Hello seekandyoushall.  Welcome to WonderCafe.ca

And to date the only soulution is a winner take all battle for the worship style.  No wonder it feels like two definititve camps.

Now that you see there are groups of people who are telling you that one service style does not speak to everyone you have some options.

1)  Continue with the fight until there is a definite winner and the losers angrily leave.

2)  Combine the styles in a fantastic way so that everyone is happy and nobody leaves.

3)  Combine the styles in such a horrendous way that everyone is unhappy and they all threaten to leave.

or . . .

4)  Have two worship times each with the style both camps want.

Call a congregational meeting and place those four choices before the congregation and take a vote on it.  It would be good if, at that meeting you could offer the congregation a range of times for option 4.

It is probably also a good idea if you realize going in that Option 2 is impossible and Option 3 is the most probable result of attempting Option 2.

And with the gossip and letter writing campaigns already underway the situation is toxic.

Call a congregational meeting, maybe for a month or two from now.  Make sure that leading up to the meeting you present the question you are going to ask the congregation to give an answer for and pump them with all the information you have that speaks to all of the options.

Then let the congregation decide.  Let them do it honestly, transparently and more or less publicly (secret ballots are not the norm nor are they required for this particular problem).

Things to consider.  If your clergy is going to be asekd to conduct two separate services in two different styles that will require less time devoted to other tasks.  What is the congregation willing to give up to facilitate option 4.

There is typically a golden hour (imaginary) for worship to happen.  Since your minister cannot lead two separate services at the same time from the same location who gives up that covetted golden hour to meet a) earlier, b) later or c) some other day?

Will your music ministry be able to accommodate a second worship with a distinct service style?  Might you need to find alternate music personnell?

What will the childcare/ Church School needs be for each service and how will you meet those needs?

Above all else remind everyone (contantly) to speak respectfully with one another and be honest with how they feel about any or all given options.  There is no wrong answer (in theory, Option 2 usually gives you Option 3 and if they are willing to go with Option 3 you are better just closing and disbanding to save everyone a lot of time and grief).

While I respect that it doesn't feel good this is a terrific opportunity for your faith community.  It is definitely a growing edge.  The trick is not to prune it to death and kill all that energy.

Grace and peace to you.

John

duplicate

RevJohn has set out the options very clearly.  I too think that you need to consider two separate services.    The question is, how do you work this out?   Two services each week (maybe instead of either getting the sacred 11:00 am time - one could meet at 10:00 and the other at 11:30 - or one might prefer an early morning or an evening service (when I was young, the young people liked the Sunday evening service with a social time afterwards).   One minister?  - each group should be prepared to do at least one service a month with lay leadership, so that the minister would only have two or three services where she would be expected to do both. 

/
An important thing to emphasis would be that although you have two separate services, you are one congregation, one church. Every effort should be made to have some people from both services get to know one another, to work together on outreach projects, to share social events like potluck dinners and sleigh-rides, rummage sales and discussion groups.
/
Be prepared to find that some people in your congregation enjoy both styles of worship and attend both services - either twice on a Sunday, or on alternate Sundays. Or, more likely, they will attend one regularly and drop in on the other occasionally.

Hi seekandyoushall ... good question to ponder.   For me, I'm wondering what has triggered this discontent?  

Has there been a recent change of minister?  

You comment that you are an affirming church - great!  That's a big process & I would think there was obviously sufficient congregational support to proceed ... and the worship services you describe seem consistent with that ... so what's changed? 

I agree with John's suggestions above.  I do think we get ourselves into trouble when we try to be 'all things to all people' - diluting everything & serving poorly. There are core values & determining how these will be born out in worship is crucial.  Some will agree, some will adapt, others will leave & find something more suited to their desires - which is perfectly okay in my view.  It usually happens with a change in leadership.  

Toxic complainers need to be counselled on the effect of their actions - they may decide to stay, modify, adapt, participate; or they may be counselled or decide to leave - which is probably in their own best interest - why continue to worship in a manner that brings stress & unhappiness for them?  Doesn't make sense to me. 

Very good points Carolla.

I agree that this situation needs to be addressed, discussed and  heard.  Maybe certain people went along with first one, then another, and yet another small change until they realised that they had only muttered privately about their dislike of the changes and now don't actually like the 'flavor' of the congregation any more?  Muttering to a few friends doesn't get heard by the rest of the group.

