- Let us pray. Let the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in thy site. Oh Lord, our strength and our redeemer. Amen. At the opening service of worship in a new academic year, It may be good for us in this sermon to look at the place of a chapel in a university. With particular attention to the university service of worship, at 11 o'clock of a Sunday morning, on our own campus. This is a live issue with many people, gown and town in the light of the previous academic year. For almost all of my 22 years as an officer of this chapel, the service moved along in a more or less unaltered course. Accepted. Appreciated. Enjoyed. But last year gave evidence of a sense of disappointment. Criticism. Even censure. Which was pointed up on several unique occasions. There was the reaction, pro and con, to the lengthy sermon of the dramatic Bishop Pike. One of God's older, angry men. There was the lecture in the chapel because no other space large enough to hold the eager crowd of listeners was available. The lecture by Altizer, that exponent of a lofty view of Jesus Christ. But more popularly known for his death of God emphasis. That caused reverberations in Allen building, even on the second floor. (audience laughs) Then there were the dialogue sermons between Chaplain Wilkinson and a student, a sound innovation which ought to be continued. And then above all else, there was the dramatic, spiritual, free-for-all one Sunday morning, which even aroused the interest of the Durham Police Department. Thanks to a worried radio listener. Now, in the like of that unusual, but stimulating year, what should be said about the chapel and its university service of worship, at the beginning of another year? Let me think out loud with you. The atmosphere of all the colleges on the campus. Yes, true in great part of the college of engineering and in the school of nursing, is that of the liberal arts. Liberal arts is a translation of the Latin (in foreign language), which may be construed as work befitting a free man. Work befitting a free man. It originated independently of Christianity, and its aim had nothing to do with preparation for the making of a living. This viewpoint, I think is epitomized in the Cambridge University toast. To the higher mathematics, may they always be useless. That's liberal arts. 
(audience laughs) It was aristocratic for the upper crust and secular, rooted in the interesting concerns of this world. Now, that is hardly the point of view of Christian faith. Which is for all strata of society, and is not concerned solely with this world. The aim of the liberal arts is a search for, and an appreciation, of truth. Come whence it may, cost what it will. The aim of Christianity is a commitment to the biblical God, as revealed primarily in Jesus The Christ. Now can search for, and commitment to, be reconciled. Some say, yes. The middle ages domesticated the liberal arts in Christian society. Education had three interweaving parts. Bodily exercise, rigorous training of the mind, instruction in Christian piety, according to the Torina of Mantua in the 15th century. Now, that might well describe the curriculum of some colleges today in the USA. Others say, no. They cannot be reconciled and they say it emphatically. There may be a valid place for religion courses in a liberal arts college. But a Christian service of worship, sponsored officially by the college, is absurd. Moreover, they believe that such sponsored worship will disappear. As one member of the Duke faculty, who expects that this chapel will be a repository for old books within 50 years. The morgue of the library. There are yet others who give a qualified, yes, to the possibility of a genuine reconciliation. They would claim that a liberal education can be illumined by Christianity, provided that the Christianity which compliments it, is unbigoted in its commitment. For an education requires religious insight, as well as the hindsight, and the foresight, which the classroom is supposed to offer. The present situation even at Duke is an understandable, if tangled, eclecticism. It is rightly realized that commitment and search are not inseparable. Yet, there is a valid hesitancy to identify the viewpoints of the liberal art researcher, and of the confident Christian witness. It's simple to be either. More difficult to be both. Duke is still willing to accept the possibility of both. Therefore, there is a chapel, several chapels, as well as classrooms and labs and libraries on the campus. The chapel then, is the place where the committed people of God in our community may meet together at the university service of worship, to express that commitment. But there is a sharp difference of opinion among us, revealed in last year's unusual experiments and resulting turmoil, as to the intent and content and shape and conduct of the 11 o'clock service. The difference may be represented in two Latin phrases. (in foreign language) and (in foreign language) (in foreign language) literally the house of God considers his house as a piece of real estate dedicated to him, occupied by (in foreign language), erected to his glory. And the most likely place in the world where contact with him may be made. It is the sacred place where God dwells in a unique way. It is a temple. A shrine. A divine domicile. God's earthly quarters. And therefore, holy ground. (in foreign language) that is the house of the people of God is holy. Not because of the building. Which may be a room in a home or in a store. But because of the congregation. The gathered community. United because of their voluntary commitment to God. The building per se, is not sacred to God or because of God. The sacredness is in his people worshiping him there. Which means that they can worship him anywhere. It's interesting to notice the influence of these two views on architecture. And in turn, of architecture on these two views. If the structure has a Holy of Holies, or a sanctuary at one particular spot in the floor plan, or a series of symbols and lights which focus the attention on one place, then the house of God idea (in foreign language) is inevitably, even if unintentionally, emphasized. If the structure has no symbols and movable chairs, and is devoid of stained glass and a special table, and ignores candles and a cross. Then the house of the people of God, (in foreign language) is obviously intended. The early church was a (in foreign language). The holiness resided in the people. The church had no special buildings. It was a politically persecuted minority for at least 200 years, and wisely kept itself inconspicuous. But when it became an accepted religion, the accepted religion of the Roman Empire, it began to build. And its choice of architecture influenced its view of its essence and transformed its thinking. The Roman