Keep in touch with what is happening
behind the scenes at First Fruits of Zion.
By Aaron Eby | Comments (7) | Posted on February 2, 2007
In this post, I will tackle some of the common objections that people have against using liturgical prayers.
To many people from an evangelical or charismatic background, “liturgy” is a bad word. It is considered synonymous with deadness, dryness and non-inspiration. It is often perceived as a box that serves only to prevent the Spirit of God from moving during a service. It is discarded as one of the “traditions of men” that the Messiah warned us to avoid. I spent most of my upbringing in a charismatic church, so I am personally quite familiar with many of these sentiments.
Liturgy can technically refer to any prescribed set of rituals used in a religious service, but in this discussion, I am primarily referring to prayers. Is it OK to employ pre-written prayers as a part of our worship?
As people have come to appreciate a Hebraic approach to faith and Scripture, and as Messianic Judaism has sought to employ the mode of worship in synagogues, liturgy has pushed its way forward as a primary issue among these types of congregations. In some sense, the debate on the use of liturgy in Messianic congregations has supplanted the common church argument over traditional hymns versus contemporary choruses.
It bears repeating that it is a common misconception that Jewish prayer is always liturgical. Judaism does not by any means teach that prayer must be formulaic, or at any particular moment of the day. One does not need a minyan, a quorum of ten men to pray, nor does one need a synagogue or a Siddur. Judaism has always taught that one may directly communicate with the Creator in your own words, in your own language, at any time, wherever you are.
In the U.S., the opposition people hold toward liturgy probably stems from two main sources. One is the individualistic mindset of American culture. It is this “I can do it myself” mentality that got many of us to start thinking outside the box of the religious system in which we were raised. Hebraic roots people like ourselves are already used to bucking the system, and we’re hesitant to replace it with another system.
A second source of opposition is the influence of the cultural transformation that occurred in America during the 1960s. The values that flourished during that era had a profound and lasting effect on American religion. This is so much the case that it is common for people to confuse true godliness and spirituality with ideals popularized at that time: freedom from restrictions and authority, egalitarianism and spontaneity. In the U.S., most people in positions of religious authority today (including Messianic congregations) come from a generation that was heavily influenced by those ideas.
The main argument against liturgy is that it represents the “vain repetitions” condemned by Yeshua. However, take a close look at Yeshua’s instructions:
And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. (Matthew 6:7 NASB, emphasis mine)
Yeshua’s criticism in this passage is not leveled against the Jewish mode of prayer. He explicitly identifies meaningless repetition as a Gentile thing. He might be alluding to the commandment in the Torah that forbids us from serving God in the way of that idol worshipers serve their gods (Deuteronomy 12:29–31). Perhaps one example of this can be seen in the contest between Elijah and the idolatrous prophets on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18).
As my friend Dana once aptly pointed out, in order for something to qualify as meaningless repetition, it must satisfy two conditions:
Being repetitive alone does not make a prayer “vain repetitions.” Jewish prayer is often repetitive, but it is far from being meaningless. In fact, Jewish prayer is deeply meaningful, being comprised mostly of the Scriptures.
Everyone employs some repetition in worship. This is not a sin. It is not a sin if you pray for the same thing twice, or even twice in one day. It is not a sin if you use the same words in a prayer that you used last time. In the most spontaneous prayers, there is typically a substantial amount of repetition.
Some congregations that would never pray a pre-written prayer because of “vain repetitions” have no difficulty reading the words to their praise and worship songs from a screen, repeating the chorus of the songs four or five times.
The use of liturgical prayers is not in view of the Master’s condemnation. The problem is when people don’t mean the words that they are repeating…or if they don’t have a meaning. This is what Yeshua was speaking against.
Traditional Jewish commentators on prayer would heartily agree. It has been said, “Prayer without kavanah (sincere intention) is like a body without a soul.”
Some people believe that repeating something over and over will cause it to lose meaning. This is sometimes the case, but not always. If I get stuck in the ritual of prayer, and do not focus on the words that are coming out of my mouth, then it can mean less.
However, it might be just the opposite. Each time you a read a passage from the Scriptures, do you discover that it means more or less to you? If you are attentive, it will mean more to you each time you read it. Each time you read it, it will take less time for you to recall what it means.