It might be useful to have a series of discussions rather than just one that could get heated in a hurry.  One discussion could be "Where are we going as a congregation" another "What is most important  to our congregations cohesiveness?  and maybe "What changes are helpful and what ones bother some of us? "Possibly a trained Conflict Resolution person could be invited to assist at some point?

Somehow I doubt that a Christian congregation is any better at solving these difficulties than any other mixed group,.  With some open minded problem solving it should be possible to find a workable solution that provides for the needs of both the more traditional and the more innovative members.  I'd consider it a worst case scenario if members start walking out in a huff or refuse to talk to each other!

Wow... I am so grateful to each of you for your very insightful ideas and suggestions and the time you have taken to share. What a blessing to have a forum to share ideas. You have offered great fodder for thought and some ideas for ways we may need to move forward. God bless and hope you all had a blessed World Communion Day!

There are, I think, two good options. One would be to adopt a blended worship style, which can be done successfully. The other would be to hold different worship services. Of the two, I'm a bigger fan of the former, as it keeps everyone together in community.

This is a key thing to consider if you go the two services approach. We did this at my fellowship back when I first started. There was a "family service" where kids were allowed and an adult service while the kids were in Sunday school. The minister and DRE who started at the time I joined brought a halt to that and went the blended route (over the objections of some elder members of the church) because the old practice was effectively splitting the congregation between the younger families and the elders.

If you go the two service route, how do you still keep a broader sense of community rather than having people gravitate into sub-communities based on which service they go to?

How does this really solve the conflict if it ends up creating two potentially conflicting sub-communities?

I'm not saying it won't work. I'm saying that if you go the two service route you need to think beyond the simple logistics of scheduling and worship leaders and look at how the idea plays out in terms of maintaining the cohesiveness of the community. It may, in fact, not solve the problem but exacerbate it.

Mendalla

I think it important that, even if you have two services, the emphasis must be that this is one church.  I mentioned this in my first post.  Events other than worship should be joint events - committees, fund raising, socials, outreach, prayer meetings, study groups - people from both services should be encouraged to participate  (yesterday my church had a social/community building activity where we met at the bowling ally for a couple of hours of fun and relaxation.  We had children and youth, families, singles, couples, seniors.  Everybody seemed to enjoy the interaction and the laughs - and suggested that we do it again).    
/
Encourage people to attend alternate services once in awhile  -  ie   got plans for the afternoon - go to the early service. 
/
Encourage respect - their choruses and loud music isn't 'noise', it's their way of worshiping.
Their hymns aren't 'slow and stuffy', they are heart-felt and familiar.
/
Try having joint services once in awhile. 

Personally speaking, I think the congregation need to openly talk about their thoughts and feelings about the issue.  Having a pastor or a small group decide on the 'cure' is, I think, a route to failure.  Whatever is decided will upset one or other subset and they will either quit or get busy undermining every step forward.

Mendalla - you make some good observations about the two service idea.  From my experience of congregations though I observed that there was already a range of subgroups.    In some congregations the older members (maybe 70+)  don't mix with the younger ones.  Those with babies and children were overwhelmed by offers to help - those in the same age group without children were treated differently.  Some sub-groups refused to include newer members.  Some sub-groups figured out how to influence the decisions of committees and meetings.  Maybe one subgroup was dedicated to 'church as a security blanket that exists to take me back into memories of childhood',  while another was working towards a 'church as a venue for volunteerism in the community', while yet another sees church as 'a creative adventure into various expressions of spirituality.'  

No easy answers come to my mind.

The only problem with this route is that the children don't like it when you rip the duct tape from over their mouths.

Regarding two services, the reality is that most congregations simply don't have the resources to do that. There's just not enough $$ for more ministerial and musician time. If two services don't work, then such a split could only be done if churches specialize - one church for the "old" and one for the "young" (a somewhat misleading label because in the UCCan, "young" means under 65, and in 10 years it will mean under 75). That's not possible in communities where there is only one UCCan church, and elsewhere, older members would rather close than see their church transformed into a "young" congregation, even it there is another "old" church to go to.  Yet strangely, many "older" members still want to see "younger" members in worship (I suspect it not only makes them feel younger, but possibly more connected to the young of their own families that they don't get to see very often these days). Perhaps Paul (Gal 3:28) when writing that "In Christ, there is neither male nor female, free nor slave"  should have added "young nor old", since the connection doesn't seem to be obvious to many. Seems to me that the willingness to accommodate (both ways) is simply an indication of how "Christian" they really want their church to be. And if they're not willing to be Christian, they should give up the pretense and close. Can't be "all things to all people"? That's what Paul advocated two thousand years ago (1 Cor 9:22), even if a more reasonable variant might be "something to all people".

