Sacred formality vs. Casual atmosphere? Effects on worshipfulness?

[~Anastasia~]

Edited:

In formal churches (I have only visited a few) I see more reverence, there seems something more of the sacred there (in the visual things) - and it seems an atmosphere that really invites worship, to me.

My experience is more with very casual churches, and I have had the best worship in those - and they tend to emphasize a relationship with God ime.

I wondered at others' opinions, and if any ever felt something was missing and desired the "other"?

That was what I meant to ask. Tried to explain further in post 11.

My sincerest apologies - the truth of my own experience I have related in here are NOT meant to disparage any church or denomination at all, just a relating of my own experience. If anything I say offends anyone - and I'm afraid I may have - please forgive me and know it was my clumsiness that was the cause, not an intent to insult in any way.






(none of these terms meant to disrespect anyone) ... it seems to me that we regard God sometimes in different ways depending on how our worship experience is set up. What do you think, and have you ever yearned for a different kind of worship experience because of it?

Below is the inspiration for the question ... I'm going to start a new thread instead of posting on the old one as this is too different a topic.

Any comments welcomed!

I have this RC friend who when he indulges pompous pontification, I respond with, "Yes, Father Johnson."

Your comment makes me very curious about something.

You were raised RC, but you left that part of the church? And you mention "pompous pontification" ... I am very curious ...

I am not sure, but it seems that I see some raised with a lot of external "churchiness" (I don't know what to call it) ... the robes, the formality, the stained glass perhaps, the ceremony, the bejeweled Cross in the procession, I've heard of censors and bells ... all of these things are very foreign to me, but they seem to fit together in some kind of religious-focused atmosphere.

It seems that sometimes those who were raised in it want to get away, and see it is "pompous" (not saying you do, but I borrowed your word).

Then sometimes, people like me, see it for the first time (or nearly so) - and it's not that it "impresses" me (I'm not easily impressed), but I guess I like the air of reverence, the importance that it seems people give their place and items of worship. It resonates with me, when I've spent too long in churches that seem to regard God and the things of God in too casual a way.

I'm not saying either is wrong. At one time I disliked my husband's semi-Baptist mega-church with all their formality and symphony orchestra. I saw that they did not "relate" to God but kept Him too "other" from themselves as though He never walked among us.

Maybe we need reminders that He is there for us in a very real and personal way, and we also need reminders that He is holy and worthy of all the pomp in the world.

Eh, I hope it's ok to reference other posts in a new thread. I think that might be best for this topic.

 

[sunlover1]

I vote, "Spirit and Truth"

 

[Tangible]

"Pomp and formality" vs. "relationship and real" is really a false dichotomy. Formal and casual worship can each be empty or real depending on many factors. Formal is no more intrinsically empty than casual is intrinsically real.

IMO, the liturgical worship I participate in today is much more real than the Baptist or Charismatic worship I practiced in days gone by.

Sunlover, I agree. Worship in spirit and in truth.

 

[GoingByzantine]

I think it is natural for people who grow up in a certain setting to get bored of it and seek something new, a RC might see a pastor in jeans and a contemporary worship band backing him up and fall in love with it...because it is so different. Likewise, a young evangelical might see the statues, the incense and the liturgy and be drawn the other direction. It is kind of like cat and mouse.

 

[Willie T]

I would have to vote for another word: Relativity... to the present times, and to the surrounding community.

 

[graceandpeace]

"Pomp and formality" vs. "relationship and real" is really a false dichotomy. Formal and casual worship can each be empty or real depending on many factors. Formal is no more intrinsically empty than casual is intrinsically real.

IMO, the liturgical worship I participate in today is much more real than the Baptist or Charismatic worship I practiced in days gone by.

Sunlover, I agree. Worship in spirit and in truth.

Truth.

 

[sunlover1]

I think it is natural for people who grow up in a certain setting to get bored of it and seek something new, a RC might see a pastor in jeans and a contemporary worship band backing him up and fall in love with it...because it is so different. Likewise, a young evangelical might see the statues, the incense and the liturgy and be drawn the other direction. It is kind of like cat and mouse.

Thank you for using the "RC" so we know exactly what you mean.
It's sometimes a bit confusing, since "catholic" can be a bit ambiguous
for our purposes.
I always feel mean when I use RC but it's the easiest way to describe
what I'm saying. Some people dislike the Roman part of that for some
reason.

Thanks GB

 

[~Anastasia~]

LOL I did such a bad job of asking my question. But I can see you all are on board, just thinking of other things as well.

