|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: No need to go to church
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I've heard the line 'You don't need to go to church to be a Christian' all my life. It's probably one of the main reasons why so few people do go to church. But I heard the other side the other day, when someone said 'They're not real Christians if they don't go to church, their coals go out'. My reaction to that is ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif) , but I'd be interested to hear what others think. Over to you.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
Ah, to go through life without having to make allowance for other people! I'd never have to meet anyone you didn't immediately like, never have any obligations, never be made to feel uncomfortable or annoyed, never be challenged. I'd never have to be anything but a glorious, sun-kissed solitary island in the world. As for love, companionship, learning from others, being stimulated by the exchange of ideas - let 'em go hang! It's worth the sacrifice, in exchange for being able to go through life doing nothing except what I want to do.
But then, how long would I survive?
And why should what's applicable to life in general not be applicable to life as a Christian?
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
It's like saying you can be a sports fan and never watch a match, a student and never attend lectures, a husband but never make love to your wife.
Why would you want to avoid it?
The Bible says 'let us not give up the habit of meeting together.
In my opinion, the people who say they believe but don't see the need to attend church are entirely missing the point about being in the family of God.
They have made personal faith into private religion and the Bible knows nothing of that.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
The discussion must hinge on the question of the word "need".
At a few junctures in my life, I've taken time out from church. The longest of these was two years, when I undertook a serious examination of my faith. I didn't go to any meetings or take part in communion. I just did a fair bit of reading.
Did I stop being a christian then? I would say not. Was I being a model christian? No. I was being monastic and hermitic (not hermetic!) in a lot of respects.
So in that respect, not going to church did prevent my being a christian. That said, I do not think that it's healthy to stay like in perpetuity. Anyone who shuns the idea of being part of a church altogether is one who I would think needs to seriously re-examine their understanding of the new testament.
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I have not been to church regularly for 18 months now. I am still a Christian. I am in touch with a number of others in a similar position.
Of course it is possible to be a Christian and not go to church. For some of us, it is far easier without the church - not because I don't meet other people, because I do, in all sorts of places and ways. It is easier because I no longer have to pretend and play the church games. I can cope with the people - including the arseholes - but the politics, manipulation and abuse I cannot.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
There are lots of reasons why someone might not be going to church, so it's harsh and self-righteous to say that a non-churchgoer isn't a 'real' Christian. People might also have different ways of 'doing church' that aren't necessarily recognised by everyone else. People go through phases.
However, on a broader level declining rates of churchgoing indicate a gradually decreasing commitment to distinctively Christian doctrines, behaviour and/or values. Church is an environment where the importance of those things is constantly reinforced, especially in the context of a secular society that lacks explicit encouragement in these areas. Without the support of some sort of active Christian community there's less external motivation to continue with them to the same extent.
[ 30. September 2013, 17:20: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
What does it mean to be a Christian, or indeed a "real" Christian? Once you have defined that, we can discuss whether going to church is a necessary part of being a ("real") Christian.
For my part, I would agree with Cyprian: "He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother." And in the ordinary run of things having the Church as mother would imply going to Church regularly, to receive the Word from her, as reading from the gospel and as Eucharist. This does not mean that a hermit cannot have the Church for his mother, too, but this would be an extraordinary case justified by extraordinary circumstance.
Is someone who does not go to Church not a Christian (in my context)? No, just as someone who ignores their worldly mother does not cease to be a son or daughter in a formal sense. But as Cyprian says, they could not have a father - an intact relationship with their father - then either. A son or daughter cannot divide mother against father, if the parent's relationship is sound. In rejecting one, one damages the relationship to the other. So I would say that someone who is avoiding Church is not a "real" Christian in this limited sense: like a son or daughter who has broken off contact with their mother and thereby also hurts their father.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Over 50 years, I have always had periods of not going to church; they have ranged from several weeks to two years. I tend to just allow them really.
But I do eventually feel a need to go back, so then I go back.
It's difficult to explain, I suppose sometimes I feel very introverted, and I don't want anyone around very much. I see both states as equally valuable.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Thyme
Shipmate
# 12360
|
Posted
I didn't become a Christian through going to church. And I haven't stopped being a Christian now I rarely go to church. I still experience the presence of God - Father, Son and Holy Spirit in my life.
After my conversion I thought I ought to go to church and I did my best to fit in. After nearly two decades I felt it was making me ill. So I stopped and have been much healthier and happier ever since.
