Actors will talk about how one of their jobs is to create "the illusion of the first time." That is, even on the 200th performance, when they've been doing the show 8 times a week for six months, they still need to convey to the audience that this is the first time that the events in the play have ever happened.
Watching the various lay leaders in worship this morning I got to wondering what the opposite of the illusion of the first time would be. All three of them sounded like they were reading their piece for the very first time, which might be the truth, but I don't think it's what you want worship to sound like.
I'm not trying to say that we should only have highly trained people leading worship. (although to be honest it is very frustrating to me that they get to do it badly while I'm not able to do it at all.) I don't need polished performance, or dulcet tones, but I would like to be able to believe that the words they're saying are important. Important to them and important to me.
Two of the examples today were people reading scripture, the first a father mumbling his way through part of Isaiah 2 for the lighting of the Advent candle (and when did it become law that families had to light the Advent candles? But I digress) and the second was someone reading a very large piece of Luke 1, including the Magnificat, and she did fine except maybe when she talked about the "fruit of Mary's loom."
But what really set me off on this rant was the recently ordained deacon who lifted the chalice high with his left hand and then looked straight down at the table while he read the words of institution like it was the first time he had ever been exposed to them. I almost laughed out loud.