Liberal Christians Want You to Pray to Plants?

In Christian news lately, Union Theological Seminary (UTS), a seminary in New York, recently posted a picture of a group of people seated near plants. The caption that went along with the picture read:

Today in chapel, we confessed to plants. Together, we held our grief, joy, regret, hope, guilt and sorrow in prayer; offering them to the beings who sustain us but whose gift we too often fail to honor. What do you confess to the plants in your life?

Christian social media went nuts, with many people calling Union’s practice strange, odd, or even pagan. I also found the photo and the caption to be quite amusing, and my brain easily was coming up with quips that mocked the worship experience. With such a huge backlash from Christian social media, UTS put out a follow-up statement, a very lengthy defense of their practice. Without making jokes about the plant liturgy, allow me to take their defense bit by bit and address why I have a genuine problem with offering our grief, joy, hope, guilt, and sorrow in prayer “to the beings who sustain us but whose gift we too often fail to honor.”

The defense from UTS is in red, my response is in black.

We’ve had many questions about yesterday’s chapel, conducted as part of @ccarvalhaes‘ class, “Extractivism: A Ritual/Liturgical Response.” In worship, our community confessed the harm we’ve done to plants, speaking directly in repentance. This is a beautiful ritual.

At the outset, I have no issue with Union’s defense. Taking a look at the world around us, I see easily that humanity has done harm to the environment and ecosystem which God has tasked us to oversee. Bible-believing Christians must admit that creation is a gift from God, and God’s gift he declared good.

“And God said, ‘Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.’ And it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.” (Genesis 1:11-13)

When God makes humanity, he gives us a task:

“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth…. And God said, ‘Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food.” (Genesis 1:26, 29)

There you have it, our God-given appointment to care for the earth BUT ALSO to utilize the plants and fruit for our food. When we confess that we haven’t done a great job caring for God’s creation, though, our confession shouldn’t be to the food but to the ONE who created the earth and set us to task. Union has a point in the confession and repentance, but they fail in their understanding of to whom they repent and confess.

Their defense continues:

We are in the throes of a climate emergency, a crisis created by humanity’s arrogance, our disregard for Creation. Far too often, we see the natural world only as resources to be extracted for our use, not divinely created in their own right—worthy of honor, thanks and care.

Union is close, but they aren’t there. The climate emergency created by human disregard for creation is a serious issue, and I agree that Christians OUGHT to lead the charge in caring for the planet – it is our God-given role! I disagree, however, with the idea that plants are worthy of thanks. They are merely plants, and plants have no being or essence that makes them special. Yes, yes, I know this defies the teaching of Master Yoda and Obi-wan Kenobi, who tell Luke that the Force flows through all things. From a Christian perspective, however, plants are designed by God as food. If anyone is worthy of thanks, thank the God who created the earth and gave us the food, but don’t thank the bushes!

But their defense goes on:

We need to unlearn habits of sin and death. And part of that work must be building new bridges to the natural world. And that means creating new spiritual and intellectual frameworks by which we understand and relate to the plants and animals with whom we share the planet. Churches have a huge role to play in this endeavor. Theologies that encourage humans to dominate and master the Earth have played a deplorable role in degrading God’s creation. We must birth new theology, new liturgy to heal and sow, replacing ones that reap and destroy. When Robin Wall Kimmerer spoke at Union last year, she concluded her lecture by tasking us—and all faith communities—to develop new liturgies by which to mourn, grieve, heal and change in response to our climate emergency. We couldn’t be prouder to participate in this work.

To these points, Union and I are in total agreement. Churches SHOULD play a huge role in taking care of the creation God left in our care, a role that means we strive to cease destroying species of animal and plant life, actively seeking to protect and nurture God’s creative activity.

Please go on, Union:

And here’s the thing: At first, this work will seem weird. It won’t feel normal. It won’t look like how we’re used to worship looking and sounding. And that’s exactly the point. We don’t just need new wine, we need new wineskins. But it’s also important to note that this isn’t, really, that radical a break from tradition. Many faiths and denoms have liturgy through which we express and atone for the harm we’ve caused. No one would have blinked if our chapel featured students apologizing to each other. What’s different (and the source of so much derision) is that we’re treating plants as fully created beings, divine Creation in its own right—not just something to be consumed. Because plants aren’t capable of verbal response, does that mean we shouldn’t engage with them?

Aaaand they are off the rails again. Treating plants as fully created beings? No. Nope. No way. They’re plants. Out of all of God’s creative work, only humanity bears the divine image.

