Responsive readings?

[clairabelle0509]

Hello everyone!

I have been a United Methodist since birth but there are quite a few things that I don't understand about our church services. At my church, we do responsive readings or litanies, where the pastor reads a few lines and then the church congregation responds in unison. What is the purpose of these responsive readings? I have always wondered.

The other thing I have been curious about is why we stand during the Gospel readings. We are allowed to sit during the other Bible readings, but when they read from the Gospel the liturgist asks us to stand. Why?

I hope someone can shed some light on these questions! Thanks for your help!

 

[cristianna]

I've never thought about the responsive readings actually. Maybe it's a form for us to say aloud/proclaim and hear each other? I don't know.

I think we stand during the Gospel out of honor and respect. But I could be wrong.

 

[dnb367]

On one hand, when we recite the same thing in unison as a congregation, we are in fact acting in unison as a congregation. To me it isn't a declaration of individual faith, but faith as a member of the Methodist Church. I'm not just a Christian- we're all Christians working together to praise God. I'm not sure what you mean with Gospel vs Bible readings, but at my church we also stand during Bible readings, but they are later said in the sermon and elaborated upon which we do sit throughout. I suppose it is a traditional manner of respect, but you could always do what makes you feel best.

Hope my opinion helps

 

[GraceSeeker]

Hello everyone!

I have been a United Methodist since birth but there are quite a few things that I don't understand about our church services. At my church, we do responsive readings or litanies, where the pastor reads a few lines and then the church congregation responds in unison. What is the purpose of these responsive readings? I have always wondered.

The other thing I have been curious about is why we stand during the Gospel readings. We are allowed to sit during the other Bible readings, but when they read from the Gospel the liturgist asks us to stand. Why?

I hope someone can shed some light on these questions! Thanks for your help!

Any of the above are legitimate reasons, but there are a few others besides.

First, one has to understand that even the most liberal and change-oriented church is actually a pretty traditional institution. There are a whole lot of things done in the church just because we've always done it that way. Just think of the order of books in your Bible. There is nothing sacred about the order, if you were to grab a set of Jewish scriptures, even though their books are the same as our OT, you would find them in a different order, so it isn't that one is right and the other wrong. But things get established at a certain point in time and we tend to keep copying them.

Among those things established is the practice of having antiphonal anthems from the songs. This goes all the way back to the days of King David. Antiphonal is just a fancy word meaning to answer. So, the choir leaders would give one line of a psalm, and then the choir would answer with the next. And thus is born an antiphon. You've probably noticed that most of our responsive readings are taken from the Psalms. We just don't set it to music anymore, and instead of a choir leader and a choir, it is the worship leader and the congregation.

Standing for the reading of the Gospel is because we project on to it that we are hearing the word of God. And of course one would stand in God's presence. Now, you might correctly reply, but I thought all of the Bible was God's word. True, but there is special significance in that the Gospel focuses especially on Christ and his work, thus by standing for it we are especially highlighting it. It also was common in Jewish days not only for people to stand when hearing from God (actually, when that happened they tended to fall on their face), but also it was customary to stand (not kneel or bow) to pray or anytime one addressed God. Sort of the idea of on your feet in the presence of the King.

Not all things go so far back as these things. Curiously, over time we reversed the roles of who stands and who sits in the service. Have you ever noticed that in the account of Jesus reading from the scroll in the synagogue that he sat? It used to be that the preacher would sit (in the seat of Moses) when delivering his sermon and the people would stand.

 

[Speculative]

You know, in our church we don't stand for the reading of the gospel, but I think we should. Actually I wouldn't mind if we stood for the entire reading of scripture.

I like the responsive readings and singings as well. It makes me feel more connected to everyone else and it's more interactive.

 

[GraceSeeker]

It's also OK to not. Much of worship is man's decisions on ways to relate best to God, not stuff that God actually ordered us to do. Example: wearing one's Sunday best. Or that we even have sermons (i.e. a time of teaching and interpretation of scripture) as a part of worship. How much of listening to a sermon is really about offering praise to God? No smart aleck comments about it is when it's over, please.

 

[Redheadedstepchild]

I don't think the sermons have anything to do with praise and worship....unless the pastor incorporates P & W in it. But, there's nothing at all wrong with that IMO. Both are important and nessiary.

