Catholic Worship vs Protestant Worship (How are they different?)

How Catholic Worship (aka Mass) Is Different From Non-Catholic's "Worship" (aka Service) 

 

One time in a party, I introduced a family new to our town to an old friend of mine. As we were all having nice conversation of pretty much anything the family needs to expect as newbies, my old friend (a fallen-away Catholic and now an active member of a certain evangelical ecclesiastic community) brought up in the conversation that they have a new pastor in their church that is smart and charismatic, and invited the new family to come and attend their worship service sometime.

Now, as a Catholic, I always admire our Non-Catholic brethren's enthusiasm of inviting other people to their church. They always seem to make evangelizing so easy and natural than a Catholic would do the inviting. We can always learn from them, we grant them that.

However, I also wonder how come is it this way? How come for some reason inviting someone to a Catholic Mass does not seem to have the same, for lack of a better word, sentiment or ease as inviting someone to attend a Protestant worship service. I come to think that aside from praying and trusting the Holy Spirit as a given among other factors necessary to evangelize others, part of it is also because Catholics and Protestants, like a lot of other set of beliefs and practices, have a different understanding of what "worship" in church means and entails.

In today's culture and generation especially, indeed we tend to gravitate and appeal towards a more contemporary, emotionally high and loud, concert-like form of music, lively sermons, energetic speakers and a great coffee service among other amenities. Choosing what church to go to is like a form of religious or ecclesiastical consumerism. So if your church is, more or less in some ways, sounds like having these attributes, your work is almost half way done "evangelizing".

On the other hand, Catholic mass tend to get a bad rap. Commonly perceived and stereotyped to be old, boring and irrelevant. We already have a preconceived defeated notion that since there won't be anything entertaining to see attending Mass, our protestant friends surely may find it unappealing, even misconceivingly cultic. Plus the anti-Catholic one-liner rhetorics and indoctrination over the past centuries of misconstruing the Mass as idolatrous, "re-sacrificing Christ in Calvary" and the like, added insult to injury.

But to help us understand worship, the question we ask ourselves is not just why we worship, but what is worship really all about, and to look at how should one supposed to worship in the context of historical Christianity. How the prophets in the old and the apostles in the new worship God in the first place? Most of all, how our Lord Jesus intended for us to worship?

Now I won't try to go through enumerating and exegeting every bible verses of what worship really is, since I'm no bible scholar or anything but in essence, worship entails sacrifice. In the old testament (e.g. Genesis, Leviticus) we read quite a number of sacrifices and offerings that had been carried out (ie., burnt sacrifices/offerings, sin offerings, peace offerings, guilt offerings, food offerings, communion sacrifices). These were how the Old Testament people worship. God centered the worship of his Old Testament people on sacrifice because it was an essential part of His plan of salvation. These are prefigured in culmination for the ultimate and perfect sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ Himself for the atonement of the human race. “Christ loved us and handed himself over for us as a sacrificial offering to God” as St. Paul said. (Eph 5:2; Hebrews 9, 10). Our Lord Jesus displayed all the dimensions of Old Testament communion sacrifice. He fulfilled a threefold role: offeror, victim and priest. In Genesis 22:7-8, Isaac asked his dad Abraham: "Hey Dad, the fire and wood are here but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?" And Abraham replied “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” (ie., God's own self).

As we walked through after Christ's death and resurrection, we find the continuing theme of worshiping God that entails sacrifice. Again St Paul tells the Romans (12:1) "to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship." And even advised in Corinths (1 Corinthians 14:40) that "everything should be done decently and in an orderly way," not in a loud and boisterous freestyle fashion.

And we go through down the line in history to learn the successors of the apostles (like Polycarp, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, the Early Church Fathers, all the 1st, 2nd, 3rd century Christians thru the 21st) all worship the same mode we find in the Catholic Mass.

The Mass is both a sacrifice and a sacrament, but primarily the former. The same offerer, victim and priest is present but in an unbloody manner. Nothing is as Christo-centric in worship as that in the Mass itself first instituted in the upper room by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. And this is the way Christians ought to worship, regardless of how emotionally high or low we feel about the church's ambience, or how boring someone's homily, or how outdated the songs are, or how lousy the church coffee tasted like. Going to church to worship should not be a form of religious consumerism, where we cherry pick to look for the best sermon, the best speaker, the best-tasting coffee or the best songs and musical band.