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it….’” (Genesis 1:27-28)

While plants are a part of God’s created order, plants do NOT bear the Imago Dei (Image of God). Humanity stands alone in this regard. We apologize when we sin against other humans because we’re apologizing to beings that are also divine image bearers. I consider myself a dog lover. I have been my entire life. As much joy as pups bring me, they are still not on the same level as other humans. Respect the creation, sure, but recognize that the Creator has made plants and animals different than the Creator made people. Scripture says that humanity is created to have dominion over every animal and to have the plants for food. They are not equal beings.

Union finishes up:

So, if you’re poking fun, we’d ask only that you also spend a couple moments asking: Do I treat plants and animals as divinely created beings? What harm do I cause without thinking? How can I enter into new relationship with the natural world? Change isn’t easy: It’s no simple business to break free from comfortable habits and thoughts. But if we do not change, we will perish. And so will plants and animals God created and called “good.” We must lean into this discomfort; God waits for us there.

On a final note, I do believe that Union’s questions are worth asking. Do we treat plants and animals as divinely created beings? No, nor should we. They were created for humanity, not as equal to humanity. It IS valid to ask how we cause harm to the created order, how our carelessness can consumerism actually works to destroy what God placed under our care. Because all of creation IS good, and because God specifically tasked us with overseeing his creation, we have a responsibility to treat well the earth and everything upon it.

And lastly, if you like to talk to tomatoes…

have I got a show for you.

Hymnals? We don’t need no stinkin’ hymnals!

A couple days ago I read a blog post from Tim Challies called, “What We Lost When We Lost Our Hymnals.” Mr. Challies is quick to point out that he is not advocating a return to hymnals, but wants us to consider what happens when we switch media in the church. With no malice or animosity, I wanted to take a brief moment to respond to his article. He writes:

We lost an established body of songs. Hymnals communicated that a church had an established collection of songs. This, in turn, communicated that its songs were vetted carefully and added to its repertoire only after careful consideration. After all, great songs are not written every day and their worth is proven only over time.

True, a book of songs is quite restrictive on a congregation’s musical repertoire.  The idea that all of the songs in a given hymnal were vetted carefully and after careful consideration is not quite true. Have you ever gone through a hymnal? I have. I have a copy of the hymnal my church used when I was growing up. And lemme tell ya, THEY AREN’T ALL GEMS!

Sure, there are the greats that we all know and love. But my 50 year old hymnal has 504 songs! That means that, within our musical canon, there was a functional canon of songs we always did and songs that we NEVER did. Many of those we never did are not great music. they aren’t memorable nor are they especially inspired. I’m not even going to mention the patriotic songs that wound up in many hymnals. 😦

Finally, the Bible never calls us to an “established” body of songs. Psalm 96 encourages us:

Oh sing to the Lord a new song; sing to the Lord, all the earth!

SOMEONE’S gotta write the new songs. And when the Apostle encourages us to singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, there’s no mention of the old standards which were appropriate for use. Since God is a Living God who is actively involved in the lives of believers, it seems perfectly normal that our worship can reflect what God is doing here and now. Hymns of old? Great! Songs extolling the ongoing work of God in the world? Wonderful!

Mr. Challies continues:

We lost a deep knowledge of our songs. When we removed the hymnal, we gained the ability to add new songs to our repertoire whenever we encounter one we deem worthy. This reduces our familiarity with our songs so that today we have far fewer of them fixed in our minds and hearts.

Sure, we don’t remember the songs of old any more. But they aren’t Scripture – there’s nothing sacred about one generation’s worship music. There are powerful songs written today that are rich with good theology and musicality. They aren’t any less wonderful just because they were written 150 years too late. This kind of ageism says that “older is better” when it isn’t. Older is older. We venerate the songs that were powerful when we had a tremendous religious experience and we look down on songs from other people’s experience. But radio, Spotify, YouTube, and iTunes has give people a wide variety of options to fix wonderful music in our minds and hearts.

We lost the ability to do harmonies. Hymnody grew up at a time when instrumentation took a back seat to the voice. Hymns were most often written so they could be sung a cappella or with minimal instrumentation. For that reason, hymnals almost invariably included the music for both melody and harmonies and congregations learned to sing the parts. The loss of the hymnal and the associated rise of the worship band has reduced our ability to harmonize and, in that way, to sing to the fullest of our abilities.

Okay, this is just bunk. I’ve been part of hymnal-using churches, and some of them were simply awful with no ability to harmonize. Since most people cannot read music, having notated music means nothing. Churches that utilized hymnals would have a couple people who could harmonize, and others would follow the examples of others to learn voice parts.

This can STILL happen with worship bands. Many modern worship bands have 2-3 part harmonies. People in the church simply have to follow the vocalist that fits their range. But please continue, Mr. Challies.

We lost the ability to sing skillfully. As congregations have lost their knowledge of their songs, they have lost the ability to sing them well. We tend to compensate for our poorly-sung songs by cranking up the volume of the musical accompaniment.

