Worship service structure and interactivity...

Submitted by David on Wed, 2006-06-21 12:43

It's been a long time since I finished reading through A Better Way, but seeing as I still have a fair number of stickie-tabs marking off various pages of the book, I figured that it was about time to start discussing it.

The general framework of a worship service in the CanRC generally consists of one service per Sunday expounding directly upon some Biblical passage, as well as one "teaching" service dealing with some portion of the three forms of (dis)unity. One thing that I've had pounded into my head in some of the TA-teaching courses that I've taken, and heard reported by a fair number of education students is that a pure-lecture style of teaching is one in which students are likely to learn the least. Some churches I've heard have attempted to deal with this by having perhaps one quite formal service but then another less formal service in which there is some degree of questions allowed, or interactivity.

Michael Horton, while not quite suggesting this, offers a fairly similar suggestions in his section of ideas at the end of the book:

Word-centered innovation. At Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, associate pastor Richard Phillips introduced a question-and-answer box and answered one of the questions just before the beginning of the evening service. This is a type of innovation that is quite useful. God does command teaching to take place in worship, and this parenthesis in the service is part of the ministry of the Word. Although Pastor Phillips did not do so, this could even serve as an opportunity for the pastor to walk among the cnogregation, providing a stark contrast between this type of teaching and the preaching that occurs when he mounts the pulpit. (Horton, A Better Way, p. 232)

Sounds to me like not a bad idea, although I suppose that podcasts and blogs can also play a similar role.

(This post was sparked by a comment about much Reformed preaching being basically "a modern lecture hall with hymns and a collection" - a post which I arrived at through gullchasedship's blog)

Comments

Scott

Wed, 2006-06-21 14:40

I suspect that few ministers are doing podcasts and blogs, but AFAIK most if not all are actively using e-mail. If any members of the congregation don't have e-mail, there's always the traditional telephone, snail mail, or in-person. Lot's of ways to get questions answered if people have any, so I don't see how the current format is a problem. People can and already do write down questions during the service if they can't remember them.

Looking back at sermons in the past few months, the sermons where I learned the least had nothing to do with the format, but the content. You don't learn anything new when someone tells you things you already know. If they tell you something you didn't know, you learn something new. If they make a connection between two things you already knew but never linked together, you also learn something new.

I think the way in which the content is conveyed is also a factor. If the minister is constantly repeating himself, you're more likely to lose interest and become lost when he finally does switch gears. It is also possible to become lost if the minister doesn't connect his thoughts at a low enough level for everyone to understand. The same applies to other subject areas as well. For example, if someone shows you how to solve a math problem but leaves out certain steps, you won't know how they got from one step to the next unless you are already familiar with the process. Ideally a minister should convey information in a way that everyone can understand, but that's pretty tough when your listeners vary in age and education. One approach I saw on a web site unrelated to theology was to begin with the minimum amount of information and then expand on it more and more such that everyone will understand, and some will understand the details. For example, the first sentence of the first paragraph is the minimum amount of information and able to stand on it's own. The rest of the first paragraph contains the most important details; the first paragraph is also able to stand on it's own. The following paragraphs elaborate on the details.

Striking a balance between repetitiveness and depth of knowledge is not easy, especially since from the minister's perspective he understands things at the high level and finding a way to convey at lower levels is the challenge.

IMHO changing the format of the worship service would not have the desired effect and could potentially frustrate some people when others ask questions which to them seem like basic stuff that everyone should already know. If you think the format needs changing, how about some scripturally-supported arguments instead of humanist philosophical ones? Our minds usually wander from the sermon because we're thinking about what we're going to do afterwards. I think the reasons for this are 25% the two I mentioned above and 75% sinful human nature.

David

Wed, 2006-06-21 18:33

Lot's of ways to get questions answered if people have any, so I don't see how the current format is a problem. People can and already do write down questions during the service if they can't remember them.

But think of how often people might forget either the question or the surrounding context which lead to the confusion. As well, if one person has a question it doesn't seem too unlikely that others would have a similar question as well. Often when a presentation of some sort is given, quite a significant chunk of time is devoted to questions, and I often find that I get more out of this than the original talk itself.

One approach I saw on a web site unrelated to theology was to begin with the minimum amount of information and then expand on it more and more such that everyone will understand, and some will understand the details.

That's a fairly common approach to things.

If you think the format needs changing, how about some scripturally-supported arguments instead of humanist philosophical ones?

Many church practices are not directly mandated by scripture - this does not necessarily make them bad ideas. Since we were talking about the "teaching" service one prominent example there is the usage of a catechism. Arguments should not be ignored simply due to the lack of proof texts supporting them. If scripture says nothing wrong about a proposed change, and the current practice is not biblically mandated then I think that reflection on "humanist philosophical" principles may be useful.

If you're looking for scriptural support for a more "interactive" worship service try 1 Corinthians 14:26.

Sarennah

Fri, 2006-06-23 01:19

Ahh it finally lets me log in!

As an education student, I get to hear a lot about learning styles. One study seems very interesting.

The Learning Pyramid
Average Retention Rate:
Lecture 5%
Reading 10%
Audio visual 20%
Demonstration 30%
Discussion Group 50%
Practice by Doing 75%
Teach Others 90%

National Training Laboratories, Bethel, METeach Others

Scott you may be one of those people who can learn very well from lectures as it may suit your learning style more than others.

For church it seems the simplest method of teaching, similarly to university's lectures, due to the high number of people being preached to. But like I said, there are many learning styles. I've got a few other resources on them. It fascinates me, actually, and I hope to implement it in my future teaching.

Scott

Fri, 2006-06-23 16:43

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles

Sarennah

Sat, 2006-07-22 17:21

http://www.mathpower.com/brain.htm

I thought you might find this interesting. It's just a random website, but it differentiates between the two types of brain dominance.