As a result I have met a lot of other christians who don't go to church, and we make our own christian communities which is church to us. Didn't Jesus say the only qualification is 'where two or three are gathered together'?
I practise my faith in my life outside church, which is where most of us have to live out our faith.
If someone wants to believe that I am not a Real Christian™ that is their problem not mine and I have no interest in the argument.
My spiritual life - my relationship with God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit - has developed beautifully since I gave up church. Sometimes I have to go back for things and I am always grateful that I have left. I have no desire to return to any form of institutional church.
--------------------
The Church in its own bubble has become, at best the guardian of the value system of the nation’s grandparents, and at worst a den of religious anoraks defined by defensiveness, esoteric logic and discrimination. Bishop of Buckingham's blog
Posts: 600 | From: Cloud Cuckoo Land | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I need to go to church to remain a Christian. I can't speak to whether that is true for others. I know that for me, going without Holy Communion for weeks or months on end has been like starvation rations. It was a joy on a recent visit to the mainland to be once more at the full banquet of the Lord. To be without church at all would be to be without even the meagre rations upon which I have subsisted, and I fear I don't have the strength to avoid starvation in such circumstances.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Galilit
Shipmate
# 16470
|
Posted
I spent over 20 years almost totally isolated but felt no less a Christian.
I prayed daily or twice daily on-line with a podcast (first a Benedictine women's order in the US then with Wantage), I was in touch with others of my particular ilk(s) by post and phone and now e-mail and skype, I read books, I was on the mailing list of 2 parish churches (one in my native NZ, one in California), lurked and later boarded the Ship...
All my e-contacts know who I am and I feel deeply connected to them and part of their communities.
If one's solitary Christianity is only because of physical/ geographical factors does that still not count as having a community dimension to my faith?
At what point is any church - even one that goes against all one's theology - better than none?
And if you are not able to understand the language does that still count as going? While I do know someone else in those circumstances and she feels very much a part of her parish community, I don't think I would feel the same way in her situation.
All that said ... "going to church" is better. Sure makes you appreciate the sacraments (well Communion and Confession/Forgiveness); and having a priest/minister to prepare them and a liturgy and a sermon as well. You get sick of writing your own and being self-sufficient no matter how clever you are
--------------------
She who does Her Son's will in all things can rely on me to do Hers.
Posts: 624 | From: a Galilee far, far away | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
.
For my part, I would agree with Cyprian: "He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother."
I'm having trouble understanding that, Ingo. Jesus taught us to pray to God as our Father but he never seemed to encourage this mother analogy, did he? I agree that we should share communion whenever we are gathered, but how often we are expected to gather seems unclear to me. I know I have never received communion with any feeling that it was nourishment coming from a mother figure. Doesn't that image detract from what His body and blood truly are?
For me a "real Christian," is anyone who believes in Christ as his savior. Church is very helpful to me in many ways but my faith is not dependent upon it and if someone finds the whole thing too stressful I wouldn't think he was not a true Christian, his faith may be much stronger than mine.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
S. Bacchus
Shipmate
# 17778
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
It's like saying you can be a sports fan and never watch a match, a student and never attend lectures, a husband but never make love to your wife.
Why would you want to avoid it?
You know, Mudfrog and I could scarcely have more divergent ecclesiological views, but in this instance I think he's totally correct.
I'd also add a line from Brideshead, when Lady Marchmain says 'It needs a very strong faith to stand entirely alone and Sebastian isn't strong'.
--------------------
'It's not that simple. I won't have it to be that simple'.
Posts: 260 | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spiffy
Ship's WonderSheep
# 5267
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I've heard the line 'You don't need to go to church to be a Christian' all my life. It's probably one of the main reasons why so few people do go to church. But I heard the other side the other day, when someone said 'They're not real Christians if they don't go to church, their coals go out'. My reaction to that is , but I'd be interested to hear what others think. Over to you.
Honestly, I think one of the main reasons so few people go to church is they don't want to deal with the judgemental jerkfaces who say crap like 'They're not real Christians if...'
But that's just me.
--------------------
Looking for a simple solution to all life's problems? We are proud to present obstinate denial. Accept no substitute. Accept nothing.
--Night Vale Radio Twitter Account
Posts: 10281 | From: Beervana | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Why would you want to avoid it?
The Bible says 'let us not give up the habit of meeting together.