How we convey that to somebody we want to invite to go to mass to really experience true biblical worship is a different story, because it is not as simple as inviting them to a birthday party or a concert. We just trust in the Holy Spirit to do the working when we put Christ out there for them by our invitation.

***

BONUS READING:

I found this write-up that was shared in one of the Facebook groups and thought this is another great read and perspective on the difference between Catholic Worship & Non-Catholic Praise Service, author unknown. It reads as follows:

Difference Between Catholic Worship & Non-Catholic Praise Service
The commands to "praise the Lord" are too numerous to mention throughout the Bible. For example, angels and the heavenly hosts are commanded to praise the Lord in Psalm 89:5; 103:20; 148:2. All inhabitants of the earth are instructed to praise the Lord (Psalm 138:4; Romans 15:11). We can praise Him with singing (Isaiah 12:5; Psalm 9:11), with shouting (Psalm 33:1; 98:4), with the dance (Psalm 150:4), and with musical instruments (1 Chronicles 13:8; Psalm 108:2; 150:3-5).

Praise is the joyful recounting of all God has done for us. It is closely intertwined with thanksgiving as we offer back to God appreciation for His mighty works on our behalf. Praise is universal and can be applied to other relationships as well. We can praise our family, friends, boss, or paperboy. Praise does not require anything of us. It is merely the truthful acknowledgment of the righteous acts of another. Since God has done many wonderful deeds, He is worthy of praise (Psalm 18:3).

Worship, however, comes from a different place within our spirits. WORSHIP SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR GOD ALONE (Luke 4:8). Worship is the art of losing self in the adoration of another. Praise can be a part of worship, but worship goes beyond praise. Praise is easy; worship is not. Worship gets to the heart of who we are. To truly worship God, we must let go of our self-worship. We must be willing to humble ourselves before God, surrender every part of our lives to His control, and adore Him for who He is, not just what He has done. Worship is a lifestyle, not just an occasional activity. Jesus said the Father is seeking those who will worship Him "in spirit and in truth" (John 4:23).

In Scripture, praise is usually presented as boisterous, joyful, and uninhibited. God invites praise of all kinds from His creation. Jesus said that if people don't praise God, even the "stones will cry out" (Luke 19:40). When the Bible mentions worship, however, the tone changes. We read verses like, "Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness" (Psalm 96:9). And, "Come let us worship and bow down" (Psalm 95:6). Often, worship is coupled with the act of bowing or kneeling, which shows humility and contrition (2 Chronicles 29:28; Hebrews 11:21; Revelation 19:10). It is through true worship that we invite the Holy Spirit to speak to us, convict us, and comfort us. Through worship, we realign our priorities with God's and acknowledge Him once more as the rightful Lord of our lives.

Just as praise is intertwined with thanksgiving, worship is intertwined with surrender. It is impossible to worship God and anything else at the same time (Luke 4:8). The physical acts often associated with worship—bowing, kneeling, clasping hands—help to create the necessary attitude of humility required for real worship.

Worship is an attitude of the heart. A person can go through the outward motions and not be worshiping (Psalm 51:16-17; Matthew 6:5-6). God sees the heart, and He desires and deserves sincere, heartfelt praise and worship.

Understanding the difference between praise and worship can bring a new depth to the way we honor the Lord.

Q&A to a Troll in a Catholic website (Part 2): What was the means did Jesus make for the transmission of our Christian faith?

PART II 

*Months ago, I was visiting a favorite Catholic website of mine on Facebook and was reading a newly released article about our Blessed Virgin Mary. As I was reading various comments of Catholics regarding the article, I noticed one particular person who appears to be trolling under the comment box, unsolicitedly "refuting" different Catholic teachings to any one who would dare to read his comments and take the bait. As I skimmed through other articles of the site, I was baffled to see that same person trolling the comment boxes again under those respective articles, taking on anybody that challenges his varied assertions and accusations, one Catholic at a time that comes his way like in a one-man-versus-an-army martial arts fighting scene. I started to see his trend.

