Post-Reformation

A Post-Reformation Model of Worship: Holiness Worship

by

The Holiness Movement did not readily record its liturgy. Worship followed a common pattern familiar to its members. A reporter describing a camp meeting in Quinebaug, Connecticut, wrote: “Meetings were held from day to day, after the usual order.” The scarcity of printed orders of worship makes exploration of this topic difficult. There are, however, some prose descriptions of portions of worship that provide sufficient information to reconstruct a typical revivalistic, camp meeting service.

Introduction

The last fifteen years of the nineteenth century were marked by controversy within the Holiness Movement. Some had chosen to “come-out” of older denominations in which holiness, in their minds, was not preached and practiced. Others relied upon holiness associations to carry on the work. These associations were established to provide means of proclaiming the Wesleyan doctrine of holiness. Meetings were arranged so that they did not conflict with the services of the established churches. These associations became increasingly interdenominational, and served as havens for persons who were in conflict with those who did not share the same understanding of this doctrine. Within a very few years, independent churches were formed from members of the holiness associations who had either “come-out” or had been removed from membership in the older denominations. These independent churches organized camp meetings and banded together for support and fellowship.

Beulah Christian was an interdenominational periodical published in the 1890s from Providence, Rhode Island. The masthead of the paper quoted a portion of 1 Thessalonians 5:23 (“the very God of peace sanctify you wholly”). The Holiness Movement rallied around this verse and others like it. This periodical was devoted to promulgating the message of holiness, and specifically to spreading the doctrine of entire sanctification. It included topical articles, news, and schedules of various camp and holiness association meetings, and testimonials to spiritual experience. The “Camp Meeting Calendar” in the issue of July 1896, listed no less than forty-seven different camp meetings for the months of July through September alone. The list included meetings from Great Falls, Montana, to Marshall, Texas, to Rock, Massachusetts. These meetings were generally a week to ten days in length. Camp meetings and camp meeting worship was in abundant supply.

We know that singing was a part of camp meeting services because of announcements which included this element. Participants in the meeting were expected to bring their own songbooks. In Beulah Christian (July, 1896), an announcement of the Douglas (Mass.) Camp Meeting read: “Rev. B. Caradine, and many other prominent ministers will be present. Rev. A. Hartt will lead the singing. Voice of Triumph will be used.” The announcement of a different camp meeting in the same issue informed attenders: “Mr. and Mrs. D. O. Chapman will lead the singing. Bring Voice of Triumph and Good News in Song.” Congregational singing, however, was not the only singing that occurred. At the Rock, Massachusetts Camp Meeting in August of 1896: “Bro. Lee was on hand to sing.” “I feel the fire burning in my heart,” and “I’ve just come from the fountain, Lord.” Singing was characterized by freedom of expression and spontaneous emotion. As one reported: “There was great liberty in the Spirit, and at times the songs and shouts of victory would for some moments sweep over the meeting. Glory to God forever!” Camp meetings, however, cannot be caricatured simply as shouting and emotional frenzies. One reported: “Interest was manifested at times by an impressive stillness, and again by shouts and other unmistakable demonstrations of joy.” Another writer attempted to squelch some of the inaccurate stories of the physical manifestations which accompanied the camp meeting: “The truth of the matter is that there was a noticeable lack of undue excitement in the meeting.”

In the evening, Bro. R. S. Robson of Boston, sang, “When I see the blood I will pass over you.” After prayer, and while the congregation were [sic] singing, “Rivers of Love,” a wave of glory came upon the people, and shouts of holy triumph were heard from many who were in touch with God. Rev. C. H. Bevier preached a sermon full of holy inspiration, from Ezekiel’s vision of the river. On invitation at the close, a large number were at the altar, who gave evidence of finding real victory in God.

Preaching, concluded by a call to conversion or commitment, was the climactic part of every worship service. Often when no mention was made of the other elements of the service, the effects of preaching were reported. Preaching was “earnest,” “soul-stirring,” and often lengthy. Although the duration of the sermon was infrequently mentioned, Beulah Christian (May, 1897) reported: “At three, Rev. G. W. Wilson preached. For two hours, the people gave rapt attention to the mighty words of life.”

