What is "Ritual"? Why does it seem some Churches give more emphasis to it while others don't?

[Marcel_Prix]

Hello everyone,

I'm not saying one side is better than another. However, it seems to me that there's a big difference in a Catholic mass and the mass at the mass at some Protestant denominations. I'm aware, "Protestant" is an Umbrella term for many different movements. And you even big distinctions between Protestants. For instance, I learned that even in England you have "High Churches" and "Low Churches." Although, I'm not clear what's the difference between them.

Also, I'd be interested in how things are perceived. For instance, there was a Youtuber who went to a Catholic mass, he dressed in much more formal clothes. The Church was more "Solemn." Being a Catholic myself I really resonated with this approached. At least from my perspective: It seems to me that this was more "serious" approach. But I can understand some people might not resonate with that approach.

Meanwhile, some Protestant denominations, it seems that the emphasis is on "vending" or a sort of experience where people vent their frustrations, or speak about difficulties they have. And everyone wears casual clothes.

I've seen it where there's a Preacher at the center and he'll talk, and the participants want to be "moved" by the speakers.

It's very interesting to me that it seems some "Self-Improvement" groups at least in America have adopted this style of teaching from the Protestant, maybe("low churches") Where they have the "teacher" at the center and he'll try to move/captivate the audience.

While I don't resonate with this approach, it seems "emotional." I can understand why some people might gravitate to it. I heard people say its "fills them"

Any way, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this topic.

 

[HTacianas]

Hello everyone,

I'm not saying one side is better than another. However, it seems to me that there's a big difference in a Catholic mass and the mass at the mass at some Protestant denominations. I'm aware, "Protestant" is an Umbrella term for many different movements. And you even big distinctions between Protestants. For instance, I learned that even in England you have "High Churches" and "Low Churches." Although, I'm not clear what's the difference between them.

Also, I'd be interested in how things are perceived. For instance, there was a Youtuber who went to a Catholic mass, he dressed in much more formal clothes. The Church was more "Solemn." Being a Catholic myself I really resonated with this approached. At least from my perspective: It seems to me that this was more "serious" approach. But I can understand some people might not resonate with that approach.

Meanwhile, some Protestant denominations, it seems that the emphasis is on "vending" or a sort of experience where people vent their frustrations, or speak about difficulties they have. And everyone wears casual clothes.

I've seen it where there's a Preacher at the center and he'll talk, and the participants want to be "moved" by the speakers.

It's very interesting to me that it seems some "Self-Improvement" groups at least in America have adopted this style of teaching from the Protestant, maybe("low churches") Where they have the "teacher" at the center and he'll try to move/captivate the audience.

While I don't resonate with this approach, it seems "emotional." I can understand why some people might gravitate to it. I heard people say its "fills them"

Any way, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this topic.

The prescribed for of Christian worship has always been the Liturgy (the Mass). Over time some groups have formed their manner of meeting. Personally I think that misses the point entirely. The reason we attend Church is worship, not to feel good about ourselves, not to hear someone's opinion of what the latest interpretation of the bible is, or any of those other things. The Liturgy has been around since the foundations of Christianity and is based on the ancient Jewish temple liturgy. In writing to Emperor Trajan around 112 AD, Pliny, Roman Governor of Bythnia, said of Christian worship:

They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but ordinary and innocent food.

Notice two things. First, they would sing responsively a hymn to Christ. The Liturgy is sung, and the worshippers respond with Lord have mercy. Second he says they would partake of food, but clarifies that it was ordinary and innocent food. The sacrifice of the Eucharist caused all sorts of wild rumors and accusations against Christians because they were known to "eat the flesh of their god" during their services. They had also adopted the mother/child motif in their artworks and the child was their god. This led to the accusation that Christians were literally sacrificing an infant and eating its flesh.

All this illustrates just how long the Liturgy has been a part of Christianity and gives insights into precisely what the Liturgy was comprised of.

 

[Brother-Mike]

I agree completely with this thread and your previous one which was coincidentally also commenting on attire. I wish more Protestant congregations were more serious about their dress code.

I forget which gospel, but if I remember correctly Jesus often spoke of the necessity of snappy dressing, good hygiene, fresh showers for the homeless and destitute lest they offend the delicate, etc.

 

[timothyu]

Ritual in the church and elsewhere was mainly for the uneducated, especially those who had no idea of the language being used, which made up most of the congregants back in the day. (It taught them to follow rules rather than live a way of life as Jesus had taught). It also unified different cultures and languages where one could attend a familiar church in any strange land. Problem is it taught them to follow but not know why. A government, much like politics today.

 

[Allen of the Cross]

I agree completely with this thread and your previous one which was coincidentally also commenting on attire. I wish more Protestant congregations were more serious about their dress code.

