in worship to recover the Psalm singingrnof the Puritans, the simple and spontaneousrnmeetings of Quakers, thernhymnody of German pietism, the folkrntraditions of the Amish, the revival songsrnof Ira Sankey and Dwight L. Moody,rnor the spirituals of African-AmericanrnProtestants? The answer, of course, is no.rnFor these expressions of Protestant piety,rneven though originating from somerngroups which would hardly qualify asrnelites, are no better than the liturgiesrnfrom the Lutheran, Anglican, and Reformedrnestablishments. What the P&Wrncrowd really wants is a very narrow rangernof musical and lyrical expression, onernwhich conforms to its admittedly limitedrnworship “repertoire.”rnIndeed, contemporary worship—andrnchurch life—depends increasingly on thernproducts of popular culture, from its musicalrnmode of expression, the liturgicalrnskits which ape T^ sitcoms, and the informalrnstvle of ministers which followsrnthe antics of late-night TV talk showrnhosts. Thus, just as the academic left advocatesrnincluding Madonna and Leave Itrnto Beaver in the canon, so the evangelicalrnchampions of contemporary worshiprnturn to popular culture—primarily contemporaryrnmusic and television programmingrn—for the content and order ofrnworship. This is remarkable for a Christianrntradition that once found its identityrnin avoiding all forms of worldlinessrnand that continues to rail against thernproducts of Hollywood and the excessesrnof the music industry. Yet, as in the casernof the cultural left, we are seeing a generationrnthat grew up on T^ and top-40 radiornstations now assuming positions ofrnleadership in the churches. And whatrnthey want to surround themselves withrnin worship, as in the classroom, is whatrnis familiar and easily accessible. Ratherrnthan growing up and adopting thernbroader range of experience that characterizesrnadulthood, evangelicals and thernacademic left want to recover and perpetuaternthe experiences of adolescence.rnIn fact, what stands out about P&Wrnis the aura of teenage piety. Anyone whornhas endured a week at one of the evangelicalrnsummer youth camps that dot thernlandscape will be struck by the similarityrnbetween P&W and the services in whichrnadolescents participate while out of theirrnparents’ hair. The parallels are so closernthat one is tempted to call P&W thernliturgy of the youth rally. For in thernmeetings of Young Life, Campus Crusadernfor Christ, or Bible camp are all thernelements of P&W: the evangelical choruses,rnthe skit, and the long talk by thernyouthful speaker calling for dedicationrnand commitment to Christ. Whilernthese youth ministries are effective inrnevoking the mountain-top or eampfiresidernexperience, they rarely provide thernsustenance upon which a life of sacrificernand discipline depends. Yet, P&W is attractivernprecisely because it appears tornoffer weekly the spiritual recharge thatrnbefore came only once a year. Consequently,rnmany megachurches that followrnthe P&W format thrive because theyrnhelp many people recover or sustain thernreligious experience of youth.rnSome may wonder what is wrong withrnassisting adults to perpetuate the emotionsrnand memories that sustain religiousrndevotion. The problem is that such experiencesrnand the worship from whichrnthey spring is concerned primarily withrnaffect. One searches in vain through thernpraise songs, the liturgical dramas, or thernsermon/inspirational talk for an adequaternexpression of the historic truths ofrnthe faith. It is as if the content of worshiprnor the object which elicits the religiousrnexperience does not really matter. Asrnlong as people are lifting up and swayingrntheir arms, tilting back their heads andrnclosing their eyes, then the Spirit mustrnbe present and the worship genuine.rnWhat is ironic about contemporaryrnworship is that its form is almost alwaysrnthe same even while claiming that olderrnworship is too repetitive. Another standardrncomplaint about “traditional” worshiprnis that it is too formal. Evangelicalsrnbelieve that God is never limited by outwardrnmeans. Believers who rely upon setrnliturgies or who repeat written prayers,rnsome charge, are merely “going throughrnthe motions.” Real faith and worshiprncannot be prescribed. Yet, for all of thernattempts by the practitioners of P&W tornavoid routine and habit, hence boredom,rncontemporary worship never seems to escapernits own pop culture formula. Again,rnthe songs are basically the same in musicalrnstructure and lyrical composition, thernorder of the service—while much lessrnformal—rarely changes, and the way inrnwhich people express their experiencerndemonstrates remarkable unity (e.g., thernarms, the head, the eyes). This hostilityrnto form and the inability to think aboutrnthe ways in which certain habits of expressionrnare more or less appropriate forrnspecific settings or purposes is whatrnfinally puts evangelicalism and thernacademic left on the same side in thernculture war. For the idea that the autonomousrnindividual must find his ownrnmeaning or experience of reality for himselfrnends up making such individuals unwillingrnto follow and submit to thernforms, habits, and standards that havernguided a community or culture. Besidesrnthe fact that the radical individualismrnof modern culture has bred as muchrnconformity as human history has everrnknown, evangelicals and the academicrnleft continue to buck tradition in thernhope of finding the true self capable ofrnexperiencing religion or life at its mostrngenuine or authentic.rnWhat evangelicals who prefer P&Wrnto older liturgies share with academicsrnwho teach Louis L’Amour instead ofrnShakespeare is an inability to see the valuernof restraint, habit, and form. Evangelicalsrnand the academic left believe thatrnwe need to be liberated from the past,rnfrom formalism, and from existing structuresrnin order to come into a more intimaternrelationship with life or the divine.rnThis is really quite astounding in the easernof evangelicals whose public reputationrndepends upon defending traditionalrnmorality. Yet, the effort to remove allrnbarriers to the expression and experiencernof the individual self is unmistakablyrnpresent in the efforts to make worshiprnmore expressive and spontaneous. Thisrnimpulse in evangelical worship repudiatesrnthe wisdom of various Christian traditionsrnwhich, rather than trying to liberaternthe self in order to experience greaterrnintimacy with God, hold that individuals,rnbecause of a tendency to sin andrncommit idolatry, need to conform to revealedrnand ordered patterns of faith andrnpractice. The traditions which Presbyteriansrnfollow, for instance, are not done tornthrottle religious experience but rather asrnthe prescribed means of communingrnwith God and his people. These meansrnwere not arbitrarily chosen by JohnrnCalvin and John Knox. Rather Presbyteriansrnhave conducted public and familyrnworship in specific ways because they believernworship should conform to God’srnrevealed truth. But just as the academicrnleft has abandoned the great works ofrnWestern civilization because of a desirernfor relevance in higher education, sornevangelicals have rejected the various elementsrnand forms which have historicallyrninformed Protestant worship, again,rnbecause they are boring to today’s youth.rnAntiformalism also explains the stressrnupon novelty and freshness so oftenrnfound in P&W. The leader of worshiprnAPRIL 1996/41rnrnrn