I’d not particularly thought about the difference between ceremony and liturgy before, but I find this helpful.

Liturgies should not be confused with “ceremonies.”  Liturgies are not “events”–one-off bedazzling spectacles rife with ritualistic symbol.  I don’t deny that the Olympic opening ceremonies were an affective, symbolic enactment of a story.  But while that is a necessary aspect of a “liturgy,” it’s not a sufficient criterion.  Liturgies are not just symbolic and ritualistic; they are enacted stories that are (1) repeated and (2) participatory.  The Olympic opening ceremonies–while spectacular and ritualistic and, without question, infused with a story–do not function liturgically because they lack these other aspects.  There is no repetition of any version of the opening ceremonies

Though I suspect the distinction could be overdrawn in some dimensions. Nevertheless a distinction between repeatedness and singularity is useful in highlighting the matters of community and formation. There are, of course similarities and grey areas …

via Fors Clavigera: Why Weigel’s Wrong: On Liturgy and the Olympic Opening Ceremonies.