As for reponsive readings, there are times when it feels like people are going through the motions....this applies to the Lord's Prayer too unfortunately. I try to really focus on the words I'm saying and think about whatever signifigance they have for me to avoid letting it become religious practice rather than an act of worship.

We stand for both the scripture and Gospel readings at my church, and for the hymns (yet no one stands up during the anthem ). I agree that we stand to give honor...though at times I think it's also used to keep us awake and paying attention...

 

[clairabelle0509]

I don't think the sermons have anything to do with praise and worship....unless the pastor incorporates P & W in it. But, there's nothing at all wrong with that IMO. Both are important and nessiary.

As for reponsive readings, there are times when it feels like people are going through the motions....this applies to the Lord's Prayer too unfortunately. I try to really focus on the words I'm saying and think about whatever signifigance they have for me to avoid letting it become religious practice rather than an act of worship.

We stand for both the scripture and Gospel readings at my church, and for the hymns (yet no one stands up during the anthem ). I agree that we stand to give honor...though at times I think it's also used to keep us awake and paying attention...

I agree completely with what you said about just going through the motions. My church started doing communion once a month and now I just feel like it is a part of the regular routine instead of being something special. And the same goes for everything else that we do regularly as a part of the service. It is a shame but a hard thing to avoid.

 

[Redheadedstepchild]

Actually, we do it once a month too (today in fact) and it's always special to me. But maybe with my short attention span I need the frequent reminder?

Anyway, I think it's all in the approach. To clarify, things like communion and any other corporate activity in the church can become routine if we allow it too. But I don't think it has to be that way. My body may be going through the motions...ok...but I can still keep my mind focused on God.

Also, I think any church can have this issue, even those that are more contemporary in structure. We talked about this here recently...but even a laid back routine is still a routine, KWIM? And routine can be, well, routine. The trick is to keep your focus on God. Think of it as an exercise. I dunno, maybe working on this in church can help with staying focused on God when in the mainstream, which is much harder.

 

[GraceSeeker]

I hear what you're saying about how repetition can rob the specialness of something. For that reason my wife and I have resolved to only say "I love you" to each other once a year on our anniversary. That way it will truly be special. None of this perfunctory routine type stuff like happens when people say it to each other every day. You won't believe this, but I'm told some people actually end up saying "I Love You" as a way to close every conversation with their loved ones on the telephone. Talk about taking the special out of something that is supposed to have deeping meaning and significance! If they keep repeating it that often, it soon won't mean anything at all.

 

[Maid Marie]

I like the responsive readings and singings as well. It makes me feel more connected to everyone else and it's more interactive.

That is why I have always liked it. My childhood pastor would have us do this and I enjoyed listening to the people all around me saying the words.

Sadly, this fell out of favor for the longest time in the Nazarene church. I hear from other nazzies that it is starting to make a slow comeback.

 

[Zoness]

I agree completely with what you said about just going through the motions. My church started doing communion once a month and now I just feel like it is a part of the regular routine instead of being something special. And the same goes for everything else that we do regularly as a part of the service. It is a shame but a hard thing to avoid.

This is one thing I have to disagree with. Bear in mind, I grew up Catholic so I am strongly biased towards liturgy. Obviously you see differently, but repetition doesn't have to take the "specialness" out of it...that only happens if you let it. People complain about taking communion monthly I used to take it several times a week! Each time just as important as the last because I knew I was interacting with God and I desired to show as much respect and admiration as I could. Just a thought.

Peace

 

[Maid Marie]

Each time just as important as the last because I knew I was interacting with God and I desired to show as much respect and admiration as I could. Just a thought. Peace

I am reading Robert Webber's Evangelicals on the Canterbury Trail now. I just got done with one contributor's testimony. He made the same statement - in Communion/Eucharist he is communing with GOD each time...which adds a wonder and excitement each time.

For non-liturgical Christians, we have been taught that communion is not a means of Grace. Thus, it is not that special. Kind of like having dessert...after awhile, a daily dessert loses its specialness, or is viewed as unnecessary fluff.

Liturgical Christians are taught that it IS a means of Grace. Thus, it is as vital as the main part of the meal - necessary nourishment which one needs each day to live.

