# Change in Our Order of Worship: any problems?



## Romans922 (Oct 6, 2009)

PLEASE NO EP COMMENTS:

Our old order of worship:
Call to Worship
Invocation Prayer
Hymn
Pastoral Prayer
Psalm
OT/NT Scripture Reading
Giving of Tithes/Offerings
Doxology/Gloria Patri
NT/OT Scripture Reading
Preaching of the Scriptures
Hymn
Benediction​What we are thinking about doing:
Call to Worship
Invocation Prayer
Hymn
OT/NT Scripture Reading
Pastoral Prayer
Psalm
Giving of Tithes/Offerings
NT/OT Scripture Reading
Preaching of the Scriptures
Hymn
Benediction​We want to not only reorganize so the order is Word, Prayer, Singing (Repeat), but also we seem to believe that the Doxology/Gloria Patri have become non-effective anymore, because we do it every Lord's Day. It is the only thing we do in our worship currently that we do exactly the same. The people seem to not think about what they are singing about anymore when we come to that point because they have done it for so many years. 

What do you guys think of the Reorganization and also the taking out of the Doxology/Gloria Patri?

We were also thinking that after a few months of no Doxology/Gloria Patri, that we could add it back in after the Benediction (knowing the Benediction is the end of worship) [perhaps only in the evening]. 

Any thoughts?


----------



## Tim (Oct 6, 2009)

Rev. Barnes,

My questions are:

1. How exactly do you intend the reordering of sing/read/pray to benefit the flock?
2. How exactly is it intended that the presence/absence of the Doxology/Gloria Patri benefit the flock?

After answering these questions, the next step would be to communicate this to the congregation. If they can't see any benefit to this, then the change is pointless. You might feel better about the order, but will your congregation? Remember that I know nothing of your congregation and where they are spiritually? 

Your care in ordering the worship is to be commended, for sure. However, to be blunt, and just speaking for myself, I can't see that I would benefit more or less either way. And I am someone who has been greatly sensitized to the issue of order in worship due to my current church in Cape Town doing things in a way that I would not choose.

Is your main reason for reordering word/prayer/singing so that it become more dialogical? If so, tell us more about this. 

At any rate, I would be most delighted to have either order of worship on the Lord's Day. 

Blessings.


----------



## Joseph Scibbe (Oct 6, 2009)

I think your idea is a good one. People often come to "worship" God in ritual and end up just playing a part of a church play. This is the same oppostion I face when I mention that I would like to see the sacrament of the Lords Supper done every week. I think that no matter what you do, you will find people that will fight you over it. I say do it though.


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 8, 2009)

Any other thoughts, especially on the use or non-use of the doxology/gloria patri?


----------



## jwithnell (Oct 8, 2009)

OK, this is from a lay-person's perspective. The doxology is often associated with a giving of thanks. (Note John's description of heavenly worship "... when the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks..." Rev. 4:9.) There are many alternatives our there, _We Give Thee but Thine Own_, and so forth, which could be used for a change-up if you think its necessary.

Is the Psalm sung? Or read responsively? That would help with my other observation. Namely more of a need for a congregational response.


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 8, 2009)

jwithnell said:


> OK, this is from a lay-person's perspective. The doxology is often associated with a giving of thanks. (Note John's description of heavenly worship "... when the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks..." Rev. 4:9.) There are many alternatives our there, _We Give Thee but Thine Own_, and so forth, which could be used for a change-up if you think its necessary.
> 
> Is the Psalm sung? Or read responsively? That would help with my other observation. Namely more of a need for a congregational response.



It is sung, like the hymns, as a response to the Word of God.


----------



## reformedminister (Oct 8, 2009)

We sing the Gloria Patri after our Assurance of Pardon and the Doxology after the offering every week. I think it can have more meaning if you do it more often. We take the Lord's Supper every week also and it is precious. I like the other changes you are considering.


----------



## raekwon (Oct 8, 2009)

This looks fine, Andrew. The only real problem I can foresee with the non-inclusion of the Doxology or Gloria Patri is that some folks who've grown used to it might be rattled and thus complain.

Have you considered maybe substituting something else for them, such as praying the Lord's Prayer in unison (if before the sermon) or confessing a creed in unison (if after)?


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 8, 2009)

Rae, 

Now you are introducing major problems if I did that.  But we have asked one of the members who we thought might be upset and she seemed to be okay with it. But we will ask the congregation to bare, bear, grizzly bear with us for a few weeks to see how it goes. 

Our congregation is typically concerned with one thing as it has to do with what we do in worship (which I am thankful for). Is what we do in worship, commanded to be done in worship? That's why I think this should go over smoothly. These two things are not commanded specifically to be done in public worship. It would be similar (in some ways) to singing come thou fount every week for over 10 years or perhaps some of you would rather sing for 10 years, Just as I am.


----------



## au5t1n (Oct 8, 2009)

I would recommend a confession of sin followed by assurance of grace and pardon. You also seem to be lacking a creed, which I think would be beneficial. And finally - The Lord's Supper! But perhaps I have just increased your service time too much! 

I enjoy doing the doxology or Gloria Patri every week. We do ours a capella, after the confession and assurance. I don't think removal of it would be that big of a deal, though.

-----Added 10/8/2009 at 02:38:26 EST-----

I think corporate confession of sin should be in every service in some way, shape, or form, even if it's just part of the pastoral prayer you mentioned, rather than a recitation, although I think confessing sin in unison has its benefits. We always follow it with silent confession of individual sin as well, for just about a minute. It will remind your congregation of utter dependence on God's grace every week - not that you are not already reminding them, of course.


