I can understand this to some extent. Most of the UCCan services that I've attended both as a member and more recently as a visitor follow the same basic pattern, have the same basic themes, follow a similar cycle of decorations and so on. People sing along politely to the hymns and don't yell "hallelujahs" at the readings or sermons. We UUs may not be the mostly lively, but we do clap along during livelier hymns and generally seem more relaxed on Sunday morning.

However, when you get into the more evangelical Christian churches with their praise bands and hallelujahs and lively, animated preaching, and so on, it really does have a very different feeling. I haven't been to many of these services, but if I could find a church that combined a more open, lively worship style with a progressive/liberal theology & social values I might well get over my current church "blahs".

Mendalla

We Baptists do tend to operate with a congregational government structure. Our Fellowship certainly does. One way in which Baptist worship services tend to be freer imho is that we use more sources for music (as I understand it the UCC generally uses but two -- VU and MV), and we do more unscripted prayer. At the UCC services I've attended, the prayers and readings were pre-printed in the bulletin, where as at my church's services we don't even use a bulletin. On the other hand, I'd say the Baptist church tends to be more rigid theologically. The UCC seems to me to be more open to a spectrum of thought and belief.

Totally hearing you, Mendalla ... P3

Hi spiritbear,

As a denomination the variation in our theological expression gives the impression that our theology is flexible.  I submit that such is not actually the case.

The testing ground for UCCAN theology is the congregation.  It is in the congregation where our theology is lived out.  As congregations will emphasize to a greater or lesser degree elements of the theological big picture it is possible for congregations to appear to resemble or not resemble other congregations.

Whether a congregation tends to lean to the theological right or theological left it will always tend to lean to the theological right or theological left.  Any change in the tendency to lean will not be accomplished easily.

The same tends to hold true for the liturgical forms of the congregation.  Minor changes to the liturgy may happen over time.  Huge changes to the liturgy tend to be temporary and take certain events into account.

No, it is about both.  Again one needs to focus on the congregation as the centre of worship.  One can push the edges from a theological or a liturgical stand-point.  There will always be a certain amount of resistance to that push.

For the most part rigidity is about familiarity and comfort zone and all of us are susceptible to that in one way or another.

I don't think you are looking for a constant so much as you may be looking for a ratio?  Something like theology is directly proportional or inversely proportional to worship.  I don't think it is that easy.

Theology (what we believe) is expressed through our liturgy (how we worship).  I know of no direct correlation between the two.  I have seen evangelical theology presented in a wide variety of liturgical forms.  I have seen progressive theology presented in just as wide a variety of liturgical forms.

Changing the theology does not automatically necessitate a change in the liturgical form.

I think it is primarily because people can only endure great flexibility in small doses.  It the worship service is essentially unrecognizable from week to week it will be difficult for many to engage on a regular basis.  Familiarity may breed contempt avoiding familiarity is difficult in creatures of habit.

I think that there is some truth to this.  I think part of the problem with creativity in worship is where that creativity comes from.  If the creativity is communal, the whole congregation is moving in the same direction then creativity becomes a beautiful and welcome thing.  If creativity is the perogative of the few and that few is insensitive to the rest then creativity is discordant and unwelcome.

In essence that happens although the authority may never be named.  I suspect for many the authority appealed to through tradition is "that which makes me comfortable"

I suspect it is six of one and half a dozen of the other.  It doesn't really matter who is rigid so much as how that rigidity comes into play.  Some will rigidly want to stay the course and others will be just as rigid in their determination to change.  Then ther are other issues that enter the conversation such as, is all change good or can change be negative?  How can we be certain that the change we are about to embark upon will be  positive or negative?

Part of that is our all or nothing mentality when it comes to the worship service.  It is where the idol of inclusion does tremendous damage.  The assumption is that the worship service is for the whole of the congregation.  I don't know where that assumption comes from.

A worship service should be for everyone who chooses to attend.  Congregations have the freedom to offer multiple worship services catering to different theological or liturgical needs.  And yet, most congregations think that offering options is madness.  True it will be more work for some.  If the need for options is real more work is required to even begin to hope to satisfy the need, insisting on a one service for all will only succeed on giveing everybody less of what they are looking for not more of it.

Congregations do not want to close.  They want to continue to be what has always been important to them.  At the same time new families are looking for something different.  One service is simply not enough to satisfy both of those needs.  Two services may be sufficient.  Does that mean two different congregations?  No, it doesn't though many seem to think it does.

My wife and I go to a restaurant.  She wants steak and I want fish.  Do we need to go to separate restaurants?  Do we need to sit at different tables?  Do we need to attend at different times?  No, we don't.  Unfortunately it isn't that easy with a worship service.  We can use the same building and the same worship space we couldn't use both at the same time in precisely the same way.  Two separate services is hard work.  Letting both constituencies die out is much easier.  It would require creativity certainly and in this instance I think such creativity stands a better chance at success than getting creative theologically or liturgically with one service.