In my opinion, the people who say they believe but don't see the need to attend church are entirely missing the point about being in the family of God.
They have made personal faith into private religion and the Bible knows nothing of that.
Crap. Utter crap. My faith is not any more personal or private now than it ever was. In fact, it is probably more out and open now than it ever was.
Why would I want to avoid it? Because it is damaging to my faith, my health, my person.
There is nothing in Christianity that requires attendence at or participation in what we currently have as The Church. The church is a HUMAN institution, with all of its human failings, and quite a few that are unique to an institution that believes itself to have a divinely ordained purpose.
There are many people who are faithful devotees of the church and have no Christian faith. There are many who are are Christians who are not in church. For some people, church is a helpful and positive part of their Christian experience, for some people, it is a poisonous part of their past that they are seeking recovery from, and may have hung onto their faith despite this.
Now stop being so fucking churchist.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I'm having trouble understanding that, Ingo. Jesus taught us to pray to God as our Father but he never seemed to encourage this mother analogy, did he? I agree that we should share communion whenever we are gathered, but how often we are expected to gather seems unclear to me. I know I have never received communion with any feeling that it was nourishment coming from a mother figure. Doesn't that image detract from what His body and blood truly are?
First, you could read Cyprian, that's why I included a link to the original text. Second, the exclusive focus on "what Jesus taught us in scripture" is a Protestant attitude of no further interest to me. Third, the birthday of the Church is after Christ ascended, hence He is unlikely to have directly encouraged this or any other analogy for the Church. Fourth, if you believed in sacraments as I do, then you would not consider yourself able to access the body and blood of Christ without that Church. Neither in the sense of here and now, since you need the services of an ordained priest, nor in the sense of history, since you would not know about Christ or be baptised in His name.
Anyway, Cyprian certainly did not intend to equate the Father God with the mother Church in the sense of these two being some kind of "equal beings". That's not the point of this saying at all. Actually, the analogy Cyprian is making is sort of lost in these times full of single parent families. The point is rather that as a child one has mother and father, and one cannot simply focus on the father to the exclusion of the mother. This is ill appropriate to a loving relationship between these parents, and ignores that they both have brought one into being. (Note that while moderns would likely focus on the mother as the "essential" parent, in Cyprian's time the patriarchal family with its focus on the father would make for a better analogy.)
[ 30. September 2013, 20:48: Message edited by: IngoB ]
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
There is the illustration Paul uses about the church being like a body. A body cannot function without all its parts working together. The head cannot say to the foot, I do not need you. Likewise, the hand cannot say to the rest of the body I do not need you. Fact is, we all need each other.
While there are those who say they can be Christian without going to church, I would like to point out that the church cannot do without you. Every Christian has something to contribute to the church. I think it rather selfish to think one can do without the church.
True, as with every institution or human organization, there will be jerks, even hypocrites, but there are also positives people. People who really care for their fellow persons. People who really want to minister to other people. People who really want to grow in the faith.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
While there are those who say they can be Christian without going to church, I would like to point out that the church cannot do without you. Every Christian has something to contribute to the church. I think it rather selfish to think one can do without the church.
I agree with you on this. The individual may have valuable gifts and insights, and the Bible says that the whole church should be able to benefit from these.
Moreover, non-churchgoing Christians still expect the gathered church community to continue to exist and to serve their purposes occasionally. Surveys show that many people feel a certain regret about the decline of churchgoing and Christian influence, but what they want is for other people to become more committed Christians, not themselves! People regret hearing that a church is going to close, even though they wouldn't have attended it themselves. They don't consider that the absence of people like themselves contributes to this sort of thing happening.
It's dawning on me that one reason for consciously going to or being or doing church is simply to ensure that there is a church. The problem with everyone being a Christian in the privacy of their own heads is that that doesn't serve the wider Christian community.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I've heard the line 'You don't need to go to church to be a Christian' all my life. It's probably one of the main reasons why so few people do go to church.
But I like going to church! I might even go if I wasn't a Christian, I like it so much. (Although it would definitely have to be the right sort of church, then.)
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
While there are those who say they can be Christian without going to church, I would like to point out that the church cannot do without you. Every Christian has something to contribute to the church. I think it rather selfish to think one can do without the church.
I agree with you on this. The individual may have valuable gifts and insights, and the Bible says that the whole church should be able to benefit from these.