I personally am ready to see it as a vital meal and no longer dessert. Unfortunately, I am in a congregation for whom it is still dessert.

 

[Zoness]

I can relate to that as I am probably really best suited for like an Anglican-Methodist fusion church however there is the liturgical gap and at times I want to play on the contemporary side but other times I feel at home on the liturgical side because that was how I was raised to worship and it is kind of ingrained in me.

 

[Maid Marie]

I can relate to that as I am probably really best suited for like an Anglican-Methodist fusion church however there is the liturgical gap and at times I want to play on the contemporary side but other times I feel at home on the liturgical side because that was how I was raised to worship and it is kind of ingrained in me.

With a handful of exceptions, the CotN is non-liturgical. For now, I feel that God wants me where I am, but if ever given a choice I think I might go to a litugically minded UMC. The Catholic church has too many rules, the Lutherans are to 'non-emotional' for me, and the EC or the Anglicans have too many problems [although, they might be a close second] for me. So, I guess you could say an Anglican-Methodist fusion church is where I want to be as well.

I just can't take another worship service with a rock band. [it's not an age thing, it is a taste thing]

 

[Zoness]

I pretty much agree with you on all parts there, wow. On rock bands yeah its a taste thing because I really like rock...specifically metal but there are certain things I expect out of a church service, I'm not gonna say its wrong but its not my cup of tea.

 

[Maid Marie]

I pretty much agree with you on all parts there, wow. On rock bands yeah its a taste thing because I really like rock...specifically metal but there are certain things I expect out of a church service, I'm not gonna say its wrong but its not my cup of tea.

Yup, those are my thoughts. I like rock, metal, Pop and P&W. But, just not for church.

The line used at my church [which has contemporary only for AM Worship] is that the non-churched will only come to a church that plays contemporary music. Yet, my friend Edith told me yesterday of a couple that came to her high lit Anglican Church looking for God. They got saved in her church and are being confirmed this Sunday. And I have heard from another that her unsaved friends won't go to her rock music church because to them that is not what a church should be.

The premise of the book Surprising Insights from the Unchurched and proven ways to reach them by Thom Rainer is that people are drawn to church and God through surprising ways...and not really the seeker sensitive model.

Some factors that can lead the unchurched to choose to attend church:

1. Crisis in life
2. Have a relative who attends church
3. The pastor and his/her preaching

Or chose one in particular:

1. Pastor/Preaching 90%
2. Doctrines of that church 88%
3. Friendliness of members 49%
4. Other issues 42%
5. Someone from church witnessed to me 41%
6. Family member attends 38%
7. Sensed God’s presence/atmosphere 37%
8. Relationship w/ other than family 25%
9. Sunday School Class 25%
10. Children’s/Youth Ministry 25%
11. Other groups/ministries 12%
12. Worship style/Music 11%
13. Location 7%
​

Thus, my church's belief that seekers will only come to us if we have rock music isn't supported.

I am not against someone else enjoying a contemporary service...I just would like to be given a choice, too.

 

[Maid Marie]

The line used at my church [which has contemporary only for AM Worship] is that the non-churched will only come to a church that plays contemporary music.

...

Thus, my church's belief that seekers will only come to us if we have rock music isn't supported.

Found out this week that we are moving to an even MORE modern worship style. Oh glory...I can't take it as it is....I am going to go insane. One shouldn't hate a worship service, ya know?

 

[LoneSheep]

More modern? How much more modern can it get?

 

[Maid Marie]

More modern? How much more modern can it get?

I don't know....I dread finding out.

It is getting pretty bad for me in the Sunday AM service here. I knew I disliked the service because of the migraines I get on Sunday like clockwork. But was taken aback when at the District NMI [missions] Convention how quickly the black cloud just lifted off of me during the evening worship service.

I like the rest of the church here [except for the fact that the guy in ss hates me]. I like the vision, the love, the esprit de corps... but I hate Sunday Morning church. And it is because I am forced to sit through the banging and clanging...and am not allowed to worship in the way God created me to.

If I had a barf button, I'd use it right here.

What is weird is that at one point around Easter, I thought I heard God say this is the last Easter I'd have to suffer like this. I don't know if that was really God or just me fooling myself. So, I have been praying for discernment. Feel free to join me y'all if you want [in praying for this].