"Pomp" is probably seen as a derogatory term (and I sincerely don't mean it to be - I just really didn't know how to describe all the things I see in a more formal church).

And attaching "real" to the opposite position - and even "relationship" was a bad choice.

I don't know how to word the dichotomy I see.

Y'all please forgive me for doing such a poor job, and I appreciate your answers.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I think the premise of the OP is a false dichotomy, I feel that relationship becomes more real in the midst of pomp and formality.

The idea that they're mutually exclusive is an old trick of evangelicalism.

 

[GoingByzantine]

Thank you for using the "RC" so we know exactly what you mean.
It's sometimes a bit confusing, since "catholic" can be a bit ambiguous
for our purposes.
I always feel mean when I use RC but it's the easiest way to describe
what I'm saying. Some people dislike the Roman part of that for some
reason.

Thanks GB

I know, I have been guilty of just using "Catholic" too many times in GT. I have also been guilty of using "Protestant" as an all encompassing word too many times as well. I am trying to get better though

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think it is natural for people who grow up in a certain setting to get bored of it and seek something new, a RC might see a pastor in jeans and a contemporary worship band backing him up and fall in love with it...because it is so different. Likewise, a young evangelical might see the statues, the incense and the liturgy and be drawn the other direction. It is kind of like cat and mouse.

Yes, I'm questioning myself if it's a matter of "oooohhhh, this is different and pretty!" I do NOT want to have any of that - and I don't think I do, or if I do, it's only an afterthought and not what is in my heart.

I guess where I am coming from - Some Baptist churches have stained glass and so on. I even had one pastor that dressed in a black outfit that looked a lot like a priest's whatever-you-call-it just without the white square thing in the collar front. And they sometimes had elaborate carved and gilded crosses. They could even be somewhat formal.

What bothered me - and I don't mean to point a finger at the denomination - maybe not all are like this - but it was the emptiness with which they seem to treat Baptism and Communion. And there was no relationship with God seemingly. (I'm not pointing a finger at ALL Baptists - by any means - maybe I just landed in a wrong church or few.) It was show up, sing, sermon, go home and try to be good. I did appreciate the high regard they held for Scriptures, and some have wonderful fellowship, but that's what I got from them.

I went to various Pentecostal churches, and I was more impressed by many leaders who "walked the walk" instead of just preaching about it. The worship was more real, the relationship was emphasized. The teaching often suffered, but sometimes it was outstanding. Not standardized. The Bible, sadly, is often de-emphasized. Sometimes the worship is just too wild. There's a lot of inconsistency - not much formality at all - but their relationship with God and their commitment to really live their faith was stronger. Casualness was nearly always emphasized.

I guess the casualness + lack of authentic worship + lack of good teaching I've run into in some Pentecostal churches lately (NOT saying they are all like this either, by any means at all - again, I think I just landed in a few bad ones maybe, and the non-denoms maybe lack consistency) ... but that has put me off a bit.

So with an eye to different theologies, I visit Methodist (not liturgical) and a Lutheran (liturgical) services, and I see much more reverence, formality. There is a sacredness there that I have been hungering for in all the casualness I've been spending time in. It seems a sharp contrast. I honestly have not been able to feel a spirit of worship yet, as it is too different for me. Yet the very atmosphere invites worship, to me, in a way I have not experienced.

Maybe I'm just talking to myself - my apologies - it might be my own personal thing and wasn't something to bring in public, but I wanted other opinions.

I'm not saying one or the other is better - but I wondered if others ever hunger for whatever is missing in their own services?

If nothing is missing for you - oh consider yourself blessed!!!

I think God is teaching me something, and maybe I just have no idea yet where He is going with this. Eh, no maybe. I really do have no idea. That's why I'm curious about other's opinions.

Thank you all for your patience and understanding. Please, I hope nothing I said insulted anyone. I do NOT mean to do that, or to lay a blanket charge against any denomination or group. Not at all.

I'm just being open and trying to explain things with words, where I don't really have a good way of explaining. Thanks everyone.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think the premise of the OP is a false dichotomy, I feel that relationship becomes more real in the midst of pomp and formality.

The idea that they're mutually exclusive is an old trick of evangelicalism.

Sorry Cogent, very poor choice of words on my part. If I could change them, I would (I already tried). I just didn't know what words to use, but I chose very poorly.

 

[Gnarwhal]

Sorry Cogent, very poor choice of words on my part. If I could change them, I would (I already tried). I just didn't know what words to use, but I chose very poorly.

Meh, no harm no foul.

