Clown Communion, Okay or Not?

Technically, I wasn't speaking directly to you, I did quote you because you used your catch phrase "church is a blast".

9 pages of debate concerning whether or not this should or should not be allowed. Let's think about this:

What are clowns known for and what are their duties?

Making people laugh and looking extremely stupid and depending on what rodeo you go to they are used as one-liner comedians and moving targets. They ride small motor cycles, spray water in each others pants, and throw whip cream pies at one another.

Do you want this character taking any part in worship service? I try to teach my son that worship should be Christ centered and that the pastor whom stands alone in front of the congregation should be hidden behind the cross of Christ, for he is there not for himself, but for Christ, to deliver His message, not his own. Is Christ the center of this or is the clown? Who did the people come to see? Who will the people leave remembering? What will be discussed?

 

We are in agreement.:thumbs:

 

If the word "clown" is replaced with "BB moderator," does this still hold true?



:laugh:

 

My "catch phrase" :laugh: I liked that. I think I've used it twice, and both times in response to someone who said church should NOT be fun.

As far as a clown serving communion in church, we are in agreement. I cannot open the link, so I had no context to make a decision on.

 

I first heard of this through Way of the Master and thought it was pretty disgusting.

Commemorating the sacrifice or our Savior on our behalf should be a solemn and reverent experience.

I don't think it's anything less than outright blasphemy and a mockery of something that the Bible tells us to hold sacred.

If I were in a church where this happened, you'd better believe I'd give the leadership a piece of my mind and I'd grab my family and head for the nearest exit.

 

What did the Way of the Master have to say about it?

 

Oh, there's a shock.

Before I was a Baptist, I was born and raised in the UMC. In fact, my grandparents helped to found the Methodist church in my hometown of Hueytown, Al.

The Methodists were once a powerful tool for the Gospel and sought to glorify God in all that they did.

Now, sadly, it's no longer the Methodist church, but the Messodist church.

Neither my grandparents nor, ironically, the Wesley's, who founded that denomination, would even recognize it now.

It is rocketing toward apostasy and I can only hope that any Bible believing Christians left in that denomination will take a page from what's going on in the Anglican and Episcopal churches now, if not from the conservative rescue of the SBC many years ago.

It's heartbreaking to see them become what they've become.

Sorry to go off topic, but this is a hot button of mine.

 

They didn't like it.

Todd actually spoke about this several times but this is the only one I can find:

http://www.wayofthemasterradio.com/podcast/index.php?s=clown+communion

It's the first segment after the Q&A at the beginning.

 

I thought you would, both times you threw that out there it just makes me think about how different I view worship services. I thought of Six Flags as a blast, Church Camp as a blast, never have I ever thought of worship services being a blast. That seems like an odd description. I use words like, convicting, though provoking, encouraging, inspirational, not a blast.

 

JD, there are several reasons why the way we part of the LS shouldn't be a 100% correspondence of what we see in the synoptics:

1. Only males partook.

2. It was still under that Law.

3. Other NT texts where we see the LS celebrated, there's no singing of a hymn.

4. The early church celebrated the LS in conjunction with a fellowship meal.

5. Both males and females celebrated the LS as seen in Acts and beyond.

The RP falls short in my opinion.

 

I agree with everything you posted here. I have a family member who graduated from "Clown College" (yes, there is such a thing) and yes, there are rules and guidelines that every clown should follow.

You are right. This goes way beyond the limits.

When people do wrong things for right reasons, they are still wrong.

 

I recognize that my opposition to clown communion is rooted in the Southern Baptist culture in which I grew up. But there was a reason for that culture, and I still embrace it.

We can argue until the cows come home about this issue. I'm just as interested in the larger picture. I'd like to know the doctrinal stance that such churches take. I'd like to hear some sermons from the pastor. I'd lik to know how clown communion fits into that congregation's ecclesiology.

Is the congregation seeker-sensitive? If so, that answers a lot of questions. Is the pastor zeroed in on being "relevant" and "creative?" More questions answered. Is he focused on making worship "a blast" and "fun," as described by webdog? Where you start determines where you come out.

I think after hearing a couple of messages from the pastor, I'd know enough to be able to determine if I'd be comfortable with anything that church does.

 

Worship should be like this anyway, and that was my point. Nobody should have to focus the service on making worhip a "blast"...it should come naturally for a believer.

 

I have to agree with Webdog here.

Church should be a source of enjoyment for Christians and it should come "naturally". Or rather supernaturally as part of our infilling with the Holy Spirit.

Folks, we're going to spend eternity praising and worshipping our Father. If we find it boring now, what's it going to be like then?

yes, clown 'communion' is to me disrespectful, but to say that worship isn't to be enjoyable also seems not just right.

 

Statement number one---I agree here that sometimes we make a mockery of the Lord's supper by doing what is stateed here. Why even bother? If this is what happens, by golly, send in the clowns, except the clown leading this is already there.

 

I think we're dealing with semantics here. Some of us recoil at describing worship as "fun" and "a blast." It conjures up images of contrived efforts to make it so. I would go along with such descriptions as "enjoyable," "satisfying," even "awesome."

We may be talking about the same things.

While worship leaders should strive to may worship memorable, even enjoyable, we must be careful not make them ends in themselves. We must not lose sight that worship must also be a solemn occasion. Solemn does not have to equate to boring.

I guarantee you that if Jesus walked into our service, there would be no fist-pumping, high fives, no clowns honking their little horns. We would fall on our faces with not a little fear. I can't imagine that a sense of God's presence in our worship would produce anything but awe. Somehow, I can't imagine describing the appearance of Jesus in our worship this way: "Hey, guess what, Jesus showed up at church today and boy was it a blast."

Could we go away from such an occurence with an emotional high? You bet. But it wouldn't be because the worship leader contrived to make it so.

I think all of us have gone away from services that were less than satisfying. But I blame my own attitude more than any lack of effort by the worship leader or the pastor. The most satifying services have come after God poured out his spirit upon us, leaving us to say 'surely the presence of the Lord was in this place." It wasn't anything we did, it was what God did.

 

Really? How were kings welcomed back? I don't think it's an either / or, but it would be both!:jesus:

 

Perhaps so. But the cause would be the presence of the King, not something worked up by the gathering.

Here's what I mean: A few years ago, I attended a service at a charasmatic church with a friend. A steady drum beat started, the folks started clapping. The worship leader shouted, "come on, people, we've got to get in the spirit!" He clapped more enthusiastically, and an electric guitar kicked in with a few licks. The people clapped harder and started dancing. In short order, the place was in a frenzy. They were having a blast.

To be sure, I have been moved by songs and hymns. I have also been emotionally touched by the reading of scripture. I have responded to the preaching. And there are some saints in my church whose praying has brought tears.

Such emotions were not ends in themselves. They were, as you said earlier, Web, natural responses to those elements of worship, not contrived. On that, we agree.