I've been wondering about reverence. In my church of late there has been a lot of emphasis placed on being reverent while within the sanctuary, I think in response to some damage that had occurred as the result of some children getting carried away during the post-service fellowshipping. I am puzzled, though, by what exactly is meant when we say we need to be reverent in church. Obviously reverence during worship is not something that need to be enforced, as you would not have true worship without it. That being the case, what is it we need to revere? Indeed, what does the word mean and where does the concept come from?
First, let us say that reverence is oriented toward an object. It is always associated with awe or a feeling of respect (as distinguished from ACTS of respect) for something or someone. It is not it itself a religious concept. The Bible uses the Hebrew word ya're both for reverence for God as well as respect for parents and elders.
Secondly, though it is associated with the emotions of awe or respect, it is not an emotion, but rather a response to an emotion. Awe may produce reverence as anger can produce aggression. The embodiment of reverence, as with love (agape) is action - our feelings of respect (ya're) for a leader might be expressed in acts of respect, such as how we address them or in what we might be willing to do for them. Similarly our reverence (ya're) for God is one motivation for acts of worship.
Also, note that, as reverence is object-oriented, it is transferrable to objects associated with the primary object of reverence. For instance, in the Old Testament reverence was given to God's glory, His name, and His sanctuary. It appears self-evident that God's sanctuary is given reverence because of its' association with God himself, just as respect for a king might lend a certain respect to, say, his crown or throne. In both cases, reverence is given not for the sake of the object, but rather to the object for the sake of awe or respect for the Source. In other words, reverence for God's sanctuary is, in reality, a way of having reverence for God Himself.
What actions can we say are reverent? I don't believe there are any prescribed set of correct reverent actions that are externally observable. The actions which have been used historically to show reverence have usually been derived internally with respect to a culture or group, rather than being imposed from without. The object of our reverence might ask us to perform certain actions as an expression of respect. If we do so, it is not the prescribed act itself which is primarily reverent, but our obedience to the desires of that which inspires our reverence. A parent that has his child's respect might ask that child to clean up his room. However, the act of cleaning up is not itself primarily reverential, but the preceding act of will, namely submission to the desire of the parent, is. Submission is one possible reaction to awe or respect, another is love. If this is true, then all of our religious life is based on reverence. We submit to God, we obey him because he is the supreme object of our reverence, because of what and who we know Him to be, and our submission is an act of reverence. We pray and worship for the same reasons - because love is a reverent act, and love demands praise and desires communion.
In what way does our reverence for God affect our behaviour? From the preceding, it would appear that the church worship service itself is, as stated earlier, an expression of reverence. What then is irreverent? In what ways do we show disrespect to God? It seems obvious to me that it is simply by disobedience and lovelessness, and not from any other arbitrarily determined action - and there are many arbitrarily determined actions which will be deemed irreverent by some. For instance, wearing a hat in church is supposedly irreverent. Now I think it unwise to say that at all times and all places that this would have been of no consequence to the issue of reverence. There may well have been a time when reverence, due to the cultural beliefs of the time and place, would have been indicated 'spontaneously' by the removal of a hat. In other words, in some culture it might be that the wearing of a hat in the presence of others indicated arrogance or presumption, or that removal of the article was a cultural sign of submission. I doubt, however, that such is the case now. My cultural surroundings do not give any reverential significance to clothing, outside of issues of modesty and decency. Therefore, though one might judge me irreverent if I wore a hat within the sanctuary, or especially during the service, one would be doing so falsly, because of assuming the same cultural (not moral or Biblical) restraints lie on me as on themselves.
The main danger from misunderstanding this topic is that reverence, when it is transferred to secondary associates, might tend to become disassociated from it's primary source. We then have people behaving toward the church building, the alter rail, or the pulpit as if the objects were, in themselves, the source objects of reverence. This is to flirt with idolotry. How close is the danger is revealed by the hebrew word shachah, which means both worship and reverence. Although reverence for secondarily reverential objects is a natural response, we must not lose sight of the fact that they are not the primary source of our reverence. I might revere the alter of my church, but I revere it through association - it is one specific location where I act out my reverence for God through prayer. However, the alter itself is no more holy, and hence an object or primary reverence, than any tree in the forest. Similarly, I revere the Bible as a means by which I learn about God (nessecitated by my love for Him) and in fact commune with Him. Aside from that, I am no more likely to bow down to that book any more than the Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. I think this distinction is not clear in many minds.
So what are we to do about reverence? First, let us keep clear in our minds the difference between primary and secondary reverence. If we are sufficiently reverent toward God, I think we need not and should not concern ourselves with secondary reverence - it will take care of itself. Secondly, let us be slow to judge. It is obvious that many actions which are commonly held to be reverential may not be so to all. It is possible that the fellowship of the congregation, including the play of its' children (within reason - wanton destruction may not be directly irreverent, but is certainly poor stewardship), might be more inclined toward reverence than an exitting the building in sullen silence, lest we somehow offend God by being merely human. After all, Jesus said merely "Allow the children to come to me". He did not say "if they must come, make sure they come wearing their very best grownup masks, quiet and serious, and I will permit them an audience".
Whom, after all, are we trying to deceive?