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 8, 2009)

austinww said:


> I would recommend a confession of sin followed by assurance of grace and pardon. You also seem to be lacking a creed, which I think would be beneficial. And finally - The Lord's Supper! But perhaps I have just increased your service time too much!
> 
> I enjoy doing the doxology or Gloria Patri every week. We do ours a capella, after the confession and assurance. I don't think removal of it would be that big of a deal, though.
> 
> ...



Are those things commanded by God to do in Public Worship?


----------



## au5t1n (Oct 8, 2009)

The manner in which it is done is not dictated; for instance, it doesn't say confession of sin must be recited. However, confessing is commanded in some form, and I think it's significant enough to have as a distinct part of the service, in my opinion.

As for reading a creed, I can only point to the existence of early creeds in Paul's letters, as well as Jesus' giving us the Lord's prayer to recite. The fact that it's in the plural indicates that the early church recited things, especially prayers and creeds. I do not believe that we are commanded to recite in unison as opposed to some other method, but it has many benefits.

-----Added 10/8/2009 at 02:48:14 EST-----

The Lord's Supper, however - a definite yes! And Apostolic precedent would suggest it should be done every meeting, ideally.


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 8, 2009)

austinww said:


> The manner in which it is done is not dictated; for instance, it doesn't say confession of sin must be recited. However, confessing is commanded in some form, and I think it's significant enough to have as a distinct part of the service, in my opinion.
> 
> As for reading a creed, I can only point to the existence of early creeds in Paul's letters, as well as Jesus' giving us the Lord's prayer to recite. The fact that it's in the plural indicates that the early church recited things, especially prayers and creeds. I do not believe that we are commanded to recite in unison as opposed to some other method, but it has many benefits.
> 
> ...



Thanks for responding and your explanation. I think we should confess our sin as well, I believe we should do it before and during and after! During, we typically make that part of our pastoral prayer, even the invocation sometimes. Coming before a holy God to worship Him, and we are but sinners. How can we stand, but by His mercy.

The creed, I have more of a problem with, if it was going to be the Apostle's, Nicene or something else. The problem with these is that they are made by men and interpreted differently. But before I myself become an EPer because that is the argument I was basically using, I will digress.

The Lord's Supper. Definitely a part of worship, but I don't agree it should be weekly. There are a few threads on this topic.


----------



## au5t1n (Oct 8, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> austinww said:
> 
> 
> > The manner in which it is done is not dictated; for instance, it doesn't say confession of sin must be recited. However, confessing is commanded in some form, and I think it's significant enough to have as a distinct part of the service, in my opinion.
> ...


We often use a passage of Scripture as a creedal statement. There are legion that are well suited for this, if you decided to do it.

As for the Lord's Supper, I suppose I must leave that discussion for those threads. I can't imagine going back to not doing it every week, though, as at my old church. I need it! I guess I need to read those threads. For me, the argument is as simple as the fact that frequent observance is both the Scriptural example and the universal practice of the early church, but perhaps I am oversimplifying. I will check out those threads when I can.


----------



## Edward (Oct 8, 2009)

Let me warn you that you are buying yourself a passel of trouble. Is it worth the pain and division it is going to bring to the congregation to do this? 

Rightly or wrongly folks get comfortable with familiar elements and forms. If you jerk out something that predates you, you are going to get push back. Don't think that just because the elders and 'leaders' are on board, the back row is as well. 

If you feel compelled to make this change, make sure that the congregation is well taught on the reasons first. Give them a chance to offer feedback BEFORE the change is made. Or, you could start being open to a new call....

Just because you may be right (and I'm not sure that you are) it doesn't mean that you should jump in.


----------



## JBaldwin (Oct 8, 2009)

Frankly, it was a relief for me to start attending a church that doesn't do everything exactly the same every week. We sing the doxology from time to time, and that's enough for me. The truth is, we sing something that expresses the same ideas as the doxology in our hymns and psalms every week anyway. The doxology simply says it in a short and precise way.


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 8, 2009)

Edward said:


> Let me warn you that you are buying yourself a passel of trouble. Is it worth the pain and division it is going to bring to the congregation to do this?
> 
> Rightly or wrongly folks get comfortable with familiar elements and forms. If you jerk out something that predates you, you are going to get push back. Don't think that just because the elders and 'leaders' are on board, the back row is as well.
> 
> ...



The session is pretty sure that this will not bring division, but might actually enhance our worship and make it more joyful!


----------



## Edward (Oct 9, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> The session is pretty sure that this will not bring division, but might actually enhance our worship and make it more joyful!



They *might* be right about it enhancing the service and make it more joyful (but that sounds like oversell on the benefit of removing the Gloria and Doxology - and I'm trying to be as generous as possible here). BUT the odds are against them being right on the issue of bringing division. 

Are they (and you) humble and wise enough to back down if it does cause problems? Why would they think that no one would be offended and tempted to a non-Bilblical response? What are you going to do to prepare the congregation for the changes?

-----Added 10/9/2009 at 08:47:33 EST-----



JBaldwin said:


> Frankly, it was a relief for me to start attending a church that doesn't do everything exactly the same every week.



The key word in your sentence is 'start'. You went in with that understanding. 

If you had been sitting in the same spot on the same pew for 60 years, you might have been less willing to embrace that change. 

Young pastors should always be sensitive to the informal leaders in the body. Or they'll learn a lesson that they may have missed in seminary.


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 9, 2009)

Edward said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> > The session is pretty sure that this will not bring division, but might actually enhance our worship and make it more joyful!
> ...



You sure are an optimist.


----------