Again, just because a church uses a hymnal does not mean anything about the skill and ability of the church. I know of many worship bands that spend a lot of time practicing so that they can be skillful and lead people skillfully. Perhaps Mr. Challies hasn’t spent enough time with the hymnal-using churches that sound like dying cats, but trust me – they’re out there!

We lost the ability to have the songs in our homes. Hymnals usually lived at the church, resting from Monday to Saturday in the little pockets on the back of the pews. But people also bought their own and took them home so the family could have that established body of songs there as well. Families would often sing together as part of their family worship. It is easy to imagine a family singing “It Is Well With My Soul” after eating dinner together, but almost impossible to imagine them singing, “Oceans.”

oceansAh, there it is – the crack against “Oceans.” It seems to be a common theme among Reformed believers. This comes across and being petty and merely personal opinion. I know for a fact that families can sing “Oceans” together because I have witnessed my wife doing it with our children. We utilize Spotify and YouTube to bring worship music into the house. Our kids are growing up around it, and the music they hear at the church is reflected in the home. The issues is not so much about hymnals versus modern media as it is about Christian parenting, and it’s less than honest to blame media for parenting failure.

Mr. Challies finishes his article with this line:

That little change from book to screen changed nearly everything.

overhead-projectorI really don’t think it did. Before the PowerPoint revolution, churches decades ago made the switch from hymnal to using overhead projectors and transparency pages.

The hymns of old and the “new” choruses of the 70s-80s were printed on the overhead transparencies and one poor soul was designated to change the overheads, making sure to slide the page up or down so that the words were never cut off! HAHA – good times! And people complained then. I heard one octogenarian refer to the choruses from the 80s as “ding-dong-ditties.” HE HATED THEM! But people have always been complaining against new songs and media in worship.

But isn’t God bigger than a hymnal? Isn’t God bigger than your favorite 150 year old song (that used to be one of them new-fangled worship songs all those kids are singing)? Instead of lamenting the loss of old forms of worship, let’s embrace new ways to worship an unchanging God.

How about you? What’s your favorite hymn? What’s your favorite non-hymn worship song?

Jesus Had Stinky Feet

Image courtesy of satit_srihin at
Image courtesy of satit_srihin at

Did Jesus Have Stinky Feet?

My wife hates feet. With a passion. She hates feet and things associated with feet (unless, of course, I’m offering to massage her feet – she’s all for that idea!). The feet are not an attractive part of the body. They get dirty. They stink. And, let’s face it, there are some pretty jacked up toes out there. Like in my bloodline. There is a phenomenon we jokingly call “The Linzey Toe”. Our fourth toe has an odd curvature to it. My dad has it. I have it. My wife prayed that our children would be spared. But, alack-a-day, they are Linzey children and received the hereditary toe.

If we feel that way about feet in our society, imagine how people felt about feet in Jesus’ day. There were no paved roads, just dirt. There were no athletic socks, just sandals or boots. I bet feet got pretty nasty. So people stayed away from feet. In fact, only the lowliest of servants would handle the feet of others.

The zealous evangelist known as John the Baptist (or, as I like to call him, Dunkin’ John) had an interesting word picture to describe the value and worth of Jesus. Mark wrote about it in his book.

John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. And all the country of Judea and all Jerusalem were going out to him and were being baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. Now John was clothed with camel’s hair and wore a leather belt around his waist and ate locusts and wild honey. And he preached, saying, “After me comes he who is mightier than I, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie.” ~ Mark 1:4-8

That’s quite a statement about how much John valued Jesus. “He is so far above me that I’m not even worthy to get down on the ground and touch the straps of the sandals on his dirty feet.” If the feet were the job of the lowest servant, John is placing himself even LOWER in comparison to Jesus.

That’s not an attitude that we see a whole lot any more. In fact, sometimes it feels as though we take Jesus for granted. We like the grace part. We like the forgiveness of sinners part. We like the “I am a friend of God” part. But we often focus on the relational aspect of Christ’s humanity that we forget the grandeur and splendor of his majesty.

Jesus wasn’t just another dude. He was the supreme dude. He was God in the flesh. And that should have an impact on us. It should mean that we tread lightly in how we come to Jesus in our own faith. It should mean that we don’t take grace as some cheap gift – it is a costly gift from someone who is so far above us that we could never even hope to reach him on our own.

I wonder how our worship services would change if we thought about ourselves as unworthy compared to Christ’s majesty…

Tonight is Saturday night. As we head into Sunday and we all go to our houses of worship, please take some time to ponder the glory and worth of Christ. Don’t take him for granted, but let’s understand our place before Him.


