I certainly agree, Tony.  I think this report is one of the best I have read on the theology of Christian assembly.  Interestingly, it has been criticised for the very reason you (and I with you) would commend it; it does not argue what Christian worship is and isn’t .

Gordon’s earlier post has begun an important conversation we need to have on what we do as we gather in Christ, when we do it and why we do it. 

Let’s have more posts that deal with these issues.  Gordon challenged us to think about praying together to confess our sins, but there are many other issues through which we need to think (I know, I’m a pedant for not ending that sentence with a preposition). 

For example, how do we select songs, when do we sing them, and why?  What is the reason for Bible readings?  Should they always be related to the sermon?  What is the place of confessions of faith?  How can the order in which we do things change the meaning of what we are doing? 
How do the 3 basic purposes of assembly shape what we do?  What do we make of the argument that atmospherics are all important? 

These are all issues current practices raise for us right now.  In the past, men like Cranmer wrote formal liturgies to deal with the issues of his day, many of which remain with us.  But our world is not Cranmer’s; we have new challenges and the way we do church is different, often for very good reasons. 

So then, let’s keep this conversation going!

I’m on holidays so not much of a contributor to conversation, but I did want to say that the report Tony refers to is well worth reading and referring to regularly! It’ll be one of my first ports of call for sermon series on ‘church and worship’, although I notice it wisely avoids these potentially distracting terms.