Thursday, April 12, 2007

Horton on Worship and Ethnocentrism

Recently I stumbled across this article by Michael Horton while searching monergism.com for articles on Christian worship. The article is called The Ethnocentricity of the American Church Growth Movement. I agree with Michael Horton on many issues. We are both Calvinists and both have a desire to see true conservative Christian worship restored in America. There are several problems with what passes for worship in contemporary America. Worship is often passed off as entertainment and often fosters an irreverent atmosphere. The old church music of the past has been quickly jettisoned in favor of giddy and sentimental choruses that lack in content and meaning. Many so-called "seeker-sensitive churches" substitute the gospel for mere consumerism. I would even go so far as to say that much of what passes for Christianity today isn't Christianity at all. However I can't agree with Horton that modern American worship is ethnocentric.

Ethnocentrism can be defined as a particular regard for one's own culture and nation over other cultures and nations. If there is anything that modern American's lack, it is ethnocentrism. The same white middle America that has completely lost its racial and ethnic conscience in the last few decades comprises the core of these seeker-sensitive churches. Whites today take pains in order to be "politically correct" in order not to offend anyone. The greatest good according to many American whites is "multiculturalism" and whites today bend over backwards to ensure that they and their children will enjoy the "multicultural experience." In this vein Michael Horton ensures his readers that "the ancient creeds, confessions, and liturgies represent the most genuinely multicultural agenda." Thus if you really want to pursue a multicultural form of worship then you should actually become more conservative and liturgical. Is it just me, or does this seem like a case of reverse psychology?

Allow me to use an example of how this is false if I may. I recently witnessed Sean Hannity on the Fox TV program Hannity and Colmes shame a former Clinton advisor asking him why President Clinton did not include more minorities in his cabinet. The obvious implication that Hannity was trying to make is that Republicans are the real party of minorities while Democrats ignore them. This ignores the fact that 90% of votes for Republicans come from whites. As much as Hannity may deny it, minorities persistantly vote Democrat. This is similar to what Horton is trying to convince us of when he asserts that modern worship is really ethnocentric, and conservative worship is multicultural. The fact is that most churches that have conservative worship are dominated by one race or another, and most of these (at least in America) are white. White America could use a healthy dose of ethnocentrism.

Horton complains that many people often think that ancient Christian worship has a "Eurocentric" bias when the reality is that ancient Christian worship is a bastion of multiculturalism. He assures us that "we are talking about prayers and forms that often are either direct biblical citations or date back to the first few centuries and come from Palestine, Asia, and Africa." This is a partial truth but the way that Horton states this is misleading. The most ancient of Christian worship was formulated in the Roman Empire, which spanned into what is today Palestine, Africa, and Asia. However the content of the ancient creeds, confessions, and liturgies were overwhelmingly developed by white Europeans. For example St. Athanasius and St. Augustine were two of the early church's greatest thinkers and defenders. Both of these men were white Romans living in north Africa. I find it odd that Horton is surprised regarding the notion that ancient Christian worship is Eurocentric. Ancient Christianity flourished in the West, and as a result Christianity is one of the most recognizable bulwarks of Western Civilization today.

Why does Horton consider modern worship to be ethnocentric? I think he confuses ethnocentrism with self-centeredness. Modern American worship is the product of self-indulgence, consumerism, pragmatism, and multiculturalism. Today many people have substituted their love of heritage and people for self-indulgence. Modern America also promotes the idea that "the customer is always right" and the American church seeks to apply this principle to Christian worship. Churches have also adapted the postmodern hatred for reason and knowledge by emphasizing feelings in worship. All of these influences have combined for America's current love for "diversity" and "cultural enrichment" to form contemporary Christian worship. Many megachurches have incorporated ethnic dancing, tribal music, or even worse, U2 into their Sunday worship in order to attract crowds. The idea that ethnocentrism influences modern American worship is patently untrue. Ultimately I applaud Michael Horton's efforts to champion conservative worship. I think that America desperately needs a conservative Christian witness in our age of postmodernism. But this tactic of reverse psychology isn't going to hack it.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

The ancient creeds and such are the most multicultural because they are the most biblically based. As God provided his Word for humanity and He is most knowledgeable about what would be truly multicultural, the closer you are to the Bible the closer you are to the "unity in diversity" that only God can achieve.

The further you get from the Bible the less multicultural your message really becomes. Think of Acts 17, do you know what triggers God has in his word to speak to the Chinese, Zulu, or Inuit in order to bring those folks to him? I don't. As a result, anything I made up and did not keep very strictly to the Bible would end up excluding by its inability to speak to those folks as adequately as the Scriptures. This is why the old BCP works so well across cultural lines, it sticks close to the Scriptures.

Most modern stuff is usually barely distinguishable as Christian, much less biblical.

ehud would said...

Really, multiculturalism is a contradiction of all individual cultures by definition. Afterall, a people adopt or spawn a culture as an outworking of certain base convictions in regard to God, society and the world around. That is-- they believe their own social ethics to be superior to those of others.

Multiculturalism conversely homogenizes all social ethics into one over-arching denial of objective truth. It postulates the theory that all the myriad cultures of the world are equally good and true. But if all are equally true they are to the same degree also equally false. Infact, the assumption that there exists a difference between good and bad is the only real "evil" in their system. Multiculturalism is nothing but the denial of distinction between good and evil.

Scarborough Fayre said...

Good points Lawrence. I still don't like the idea that the Bible is "multicultural" in the sense that Horton seems to mean it. I think that the Bible transcends culture in that it can speak to every group including the Chinese, Zulu, and Inuit. I share your appreciation for the BCP liturgy precisely because it sticks so close to the Bible.