An invitation to a camp meeting in Danielson, Connecticut in August of 1897 accurately summarized the purpose and design of revivalistic worship. “The design of these meetings is the conversion of sinners, the entire sanctification of believers, and the promotion of genuine Christian life and efficiency.” This was the character of worship in the camp meeting tradition of the late nineteenth-century Holiness Movement.

A Post-Reformation Model of Worship: Restoration Worship

by

Until the rise of the Stone-Campbell movement on the American frontier, the restoration movement that began in Britain was so fissiparous in spirit that much diversity in worship was inevitable. Eventually, however, a primitive model of worship based on the second chapter of Acts prevailed.

Introduction

The restoration movement can be traced to the departure by John Glass from the Church of Scotland in 1728. His son-in-law, Robert Sandeman, started several small churches in Scotland which patterned their worship in such a way as to restore the order of the church described in the book of Acts. Yet another branch of this movement began when James and Robert Haldane started an independent church in Edinburgh in 1799 as well as a seminary in Glasgow.

As Sandemanean and Haldanean influence spread, Thomas Campbell and his family started attending services in the Haldane church southwest of Belfast, Ireland. Campbell, a Presbyterian preacher, was impressed by the ideas of the Haldanes. His son Alexander, eventually became the most articulate advocate of restoration ideas.

In 1807 Thomas Campbell set sail for the United States. Arriving in western Pennsylvania, he found that religious freedom and the separation of church and state had resulted in unbridled sectarianism. Moreover, only one adult in ten belonged to a church and attended worship regularly. Sectarianism was an obstacle to evangelism: Therefore, Thomas Campbell declared, “The Church of Christ upon earth is essentially, intentionally, and constitutionally one.” Furthermore, he claimed, “Division among Christians is a horrid evil fraught with many evils.” Unity among Christians, he said, should be based on love and on a simple effort to follow the Scriptures alone in faith and practice.

At about the same time in Kentucky, Barton W. Stone was leaving the Presbyterian church for similar reasons. Those who followed his lead simply called themselves “Christians,” and they also based a plea for Christian unity on the standard of restoring the faith and practice of the church to a New Testament pattern.

Although no absolute rules were set down by restoration leaders for an order of worship, churches in this movement looked to Acts 2:42 for a model of how the New Testament church worshiped.

Text:

1. Invocation
2. One or two hymns
3. Reading of Scriptures
4. Prayer
5. Hymn
6. Sermon
7. Invitation hymn
8. Lord’s Supper
9. Hymn
10. Benediction

Commentary: To overcome the formalism of the Church of Scotland in the late 1700s, restoration worship followed a variety of practices. Resistance to prim ceremonialism attracted pioneers on the American frontier in the early 1800s. Farmers in western Pennsylvania, western Virginia, Ohio and Kentucky had little use for protocol in worship: What they wanted was substance. They considered prescribed prayers less meaningful than impromptu petitions from the lips of a lay elder. Imposed liturgies satisfied these pioneers less than informal services improvised for the circumstances of each congregation.

Nevertheless, part of restoring worship to a New Testament pattern was doing all things “decently and in order” as Paul encouraged in 1 Corinthians 14:40. One thing was certain: the Lord’s Supper would be observed weekly, and that practice became a normative and identifying feature of the movement. Moreover, restorationists understood the Lord’s Supper as a symbolic memorial of the self-giving sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which revealed God’s unconditional love in history, and which continues to show forth God’s forgiving grace. A leader, usually a lay elder (most frontier churches functioned without ordained ministers), took the bread and cup, offered a simple prayer of thanks, broke the bread, and gave the bread and cup to the congregation to share with one another.

In the language of Acts 2:42, “the fellowship” (koinonia) implied a partnership with other Christians. Thus, a weekly collection of tithes and alms for the work of the church and the relief of the poor played an important role. This offering was integrally related to the Communion service.