Moreover, non-churchgoing Christians still expect the gathered church community to continue to exist and to serve their purposes occasionally. Surveys show that many people feel a certain regret about the decline of churchgoing and Christian influence, but what they want is for other people to become more committed Christians, not themselves! People regret hearing that a church is going to close, even though they wouldn't have attended it themselves. They don't consider that the absence of people like themselves contributes to this sort of thing happening.
It's dawning on me that one reason for consciously going to or being or doing church is simply to ensure that there is a church. The problem with everyone being a Christian in the privacy of their own heads is that that doesn't serve the wider Christian community.
What I'm reading, seeing, and hearing is that people are seeking new ways of engaging with the church, and churches are largely failing in helping them with that.
What are churches doing to help people with their individual devotions? Are they open when people want to stop in? Can people from your church name five acts of devotion that are normal practices for your appendage of Christianity?
It seems like most churches just assume that people aren't going to engage in personal acts of devotion outside of worship, and don't bother teaching anything, aside from passing references to unstructured prayer and Bible reading.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I wish that's what I was getting from this, Olaf.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
I wish that's what I was getting from this, Olaf.
I hear ya. I know plenty of people who are probably just being lazy. I have to confess I feel it myself sometimes, especially since my church only has one service at the crack of dawn on Sunday morning (by my reckoning).
I'm afraid pushing the whole "community" point isn't going to work. It's a nice sentiment, but it's a relatively recent phenomenon, said by recent seminarians. Think of baptisms. Nowadays we say "baptism is a communal event" but for much of Christendom the sacrament of initiation took place in private or semi-private circumstances. People haven't just forgotten this fact. The communal rationale can backfire, anyway, and we could simply end up being social clubs.
With so many people saying "spiritual but not religious," I say it's for churches to step up and work with it. What kind of spiritual practices do people undertake? How can the church get a piece of the action? What choice do we have? Guilting people into community sure isn't working.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
What I'm reading, seeing, and hearing is that people are seeking new ways of engaging with the church, and churches are largely failing in helping them with that.
What are churches doing to help people with their individual devotions? Are they open when people want to stop in? Can people from your church name five acts of devotion that are normal practices for your appendage of Christianity?
It seems like most churches just assume that people aren't going to engage in personal acts of devotion outside of worship, and don't bother teaching anything, aside from passing references to unstructured prayer and Bible reading.
I stand by my previous post, but I also have much sympathy with what you're saying here.
As someone who was once an active church member and lay leader but who is currently something of a church wanderer I feel frustrated both by people who criticise from outside but never join in to help, and also frustrated by the churches themselves, by their inflexible structures and their attachment to the status quo.
There's a vicious cycle of people finding church unattractive and then leaving, which means that fewer people are left behind to make the changes that are necessary, to provide the funds to do the work, and to challenge entrenched attitudes among the powerful people who remain, lay and clergy. But decline makes congregations demoralised and inward-looking at the very point when they need to be reaching out and developing a strong vision.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
The fact that not all church-goers truly practice Christian charity is fair enough. But the other side of the matter is that the life of charity is not enough, not so far as the Christian faith believes. Worshiping God is as much an ethical duty as caring for the poor, and love for God means living out that worship with the Church.
I would dare say that hearing services on the Lord's day is our primary ethical duty as Christians. Not our only duty, but the first duty that we are all called to.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
In my opinion, the people who say they believe but don't see the need to attend church are entirely missing the point about being in the family of God.
Define church. Is Salvation Army (with no sacraments) a church? (Didn't it at least originally think itself not a church?) Are Quakers (with no clergy) a church? How about a group that meets in a rented store front instead of a building with a steeple or bell tower? Or that meets regularly to worship God in a private house (lots cheaper than renting a location, for a small group)?
I think a lot of people have too narrow a definition of what constitutes "gathering together." A lot of people I know who don't attend church in the formal sense, do intentionally gather with other Christians.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
I go to Church for the sense of fellowship and community, to see my friends and catch up with everyone.
I can worship God anywhere (in fact I struggle to worship God in Church). I much prefer to worship alone as I am odd, loud, exuberant and dance a lot. So if I'm alone I don't have to worry about what other people think. I keep still and quiet like everyone else in Church.
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ophicleide16
Shipmate
# 16344
|
Posted
Just to throw it in here- imo when people dismiss churchgoing (and it usually is terribly dismissive) as unecessary for some kind of spiritual authenticity, what they really mean is 'any of that praying stuff.'