I forget which gospel, but if I remember correctly Jesus often spoke of the necessity of snappy dressing, good hygiene, fresh showers for the homeless and destitute lest they offend the delicate, etc.

Nothing says "yep, I'm holy, I'm right with God" like a $500 suit. Jesus said "ye shall know them by the suits they wear," right?

 

[disciple Clint]

Hello everyone,

I'm not saying one side is better than another. However, it seems to me that there's a big difference in a Catholic mass and the mass at the mass at some Protestant denominations. I'm aware, "Protestant" is an Umbrella term for many different movements. And you even big distinctions between Protestants. For instance, I learned that even in England you have "High Churches" and "Low Churches." Although, I'm not clear what's the difference between them.

Also, I'd be interested in how things are perceived. For instance, there was a Youtuber who went to a Catholic mass, he dressed in much more formal clothes. The Church was more "Solemn." Being a Catholic myself I really resonated with this approached. At least from my perspective: It seems to me that this was more "serious" approach. But I can understand some people might not resonate with that approach.

Meanwhile, some Protestant denominations, it seems that the emphasis is on "vending" or a sort of experience where people vent their frustrations, or speak about difficulties they have. And everyone wears casual clothes.

I've seen it where there's a Preacher at the center and he'll talk, and the participants want to be "moved" by the speakers.

It's very interesting to me that it seems some "Self-Improvement" groups at least in America have adopted this style of teaching from the Protestant, maybe("low churches") Where they have the "teacher" at the center and he'll try to move/captivate the audience.

While I don't resonate with this approach, it seems "emotional." I can understand why some people might gravitate to it. I heard people say its "fills them"

Any way, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this topic.

The Catholic Church is base on sacraments which require ritual the protestant churchs are based on relationship, this is a very general statement so do not try to apply it to all situations. It come down to a question of are we saved by grace through our faith or are we saved by grace through our faith plus acts or works. In general Catholics believe that grace is obtained through the sacraments while protestant churches believe that grace is a free gift of God based on a relationship of faith.

 

[timothyu]

In general Catholics believe that grace is obtained through the sacraments while protestant churches believe that grace is a free gift of God based on a relationship of faith.

Which was easier to teach by missionaries?

 

[dqhall]

Hello everyone,

I'm not saying one side is better than another. However, it seems to me that there's a big difference in a Catholic mass and the mass at the mass at some Protestant denominations. I'm aware, "Protestant" is an Umbrella term for many different movements. And you even big distinctions between Protestants. For instance, I learned that even in England you have "High Churches" and "Low Churches." Although, I'm not clear what's the difference between them.

Also, I'd be interested in how things are perceived. For instance, there was a Youtuber who went to a Catholic mass, he dressed in much more formal clothes. The Church was more "Solemn." Being a Catholic myself I really resonated with this approached. At least from my perspective: It seems to me that this was more "serious" approach. But I can understand some people might not resonate with that approach.

Meanwhile, some Protestant denominations, it seems that the emphasis is on "vending" or a sort of experience where people vent their frustrations, or speak about difficulties they have. And everyone wears casual clothes.

I've seen it where there's a Preacher at the center and he'll talk, and the participants want to be "moved" by the speakers.

It's very interesting to me that it seems some "Self-Improvement" groups at least in America have adopted this style of teaching from the Protestant, maybe("low churches") Where they have the "teacher" at the center and he'll try to move/captivate the audience.

While I don't resonate with this approach, it seems "emotional." I can understand why some people might gravitate to it. I heard people say its "fills them"

Any way, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this topic.

One denomination has an occasional foot washing service. People paired off and washed each other’s feet like Jesus washed the feet of his disciples: men with men and women with women. Another denomination had a pot luck supper once a month. It was a chance for people to visit each other after the service. There were Bible studies, singing hymns, sermons, the Lord’s Supper, retreats etc. The Protestants have their sermons and the Catholics have their homilies.

Church attendance has been declining to the point where most people do not attend church on a regular basis. There is Christian education information online for those who like to do research.
The Decline in Church Attendance in COVID America

 

[Marcel_Prix]

I agree completely with this thread and your previous one which was coincidentally also commenting on attire. I wish more Protestant congregations were more serious about their dress code.

I forget which gospel, but if I remember correctly Jesus often spoke of the necessity of snappy dressing, good hygiene, fresh showers for the homeless and destitute lest they offend the delicate, etc.

I assume you are being Sarcastic. Since you have been following my threads, here's a question/observation for you and others reading the thread. I noticed that in North American Culture(USA and Canada) people seem to have a different conception of "freedom" being "negative liberty." Where they don't want others telling them what to do. This included advice and suggestions. For instance, I noticed that in Italian and French culture people will tell others, "don't eat X food since it's unhealthy." But if you were to say it in an English-speaking country, people would say, "I can do whatever I want." The "burden of proof" falls on the person giving the advice they'll say, "Are you shaming people..."..etc.

