Two years ago our elders established a worship committee. Its purpose was to plan Sunday morning worship services once a month for an eight-month period. Each service was to include Communion and to use a worship tradition different than our own.
One of the elders headed the worship committee, and he asked two women and two men of differing ages and backgrounds to assist him. All said yes, and were eager to begin.
At the first meeting, specific guidelines were given: the church calendar would be used for topic ideas; we’d alternate monthly between formal and lighter liturgies; and to some degree, any liturgy we copied would be adapted to fit the needs, limitations, and doctrinal framework of the fellowship. Worship was defined as a response to God, resulting in service to people. After two hours, the first Sunday was arranged. With a bit of legwork by everyone, such as talking with the musicians and bulletin typists, everything would be fully ready.
A lengthy bulletin announcement and pulpit explanation the week before the first new service prepared the congregation. Both messages said there would be a different format on the first Sunday of each month, September through April, and explained why the elders were introducing these changes. The worship committee’s members were named, and the congregation was encouraged to give them feedback during the following months. Then the worshipers were told what to expect in the next week’s service.
The first Sunday in September we followed a formal Methodist liturgy for Kingdomtide. It was a breath of fresh air for many members. Most people had never knelt when praying at our church (we don’t have kneelers), and the group prayer of repentance, which we read from our bulletins, also was new. Of course, things like the Gloria Patri, older songs, Scripture readings, and the Apostles’ Creed were familiar forms, just done in a new context.
The reaction? Generally positive. “I’m glad we’ll be having Communion more often,” one person said. One member from an Episcopalian background added, “It’s great to use some of the older and richer hymns of the faith.” Another member with a non-denominational background affirmed, “Our church needs a feeling of historical roots.”
Encouraged, the worship committee was ready for its next meeting. Over the months, a variety of services was prepared. We chose the order, music, readings, message topic, speaker, time framework, and special events to be included. Sometimes we asked our pastor to lead the service and give the sermon; sometimes an elder did; and sometimes lay friends (from the church whose tradition we were following) were invited to help. Here is the overall format that was set up:
Figure/ Chart
Congregational feedback was consistently positive as the eight months went by. In talking with different parishioners, several strengths of the worship services were mentioned:
It was a time of exposure, learning, and appreciating. One elderly woman said she was glad it “exposed everyone-including me-to other forms of worship in which Christians participate. It’s easy to get into a rut over the years and forget there are other styles and forms of worship.” One older man even said, “I’m a get-in-the-rut type of guy. So I liked the worship variety.” A younger member added that the services “helped me understand Christians who worship differently than we do.” Even a 12-year-old boy learned something new. After the church-wide dedication of our children on Candlemas, he summarized the service: “Children are just as important in the church as adults.”
The variety was helpful. The services “broadened the scope of worship expressions for most people.” The various emphases “brought up different aspects of Christ we normally don’t talk or think about.”
People sensed anew their historical foundation. One elder said the greatest value of the services “was primarily in remembering our historical roots.” For example, one woman pointed out that she liked the old tradition of kneeling together. It made her feel that our church was part of a bigger group of people worshiping together. Another parishioner was struck by the group confession idea before Communion. “We forget,” she said. “Sometimes we don’t take the time to clear our hearts before God.”
Worship became more meaningful. One woman was thinking out loud about all the new worship services she could recall. Then she concluded, “I have a deeper meaning of the word worship for myself.”
Although the experience was fruitful, the services were not without fault. We listened to the feedback and tried to correct what we could.
Some services were so different that church members felt uncomfortable. “We were so caught up in the details, we didn’t always worship,” said one woman. People weren’t always sure just when to stand, when to read the congregational prayers, what to look at, or whether to chat informally before the services. During the more formal liturgies, they were often unfamiliar with some of the words. Too many new things made people uncomfortable. The committee should have given more preparatory explanation to the congregation, as well as kept a few more features of a typical service mixed in with the new forms.
One worshiper was concerned that “as a church, we need to seek our own identity in worship and not copy others.” This criticism might not have arisen had we communicated the purpose of these services more clearly. We were not looking for a new format; we were seeking ways to enhance our own style and format. I explained that to this particular worshiper, and we talked a bit more about the experience. Then she said, “Well, it was a good exposure; but I guess I’m glad we didn’t continue it permanently.”
Here are some additional pointers for a church which would like to try this type of worship experience:
¥ The pastor and other leaders must wholeheartedly support the undertaking. Our pastor clearly supported us, although he didn’t attend our meetings. In the elders’ meetings, he repeatedly made two things clear: that he was pleased with the quality of the committee’s work and with the congregation’s response.
¥ The church leaders should give specific guidelines. The committee should have a working definition of worship. It needs to know how many months it will operate, and what limitations it has.
¥ Let the congregation know what will be happening. If people are informed and asked for assistance, they will get more out of a new worship experience.
¥ Enlist as many people as possible to help. Subcommittees could be formed for each service to help research the various liturgical traditions. Other pastors, public libraries, and nearby theological school professors can usually supply sample liturgies and ideas.
-Warren Bird
Countryside Chapel
Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Copyright © 1981 by the author or Christianity Today/Leadership Journal. Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.