That is, it would probably never occur to them that reading, meditation and other practices might play a part in someone's life outside of the church. To them, being a good christian means being nice to people at only a surface level.
Posts: 79 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Drifting Star
Drifting against the wind
# 12799
|
Posted
I think that's highly unlikely for the people on here. Most of the people here who are saying that they don't go to church are people who have been hurt or damaged by the church in some way. You only need to read through this thread to see that. Equally, the fact that they are here, on this Christian website (oh yes it is) means that they are fully aware "that reading, meditation and other practices might play a part in someone's life outside of the church".
Dismissive is the very last thing they are. Those who dismiss their experiences, however, are a large part of the church's problem.
Personally I would say that I have in the past had to stop going to church in order to remain a Christian.
--------------------
The soul is dyed the color of its thoughts. Heraclitus
Posts: 3126 | From: A thin place. | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I would dare say that hearing services on the Lord's day is our primary ethical duty as Christians. Not our only duty, but the first duty that we are all called to.
'Hearing services' - what an odd phrase! And IMO what an odd thing to consider our primary duty as Christians. Not loving God and neighbour, not offering our whole lives to God as a life-long act of worship to Him?
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I think a lot of people have too narrow a definition of what constitutes "gathering together." A lot of people I know who don't attend church in the formal sense, do intentionally gather with other Christians.
Hear, hear. Referring back to the OP, I think for most people our coals do go out to an extent if we are trying to follow Jesus on our own. It takes a lot of self-discipline to keep going even through the low, dry spells, without people alongside to pick you up and spur you on.
However, I agree 100% with Belle Ringer that many people's 'gathering together' with fellow Christians might, unfairly IMO, not be considered as an authentic expression of 'going to church'.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I think a lot of people have too narrow a definition of what constitutes "gathering together." A lot of people I know who don't attend church in the formal sense, do intentionally gather with other Christians.
Like here on the Ship, for example.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Two-Owls
Shipmate
# 9680
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Drifting Star:
Personally I would say that I have in the past had to stop going to church in order to remain a Christian.
Spot on Drifting Star. Deep down I am and will always remain a Christian but I have never been comfortable in a church. I left the Catholic Church as soon as I could and I suppose that has coloured my subsequent interactions with protestant churches but if you have to be a regular member of a church in order to be a Christian then I suppose there is no place in Christianity for me.
Posts: 1262 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Reading some of the disparaging and dismissive comments being made by some here about those who do not attend church would be enough, I'd think, to confirm in those people that they've made the right decision.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Reading some of the disparaging and dismissive comments being made by some here about those who do not attend church would be enough, I'd think, to confirm in those people that they've made the right decision.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Karl
As I said, there are plenty of reasons not to go to church (whatever we mean by 'church'), including the inadequacy of churchgoers, but that doesn't mean it's unproblematic, if not for the individual then for the religion as a whole.
I think we should go back to the days when people who disapproved of other people's churches started their own. I wonder when that stopped happening? The suburbs have Fresh Expressions and the inner city has African Pentecostal churches. But there seems to be a gap in the market somehow.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
The silly thing is that now, more than any time in the past, people who feel like that ARE able to influence churches and produce the sort of place that they would want to worship in. Congregational numbers are going down and churches are desperate for people to volunteer to go on the PCC. Churches are open to people with energy creating and resourcing 'Fresh Expressions' of church in their communities. But what do they do instead of that? They leave. So the church carries on in the same old way with even fewer people.
I don't understand it. Perhaps people just prefer whinging than actually staying to do the hard work to set it all up. Perhaps they are afraid that, if they do so, they will fail. So it is easier to whinge and stay away.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think we should go back to the days when people who disapproved of other people's churches started their own. I wonder when that stopped happening? The suburbs have Fresh Expressions and the inner city has African Pentecostal churches. But there seems to be a gap in the market somehow.
So you're advocating schism as a solution to the problem of church attendance? Nice.
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
So you're advocating schism as a solution to the problem of church attendance? Nice.
ISTM it's only schism if you think of unity in institutional terms (which I don't, and I guess SvitlanaV2 doesn't either).
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think we should go back to the days when people who disapproved of other people's churches started their own. I wonder when that stopped happening? The suburbs have Fresh Expressions and the inner city has African Pentecostal churches. But there seems to be a gap in the market somehow.
So you're advocating schism as a solution to the problem of church attendance? Nice.
