both can be liturgical

Yesterday I had the privilege of continuing my journey through area churches-this time the St. John Lutheran Church. As has been the case previously, I was impressed with some similarities to all other churches and, mostly, enjoyed meeting the people I already know from the community. However, I did find this gathering a step apart in uniqueness from what I'm typically accustomed to.

The whole experience was richly permeated with ritual and symbolism. Things began to commence as a young man quietly approached the "stage" with a candle lighter and lit each of the candelabras. Then, before leaving the stage, he made a little bow. Soon the pastor, clad in modest vestments, began his journey to the front pausing to bow and then approaching the cross to pray. Hymns were simply sung, prescribed prayers were rotely repeated, readings were observed, and lofty speaking was made. The choir assembled at the front for a couple of special pieces (hymns) which were simply but beautifully performed, almost making me want to join them (made me reminisce of my choir days in college). The end of the service was marked by a long pastoral prayer (again made by the pastor facing away from the congregation at the cross) , another hymn sung, and the candle guy snuffing out the candles.

I was mixed in my internal reactions to this service. Religious tradition typically reeks to me of dusty meaningless repetition. And yet as I participated in this unentertaining, but very symbolic service, I almost felt a little cleansed at the end. It was kind of strange. The simple hymns seemed to penetrate my heart in contrast to the "dry" readings. In talking with a lady after, I sensed that what went on there was very meaningful to her and a variety of others.

In the book mentioned in my last post, the author talks about high church vs. low church (the rough difference being that high churches have everything very ritualistic, symbolic, and prescribed while low churches value spontaneity and informality). The point was made that both styles of church are actually liturgical (liturgical is another term for high churches because it refers to following a liturgy or prescribed way of doing worship). While many churches pride themselves on doing things spontaneously in an effort to be real and authentic, they often actually end up with a different form of liturgy. There are all sorts of rigorously observed but "unwritten" protocols and codes. Even the prayers which seem to come "off the top of the head" are often very similar beginning and ending with much the same words.

Ritual, ceremony, and symbolism are an integral part of our humanity. Just look at Christmas, marriage, birth, birthdays, deaths, holidays, etc. and it becomes very appearant that we like to do certain things in certain ways to commemorate important events and relationships.

I'm not settled on what this all means to me ultimately. I just know I detest dry ritual getting in the way of the excitement of spontaneity and yet I'm mildly mysteriously drawn to how certain ceremonies and disciplines seem to bring a depth of meaning and experience that may be beneficial at times too.

In closing, I like how one Pentecostal pastor defined the difference between a liturgical church and a non-liturgical one. One has the service written out and the other doesn't.