What is an average Lutheran Sunday service like?

[Andrew]

I've never attended one and I don't know of any local Lutheran believers personally..
So how is the average service carried out?

Any good videos of a Lutheran sermon?

I've been to Catholic, Baptists and Pentecostal services and I have noticed the differences, what makes a Lutheran church service stand out?

 

[Lamb]

It depends on which synod. If it's ELCA it's all over the place from liturgical to downright crazy heresy!

Most of the LCMS (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod) churches follow a liturgical service. Here is a thread devoted to the Lutheran liturgy:

Lutheran Liturgy Explanation

I love to Skype with my friends! We end up talking about anything and everything and one day we were discussing the liturgy and how filled with God's Word it is. This is my thread to explain the Liturgy, but because I'm Lutheran, it will be a Lutheran liturgy. I'm going to try to post a new...

christianityhaven.com

 

[atpollard]

It is actually a lot like a mass without the “calisthenics” (although as a rule, Lutheran churches tend to rich forms in expressive materials like wood arched beams, without the ornamentation of a Roman Catholic Church.)

 

[Andrew]

It is actually a lot like a mass without the “calisthenics” (although as a rule, Lutheran churches tend to rich forms in expressive materials like wood arched beams, without the ornamentation of a Roman Catholic Church.)

Oh wow.. I was expecting OSAS charismatics actually!
Reminds me of a usual Catholic service. Thanks for the share!

Definitely of disciplined origin, I can see that Paul and Clements words were well received in the Church in Rome, very organized and structured just as the fathers instructed.

After all Luther was a Catholic
This all gives me a new perspective, so what's really the difference between Lutheran, Catholic and Eastern Orthodox?

I was raised Catholic and this was the same message I received, Jesus died for our sins, thanks again

 

[Particular]

I've never attended one and I don't know of any local Lutheran believers personally..
So how is the average service carried out?

Any good videos of a Lutheran sermon?

I've been to Catholic, Baptists and Pentecostal services and I have noticed the differences, what makes a Lutheran church service stand out?

Listening to a Lutheran Pastor is like listening to a Stuart Smalley "Daily Affirmation."

 

[Andrew]

Listening to a Lutheran Pastor is like listening to a Stuart Smalley "Daily Affirmation."

Still better than Joel Osteen

 

[Lamb]

Oh wow.. I was expecting OSAS charismatics actually!
Reminds me of a usual Catholic service. Thanks for the share!

Definitely of disciplined origin, I can see that Paul and Clements words were well received in the Church in Rome, very organized and structured just as the fathers instructed.

After all Luther was a Catholic
This all gives me a new perspective, so what's really the difference between Lutheran, Catholic and Eastern Orthodox?

I was raised Catholic and this was the same message I received, Jesus died for our sins, thanks again

There are a lot of similarities to the Catholic mass because the mass comes from scripture (read through the link I posted above for all the scriptural references) and is based upon the early church in the New Testament. There is a reason for everything in the liturgy (again see the link).

A normal service will have us declaring ourselves sinners, the pastor giving us absolution (remember Jesus died for those sins!) then we turn our focus toward the main part of the service which is to receive the Lord's body and blood, shed for us for the forgiveness of our sins.

Our word for Divine Service comes from Gottesdienst and it's a German word meaning God’s service. God serves us by loving us, dying for us, feeding us, strengthening us, all by His Word. God loves to give us gifts!

 

[Josiah]

I've never attended one and I don't know of any local Lutheran believers personally..
So how is the average service carried out?

Any good videos of a Lutheran sermon?

I've been to Catholic, Baptists and Pentecostal services and I have noticed the differences, what makes a Lutheran church service stand out?

Our Confessions state, "It is not necessary that services be the same everywhere." Thus, unlike Catholicism or Anglicanism for many years, there has never been an official, required, single order of service or worship style. This has differed by century and by country... and now it is common for quite different services to exist - even at the same Lutheran church; a single congregation might have 2 or even 3 very different services on a Sunday morning.


All that said, Lutherans DO tend to be liturgical (even at their "contemporary service"). The service is structured, planned, well thought out. There is a theological order to things that often follows the very historic sequence of Confession/Absolution, Praise, Bible readings and sermon, prayers and Sacrament. Generally, one of the Creeds and the Lord's Prayer and 3-4 Bible readings from the ecumenical lectionary are included, and now most Lutheran churches share the Holy Sacrament each Sunday at each service (although not ALL Lutheran churches do the later).