In the past schism was often (though not always) a factor in increasing church attendance and involvement. It tends to suggest that people are engaged in and invigorated by theology and church life, rather than feeling bored and demoralised by those things, which is usually the case today.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Why would you want to avoid it?
The Bible says 'let us not give up the habit of meeting together.
In my opinion, the people who say they believe but don't see the need to attend church are entirely missing the point about being in the family of God.
They have made personal faith into private religion and the Bible knows nothing of that.
Crap. Utter crap. My faith is not any more personal or private now than it ever was. In fact, it is probably more out and open now than it ever was.
Why would I want to avoid it? Because it is damaging to my faith, my health, my person.
There is nothing in Christianity that requires attendence at or participation in what we currently have as The Church. The church is a HUMAN institution, with all of its human failings, and quite a few that are unique to an institution that believes itself to have a divinely ordained purpose.
There are many people who are faithful devotees of the church and have no Christian faith. There are many who are are Christians who are not in church. For some people, church is a helpful and positive part of their Christian experience, for some people, it is a poisonous part of their past that they are seeking recovery from, and may have hung onto their faith despite this.
Now stop being so fucking churchist.
I don't understand this, genuinely. I can understand that you have this reaction to a particular, or even several institutions labelled church. I do too, to be honest.
But do you mean to reject altogether the corporate aspect of the Christian faith, the "one another" side of stuff? And if not, are you doing that some other way? And isn't that, to some extent, church?
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
Ideally, a Christian would be worshipping regularly alongside other Christians and be actively involved in a church community. (There's lots in the Bible about the need to be involved in a church community. I suspect that any discussion about what is meant by "a church community" could go on for some time ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ). It’s harder to be a Christian on your own – with no one to chew the fat with, give you encouragement and hold you accountable. But life isn’t always ideal.
Some people’s experience of church is so negative that they really don’t want to repeat it, others just don’t do community well.
One reason that no one seems to have mentioned yet is that not every Christian is a Nine to Five-er. Some people work on Sunday’s so can’t make a morning or evening service! We have a few of them at our place and although Rev T holds a regular evening group and contacts them regularly to see if they’re okay, that only does so much!
Tubbs
[ 01. October 2013, 13:54: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Desert Daughter
Shipmate
# 13635
|
Posted
One important point is that there is no "blueprint" lifestyle for being a Christian, to be followed by every one. Most of the people on this board appear to be generally happy with other peoples' presence (if not company) and appear to have some need to be acknowledged by, and exchange with, others. Which is nice.
But some of us (admittedly a small minority, but heck, don't we live in a minority-embracing age??) are not like that. We do not like the presence of others. We prefer to be alone. We do not take our self-identity from belonging to a group. We do not like to "participate", "share", "join", or whatever other happy-verb neo-church-talk loves to throw at us.
For some of us, attending church is an ordeal. This has nothing to do with the importance we give or do not give to what in some Churches is referred to as the Eucharist. It has everything to do with other people. They just drain our energies, they are uninspiring, and they actually distract us from praying.
I am not saying we are ideal. I am not saying everybody should be like us. But we exist, and there is nothing sinister about us. We do pray for others, we do charitable acts, we do think a lot about our contribution to making the world a better place. We just prefer to be alone. That's when we are the best we can be.
--------------------
"Prayer is the rejection of concepts." (Evagrius Ponticus)
Posts: 733 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
It's difficult - I value weekly Eucharist, but my depression-anxiety makes it difficult sometimes to make church. As has been said upthread, making a Sunday morning service is difficult for a lot of people for outside reasons - working on Sundays, separated or divorced parents having their kids on Sundays and church isn't exactly a fun activity etc. And you know, church is boring for a lot of people. Turning Sunday into (effectively) another day of work for which you don't even get paid is not going to attract anyone.
If it's difficult for me to get to church and I'm one of those people who naturally like church, it's even more difficult for those who don't naturally like church but nonetheless are very much Christians.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
Tubbs has a good point. Walmart is the number one employer in the US and Sunday is its busiest day so that alone accounts for lots of people who couldn't go to church if they wanted to.
Then there are the people who do have Sunday off but have been working ten hour days all week and are just plan exhausted on Sunday.
When I hear of churches desperately planning to change, I wonder if its really going to help.