 

[Albion]

"Pomp and formality" or "relationship and real"

Edit - sorry it was quickly pointed out to me that I did a terrible job of choosing terms. My apologies to everyone. I really had no way to express what I wanted to say.

Post 11 I tried to clear it up a bit.

I only meant - in formal churches (I have only visited a few) I see more reverence, there seems something more of the sacred there (in the visual things) - and it seems an atmosphere that really invites worship, to me.

My experience is more with very casual churches, and I have had the best worship in those - and they tend to emphasize a relationship with God ime.

I wondered at others' opinions, and if any ever felt something was missing and desired the "other"?

That was what I meant to ask.

FWIW, I thought your choice of words was fine. I suppose that someone might object, but what you said seemed clear and not worded in any kind of mean way.

That said, my own feeling is that both kinds of worship have their merits. Some people just cannot abide one or the other of them, but I've been uplifted and benefitted from very simple, Baptistic worship and churches...and also from the very High Church services of RCs, EOs, Lutherans, and Anglicans.

The problem is that you can't have them all at once and no church is flattered to have you drop in once in awhile, even if you're getting your "fix" of the other kind of worship on the off-Sundays.

 

[~Anastasia~]

FWIW, I thought your choice of words was fine. I suppose that someone might object, but what you said seemed clear and not worded in any kind of mean way.

That said, my own feeling is that both kinds of worship have their merits. Some people just cannot abide one or the other of them, but I've been uplifted and benefitted from very simple, Baptistic worship and churches...and also from the very High Church services of RCs, EOs, Lutherans, and Anglicans.

The problem is that you can't have them all at once and no church is flattered to have you drop in once in awhile, even if you're getting your "fix" of the other kind of worship on the off-Sundays.

Thanks, Albion, that was very kind of you.

I guess what I am questioning in myself is something my husband mentioned the other day to the effect that some people "need" the visual aspects. I asked if he thought that was a bad thing, and (surprisingly to me) he said no.

It's not the actual style of worship at this point. The Methodist churches offer hymns and praise, not liturgy. And of course the Lutheran offered liturgy.

I guess it's a combination of holding the sacraments AS sacraments, and the visual elements that imply "sacredness".

I know many churches value meeting the people, ministering to the people, as part of their worship and would never WANT to look that way. I value the ministry too, but I guess I kind of want some part of church to be for the sake of worshipping God as holy.

Of course other churches regard God as holy, and maybe it's a matter of immaturity on my part, but it makes so much more of an impression on me to see the cross handled so reverently, and the priest/pastor ministering at the altar before the Lord (I'm guessing that's what he's doing).

I don't know if it recalls OT to me, or descriptions of heaven, or both, I'm not sure.

The more informal churches remind me of Jesus' ministry on earth, certainly.

It's just that both seem so precious. I don't despise either, but it's a sudden glimpse of something I've always missed.

Yes, I think I am finally getting a little bit of what God wanted me to learn.

I don't suppose it is possible to have both, since they don't exist in one place. I'm not sure it would be possible to combine them if that were anyone's intent.

As to a church I may end up in, I don't know. I know it won't have everything. I've never been in a "perfect" church. I always had to compromise something. Most likely it will have much to do with my husband, where we make our church home. After 4 years of being without, I also just WANT a church home. Overall that is more important that style of worship or whatever, though I surely wish I could mesh well with theology. But it's not about a "fix" ... I guess I wanted to understand, and in the process of writing this reply to you, I think I'm starting to see.

Thanks very much for your post.

And thanks to anyone out there who might be bearing with this thread - again I am sorry if I offended anyone.

Blessings and peace to all my brothers and sisters.

 

[Albion]

Thanks, Albion, that was very kind of you.

I guess what I am questioning in myself is something my husband mentioned the other day to the effect that some people "need" the visual aspects. I asked if he thought that was a bad thing, and (surprisingly to me) he said no.

It's not the actual style of worship at this point. The Methodist churches offer hymns and praise, not liturgy. And of course the Lutheran offered liturgy.

I guess it's a combination of holding the sacraments AS sacraments, and the visual elements that imply "sacredness".

I know many churches value meeting the people, ministering to the people, as part of their worship and would never WANT to look that way. I value the ministry too, but I guess I kind of want some part of church to be for the sake of worshipping God as holy.

Of course other churches regard God as holy, and maybe it's a matter of immaturity on my part, but it makes so much more of an impression on me to see the cross handled so reverently, and the priest/pastor ministering at the altar before the Lord (I'm guessing that's what he's doing).

