worship that has been part of Lutheranism's history and confession for over half a century are going down a rabbit hole that will lead them no where good.  That said, however, the presumption that America does not know what to do with a Mass replete with rich ceremonial and so some sort of accommodation must be found are likewise delusional.

Some have suggested that most Americans do not know what to think of nor do in the Western form of the Mass that is the hallmark of Lutheran piety and practice.  Really?  With Roman Catholicism the largest Christian Church in America and the Mass in English for all to see and hear and understand, how can it possibly be suggested that Americans are tone deaf when it comes to the Mass?  I am not at all suggesting that Americans fully understand or appreciate the careful liturgical theology of the Mass.  That would be hard to state even of Rome itself, much less of Lutherans!  But to suggest that this form is so alien and foreign to Americans that we must somehow invent a way for it to be explained to them, is a bridge too far.  Unpack the Mass we must but we do not need to make the Mass American or pedestrian in order for America's nonreligious to get it.  Nor should our appeal be to logic or reason.  Our appeal should be to Scripture.  Our "Mass" is in great measure simply Scripture said or sung, either directly word for word from the Bible or paraphrased.  In fact, I would insist that anyone who is deep in Scripture will eventually become deep in the liturgy.  It does not need to be a requirement to see the obvious.  Scripture is liturgical -- from the minutia laid down by God for the size, appearance, adornment, and practices of the Temple to the design of texts to be sung and not simply recited right down to the practice of Jesus Himself.  Scripture is liturgical.  We are liturgical.

Adiaphora should not be invoked here to justify deviation from the liturgical pattern and outline of worship which is inherent to Scripture and confessed boldly in the Book of Concord.   No Lutheran has ever understood this term rightly if they have used it to make equivalent holiness worship of the Pentecostals, Protestant worship as practiced by many, and the Divine Service. Of course this is a confusion or worse.  Adiaphora was meant as a means of limiting the requirement of absolute uniformity of ceremonies and church usages within those who follow the pattern of liturgical worship and not a means of justifying anything and everything that could possibly be done in the name of the Lord.  The better answer is to admit the obvious.  Free worship of Pentecostals and the shape of worship among the Protestants as a whole may not be the worst thing on earth but at least as Lutherans we know it is not us.

Our goal should not be to sell folks on the value of what we do on Sunday morning but to suggest to them that the Divine Service presumes a high view of the Sacraments and a high Christology and Scripture.  If we fail to do this, we have already lost the argument.  Lutherans will never be on the vanguard of such liturgical accommodation because we know the one thing needful -- conservative in confession means Biblical and this all means that we must be who we are and not imitate those who we are not.  I think the greater damage is done by those who structure Sunday morning so that Lutheran looks no different than main street Pentecostalism or big box denominationalism.  If they think we are Catholic, we have already won half the battle but if those who are adamantly Lutherans but who are more like Jimmy Swaggart or Andy Stanley than Pope Benedict XVI, it is time to bring back spread the mystery and let them think "you know, they really are Catholic."