The same can be true of the prayers. The prayers are deeply poetic and profound. At first, it can be difficult to focus on them and to understand them. But each time you pray, you may notice more and more about them, and it will be easier to concentrate on the meaning. It’s much like someone who walks through a field or a forest. At first, trudging through the weeds is difficult and slow going, but after doing so day after day, week after week, and year after year, it becomes easier and easier to get from point A to point B.
This is one reason you may hear Orthodox Jews praying so quickly. It takes very little time for them to recall the profound meanings in the prayers, since they have been doing so from a very young age.
There are some that feel that something that is written or follows a formula does not allow room for the Holy Spirit to move. But choruses such as “Blessed Be Your Name” or “Open the Eyes of My Heart” are also written in advance. If it must be entirely spontaneous in order to allow for the Spirit, then choruses such as these should never be used. People should just sing (or say) whatever comes to them at the time. Yet we know that that would lead to chaos and disunity.
Even the most “Spirit-filled” congregations usually follow a standard order or worship. They may open with a Psalm, sing a certain number of songs, take an offering, hear a sermon, and have an altar call. The structure of service found in the siddur is the very same idea, except that it is rooted in an ancient tradition that dates back to the Messiah and the Temple services sanctioned by God.
It was the Holy Spirit that filled the Tabernacle. And yet, it pleased God to have a specific order and structure to the way the services were run. In fact, the Bible itself is inspired by the Holy Spirit, and the Bible is structured and written. Thus we see that the Holy Spirit can also inspire things that are structured and written.
Fundamentally, this objection stems from the non-biblical idea that the Holy Spirit is the zany, unpredictable, spontaneous personality of God. Just as something can be spontaneous does without being inspired by the Holy Spirit, something can be inspired by the Holy Spirit even if it is not spontaneous.
If you belong to a congregation that values the ability to be spontaneous, which is by all means a good thing, you can still benefit from liturgy. It is not all or nothing.
Some people think that the synagogue liturgy is impersonal. As I mentioned before, there is room within Jewish prayer for personal prayer. Prayer can be spontaneous and flow from the heart.
But it is true that the synagogue liturgy is often not personal. That is by design. There are times when it is appropriate to focus on personal issues, but when we stand united with all Israel, our personal issues are miniscule compared to the glory of God and His Kingdom. The point is to get our minds off of ourselves.
In our culture, we have become so self-centered. Everything is marketed as “choice,” “personal,” “customized.” Everything you buy or do is a chance to express yourself or define your identity. This aspect of modern culture has pervaded the Church. The sermons are all about self-help. The praise and worship is often self-focused: “I/me/my.”
These prayers are not personal, because they are about God and His Kingdom.
Another common way to reject the prayers is to say, “I grew up Catholic, and all the liturgy just reminds me of that. Praying those liturgical prayers was so empty for me.”
Certainly the Catholic Church has some things wrong. But just because the Church does something does not make it wrong. The Catholic Church borrowed many things from Judaism (because they believe that the Church has replaced Judaism). In addition to this, they were influenced by many non-Jewish and non-biblical ideas and practices, and for this reason it should be no surprise that a person may have difficulty connecting to the God of Israel in a Catholic service.
Second, the person attending a Catholic service may be in need of genuine spiritual renewal. When this person prayed those prayers in the Church, he or she may have been a different person from who they are now.
Someone who was raised with a liturgical tradition that they did not appreciate is presented with the difficult challenge of overcoming emotional barriers and looking at something with new eyes. That can be difficult, but it is worth it.
Some people reject liturgical prayer and worship because they don’t get the same positive feeling from it that they do with other forms of worship. But prayer takes sacrifice and dedication. We do not worship or pray because we enjoy it, although that may often be the case. We worship because God deserves it. Everyone likes to feel spiritually charged, but whether or not a person feels spiritually charged from a form of worship should not be the primary issue. True worship is submission to God. Our goal should be to determine how God wants us to worship Him. To put it bluntly: we’re not worshiping you.
