A
couple of months ago I came across this Unitarian Universalist meme about
responsive readings. (See above.)
Leader: You don’t
like responsive readings.
Congregation: We don’t
like responsive readings.
Leader: Responsive
readings run contrary to everything you believe in as a Unitarian Universalist,
because of instead of formulating your own thoughts and opinions in your own
unique way, you simply repeat words I have chosen for you.
Congregation: Like a
store-bought greeting card, responsive readings sap us of the ability to choose
the words and expressions that we ourselves would have chosen.
The
“responsive reading” went on to poke fun at what a leader could make a
congregation do—moo like a cow or bleat like a sheep.
It
ended this way:
Leader: Repeat
after me: I will never, ever mindlessly repeat words that someone else has
chosen for me.
Congregation: I will
never, ever mindlessly repeat words that someone else has chosen for me.
I
thought about that meme because there was a responsive reading at a church I was at today.
As
these things go, it was OK. It asked us to be careful about the things we do
and say.
Although
it’s a sentiment I can agree with, I didn’t participate. I almost never do.
Why?
Because before I start reading the words out loud, I need to know if I agree with
them or not.
Sometimes,
I don’t agree. Then I am unwilling to publically proclaim an intention I don’t
intend to follow through on.
To
lie, in other words.
Oh,
come on now, some might be saying. It’s just a harmless exercise. Like the
sermon, most people won’t remember what they said five minutes after it’s over.
Maybe. But it’s still mighty presumptuous of someone to think they know what I want or need to say to God, or to others in the church.
Speaking just for myself, I think responsive readings need to go. They reflect what the leader, pastor or worship planner wants to say, but not necessarily what I want to say—or others in the congregation.
Maybe. But it’s still mighty presumptuous of someone to think they know what I want or need to say to God, or to others in the church.
Speaking just for myself, I think responsive readings need to go. They reflect what the leader, pastor or worship planner wants to say, but not necessarily what I want to say—or others in the congregation.
(This doubly true for confessions; how can anyone know what I need to confess?)
If
churches insist on doing them, maybe they need to give the congregation five
minutes to read the words quietly, and then decide if they want to say them out
loud.
To be clear, this is not an issue for liturgical churches. This is mostly an evangelical thing. The historic creeds are OK by me. They've been theologically vetted and have decades of use and reflection.
Plus, they are familiar. I know what they say, and have had time to think about the implications of saying them.
But for all you other pastors and worship leaders, repeat after me:
Plus, they are familiar. I know what they say, and have had time to think about the implications of saying them.
But for all you other pastors and worship leaders, repeat after me:
Leader: You will do
no more responsive readings.
All: We will do
no more responsive readings.
Leader: Unless you
give people time ahead of the service to read it, or make it part of the
ongoing and familiar liturgy of the church.
All: Unless we give
people time ahead of the service to read it, or make it part of the ongoing and
familiar liturgy of the church.
Leader: Also, moo
like a cow.
All: Moo!