If I recall correctly, he said he used to be Catholic and now belong to some strain of Protestantism (among the roughly 33,000 in existence today) and the Bible alone (Sola Scriptura) is his sole authority. I told him that swapping Bible verses won't get us anywhere (to argue about Mary, Purgatory, Saints and all other Catholic beliefs that Protestants think are a bunch of hooey). Instead I politely ask him if he is willing to answer 3 fundamental questions about our Christian faith. He obliged although seemingly a bit reluctant at first, but answered it nevertheless. Here's one of the questions I raised, his reply and my response back on his reply:

Me: What was the means or provision did Jesus make for the authoritative transmission of the Christian faith?

His Reply:

Jesus gave men to teach the gospel, first apostles to write and conclude scripture (remember, the canon of scripture was closed at AD 94 with the conclusion of the book of Revelation). While those who followed the apostles did not write scripture (it was already concluded) the Holy Spirit gifts men to be table to pass on the gospel though not perfectly.

My Response:

Jesus never direct His apostles to write or read the Bible as the means to transmit the faith. The Bible did not even exist yet during the ministry of Christ. We don’t find that teaching of Jesus in any of the writings of the apostles. Even the apostles themselves never expected they are going to be writing books when they signed up to follow Christ. Moreover, only 3 out of the 12 apostles wrote scriptures, where were the paperwork of the remaining 9 if writing was such a priority? We don’t find in scriptures that says: "We only need the Bible as our sufficient rule of faith and here are its table of contents (and make sure it's 66 books only! No more nor less, OK?)" Also it is good to keep in mind that the letters Paul wrote where occasional documents meant to address problems within a specific community of believers (e.g. I, Paul am writing to you, Corinths because of this issue, Galatians here is my letter to your issue, etc.)

Instead, Jesus said in Matthew 28 to the apostles "Go, therefore, make disciples of all nations and teach them to observe all the Commands (ie., orally) I gave you. And I am with you always to the end of time." Everything He commanded was Oral. Jesus did not write everything down. Some of it were rituals: "Do this in memory of me" (ie., Eucharist)... or "Baptize them in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit"... or "If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained" (ie., Confession), etc. etc... So he commanded all these to the apostles, to be passed down (ie., tradition) to their successors and in perpetuity guaranteed by his divine authority “I will be with you until the end of age,” and “the gates of hell will never prevail.” Jesus gave us a Church, to be the pillar and foundation of our faith (1 Tim. 3:15). St Paul even affirms this Oral tradition (1 Cor. 11:23, 1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thes. 2:15, 2 Tim. 2:2, Rom. 10:17).

So then we ask, where is this church in the 1^st century, or 2^nd, or 3^rd down to the present 21^st century that the gates of hell will never prevail as Jesus promised us? There’s only one in direct continuity tracing back to Jesus and the apostles for 2,000 yrs: The Catholic Church. (The so-called protestant “reformers”, they were 1,500 years too late). And we all know what happens when we leave it to ourselves to interpret the Bible (Sola Scriptura, a man-made doctrine by Martin Luther): 33,000 denominations and counting, all claiming the Holy Spirit is in their side of the argument and their biblical interpretation, and everyone else's got it wrong. St Paul clearly says in 1 Cor. 11:16 -- “If anyone wants to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor do the churches of God.” Also, 1 Cor. 1:10 -- “I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree together, so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be united in mind and conviction.”

"Denominationalism" isn’t found in the bible. The whole protestant tradition exists in all its multiplicity because of this incoherence. Every protestant theologian or pastor that pops up is going to give you his authoritative take on what is dogma and what’s opinion and the next guy gives you something different.

Get paid to share your links!

Q&A to a Troll in a Catholic website (Part 3): "What divine authority has revealed the contents of the Bible?"

PART III

*Months ago, I was visiting a favorite Catholic website of mine on Facebook and was reading a newly released article about our Blessed Virgin Mary. As I was reading various comments of Catholics regarding the article, I noticed one particular person who appears to be trolling under the comment box, unsolicitedly "refuting" different Catholic teachings to any one who would dare to read his comments and take the bait. As I skimmed through other articles of the site, I was baffled to see that same person trolling the comment boxes again under those respective articles, taking on anybody that challenges his varied assertions and accusations, one Catholic at a time that comes his way like in a one-man-versus-an-army martial arts fighting scene. I started to see his trend.