Catholic and maybe Orthodox faiths: It seems you reach out to the Church and through your "act/works" you need to "prove" yourself worthy of being part of the Church. Be it through formal attire, learning Latin, or giving contributions to the Church. I'm not saying everyone does this but I feel that you need to prove it.

Some Protestant denominations: It seems that the Church needs to "reach out to you and large groups of people." Where they will try to "emotionally appeal" to them so that they sign up for their Church. And all the Churches are competing with each other for adherents. A friend told me that's why some people join one church and then move on to a different protestant church that appeals to them more.

It's very interesting since I see big companies in America follow a similar logic. They'll always try to make everything as "simple as possible" or as "accessible as possible" so that average large groups of people can buy their products.

 

[Brother-Mike]

I noticed that in North American Culture(USA and Canada) people seem to have a different conception of "freedom" being "negative liberty." Where they don't want others telling them what to do. This included advice and suggestions. For instance, I noticed that in Italian and French culture people will tell others, "don't eat X food since it's unhealthy." But if you were to say it in an English-speaking country, people would say, "I can do whatever I want." The "burden of proof" falls on the person giving the advice they'll say, "Are you shaming people..."..etc.

I would politely dispute your logic regarding Europeans versus North Americans, at least given the scenarios that you presented. For example, imagine any of the following interactions:

1. You're eating a hamburger. A complete stranger says to you "You shouldn't eat that because it's unhealthy."
2. You're eating a hamburger. Someone says to you "Stop eating that right now because it's unhealthy."
3. You're eating a hamburger. Your mother says "Stop eating that right now because it's unhealthy."

In all cases, I don't believe that there would be any fundamental difference between a typical EU response versus an NA response, namely:

1. "Mind your own business" (or in more polite sub-locales "Thanks for the tip, noted").
2. "No" (or in more polite sub-locales "I appreciate the concern but I'm choosing otherwise").
3. "Okay."

Also, most countries in the EU and NA have deeply established traditions of civil and rights law that mostly shields individuals from being compelled to act in arbitrary ways, or from being compelled to speak in certain ways. So I'm not sure there's any validity to the points you were attempting to make here.

And all the Churches are competing with each other for adherents. A friend told me that's why some people join one church and then move on to a different protestant church that appeals to them more.

Help me understand here - there are multiple Roman Catholic churches a short distance from me. Is there zero attention paid by any of them to be attractive to outsiders and draw greater attendance? Are parishioners not free to choose among them? The closer your response to this last question approaches "No" the more I would follow up with "What motivation does a priest have in improving his homily if the parishioners are stuck with him?".

It's very interesting since I see big companies in America follow a similar logic. They'll always try to make everything as "simple as possible" or as "accessible as possible" so that average large groups of people can buy their products.

Are product simplicity and accessibility bad things? Either way, the basis of your statement here does not reflect the history of industrial design - if anything it's the opposite, with many European designers and firms often in the forefront of design innovation.

My thoughts at least - I'm happy to hear how I'm incorrect

 

[BNR32FAN]

Hello everyone,

I'm not saying one side is better than another. However, it seems to me that there's a big difference in a Catholic mass and the mass at the mass at some Protestant denominations. I'm aware, "Protestant" is an Umbrella term for many different movements. And you even big distinctions between Protestants. For instance, I learned that even in England you have "High Churches" and "Low Churches." Although, I'm not clear what's the difference between them.

Also, I'd be interested in how things are perceived. For instance, there was a Youtuber who went to a Catholic mass, he dressed in much more formal clothes. The Church was more "Solemn." Being a Catholic myself I really resonated with this approached. At least from my perspective: It seems to me that this was more "serious" approach. But I can understand some people might not resonate with that approach.

Meanwhile, some Protestant denominations, it seems that the emphasis is on "vending" or a sort of experience where people vent their frustrations, or speak about difficulties they have. And everyone wears casual clothes.

I've seen it where there's a Preacher at the center and he'll talk, and the participants want to be "moved" by the speakers.

It's very interesting to me that it seems some "Self-Improvement" groups at least in America have adopted this style of teaching from the Protestant, maybe("low churches") Where they have the "teacher" at the center and he'll try to move/captivate the audience.

While I don't resonate with this approach, it seems "emotional." I can understand why some people might gravitate to it. I heard people say its "fills them"

Any way, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this topic.