.



.

 

[Josiah]

The BUILDING of my parish is more simple and humble..... and we are a small group.... but yup, that's pretty much the service at our church.



.

 

[tango]

Our Confessions state, "It is not necessary that services be the same everywhere." Thus, unlike Catholicism or Anglicanism for many years, there has never been an official, required, single order of service or worship style. This has differed by century and by country... and now it is common for quite different services to exist - even at the same Lutheran church; a single congregation might have 2 or even 3 very different services on a Sunday morning.

I wondered if that would be the case. I grew up attending an Anglican church (not by choice, I was too young to be left home alone) and noted a lot of similarities when I visited a friend's Lutheran church many years ago. The Anglican church I went to as a child had almost no variation from one service to the next to the next - the hymns and readings would be different but everything else was word-for-word the same.

I sometimes wonder how many churches have such a rigid structure to their services. I understand there are reasons for doing it that way and some people really like it. Personally I prefer a little more variability from one service to the next but that's a matter of preference rather than theology.

 

[Lamb]

I wondered if that would be the case. I grew up attending an Anglican church (not by choice, I was too young to be left home alone) and noted a lot of similarities when I visited a friend's Lutheran church many years ago. The Anglican church I went to as a child had almost no variation from one service to the next to the next - the hymns and readings would be different but everything else was word-for-word the same.

I sometimes wonder how many churches have such a rigid structure to their services. I understand there are reasons for doing it that way and some people really like it. Personally I prefer a little more variability from one service to the next but that's a matter of preference rather than theology.

Oh it's not the same week after week after week! We have 5 different liturgy settings in our hymnals so there is going to be variation. We also have Matins and Vespers services (mornings and evenings) plus Compline services.

 

[Albion]

I wondered if that would be the case. I grew up attending an Anglican church (not by choice, I was too young to be left home alone) and noted a lot of similarities when I visited a friend's Lutheran church many years ago. The Anglican church I went to as a child had almost no variation from one service to the next to the next - the hymns and readings would be different but everything else was word-for-word the same.

Roughly speaking, that's true...much as in a Roman Catholic church. Or even an EO church. This all goes back to the elaborate combination of prayers, petitions, confession of faith, instruction, sacrament, etc. that created what we call 'liturgical worship' in ancient times.

I sometimes wonder how many churches have such a rigid structure to their services. I understand there are reasons for doing it that way and some people really like it. Personally I prefer a little more variability from one service to the next but that's a matter of preference rather than theology.

Well, the colors of the season change, the sermon and readings from the Bible change, some of the prayers change, the hymns change with the changing church calendar of events (Lent, Eastertide, Pentecost, etc.), and there is room for some other special occurances like a baptism. So to us, there's variety along with the essential elements of worship.

 

[tango]

Well, the colors of the season change, the sermon and readings from the Bible change, some of the prayers change, the hymns change with the changing church calendar of events (Lent, Eastertide, Pentecost, etc.), and there is room for some other special occurances like a baptism. So to us, there's variety along with the essential elements of worship.

It obviously works for many people - I guess if everybody thought as I do the Anglican church probably wouldn't exist any more. As I said it's a matter of preference rather than theology.

 

[Albion]

It obviously works for many people - I guess if everybody thought as I do the Anglican church probably wouldn't exist any more. As I said it's a matter of preference rather than theology.

Yes. Sure. I just thought I'd add a little more to the discussion.

 

[tango]

Yes. Sure. I just thought I'd add a little more to the discussion.

What is it about the very structured service that appeals to you? (Serious question, looking to understand how different people have different preferences)

 

[Albion]

What is it about the very structured service that appeals to you? (Serious question, looking to understand how different people have different preferences)

It's a beautiful, logical package, this historic liturgy. And like other things in our lives, we find value in the constancy and familiarity of the ceremonies that carry the deepest meaning. Why, for example, do most people tend to want weddings and graduation exercises and such things to be solemnized in the traditional manner and not just dashed off informally? It could always be said that the same end result is achieved, so why not?

You get the point.

This kind of worship, the liturgy, is essentially the same as Christians have followed since the days of the early church. That doesn't mean that other forms of worship, whether contemporary adaptations, sacred dance, or whatever are automatically defective. However, liturgical worship provides enough variety within the standard forma, that I would not personally want to sacrifice the tradition that spiritually binds Christians of all times together merely for the sake of being innovative.