If I recall correctly, he said he used to be Catholic and now belong to some strain of Protestantism (among the roughly 33,000 in existence today) and the Bible alone (Sola Scriptura) is his sole authority. I told him that swapping Bible verses won't get us anywhere (to argue about Mary, Purgatory, Saints and all other Catholic beliefs that Protestants think are a bunch of hooey). Instead I politely ask him if he is willing to answer 3 fundamental questions about our Christian faith. He obliged although seemingly a bit reluctant at first, but answered it nevertheless. Here's one of the questions I raised, his reply and my response back on his reply:


Me: What divine authority has revealed the contents of the Bible?

His Reply: Thank you for asking. As believers, we know that God guided the formation of the bible, and essentially all of the books of the bible were already generally accepted as scripture when the bible (the compilation of scripture, a bookkeeping exercise) was generated. The Catholic church did great work in the librarian sense, with some protestants later putting chapter and verse numbers on the bible. All this is practical in order to reference scripture, but no librarian task had any effect, nor grants any authority over understanding or teaching scripture. That's misguided, though it is a view held by a small minority. Remember, scripture is God's word, and came from God, not from men. It doesn't require men to say it's so in order to be God's word.

My response: Sorry to say I don’t find your version of History compelling. You said “essentially all of the books of the bible were already 'generally accepted' as scripture when the bible was generated” but how do you know which scriptures belong to the Bible in the first place before it was generally accepted? In the first 4 centuries there are a lot of scriptures and books floating around, some spurious and false we now know today, that claims to be divinely inspired as well. How come books like: the gospel according to the Hebrews, St Paul’s epistle to the Laodiceans, Epistle of Clement, Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas, Doctrine of the 12 apostles, Apostolic constitutions, the Gospel of James, gospel of Thomas, Acts of Pilate, Acts of Paul and Thecla and many others, why are these books not in our Bible today? If the Catholic Church did just bookkeeping and plays merely a librarian like you said, they played a lousy job compiling and missing out a lot of books. So how do we know only 27 New Testament books were accepted as divinely inspired and included in the Bible? Who said so? We don’t find any verse or chapter in the Bible that says Hebrews or Corinthians or Revelation, etc., should be included in the Bible’s table of contents. Scripture itself does not dictate its own table of contents. Again, there had to be an authoritative church before the Bible was compiled to determine what books belongs to the Bible.

It is a fact of history that the Councils of Hippo and of Carthage in 397 AD (all Catholic bishops) under Pope Damasus I, gathered and determined what books were divinely inspired and which one weren’t, settled the Canon or collection of new testament scriptures, decreed that its decision should be sent on to Rome for confirmation, and promulgated it to the whole world saying this is the Word of God that all Christians ought to read. This does not sound like a job of a mere librarian to me. Of course they were guided by the Holy Spirit in determining those books, Jesus said so in Matt 16:18-19; Luke 10:16. The chapters in the Bible were later put forth by 13th-century Archbishop of Canterbury Stephen Langton (he does not sound like a Protestant to me, either), and the verses where put by 16th-century French printer named Robert Estienne (better known as Stephanus).

So if you accept the authority of the Bible, then you accept the authority of the Catholic church because the Catholic church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, was the one who "hand-picked" and decided only 27 books were divinely inspired among the rest and compiled the Bible (Old Testament & New Testament) you and I and the whole world are now reading today. (The first Protestant, Martin Luther, an ex-Catholic priest, where do you think he got the Bible from)? If you don’t accept the authority of the Church, then you might as well throw the Bible out in your hands then, because the Bible is a product of Catholic tradition.

Get paid to share your links!

Leading a charismatic worship: Another reason why I appreciate the Mass

Charismatic style of worship or popularly known as a Prayer Meeting, in a nutshell, is basically praising God together with fellow members in a Christian community. Usually it starts with an exhortation from the worship leader (to inspire or bring the congregation into the presence of the Holy Spirit), and then followed by fast and slow worship or gospel songs about 4 or 5 tracks.