basilica and later the Gothic Church overwhelmed the worshiper with a sense of all majesty and mystery. A cathedral congregation is a far cry from a kitchen meeting in self understanding. Now, thanks to James B. Duke's high opinion of Princeton University, the Gothic revival was imposed on West Campus. Oh, lucky East. (audience laughs) This magnificent chapel with seats for, we don't know, 1800 to 2000, is good Gothic. It is true Gothic. Splay-footed, goggle-eyed Saints fill its colorful windows. You know, since the hail storm, (clears throat) one Saint in the great window back here, James The Elder, has a monocle. (audience laughs) It's very English. (clears throat) (audience laughs) Maybe we leave it. Carving of the finest in wooden stone offer a sense of grandeur even awe. A great organ extols God. The table where bread is broken. The table of the uncommon common meal, is topped with a cross and candles, half hinting that it may be a shrine. So, unconsciously, unintentionally, inevitably the (in foreign language) conception dominates, almost obliterates, the (in foreign language) idea. The house of the people of God is subordinated to the house of God. This in part, lay behind last year's experimentation. And it does raise a question as to what we can do and should do, in the intent and content and shape and conduct of the university service of worship on Sunday morning, in this type of a ecclesiastic building. What then shall be the dominating view of the (mumbles) chapel, which shall control the kind of service we have here on Sunday mornings. For many, if not most of us, the (in foreign language) conception dominates. The chapel is God's house. It is the holy place. Not because of the congregation. Because of him. It is the place to which we come when we want to make contact with him. Either in company with our fellows, or in isolation from our fellows. Let me illustrate. A housemaster called up at 1:30 in the morning this past week, to find if the chapel could be opened to allow a freshman to sit there. The freshman had just heard that his fiance had been killed. The chapel was opened. People who seldom, if ever, worship here or anywhere want to be married in the chapel. And not only for cast or aesthetic reasons. They wish to acknowledge at a focal point in life that which is ultimate and somewhat unknowable, but worthy of reverence. They believe God is here and they hope he is here for them. Now, with that view of the chapel, such people will desire a service which is fitting, majestic, and dignified, and stately and grand. Worthy of God and of Gothic. For other people, and perhaps for all of us on occasion, the (in foreign language) is the controlling idea that comes to the fore on special occasions, or at a service of Holy Communion, following a wedding rehearsal. At the school of nursing capping service, where the recessional ends in feminine shrieks of mutual joy. At a service of infant baptism or of infant dedication, when Christian vows are publicly spoken in the presence of witnesses. Now, can these two views be reconciled in the chapel and particularly at the Sunday morning university service of worship? Let me offer a thought for your consideration. Let the chapel be, by conscious intention, the central house of God. For the various, numerous congregations of the people of God, which are scattered all over the campus. The wise, the interest groups of the new University Christian Movement. The Newman Club. The Cabot Society. The Fellowship of Christian Athletes. The Student Christian Fellowship. The full members group. All the multifarious and diverse, and valid, and useful communities of fellow Christians on our campus. And let the university service of worship be the united affirmation of our common worship of the God and Father, who is God and father of all the groups and of each of us. Now, because the chapel has the build and bearing of a Gothic Cathedral, the ritual and ceremonial of the service cannot be comfortable to that of a Harlem Storefront Parish, or a Quaker meeting. We had better co-operate with what Mr. Duke gave us. The service should open with a procession. With the cross if not the flags carried before the choir. The emphasis should be upon praise and prayer, with the sermon minimized in length. I'm a good one to say that. (audience laughs) The ushers and collectors should be gowned. This flower they always just look like strays from a wedding. (audience laughs) There should be more congregational participation in hymns and prayers. Now, there is room for experiment. Carefully planned and worthily executed. Even for guitars. If the National Cathedral once a year, can stand bagpipes leading the choir and clergy into the chancel. We can surely risk unusual musical accompaniment on occasion. After all, the bagpipe is the one musical instrument for which no sacred music has been written. (audience laughs) In Robert Burns, it is the devil who plays the pipe. There is no valid reason why God should not be addressed in prayer as "You", rather than as "Thou". Though one does shudder at "You" and "Thou" indiscriminately in the same prayer. A sign of the careless and sloppy preparation of an untidy mind. A service which remembers the elements of adoration and confession, of forgiveness and Thanksgiving, of intercession for others, and supplication for ourselves. Of the reading and interpretation of the word, of dedication and benediction, can unite the scattered companies of the committed people of God, once a week, in a great outpouring of our united and ecumenical recognition. Affirming that we are not divided. All one body, we, under God. Now, this demands the combined resources of the ministries, of music and prayer, and the word. Of ushering and collecting. Of all the people of God in this house of God. The scripture lesson of the morning, the 84th Psalm, told of the joy that a Hebrew found in the temple. How lovely is thy dwelling place. Oh, Lord of hosts. That's (in foreign language). Blessed are those who dwell in thy house ever singing thy praise. That is (in foreign language). That somewhat unites the two ideas. Now, the Psalm has been put into meter and the first five verses are our closing hymn. They express the joy of the people of God, all kinds of people of God, who stand united as the people of God, in the house of God. And don't be surprised about the sparrow finding a house where into rest and the swallow, because birds have been coming through that window, and finding a place here. But before we sing that hymn, let us pray. We praise Thee, O God. We acknowledge Thee to be the Lord. Accept the worship of thy people and thy house. For, to Thee, we ascribe honor and majesty, dominion and power, as is most due. Amen. (organ music playing and people singing a hymn) (background organ music playing softly)