There's plenty of opportunity for that with other church activities anyway; and, in fact, many parishes also offer the service of Morning Prayer that is conducted without the Lord's Supper, so there is variety right there and many parishioners find it to be as edifying as the Order for Holy Communion.

 

[Andrew]

It's a beautiful, logical package, this historic liturgy. And like other things in our lives, we find value in the constancy and familiarity of the ceremonies that carry the deepest meaning. Why, for example, do most people tend to want weddings and graduation exercises and such things to be solemnized in the traditional manner and not just dashed off informally? It could always be said that the same end result is achieved, so why not?

You get the point.

This kind of worship, the liturgy, is essentially the same as Christians have followed since the days of the early church. That doesn't mean that other forms of worship, whether contemporary adaptations, sacred dance, or whatever are automatically defective. However, liturgical worship provides enough variety within the standard forma, that I would not personally want to sacrifice the tradition that spiritually binds Christians of all times together merely for the sake of being innovative.

There's plenty of opportunity for that with other church activities anyway; and, in fact, many parishes also offer the service of Morning Prayer that is conducted without the Lord's Supper, so there is variety right there and many parishioners find it to be as edifying as the Order for Holy Communion.

Indeed the early churches took heed of the criticism and instructions of the Apostles and those appointed by them, an orderly structure being a main priority

 

[Josiah]

I wondered if that would be the case. I grew up attending an Anglican church (not by choice, I was too young to be left home alone) and noted a lot of similarities when I visited a friend's Lutheran church many years ago. The Anglican church I went to as a child had almost no variation from one service to the next to the next - the hymns and readings would be different but everything else was word-for-word the same.

I sometimes wonder how many churches have such a rigid structure to their services. I understand there are reasons for doing it that way and some people really like it. Personally I prefer a little more variability from one service to the next but that's a matter of preference rather than theology.

Thanks, Tango....

As I noted, it is NOT required that all Lutherans worship the same...and it DOES vary (often, in the same church; a single congregation might have two very different worship services).

But I think my parish is common.... we use a liturgy from our LCMS hymnal .... and (it seems unlike Lamm's parish) it never varies, we always use the SAME setting. Now, there are things that change.... there are some alternate musical settings, there are changes in the collects and readings, and of course the hymns change every week, but yeah - it's a LOT the same, week to week. Personally, I like it that way.

Now, I affirm worship that is biblical, planned, thought-out, well done.... but I think that can be in a WIDE variety of styles. Different strokes for different folks. Just as very different foods appeal to different people- and all are great (as long as they are healthy) so it is with worship styles. I just think it would have "meat" and meaning.

My brother attends a huge non-denom Mega Church. The "worship service" is mostly one long and VERY LOUD rock concert - done as well as any rock concert you might pay $100 to attend. But that's about it. No Scripture reading. No Lord's Prayer. No Creed. No confession/absolution. And most of the songs (while roughly Christian) are SO "empty" as to have little significance (Luther: "All foam and no beer"). The sermon seems well planned (although they tend to be HOW TO rather than Law/Gospel, self focused rather than Christ-centered). Seriously, honestly, I'm at a LOSS to know why THOUSANDS choose to worship there.... now the STYLE doesn't bother me a bit, the "lite" aspect does.



Blessings!



Josiah

 

[tango]

It's a beautiful, logical package, this historic liturgy. And like other things in our lives, we find value in the constancy and familiarity of the ceremonies that carry the deepest meaning. Why, for example, do most people tend to want weddings and graduation exercises and such things to be solemnized in the traditional manner and not just dashed off informally? It could always be said that the same end result is achieved, so why not?

You get the point.

I see what you're saying although I'm not sure weddings and graduations are entirely relevant as comparisons. I've been to weddings that were hugely solemn events, so solemn you'd be forgiven for thinking it wasn't supposed to be a happy occasion. I've also been to weddings held in a more contemporary venue with vows that seemed (to me at least) to be so watered down as to be almost meaningless. The same result was achieved, I guess that particular couple didn't feel the need for great ceremony beyond what was legally required for the marriage to be valid. Graduation, for me, was pretty much a case of jumping through the hoops to be formally given a qualification - I didn't really feel the need to get dressed up in a fancy hat and gown to stand in line to shake the dean's hand during my 10 seconds in the limelight.

I find it interesting to compare and contrast different opinions of very highly structured services, particularly the way some consider them beautiful and logical and others describe them as constraining. Having always fallen into the latter camp the thoughts you're describing here seem at least somewhat odd to me, but certainly worth exploring further. Perhaps I need to look more closely at the process and try and see beauty there for myself.