Hi All,

If we accept the premise that there are many different learning styles and we each find one or more style more instructive than others why would we not accept the premise that there are many different worship styles and we each find one or more style more conducive to worship than others?

My work with Natural Church Development suggests that there are as many as 9 basic spirituality styles (which means that there are as many as 9 ways to worship the same God).

Remember this:

http://www.wondercafe.ca/discussion/religion-and-faith/ncd-spirituality-style-project

What one worship service says, is "Be like us."  That isn't an appeal to unity, that is an appeal to uniformity.  Blended services only work when all parties are resigned to getting shafted because at any one moment in a blended service as many as 8 distinct worship styles are being ignored.

So long as everybody feels that they are equally getting the short end of the stick there will be some semblance of peace within the congregation.  There won't be an overwhelming amount of joy or enthusiasm but peace is good enough.  I guess.

In this congregation some don't feel that they are equally getting the short end of the stick they believe (rightly or wrongly) that they are constantly getting the short end of the stick.  They now have neither joy, nor enthusiam nor peace.  Something needs to change.

I can learn from every worship style.  Which is fine if I show up looking to be educated.  If I am there to worship then I won't be learning from other styles I will be disengaging when the style alienates.

Let me explain by referring to my own profile from the NCD Sprituality Style Project thread.  My most preferred worship style is Rational (125) and my least preferred worship style is Enthusiastic (96).

Both styles have distinct strengths and distinct weaknesses.  Unfortunately for me the two strengths of these styles work at cross purposes to one another and in a worship service where these two are blended I would probably spend more time biting my tongue than praising God.

Which means when everyone asks me how much I enjoyed the service my answer will be "not very."

One style is not a better style than the other.  So there should be no snobbery involved.  I am better suited for one style over the other so it makes perfect sense that I would be more comfortable with one style over the other.

It is sort of like fish and water.  Fish tend to be more comfortable in water than they are out of water.  And of all those fish some tolerate cold water better than they do warm water and others tolerate fresh water better than they do salt water.

Which is why world class aquariums have different tanks rather than attempting one huge blended one.

Ultimately the need for one community is less about worship and more about control.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Blended worship offers many advantages, both to individual local churches, and to the Church universal. For those interested in this topic, I suggest the book "Planning Blended Worship: The Creative Mixture of Old and New" by Robert Webber.

Amen revjohn - well stated. 

A few years ago at the More Franchises conference I think - I went to an interesting presentation.  This church  recognized that many families with kids came to church only once a month, if that.  So they decided - well, if that's the case, then let's schedule in a whopper of a great service for them on a regular basis - first Sunday of each month - and it has been well received.  I realize this is a bit of a divergence from the challenges in the OP - but revjohns's comments re differing worship styles triggered that recall.  It's an interesting variation on same old, same old Sunday worship routines.  It was openly discussed & intentional in the method instituting variation.    

Then don't duct tape the children's mouths. Duct tape the people who are complaining instead . I'd rather hear from the kids myself.

Mendalla

Could you duct tape the children to the people who complain about children? That would be an epic solution.

Conflict?  What conflict? There's no conflict.

I would add this:  do not vote but discuss the pros and cons of what John has outlined as questions about worship. Have some education about worship and styles.  Ask questions of about what is your business, that is what is we are doing and trying to do in worship.  What is the vision of the congregation - for example if inclusion is the goal how do we do it so it is really efficacious.  What is the role of spirituality, and deeping it.  Is the service to be didacte that is we are trying to form people by suggesting this is the way we are - is social justice and end or do we use worship to make people in our image.  Just some questions.

I have a long history in social justice but I stopped going to one church because the sermons were always beating us up to be 'better' questions.  The inclusion was such as every sunday where I wanted some space i kept getting welcomed, to become part of the family when the church is not family.