Some congregations hesitate to employ liturgical prayers because they are afraid of what visiting non-believers might think. As I previously mentioned, our goal should be to worship God the way He wants it. It is entirely backwards to worship God in the way that non-believers want Him to be worshiped.
Of course it is important to make services accessible to newcomers. It is important to help them know what is going on and to help them understand why and how you do things. That can be done even if you use liturgy.
This objection is usually raised by people who are turned off by liturgy themselves and project their own sentiments onto non-believers and newcomers. In reality, non-believers often do not have the same religious hang-ups we do, and some appreciate the poetry, beauty and authenticity of these ancient prayers.
I hope these answers have addressed some concerns you may have had about liturgy. I know that there are many other objections that people raise. My hope is that more disciples of Yeshua will learn to appreciate and employ the traditional mode of worship. In a future post, I would like to discuss more of the positive side of the coin and show the benefits of Jewish liturgical prayer.
Aaron Eby
14 Shevat 5767

Clear, black and white, easy-to-follow logic! Boundary Stones presents a compelling and positive case for the Torah to return as life's guidebook for every disciple of the Messiah.
Use RSS feeds to track this section in your favorite reader.
Visitor Comments
Well said Aaron
Warren
Posted by: Warren Nyack | February 2, 2007 8:00 PM
Very good post Aaron. Great insights. According to the book of Revelation, we will all one day surround the throne of Glory and sing together liturgically. Might as well get used to it now.
I always like to remind people that the entire book of Psalms is a book of liturgy. I was once speaking with a Messianic Jewish woman who spurned liturgy. She was a baby-boomer.
I tried my book of Psalms argument with her, pointing out that the book of Psalms is all liturgical, the ancient liturgies of the Temple.
She was not convinced. She replied, "I think of the Psalms as being all written by David as he laid under a tree with his harp, watching the sheep."
I am fairly certain that this particular woman will never be comfortable praying liturgically. Perhaps, the solution in such a case is that people who have an immovable aversion to liturgical forms should not pray liturgically.
Just as the Talmud says, "A man should pray in a language he understands" perhaps a man should pray in a mode he understands. Praying in English is not ideal. But it is better than not praying or praying with no comprehension. A person who cannot pray liturgically should likewise be encouraged to pray however it is that they can. Of course, this should not become a community standard that shapes the ccongregational worship services--instead it reflects a personal approach to God.
I find it hard to feel comfortable praying with a minyan composed of several people who resent being part of the minyan.
At Beth Immanuel, in Hudson, WI, we have solved that issue to some extent by dividing our Shabbat morning service into two separate services, a traditional liturgical service containing the Torah reading and morning prayers followed by a contemporary service with worship choruses and a conventional sermon. Most people attend both, but those who don't care for the traditional forms are more comfortable showing up only for the second service. It's nice.
Posted by: D. T. Lancaster | February 4, 2007 4:30 PM
It is interesting to see that God gave the Temple service to David 'by the spirit.'
Then David gave to Solomon his son the pattern of the porch, and of the houses thereof, and of the treasuries thereof, and of the upper chambers thereof, and of the inner parlours thereof, and of the place of the mercy seat, -- 1 Chr 28:11 (KJV)
And the pattern of all that he had by the spirit, of the courts of the house of the LORD, and of all the chambers round about, of the treasuries of the house of God, and of the treasuries of the dedicated things: -- 1 Chr 28:12 (KJV)
Also for the courses of the priests and the Levites, and for all the work of the service of the house of the LORD, and for all the vessels of service in the house of the LORD. -- 1 Chr 28:13 (KJV)
Posted by: Steve Petersen | February 4, 2007 9:54 PM
I estimate that I have presented “Knocking on Heaven’s Gates” over hundred times in this past year. This seminar introduces the idea, role and importance of set-time liturgical prayer. This seminar is full of disclaimers---I grow exhausted filling this teaching with various qualifiers, yet I know that it is necessary because liturgical prayer is a new approach for most people. It goes against the model of prayer that we have been taught in our past religious settings.
One of the standard “disclaimers” that I give toward the end of the teaching is that our (FFOZ’s) emphasis is not so much that we want everyone to use the siddur to pray—but rather to PRAY. We have found the siddur and set-time prayer to be effective tools in assisting us in establishing a meaningful and disciplined prayer life.