This kind of worship, the liturgy, is essentially the same as Christians have followed since the days of the early church. That doesn't mean that other forms of worship, whether contemporary adaptations, sacred dance, or whatever are automatically defective. However, liturgical worship provides enough variety within the standard forma, that I would not personally want to sacrifice the tradition that spiritually binds Christians of all times together merely for the sake of being innovative.

Is it the same as the days of the early church? Looking at how Acts describes the early church I sometimes wonder. That's not to say it's a bad thing, I'm just not sure that "it's been done this way since, forever" is a valid argument.

There's plenty of opportunity for that with other church activities anyway; and, in fact, many parishes also offer the service of Morning Prayer that is conducted without the Lord's Supper, so there is variety right there and many parishioners find it to be as edifying as the Order for Holy Communion.

The Anglican church near where I grew up didn't do communion every week. It was a long time ago but from what I recall it was maybe once a month. If I recall we had one order of service book for regular services and a marginally different one for communion services (it might have been one book with an added section that was used for communion).

 

[tango]

Thanks, Tango....

As I noted, it is NOT required that all Lutherans worship the same...and it DOES vary (often, in the same church; a single congregation might have two very different worship services).

But I think my parish is common.... we use a liturgy from our LCMS hymnal .... and (it seems unlike Lamm's parish) it never varies, we always use the SAME setting. Now, there are things that change.... there are some alternate musical settings, there are changes in the collects and readings, and of course the hymns change every week, but yeah - it's a LOT the same, week to week. Personally, I like it that way.

Now, I affirm worship that is biblical, planned, thought-out, well done.... but I think that can be in a WIDE variety of styles. Different strokes for different folks. Just as very different foods appeal to different people- and all are great (as long as they are healthy) so it is with worship styles. I just think it would have "meat" and meaning.

My brother attends a huge non-denom Mega Church. The "worship service" is mostly one long and VERY LOUD rock concert - done as well as any rock concert you might pay $100 to attend. But that's about it. No Scripture reading. No Lord's Prayer. No Creed. No confession/absolution. And most of the songs (while roughly Christian) are SO "empty" as to have little significance (Luther: "All foam and no beer"). The sermon seems well planned (although they tend to be HOW TO rather than Law/Gospel, self focused rather than Christ-centered). Seriously, honestly, I'm at a LOSS to know why THOUSANDS choose to worship there.... now the STYLE doesn't bother me a bit, the "lite" aspect does.

I agree with you entirely on the "lite" aspect. One thing that troubles me about an awful lot of the most modern "Christian" music is that so often it's nothing more than an "ear worm" with maybe (but not necessarily) an occasional mention of God or *gasp* Jesus Christ. A lot of it is very me-centered - all about what I'm doing and what I'm singing and how I'm praising etc. "All foam and no beer" sums them up pretty well!

I've had a few discussions with people at my church about some of the more contemporary songs we use and how they are very thin, theologically speaking. Often the pushback is based on some variation of "but we like the song". And that's great, but liking a song doesn't qualify it for inclusion at church. I like "Paranoid" by Black Sabbath but I'd find it remarkable if any church included it in a service - if anything I'd regard inclusion of a song like "Paranoid" as a sign that a church had lost the plot.

With regard to the "how-to" style of sermon I guess that's the sort of thing it's hard to quantify. Certainly I've sat through a few sermons that have taken a really deep dive into Scripture but in a very abstract sense - the kind of sermon that, by the end, I'm left thinking "that's great, but how is it relevant to me?" Other sermons would perhaps qualify as "how-to" sermons, but in the sense that they take a piece of Scripture, consider it in context (textual and cultural) and then consider how we might apply it to our lives today. If anything that's the sort of thing that I would think is more useful.

I suspect things like the Creeds and Lord's Prayer are areas where some find things appropriate and others find them repetitive. I can pray the Lord's Prayer at any time, in or out of church, so I personally don't feel the need to explicitly recite it during every single church service. Likewise I can believe the entirety of any given Creed without explicitly reciting a statement of beliefs every single week. My concern with reciting the Creeds is that, for me at least, it becomes an automatic process that loses its meaning over time. In a loosely similar vein I would be concerned that people who were unsure about some aspect of it would end up succumbing to social pressure to vocally affirm that "they believe..." when in fact they don't believe it at all.