Scriptures and sermons almost always were from the New Testament, which they considered not only a more recent, but a brighter disclosure of the light of divine truth than the Hebrew Scriptures. The Bible was understood as a set of facts which, if clearly set forth, would be seen the same way by everyone. The New Testament came to be seen as a “constitution” for the Christian life.

Salvation was considered a legal kind of transaction, so the purpose of the sermon was to convict—not by means of emotional enticement, but by the use of reasonable common sense. Clear, simple communication was more important than theological refinement. The sermon became more evangelistic due to the situation of preaching to the many who were unchurched; often sermons led to an invitation to Christian discipleship. Those who responded to such a call were received into the church as members based on a simple confession of faith in Christ and baptism by immersion. They were not tested for correct beliefs, nor obliged to describe a personal religious experience, nor required to pass a vote of the congregation.

An issue that divided churches in this movement by 1900 was whether instrumental music should be used. In pioneer churches, musical instruments often were unavailable. But singing was very important. Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 were understood as promoting congregational singing both as an expression of praise and as a means for building up faith among believers.

A Post-Reformation Model of Worship: African-American Worship

by

We find diversity in the worship practices of African-Americans. This diversity results from differences in points of entry into and acceptance of the Christian faith, as well as denominational distinctions. However, there is a common history and heritage rooted in the religious life of Africans enslaved in America. There is sufficient documentation for the genesis of unique African-American worship styles in the imposed marginalization of Africans in America. For a people whose slave existence was partially supported by Scripture, it was necessary for a new form of Christianity to be shaped. The “new” religion represented a fusion of a number of worldviews, beliefs, and practices: African, Judeo-Christian, Euro-American, and African-American.

Introduction

Although they had some exposure to Euro-American worship practices, slaves generally found this form of worship both depressing and oppressive. The message of the gospel preached was often designed to keep slaves under oppressive control. Parameters set by slaveholders limited natural response to God by a people who needed freedom in order to express their faith. Opportunities were not provided for communal fellowship in worship which was so basic to a people who valued kinship and community. In such an unfriendly, nonspiritual environment, African-American worshipers were forced to find a separate time and place (sacred space) for freedom in worship. Their hunger to hear the Good News without the hypocritical slants given in worship planned for slaves was part of the empowerment which propelled them away from Euro-American established worship.

The first attempts at separate worship in locations where the slave system was most oppressive were necessarily clandestine and risky. Nevertheless, slaves developed a religious life of their own in which ritual action could evolve. In the secrecy of brush arbors (also referred to use as “bush harbors,” and “bus harbors”) and “designated” cabins, slaves indigenized Christianity. Such places were later referred to as “invisible institutions” to distinguish them from visible or legal places of worship.

The earliest liturgical shaping occurred in late evening prayer and praise meetings which often lasted all night. In privacy, slaves could meet, respond to, and interact with Jesus who had walked a similar path. Struggles, sorrows, and pains which the slaves experienced could be poured out with confidence to one who listened with compassion. The joy of simply being alive and able to meet together “just one more time” provided profound hope for freedom in this world. Preachers, who were licensed only by virtue of their “call” by the Holy Spirit and approved by the slave community, provided gospel messages of freedom and exhorted the worshipers to seek personal encounters with God in Jesus the Christ. The gathered community helped in the spontaneous shaping of the worship through their propensity to “move with the Spirit.”

Since worship was initially clandestine and informal, the flow of services was never exactly the same everywhere. Elements of worship and a basic rhythmical flow can be determined, however, from slave narratives as well as from diaries and letters of observers. What is readily apparent is that African-American worship was truly the “work of the people” enabled by the Holy Spirit. In most, if not all, services, the community involved itself in singing, praying, preaching, shouting, and communal fellowship. There is also evidence of calls to worship, community concerns (as a part of the time of gathering), and personal confessions of sin as a part of individual testimonies (most often in relation to conversions).