The teaching staff here at FFOZ made the decision a couple of years ago to begin to teach in this area (of liturgical prayer), to begin the daunting and extensive siddur project, and to challenge the long-established method of prayer. We knew that we had our work cut out for us at that time, and we know it still is. For example this last weekend my family worshiped with a beautiful Messianic Torah community here in Gainesville, FL. Their service was full of liturgy—it was both traditional and non-traditional. On their website they state,
* Davidic worship & dance
* Traditional (Siddur) & Spirit-filled Prayers
* Family participation in Kiddush
In practice, their liturgy was very “spirit-filled,” yet by stating this distinction on their site, some could assume the counter statement as true: that traditional prayers are not “spirit-filled.” I know that they do not consider their liturgical prayer the antithesis of spontaneous prayers.
The leader of the congregation did an excellent job in communicating this throughout the service—he reminded me of myself at FFOZ seminars, always having to explain and, in some cases, justify why we introduce and utilize liturgical prayers.
I sense that this BLOG, and our teachings in this area of prayer, are changing people’s perceptions of this form of prayer, and many are starting to incorporate it into their lives.
Aaron, we were wrong in our planning meeting when we outlined our direction in this area—we thought that this teaching prayer would be met with great resistance. My experience has been just the opposite of what we thought. Instead, hundreds of notes and letters are coming in and indicating that this biblical and ancient form of prayer is making a deep impact into people’s lives today.
Keep up the good work!
Posted by: Boaz Michael | February 5, 2007 1:20 AM
I really appreciate your teaching, and Boaz's teaching as well on this subject. Liturgy is a powerful tool, it pushes us into new areas of prayer. Most of us follow a format of prayer even when suposidly praying spontaniously. I found this true even in the most Charasmatic environment. We fall into familar patterns that stagnate without something to guide us further on. Liturgy is a great tool to guide us into new areas of prayer. The danger is to see Liturgy as monolithic an unchanging. I recently read in a book on Jewish prayer that the Talmud and Scriptures are closed to expantion but the prayer book is still open. We need to continue to encourage our liturgy to grow and range, while appreciating the riches of the past. The siddur has great depths that we as Christians are just now encountering. The prayers of scripture are equally rich. We need to continue to allow the "new song" to enter our liturgy, and to allow artistic forms to enrich our offerings to the Lord. God still breaths on a new generation of poets and musicians and artists. As we continue to view our liturgy as alive, it will continue to be a fresh sacrifice, without loosing the significance of it's ancient roots.
Posted by: Randal Weidenaar | February 5, 2007 6:15 PM
Shalom Aaron,
Liturgical prayer seems in line with the Torah. The Torah teaches us to do things not in an arbitrary manner, according to our own spontaneous impulses, but to follow HaShem's guidelines. However, I find 1 Cor 14:26 difficult to reconcile with following an established liturgical order in congregational prayer and worship. Paul says: "How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying." Here it seems that the contents of the service is "composed" by the members of the congregation themselves, under the guidance of the Spirit. One brother proposes to sing a psalm, a second follows with a proposal for a second psalm, a third has a doctrine to explain, &c. My question is: How do you reconcile this passage with following an established liturgy?
Posted by: Geert ter Horst | May 28, 2008 9:18 PM
Thanks for your question. It brings up an important point.
One can accept the validity of liturgical prayer and incorporate it into a service without it becoming the exclusive form of worship. That is to say, it is possible to have some standard, established liturgical element to the service as well as things that are not scheduled or not patterned. There is no indication in the passage you cited that Paul outlined the contents of the entire program. Historically, it seems clear that the liturgical element common to other branches of Judaism would have also been present.
Besides, the recital of a psalm, either a canonical psalm or a recently composed piyyut would technically constitute a liturgical form of worship.
Finally, we must not miss the very point of the passage, summarized in the last verse of the chapter:
Paul is specifically indicating that these congregational contributions should not occur spontaneously and at random, but should operate according to a prescribed schedule or order. A prescribed order for worship is, by definition, liturgy.
Posted by: Aaron Eby
|
May 29, 2008 2:42 PM