Fighting in the Worship Wars

Image courtesy of bplanet at
Image courtesy of bplanet at

Did you know that some church songs are holier than other songs? It’s true. Just ask anyone. Well, that’s true subjectively. I’m pretty sure it’s not an objective truth. What makes a song appropriate for use in church? Is it about style? About content? For every 5 people you ask you will find 7 opinions on the matter. There is no unified voice in what make an appropriate worship song. Welcome to the WORSHIP WARS.

People complain about the contemporary Christian worship music that floods many churches and ask why we can’t go back and do the good old songs that were full of theology (yes, I’ve actually heard that argument before). But when those “good old songs” were new people were complaining about them asking why the church had to shift from its older style of worship. Each generation finds its own voice in worshipping God. Style doesn’t make one song better than another.

What about content, then? The good old hymns of the church had great content that is missing from a lot of these “ding-dong ditties” (an expression one octogenarian used in conversation with me). But let’s be honest – for every generation of sacred songs there are some that are wonderful. They are timeless songs that proclaim great truths and will be sung for decades (if not centuries). But there are also songs that are just plain junk. Read through any hymnal and you will find the classics, but there are also songs in there that were no good, are no good, and will never be any good.

There are songs being written currently that have wonderful content full of rich theology. There are songs being written now that are fluff, spiritual marshmallows that don’t nourish the soul. Don’t cast out an entire generation of music because of some bad songs – every generation has bad songs.

What does it really come down to, then? Personal preference. That’s it. We like the songs that we like. We dislike the songs we dislike.

Grumpy Cat

Sometimes we’ll like the way a certain line moves our soul. Sometimes the melody will capture us and we will love worshipping to it over and over and over and over again.

A mentor of mine once noted that people seem to love the worship songs that were present when they had a significant spiritual experience. What was being played when you had your first real encounter with Jesus? Chances are that those songs will have a special place in your heart. If you have attended a retreat or spiritual conference that was dynamic and revitalized your spirituality, the songs played at that event will have significantly more meaning to you than a new song introduced by your church’s worship team the following week. We are a highly subjective people. Our experiences lead us to like or dislike worship.

When we understand that our experiences and preferences determine our pleasure and displeasure with songs we are freed to worship alongside of people in spite of differences. We don’t have to like the same music, but we worship the same Jesus. I don’t even have to have all of the words of a song memorized to worship God. God transcends words and is not limited to what I can read on the projection screen and sing along with.

As a pastor, then, I have made a conscious effort to engage multiple generations and styles in our church’s service. This is typically called a “blended service” – which I guess is an adequate description. Our worship leader is prayerfully intentional in selecting songs that cover a variety of styles and eras. I don’t think that our way is the best way, but we do understand that people respond to different music in different ways, and we seek the good of the ENTIRE church, not just one demographic.

We recently conducted an unscientific survey in our church, asking people to rate 20 different worship songs. They were asked to scale how familiar they were with the song (little, medium, or very familiar) , how much they liked the song (don’t like, somewhat like, really like), and if they wanted to hear it more, less, or the same. We included 5 hymns and 15 contemporary songs.

We found an interesting phenomenon: even when people really liked a song they indicated that they would like to hear it played about the same in church. This was true almost across the board for hymns and contemporary songs. For example, Revelation Song received one of the highest favorability ratings in our church 73.1% of responders really like it. At the same time, the overwhelming majority said the frequency of play in church was fine and to keep it the same.

While we don’t pick music based on the subjective likes and dislikes of people, the surveys were interesting to see how people think and what they desire in a weekly worship service. I don’t think we’ll ever get it all right. No single service will make everyone content, but we do want to be intentional about creating a worship environment where it is easy to worship God, so we will continue to utilize the blended method. If your church does something else – more power to you. But we have to be faithful with what and who God is calling us to be.

I don’t think the worship wars will ever end. It’s about personal preference, so we will never achieve total unity. But we can worship alongside each other and embrace each other’s preference even if it isn’t our own. I really don’t think God cares about our preferences as much as he cares about whether or not we are actually worshipping. So, next Sunday at church, forget about what you like or prefer and attempt to engage and worship God no matter what song the praise team is leading.

How about you? What are your preferences? What songs move you? What songs make you shut down?

And, just because I know some of you are interested, here are the 20 songs from our survey:

1. Victorious – 
2. Let God Arise – 
3. Mighty to Save – 
4. All Hail the Power of Jesus’ Name – 
5. Great is Thy Faithfulness – 
6. When the Stars Burn Down – 
7. God is Able – 
8. 10000 Reasons (Bless the Lord) – 
9. I Surrender – 
10. Everyday – 
11. My Savior Lives – 
12. The Solid Rock – 
13. Blessed Assurance – 
14. Revelation Song – 
15. Glory to God Forever – 
16. Here In Your Presence – 
17. Here and Now – 
18. Wonderful Merciful Savior – 
19. The Stand – 
20. Days of Elijah –

%d bloggers like this: