This is probably going to come off as snarky criticism, but please take my word that I don’t mean it that way. It’s just that my diocese, the Episcopal Diocese of Ohio, promulgated a brochure-like document entitled “Vision Integration” at our most recent diocesan convention back in November. At the time, I didn’t pay it much attention: I’m retired, I’m not required to pay attention to these sorts of things any longer.

However, I more recently agreed to be part of a diocesan task force which, as I understand our mandate, is to develop one or two innovative programs or projects to assist our parishes with building maintenance and management issues. In preparation for our initial meeting, we were asked to review the “Vision Integration” document. Doing so, I have been reminded of a philosophical and spiritual position I have held about worship and liturgy for more than 35 years, which is to say “for longer than I’ve been an ordained person.” It is the belief that worship is central to the existence and mission of the church, moreso than any other ministry or activity the church may undertake. It is a position that is core to my ecclesiology, core to my understanding of the nature and purpose of the church.

I was reminded of this ecclesiological issue because it is obvious that my position is not shared by those who produced the “Vision Integration” brochure. That disappointments me. It won’t make me decline to serve on the task force, but my position with regard to the centrality of worship will certainly influence my participation on the task force.

The “Vision Integration” sets out a vision statement for the diocese: “Connected in Beloved Community, we seek to be faithful, healthy, effective, and sustainable sharers of the transformative love of Jesus.” Great vision statement! As good as any vision statement there ever was, and as bad. Short, succinct, and almost totally lacking any testable goal. Exactly what a vision statement should be. It’s a vessel into which can be poured anything church leadership wants to do.

This vision is then quartered, divided into four “specific ways we
are called to work towards our vision,” four “specific ways in which we will integrate our vision throughout the Diocese of Ohio.” These four ways are labeled “Leadership,” “Faith Communities,” “Resource Allocation,” and “Connectivity.”

With regard to “Faith Communities,” the document asks the question “Why Faith Communities?” It provides five bullet-pointed responses in the following order:

  • Spiritual Practices
  • Discipleship
  • Community and Care
  • Service to others
  • Worship

On another page, the “Vision Integration” brochure shows a new organization of our diocesan staff around the four “specific ways.” With regard to “Faith Communities” there are four staff people assigned responsibility: a Canon for Innovation and Congregational Development (presumably a full-time position), a Missioner for Innovation and Transition (also presumably full-time), and two directors for the diocesan iteration of the College for Congregational Development (part-timers who also have full-time parish responsibilities). Note that also worship is the fifth of the reasons “Why Faith Communities?” there is no staff person listed under Faith Communities with responsibilities concerning worship. In fact, the only staff person in any area with worship-oriented duites is the Diocesan Liturgist who is included among the staff tasked with overseeing “Connectivity.”

Currently, the Diocesan Liturgist is a part-time staff person who also has full-time pastoral obligations in one of our congregations. The listing of the position under “Connectivity” is not inaccurate since this person’s responsibilities, at least to date, have been to craft services to be offered at diocesan events, recruit liturgical leadership for those services, and serve as master of ceremonies at those liturgies. The Diocesan Liturgist has not been tasked with any oversight of or assistance with the developing of worship forms or worship leadership competence at the parish level.

I offer all of this summary as lead-in to discussion of that philosophical-spiritual position regarding worship and liturgy that I mentioned earlier. I believe that worship is the one and only thing that the church does that no other human organization does. Worship, and in our tradition that is to say liturgical worship, is the whole reason for being of the church. All the other actiities undertaken by the church can be, and frequently are, done by other organzations and often are done better by those organizations than they are by the church.

For example, consider the “Vision Integration” document’s four other responses to “Why Faith Communities?”

Spiritual practices: all religions, and many philosophical traditions which do not consider themselves to be religions, undertake to teach spiritual practices. Fraternal organizations such as the Freemasons also do so. The gymnasium where I work out offers classes in meditation and mindfulness, and those classes are often larger and better attended than some church services.

Discipleship: Again, every religion fosters discipleship of one form or another. While we often think discipleship in terms of “following the Gospel,” i.e., as an exclusively Christian process, the word describes any disciplined journey of spiritual growth. Following the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous is a form of discipleship. Engaging in daily meditation on the teachings of the Buddha is a form of discipleship. Regular physical excercise and practice in a particular sport is a form of discipleship. Regular rehearsal of ballet or other dance, daily practice of singing or playing a musical instrument, daily painting or writing … these are all forms of discipleship, none of them necessarily Christian.

Community and Care: Families, fraternal organizations, political parties, alumni associations, all human organizations to a greater or lesser extent engage in community maintenance activities including the care of their members. It may not always be great care; the church, indeed, often fails to offer significant care to its members, but sometimes it tries, as do other forms of human association. The church is not alone in seeking, and failing, to maintain community and provide care.

Service to others: The Red Cross, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, until recently USAID, Oxfam and numerous other charities all serve others with much greater effectiveness than does the Episcopal Church.

Worship of God incarnate in Jesus Christ is the only thing the church does that no other human association or organization does. It is the thing that Jesus entrusted to the church on the night before he was crucified when, taking bread and wine, blessing it and distributing it, he said, “Do this in remembrance of me.” Only the church does this and everything else the church does must flow from this. I am an Episcopalian because I believe the form of liturgical worship we offer is (or, at least, can be) one of the best ways follow Jesus’ direction and to ground all of our other ministries.

Liturgy done well both convicts and uplifts: it convicts the worshiper of the in-grained sinfulness of all humans and it uplifts the worship with the assurance of the inate worth of human beings and the forgiveness of God. Liturgy which is inspiring and engaging empowers the worshiper to continue in spiritual practices and discipleship, and commissions the worshiper into a life of community, care, and service to others.

Therefore, in my opinion and according to my ecclesiology, worship should not be the fifth reason “Why Faith Communities?” It should be the first reason “Why Church?”

I was recently told a really disturbing statistic about the Episcopal Church: the current ASA (Average Sunday Attendance) in Episcopal Church parishes is 34. Thirty-four! There are only 34 people sitting in the pews of the average Episcopal Church on Sunday mornings! I trust the source of this information although I’ve been unable to independently verify it; the most recent press release from the church gives the 2023 ASA at just over 60 (which is bad enough). When I left active parish ministry in 2018, the figure I recall was an ASA of 80.

I’d assumed that ASA would have declined because of the Covid pandemic and changes in attendance patterns. With many people now “attending” church by watching it through internet broadcasts or Zoom meetings, actual participation is probably hard to measure. However, in a church which states in its main liturgical text that the Holy Eucharist is “the principal act of Christian worship on the Lord’s Day and other major Feasts” in person attendance is really the only measure of full participation.

I believe (and I may be entirely wrong, but I don’t think I am) that if our visioning would put worship and liturgy at the top of our priorities, our attendance and participation would be much higher, and our attention to other ministries of the church would be more effective. Worship is what we do, what only we do. We should do it as vibrantly and engagingly as possible. We should make it our principal focus, not the fifth bullet point of one of four “specific ways” of “integrating” our vision of the church.

I will be grounding my participation in the building maintenance and management task force on this understanding of worship.