It is originally a Protestant style of worship, fairly novel (early 20th century innovation), and still the main, normative and typical type of worship being done in various Protestant denominations in their Sunday services today. However, this is allowable in Catholic settings as well (gained popularity in the 1960's), approved by Popes including Pope Paul VI, Pope St. John Paul II and others (although not to be substituted or replaced for the Mass), and adopted by Catholic Charismatic groups.

I happened to belong to one particular ecumenical Charismatic-based Christian community here in the US. And I am currently one of only 6-7 persons in (roughly) 20+ families in the community that take turns in leading worship every other week.

When it is my time and schedule to lead, I have to prepare myself for the whole thing, usually a week before, sometimes longer. Although it is always a great privilege and a blessing to serve others and also an opportunity to "deny yourself and carry your cross" to share your time and service through leading a worship gathering, personally for me, preparation (and delivery) usually take some work, considering you have other daily concerns to attend to, like family and your day job that I bring home with me.

One of the toughest challenges in preparation for worship is looking for a material to be used for exhortation (of course, it is a given that you pray for wisdom, light and inspiration in everything you will do). After I found and worked on my material, executing and delivering it in front of people is another challenging "predicament." Once exhortation is done, you start your worship songs by cueing the music ministry and lead everyone to praise and worship by singing out loud, raising your hands and all that. During the music part, it is a standard practice that you as a worship leader initiate the community in vocal prayers in between those 4-5 song transitions and this pose a challenge as well. Spontaneity in vocalizing your prayers out loud actually requires a bit of preparation too (sounds oxymoronic) at least for me, and I do get mentally blocked or stumped or dry once in awhile, unfortunately. Even though brothers and sisters in the community generally don't mind if you make mistakes (the beauty of Christian charity and forgiveness at work), but in my sinful and proud nature, I can't help feeling a sense of embarrassment internally as well if I ever do.

These experiences brought me to reflect and see, and came to realize a certain perspective about the elements of the Mass in relation to Worship leading.

"How did our Lord really intend our worship to be?"

As a Catholic, we believe He intends that the highest form of worship is about the HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS as what the Apostles had been doing since the dawn of Christianity. Where prayers makes more sense and fitting if it is liturgical and formulary, rather than in spontaneity. Where the central part of worship is not the sermon or homily (no matter how lively or spiritually inspirational the preacher or pastor's talks are). Because if it is about preaching, worshiping our Lord pretty much hang almost solely on the knowledge, wisdom, talent, personal bible interpretation, current subjective disposition and prayer life of the pastor or speaker or the one leading the worship.

Thankfully, the good news is our Lord knew all too well how we should worship that is, not just more objective and consistent, but also more liberating for the pastor or the one leading. That is, He instituted the Mass in the upper room, where we can worship as one body--universal in scope. Not localized and not subjectively dependent on the preparedness and skill of the preacher. Wherever you are and wherever you go around the world, whichever Catholic church you hop into in every town, you hear the same liturgy, the same Gospel readings, the same rites. Across the globe, you can still know and understand (and participate more effectively and consistently) what is going on in the Mass inspite being celebrated in different languages. No worship service is as Christo-centric as the Holy Mass, wherein it directs yourself (and the one leading the worship, i.e. the priest) to focus on Jesus Christ Himself, and not on the "performance" and "meat" of the sermon of the worship leader and song choices to feed one's soul.

As a worship leader, I find it pretty liberating, indeed. It is liberating as a Catholic to know that preaching and singing songs of praise (though fun or entertaining and uplifting as it is) are not the core of worship, and thus it is more objective and consistent to worship our Lord regardless of how your feelings are or how bored you are at Mass, again simply because you are not subjectively dependent on how good or bad the preacher and the music bands are. And It is also liberating for pastors to know that they don't have to carry all the heavy burdens of preparation and leading week after week to come up with new fresh and inspirational ideas and materials in order to feed the flock spiritually. Giving a great homily or sermon is just icing on a cake, the liturgical Holy Mass worshiping our Almighty God mainly takes care of everything else (prayers of contrition, thanksgiving, supplication, petitions, praise, you name it). It has been for 2,000 years and counting.

Get paid to share your links!