In early African-American worship, the manner and style of the execution of the elements were perhaps as important as what was done. In a way, manner and matter, or content, were inseparable. This is not to say that the work of the people (the liturgy) was a haphazard exercise. It does affirm the élan vital of the African inheritance which allows worshipers to “see” and understand through all of the senses—the total being. One does not listen simply through the ears alone; one does not see simply through eyes only, and one’s emotions can be animated by intellect, reason, and intuitive sight. Directions in the flow of the service depended upon the worshiping “moment” and all that this entails. One element was not void of other elements, and music and bodily movement were often combined with all elements.

The order which follows is based on a composite of information received from slave narratives, the oral tradition, current practices rooted in the early slave period, and written records, diaries, and letters from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This order represents the first common model of African-American worship, out of which other unique models incorporating denominational practices have emerged.

Text:

Call to Worship. The “call to worship” started long before services began, usually announcing the time and place in words of songs which had dual or multiple meanings. Slaves would understand that songs such as “Steal Away to Jesus,” “Get you Ready There’s A Meeting Here Tonight,” and “Over My Head” might have been calls to meeting or calls to escape. Either would have meant freedom from the current situation, in spite of the danger of getting caught. Certain words in the “call” might have also identified the sacred space and time for worship, since it was often necessary to change either or both.

A Time of Gathering. There is sufficient evidence that slaves might have spent a portion of time at the beginning of worship “reconnecting” and establishing the sacred space. They would inquire about the state of health of each person gathered, what they had been doing since the last meeting, and the whereabouts of the family. They sang, greeted, and embraced each other as they continued in worship.

Singing. The response to God in song reflected the African propensity to engage the whole self in prayer, expression of belief, attitude, and commitment. Very soft singing was apparently an extension of the call to worship, as the gathering community reconnected and became centered so that worship could take place. Words and music were shaped spontaneously, or were carried over from their oral memories of psalms and hymns heard in Euro-American worship. The sound of slave singing has been described as wild, weird, plaintive, sorrowful, and sad.

In music and song slaves were lifted closer to God and to each other as they struggled to live in their situations created by a harsh slave system. Singing at worship and at work helped to ease pains, and connected the sacred-secular dimensions of life. Singing served a symbolic linguistic function as a common means of communicating the faith and hope of an oppressed, marginalized people. Spirituals, the first religious music created by African-Americans, communicated a spiritual depth when sung and heard that even non-Blacks recognized as powerful.

Prayer. Prayer seems to have been especially important in worship, and also signaled a new level in the dynamics of the flow. The first of these prayers were later labeled “invocations.” They are filled with thanksgiving to God for allowing people to be there “clothed in their right minds.” In keeping with the African tradition, there were prayers of adoration, praise, thanksgiving, intercession, and petition. Prayers after the sermon would often “drive home” the message of the sermon, or exhort the congregation to live “so God could use them.” It was not unusual for conversions to take place in the midst of prayers, as people continued to respond to the Word. Liberation, freedom, and deliverance were natural themes of prayers.

Preaching. The word of God preached, heard, and experienced in a free (albeit clandestine) worshiping environment was the foundation of the Invisible Institution. The reality of the presence of Jesus, the Word incarnate, was evident in sermon, song, and prayer. In separate environments the good news of liberation, salvation, and sanctification for ALL was quite clear. It was important that the preacher as divine deliverer of the Word, was responding to a call from God, was knowledgeable of the Bible, and had the ability to communicate with the community. Like the African griot or story teller, the preacher was able to hold the attention of the people and engage them in dialogue. The role of the preacher as priest, pastor, prophet, diviner, and “chosen” leader (both by God and the people) converged during the time for preaching. Whatever else the people expected during these clandestine gatherings, nothing was more important than the preached “word from the Lord.” Although preaching styles varied, an intoned or musical delivery style was quite common. This style encouraged dialogue that would evolve into a new song.

Shouting. Shouting in worship, including involuntary physical movements, is one way that a person responds emotionally to the encounter, movement, and enabling power of the Holy Spirit. Such physical response, described as religious ecstasy or “getting happy,” also may have involved uncontrollable screams, yells, and vocal utterances called “speaking in tongues.” Shouting could occur during preaching, praying, singing, or the delivery of emotional personal testimonies. Although shouting occurred with individuals, the community was affected by this emotional expression as it participated with the individual emphatically, or as others’ emotions were so aroused that they, too, would shout.