Ive never attended a Catholic Mass before although I have watched one on YouTube and I have to admit I thought it was one of the most beautiful gatherings I’d ever seen. It seems very structured and formal, but personally for me I prefer a more informal and sporadic approach to Sunday gatherings. It’s just my personal preference. One reason is I wouldn’t want those who may be less fortunate to feel uncomfortable or underdressed to attend Church. So I usually wear blue jeans and a Polo style shirt with a collar. Nothing too fancy. I also like the ability to shout AMEN PASTOR!! when the urge arises and I strongly agree with something that was said. I haven’t seen people do this in a Catholic Mass not that it’s a big deal or anything. I just like to feel free to express myself and convey my feelings and emotions. Personally for me I feel like I would probably be a bit shy to do that in a Catholic Mass which would make me feel a bit suppressed in my worship. I want to praise God from my heart when I feel the urge not holding back. Anyway that’s my opinion.

 

[Marcel_Prix]

I would politely dispute your logic regarding Europeans versus North Americans, at least given the scenarios that you presented. For example, imagine any of the following interactions:

1. You're eating a hamburger. A complete stranger says to you "You shouldn't eat that because it's unhealthy."
2. You're eating a hamburger. Someone says to you "Stop eating that right now because it's unhealthy."
3. You're eating a hamburger. Your mother says "Stop eating that right now because it's unhealthy."

In all cases, I don't believe that there would be any fundamental difference between a typical EU response versus an NA response, namely:

1. "Mind your own business" (or in more polite sub-locales "Thanks for the tip, noted").
2. "No" (or in more polite sub-locales "I appreciate the concern but I'm choosing otherwise").
3. "Okay."

Also, most countries in the EU and NA have deeply established traditions of civil and rights law that mostly shields individuals from being compelled to act in arbitrary ways, or from being compelled to speak in certain ways. So I'm not sure there's any validity to the points you were attempting to make here.



Help me understand here - there are multiple Roman Catholic churches a short distance from me. Is there zero attention paid by any of them to be attractive to outsiders and draw greater attendance? Are parishioners not free to choose among them? The closer your response to this last question approaches "No" the more I would follow up with "What motivation does a priest have in improving his homily if the parishioners are stuck with him?".



Are product simplicity and accessibility bad things? Either way, the basis of your statement here does not reflect the history of industrial design - if anything it's the opposite, with many European designers and firms often in the forefront of design innovation.

My thoughts at least - I'm happy to hear how I'm incorrect

You didn't address my point on, "Negative Liberty," which is at the center of this argument, exactly what I am arguing about and just went to do your example. Also something unacceptable doesn't need to be "codified" in the law. Most people in a given society will quickly point out that something(like a attire) is unacceptable without having a law for it.

Here's some evidence to argue against your point. In France, Italy, Spain and many others societies around the world there's a degree of "Social Pressure" to not dress however, you want especially if its offensive to most people. Here's a few Anglo ladies who lived in France and other European countries and one of them said, "Its very easy for things to become "vulgar"....at least in America Yoga pants are worn everywhere, here that is not acceptable."

In regards to advice, here's the lady again and her husband told her not to wear those clothes, her friends, workplace would also call her out, not to wear "improper clothes."

I'll answer your other objections tommorow.

 

[RileyG]

Throughout Sacred Scripture, the worship of God has always been liturgical.

 

[RileyG]

The Catholic Church is base on sacraments which require ritual the protestant churchs are based on relationship, this is a very general statement so do not try to apply it to all situations. It come down to a question of are we saved by grace through our faith or are we saved by grace through our faith plus acts or works. In general Catholics believe that grace is obtained through the sacraments while protestant churches believe that grace is a free gift of God based on a relationship of faith.

No. The Sacraments are means of grace. Grace is not legalistic. The sacraments are God's gifts to us. We are very relationship-oriented people.

 

[timothyu]

Throughout Sacred Scripture, the worship of God has always been liturgical.

Possibly but the earliest churches responded not in word but in deed. A way of life was their ritual.

 

[disciple Clint]

No. The Sacraments are means of grace. Grace is not legalistic. The sacraments are God's gifts to us. We are very relationship-oriented people.

OK so sacraments provide grace that is not available through relationship?

 

[rturner76]

The Catholic Church is base on sacraments which require ritual the protestant churchs are based on relationship,

And accepting the sacraments enhances our relationship.

 

[disciple Clint]

And accepting the sacraments enhances our relationship.

OK, how?

 

[rturner76]

OK, how?

When we are given the body and blood of Christ, for example, we are taking the physical manifestation of Jesus Christ into our physical body. It's a very moving experience that brings us closer to God spiritually as well.

 

[disciple Clint]

When we are given the body and blood of Christ, for example, we are taking the physical manifestation of Jesus Christ into our physical body. It's a very moving experience that brings us closer to God spiritually as well.

Can you apply that same logic to all the sacraments?