Grace and peace to you.

John

I like the UCC liturgy - I like the flow, the invitatioo to worship, the word (scripture and message, the response, the blessing.  I like the interplay of music, prayer, word, music, offering.   I like new hymns, taught to the congregation.

But I also like innovation.   I like the occasional dramatic reading, rather than the usual scripture reading.   I like an occasional drama acted out well instead of a sermon.  I like to see children and family groups taking part in the leadership.  I like the introduction of drums, guitar, bugle, or other instrument.   And the occasional participation of the congregation.   And I like change - not for the sake of change - but when it will carry the message more effectively. 

I have hope for the UCC.  I recently attended a covenanting service for a new minister in a very traditional congregation, and, while many of the familiar elements were there, they were done with flare and drama - and everything wasn't read from the bulletin.   And this past Sunday I attended a regular worship service when not just the usual three or four hymns were sung - but eleven in all - both old and familiar, or more recent, or new.   Not something for every Sunday but very appropriate for a New Year's day service when only about half the congregation were present.

What I don't like, and I hope our church doesn't promote it:

reading a selection from 'Chicken Soup for the Soup'  instead of a message

change for the sake of change

people being put on the spot - handed a paper at the door and asked to read or play a part without preparation - or asked a question in the middle of the sermon. 

over acting - over dramatization - putting on a theatre production instead of a worship service

foolishmess - half the congregation barks like dogs while the other half moos like a cow (or whatever)

short choruses and bad theology instead of meaningful hymns

And I would never trade my 'rigid' worship style for the rigid theology, or the control that the pastor seems to have over the congregation.

(and example of control - an elderly man recently told me that he had to give up bowling because the pastor had seen his name in the paper as a winner and told him that as a Christian he shouldn't be competing.  I told him that I didn't see anything wrong with it, and he admitted that he didn't either, but he couldn't go against his church.   I can't imagine anyone in the UCC accepting that type of control.)

Brigid Willard wrote Church isn’t where you meet. Church isn’t a building. Church is what you do. Church is who you are. Church is the human outworking ...

So what makes a church more or less rigid ... the people under the roof.

Humans by nature are clannish.  While we like to think we are bigger, global, deep down our allegiance lies with family and then extends outward.  That extension will reflect the dominant culture and it will be based on one or the other primary foundation; conformity or nonconformity.

The broad umbrella of Baptists shields a cultural history of first nonconformity.  They battled the dominant group with the result that many fled to the colonies where their histories influenced their new creation.  How they felt about their flight influenced their groups - some sought rigid control others preferred less.  Neither choice was superior to the other, both were outcomes of survival and continue because they were effective.

Even those denominations that have a defined hierarchy - the Church of England, the Roman Catholic, etc, will have congregations that are either rigid or not.  They may proclaim their allegiance to Pope or Queen but they reflect their own unique community.

Some people need to have other's in control - a clearly defined structure of purpose and authority.  There is both comfort and security in such settings.  For others that security is confining and thus they will loosen the dictates, adapt those that fit and discard those that don't.

This is human nature.  It is found in all group settings, from corporate to church.  It is why my experience with both the Baptist and United Church differs from others.  People can tell me that I am wrong but I will always beg to differ because I have lived a different exposure to them.

It the personal experience that forms the foundation of disappointment and disillusionment yet also the journey and discovery and it is the eternal conflict between that disappoint and discovery that makes life, at least for me, interesting and hopefully less rigid.

The thing with UU liturgy is that it is very much dependant on the orientation of the congregation. While there is plenty out there on UU worship (including a very good book on the subject that my fellowship uses as a resource), there is no hard and fast, set liturgy. My fellowship, and many others, uses what is basically a simplified, stripped-down, "unplugged" Protestant liturgy. Enough structure to have the flow required of a service but without as many fiddly bits that I find bog things down (e.g. sung responses in the middle of psalms, prayers and congregations responses after every little thing). It also creates a lot of flexibility if you want to do something a bit different (e.g. I've replaced the meditation, reading, and sermon with a series of readings and reflections for some services I've done). I love the simplicity of the UU liturgy and that's part of the reason my forays back to the UCCan never seem to pan out. I understand why the United churches that go to do things the way they do, but it isn't necessarily helping me get into worship. Kind of the opposite of you, I guess, Mists.