Conversions. Slaves were often inhibited from adapting to the external world set by the narrow parameters of slavery except on a superficial level. Psychological release from uncertainty, necessary cleansing, and regeneration could happen through the experience of worship and (for some) through conversion. The desire for personal status and affirmation could be realized in such forms as visions, dreams, and imagination where individuals could be convinced of their worth. These forms of behavior were unleashed when there was a “knock-down” conversion experience. For the slaves, conversion was the overcoming of a struggle to recognize God in Jesus Christ, and the ultimate awareness that God had already freed him or her to walk in God’s glory. Since for some the state of “not knowing” or not having had a personal encounter was sinful, the convert would identify his or her experience as a release from sin. Shouting was quite often linked with the emotional conversion experience, as evidence of the fire of the “Holy Ghost” burning inside. Shouting was part of the evidence of conversion—or an outward demonstration of the inner joy of a divine creative encounter.

Testimonies. If time permitted, the people offered personal testimonies in worship, an act which had a definite impact on the corporate community. All could claim the experiences and learn from them, so that they were enabled to walk together in the testimonies of others.

Singing. There is little evidence of an exact form for closing worship except that there was singing and sometimes a prayer. One can speculate that many of the clandestine meetings were abruptly ended if there was evidence of an outsider approaching. Prayers and songs attest to some words of parting which served as a benediction:

Lord, make me more Holy …
Until we meet again.
Lord, make me more faithful …
Until we meet again.
Lord, make me more loving …
Until we meet again.

A Post-Reformation Model of Worship: Adventist Worship

by

Early Adventist worship was simple, informal, and vigorously nonliturgical. When the first church Manual was adopted, reluctantly, in 1883, it made no mention how regular worship services should be conducted. It did, however, lay down some guidelines for the “ordinances of the Lord’s house,” meaning the Lord’s Supper and the accompanying foot-washing service. Indeed, the earliest mention of an order of service for Adventist churches appears to be in a book published in 1906 by a prominent Colorado pastor, H. M. J. Richards.

Introduction

This order of service is presented below. Scattered hints in earlier sources mention such elements as “prayers, singing, exhortation, and preaching” (see D. M. Canright, “A Few Thoughts About Meetings,” Review and Herald, vol. 28 [Oct. 30, 1866], 173).

Text:

Silent Prayer
Opening Hymn
Public Prayer
Hymn
Sermon
Hymn
Benediction

Commentary: The minister enters the pulpit and kneels for a few moments in silent prayer to God. All the people bow their heads and unite with their minister in silent prayer, imploring the Divine blessing upon the services of the hour. Then the minister announces the opening hymn, then all stand and join in singing. After this the minister and all the people kneel in prayer, while he leads them in a public extemporaneous prayer of moderate length and appropriate to the needs of the people and subject of the sermon. Usually a second hymn is then sung, and the sermon follows this. The service is concluded by another hymn sung by the entire congregation, after which the benediction is pronounced by the minister. (H. M. J. Richards, Church Order [Denver: Colorado Tract Society, 1906], 64).

Even this order of service was not ironclad. Richards allowed for some variations, such as “special music,” including sacred solos, duets, quartets, or anthems; and also occasionally “a short Scripture reading at some time before the sermon; and at times a short prayer is introduced after the sermon, when the Spirit so directs.” Richards’ only concession to liturgical propriety was his insistence that no announcements intrude on the worship service and that the benediction be pronounced by an ordained minister. Ten years earlier the same reservation had been expressed, describing a benediction as “a blessing pronounced upon the congregation. In doing this the minister usually raises his hands and blesses the congregation in the name of the Lord, pronouncing grace, mercy, and peace upon them. This function … ought to be confined to ministers of the gospel.” (G. C. Tenney, “To Correspondents, #68” Review and Herald 73 [March 31, 1896], 202).