I don't know if it recalls OT to me, or descriptions of heaven, or both, I'm not sure.

The more informal churches remind me of Jesus' ministry on earth, certainly.

It's just that both seem so precious. I don't despise either, but it's a sudden glimpse of something I've always missed.

Yes, I think I am finally getting a little bit of what God wanted me to learn.

I don't suppose it is possible to have both, since they don't exist in one place. I'm not sure it would be possible to combine them if that were anyone's intent.

As to a church I may end up in, I don't know. I know it won't have everything. I've never been in a "perfect" church. I always had to compromise something. Most likely it will have much to do with my husband, where we make our church home. After 4 years of being without, I also just WANT a church home. Overall that is more important that style of worship or whatever, though I surely wish I could mesh well with theology. But it's not about a "fix" ... I guess I wanted to understand, and in the process of writing this reply to you, I think I'm starting to see.

Thanks very much for your post.

And thanks to anyone out there who might be bearing with this thread - again I am sorry if I offended anyone.

Blessings and peace to all my brothers and sisters.

Thank you. Actually, when I said something about getting your "fix" at the opposite kind of church, I meant "you" in the generic sense and I was thinking of myself because I do get a lift out of both types. But just as I experience that, I'm simultaneously missing the other...so it seems a never-ending conflict.

 

[Rajni]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]

I only meant - in formal churches (I have only visited a few) I see more reverence, there seems something more of the sacred there (in the visual things) - and it seems an atmosphere that really invites worship, to me.

My experience is more with very casual churches, and I have had the best worship in those - and they tend to emphasize a relationship with God ime.

I wondered at others' opinions, and if any ever felt something was missing and desired the "other"?

[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I agree, the formal environment does evoke a certain reverance and[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]worshipfulness that I missed in the non-liturgical churches I had been to in[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]the past.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I think one can have the formality right alongside the relationship, if one[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]desires to.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]After having not attended church at all for quite awhile, yet still cultivating[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]my relationship with the Lord outside the church system, I actually realized[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]that the only format that would be able to speak to my current relationship[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]with the Lord was a more formal, liturgical style. And that's on the heels of[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]probably the least formal approach to spirituality out there, namely the[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]unchurched approach. [/FONT]



–

 

[concretecamper]

Why can't "formality" be "real and relationship?

 

[~Anastasia~]

Why can't "formality" be "real and relationship?

Sorry concretecamper - I regretted that title right away, and as far as I can tell (I tried) I can't edit the title of the OP.

I was very close to discovering something I've been trying to learn and sort out for a few weeks, and my excitement got the better of me.

I should have said something about formal "sacred" type environments as opposed to casual "?" type environments.

Formal CAN be real, and there can be relationship. I just chose words very poorly in my haste. I apologize for that.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I agree, the formal environment does evoke a certain reverance and worshipfulness that I missed in the non-liturgical churches I had been to in the past.

Yes, I think that is one thing that struck me. The formal environment created a certain reverence and worshipfulness - I have not been in quite that kind of environment before.

I actually got an inkling in a Methodist church (non-liturgical) a few weeks ago - altar boys in robes wearing white gloves carried a bejeweled cross up the aisle, candles were lit from a flame carried behind it. There were stained glass windows depicting scenes from the life of Christ around the sanctuary. And at other churches (Methodist and Lutheran) I watched the pastor/priest minister at the altar toward the Lord (I think, don't know what else to call what they did).

It wasn't the liturgy yet, but the very environment that put me in mind of things I've never experienced. There was a different kind of worshipfulness, yes.

Strange, as normally until recently I would have seen that kind of thing in a totally different light.

The liturgy itself I felt terribly lost in, as I've only been in one, and did not at first know how to look up the next thing, and I couldn't follow along. But I'm sure that's a matter of learning.

I think one can have the formality right alongside the relationship, if one desires to.

Absolutely. Terrible choice of words on my part - sorry about that.

After having not attended church at all for quite awhile, yet still my relationship with the Lord outside the church system, I actually realized that the only format that would be able to speak to my current relationship with the Lord was a more formal, liturgical style.

I guess that's part of what I'm exploring - you mentioned your current relationship with the Lord and needing to be involved in the formal, liturgical style. You find things change over time? I guess that surprises me.

I just "discovered" the more traditional, formal style with all the visual things that put me in mind of the sacred. I don't quite know what to think yet. But it had a powerful impact on me - and not to say I'm impressed with richness or anything - it's more that all of this is devoted to the Lord. I'm still trying to understand.

Thank you so much for your post!