Now, in terms of church governance and community, UUs are very much congregational so how much rigidity you find in that aspect of the church is going to depend on the congregation in question, its by-laws and practices, and the congregation's attitudes. My fellowship can be quite rigid at times (esp. where procedure in meetings is concerned), but we have changed our governing structure in recent years to, we hope, make it more flexible and responsive to changing needs and smaller numbers. And we have the authority to do that. Each congregation is self-governing and sets its own governing structure and by-laws. Some have a Board and Council structure, some have something more like a Unified Board, and I suspect there are some other variations out there as well.

Mendalla

I dislike the lectionary.

I miss thought, long sermons and the whole meditative functionality of Christianity.  UCC is really really wide of the mark, at present  therefore

 Leaving all the above to the right wing

as usual

to define. 

Thanks MC. I also went to a couple of the Baptist churches other events for a few weeks, and it just didn't feel like the right place for me to stay...the overall message was "off" for me. I went to a discussion about employment, and an author of Christian books was talking about how we can all serve God by doing the best at our jobs, no matter what they are,whether we are a wealthy business person or a janitor and we will be doing God's work...and that wives at home are doing God's work while husabnds provide (although I don't see anything wrong with anyone being a stay at home mom...it had more to do with the tone)...I did not agree with him on many points, and even felt myself getting a little bit hot under the collar. I agreed with him that career "status" wasn't important, and that a janitor needn't be ashamed of being a janitor, but beyond that, I had trouble with the presentation...I was more concerned about "who" I work for, whose side am I on, not  about how much I would give to my work...all employers are not alike, not all are ethical, so I will not waste my energy and efforts serving them-- but that wasn't even on the radar... not to mention their position on women, gays, and not much mention about current events or anything happening anywhere outside of their church community...some people seemed to have no idea what was going on in the world and didn't want to. But I should point out the good things.  People really were friendly and I do have a good friend whom I met there. The experience wasn't all bad, and I must say their hospitality was generous-one person really went out of their way to help me with something I was in distress about, he dedicated a great deal of his day, went above an beyond, to helping me one day...it was really humbling... he was wonderful...that I found really admirable-- and I learned from that about hospitality. But as a church community to settle into, because of some of their views, it just didn't feel like home...and I am not even sure all Baptist churches hold the same views as that one--that was just my experience at that one. 

If a progressive, liberal minded, and socially aware church had a more evangelical,  roof raising approach, a bolder, more motivated into action approach...I would definately check it out!  However, my church has many things about it that I feel inspired by and excited about.

Rigid or not rigid, UCC, the church I go to feels like home-- the services, ministry and people are real, warts and all. It's all very real...like a family!

MC, in all fairness, I think the pastor did try to include a message for today...but he talked a lot about the early disciples and didn't mention how that lesson works in his own life or tell a hypothetical story, with context, about how it might apply to us, so I didn't feel inspired as to how I might carry that lesson forward into my own life .... I am not sure, maybe it's just me, but the first time I went to the UCC church I go to now I said "Ah ha. Yes." That was just my experience. My minister now talks about Biblical text, theologians, monks,mystics,  poets throughout the centuries, lyrics of musicians, many influential and inspired figures, daily life, current events,  even movies, and ties the lesson back to the meaning in scripture. It works for me. I walk out feeling like there's something to think about, to believe in, and to act on in my life, with scripture. I need to know how I can do better when I walk out the door. I feel connected to God when I feel that guidance and inspiration. It's a very special place.

I am going to make a conscious effort, a resolution, not to focus on what I don't like, and to focus instead on positive things to say, and on peacemaking. It's really important to me...so I don't want to get into a rut, finding fault where I should be focused on good.  I was just reading my previous post and I am too judgmental without even realizing it as I am doing it sometimes. It is always a temptation for me, when making a suggestion, to first complain.

I liked the people I met at the Baptist church, they are all just seekers on a journey like all of us...and just because it didn't work out for me there, doesn't mean I have the right to criticise.  I feel badly about it,  in light of how helpful they were. 

Again, in terms of rigid or not...I don't think it's black and white. people are people, they respond to different things in different ways. Some people need more structure to stay on the path, others need more freedom to explore it.

You are very generous in saying this, because it is very easy to focus on the negative.  This is why I don't come here often.  I feel that my comments are generally more negative than positive.  Part of this is frustration steming from the fact that we sometimes feel powerless to change the wrongs we see.

We are into our 4th or 5th year of "breeding".  That's even worse than elephants! :)

We are all reluctant to give up the old in favor of something completely new or unknown.  Do we need to let the old die completely before we can look at a new way of doing things?  This might even mean leaving the UCC, because we are so controlled here and seem to just be treading water.

I am almost to the point of abandoning ship.  When you look around our community,  much more good is being done by our service organizations. Our hands seem to be tied while we continue to jump through hoops and worry about finances, Presbytery rulings, etc.