A Post-Reformation Model of Worship: Revival Worship: Charles G. Finney

by

No orders of service from either of Charles G. Finney’s pastorates are extant. However, orders of service from the First Church in Oberlin, Ohio, are available from the pastorate of Finney’s successor, James Brand, dating from the 1890s—a full twenty-five years after Finney’s retirement. In addition, sermon notes (c.1850) from Finney’s son-in-law, James Monroe, containing order-of-service outlines, are also available. The orders of service described in Monroe’s notes correspond to the orders of service observed at First Church of Oberlin nearly a half-century later. We can, therefore, have a certain amount of confidence that the order of service given below (a hybrid developed from Monroe’s notes and the First Church orders) is similar to the liturgy employed during Finney’s tenure.

Introduction

There is nothing different or new about this order of service; it resembles that of many American churches with nonliturgical, low-church traditions. (Finney’s own religious background was Presbyterian.) The novelty is not so much in the order, but in the way in which the various elements of the service were expressed.

Text:

Prelude

Usually on the organ, although at times a small orchestra was employed. The Prelude was designed to set the mood of the service, to prepare the worshipers for the sermon—to soften their hearts for the touch of the Holy Spirit.

InvocationDoxology
The place of the Doxology in the liturgy seems to have been flexible. Its alternate placement is denoted by an asterisk (*).

Anthem

Here we notice a substantial difference from the traditional model of worship. Revivalism brought the choir to the fore, not only physically (from the balcony to the nave), but liturgically. Whereas earlier the choir had been used to help lead congregational participation through song, the choir now had a specific role in the liturgy, derived from its role in the revival meeting. The anthem was a musical mini-sermon of sorts, a message in song directed at the hearts of the congregation.

Finney reportedly loved music because it touched him personally. Choral music at First Church ranged from arrangements of popular hymns to more traditional pieces such as the “Hallelujah Chorus.” The issue with Finney was not whether a musical piece was or was not traditional, but whether it produced a “heart-felt” response to the gospel.

Scripture Reading
A passage tied to the topic of the sermon.
Prayer

An extended prayer, containing praise and adoration, thanksgiving, and addressing the various needs of the congregation. In the revival services a prayer such as this addressed particular persons by name and prayed for their salvation. A certain amount of these emphases probably remained in Finney’s pastoral services.

(*) Doxology

Hymn

As in the revival meetings, hymns were frequently directed at the needs of the sinner. Through the hymns’ lyrics, the sinner’s attention would be directed to his or her sinfulness, and consequent need of repentance. Although usually associated with later revivalists, Fanny Crosby’s hymns reflect the prevailing sentiment:

Pass me not, O gentle Savior—Hear my humble cry!
While on others Thou art calling, Do not pass me by.

Offering

Sermon

While Finney’s revival sermons lasted up to two hours, Sunday, pastoral sermons probably were shorter. Given, however, their substantial length in manuscript outline, they were substantially longer than modern sermons, and were probably close to one hour. Their topics ranged widely, from exhortations on elements of the Christian life to the amelioration of social ills (most notably the abolition of slavery and advocacy of temperance). Characteristic of Finney’s sermons were his passionate, pleading delivery and his pedagogical approach which rooted all points in the individual Christian’s need for holiness, or full consecration to Christ. The pursuit of such a holy life was squarely on the shoulders of the individual person who must choose, of his or her own volition, to follow Christ.

Altar Call

By no means a regular occurrence on Sundays for Finney, the addition of an altar call demonstrates his new approach to worship. While it shows the change from a Calvinist to an Arminian soteriology (which has become standard in much of modern American Protestantism), the inclusion of an altar call also demonstrates the change in ecclesiology noted above.

Prayer

For Finney, the final prayer was one last opportunity to reinforce the message of the sermon to the individuals in the congregation, often asking God to “drive home” the message, and “melt hard hearts. ”Finney often employed agricultural imagery (“breaking up the fallow ground”) which spoke much more poignantly to his rural parishioners than to the residents of the modern urban age.

Hymn (Usually of slower tempo, providing one last opportunity for the penitent to respond.)
Doxology
Benediction