I left a church that was all about "fellowship," for a Lutheran church that, to me, was more focused on worship. I wanted their sacraments, formal prayers and readings, and less music and audience participation. Like St. Paul, I was tired of hearing the same women stand up and talk at length, every Sunday, about their numerous praises and prayer concerns. I was tired of the service being dominated with music from the band, consisting of about a quarter of the church's members. Anyone who ever played drums, bass, horn, keyboard or guitar in a 1970's garage band was now at the front of church satisfying their rock star dreams. I know that sounds mean. I actually think that's all fine for them. They love it and look forward to Sunday's where they can share their gifts. Good for them. I just became tired of being their audience and wanted to focus less on them and more on my own struggles to connect with God.
Consequently, I think we need all our denominations because we want such different things from church. I just don't think any church needs to force change based on what they think will bring in the Christians at home. All the people I know who say they are "spiritual not religious," just mean that they get a thrill when they look at a sunset but don't bother them on Sunday morning. Those who say they are Christian but don't like church usually have had bad experiences in church and attendance actually harms their faith. How can we tell them they must go?
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
And don't forget to think of Introverts Я Us. We might like to sit in our solitary cell/bedroom/mother's basement, but that doesn't mean that we are not plugged in to God's great glory.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
Olaf
The church has always been about community. It is not a new phenomenon. Baptism is initiation into the community. Confirmation is learning the basic doctrines of the community. The Eucharist is a communal meal that you not only share with those you worship with, but also with all Christians world wide and past, present, and future.'
This individualism is a relatively new happening. It comes from mostly Western European and American cultures, but it is not seen in Eastern European Russian and Asian cultures as much. I would refer you to the recent discussion on baptism. Many of the individualists, though not all, were arguing for an individual believer's baptism, while the communalists were arguing pointed out the whole households were baptized when the head of the family came to faith. Individualism started out with the raise of the anabaptist movement, but communalism was there from the beginning of the church. That is what ecclesia means: an assembly of like minded people (originally referred to a political party but assumed by the body of Christ).
From my own personal experience I can tell that things do not go right for me spiritually when I detach myself from the body of Christ. It is when I cling to the body I find comfort and peace.
Actually, the communal nature of the church is the counter cultural balance to the Western ideal of individualism.
[ 01. October 2013, 13:02: Message edited by: Gramps49 ]
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
'Hearing services' - what an odd phrase! And IMO what an odd thing to consider our primary duty as Christians. Not loving God and neighbour, not offering our whole lives to God as a life-long act of worship to Him?
I only specifically said that going to church followed from our duty to worship God, and was not our only duty as Christians. Maybe give reading a go before responding? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
It’s harder to be a Christian on your own – with no one to chew the fat with, give you encouragement and hold you accountable.
Agree, and the problem with formal church is - none of that happens, or rarely.
Formal church is inherently impersonal. Be quiet and do as you are told - sit through someone else's selection of music, prayers with generalized wording, a sermon on a topic that may have nothing to do with you, go to coffee where everyone is doing small talk or rounding up a crew to paint the Sunday school room (and the painting crew chatter is the football game), go home.
The "chew the fat, give you encouragement, hold you accountable" takes place entirely outside the formal church, in my experience. It's in the house gatherings, in the lunch meetings with a few trusted Christian friends, in the long telephone call conversations and prayer about our own current joys and needs.
If "chew the fat, give you encouragement, hold you accountable" has anything to do with what church should be about, people who skip the formal thing and have regular prayer times and regular meetings with one or a few other Christians may be "going to church" as much or more than those who attend the formal weekly event.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Formal church is inherently impersonal. Be quiet and do as you are told - sit through someone else's selection of music, prayers with generalized wording, a sermon
Perfect! And the popularity of Cathedrals would imply there is a particular personality type which prefers this approach. It's churches which interfere too much in people's personal lives which is offputting to the more introverted types.
For the very individualised, though, one of the worst things is that churches are often closed during the week. If at all possible, they need to be kept open so people who can't cope with corporal worship still have a spiritual space to go for a time of quiet and refreshment.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
now, more than any time in the past, people who feel like that ARE able to influence churches and produce the sort of place that they would want to worship in. Congregational numbers are going down and churches are desperate for people to volunteer to go on the PCC.
Depends on the church. Some are run by an in-group who have a specific image in mind of what their church should be (cling to being, return to being), and newcomers (or oldtimers) who want to do anything not consistent with that image are not allowed influence.
If you are single in a church that identifies as a family church, or a career women when the controlling in-group believe all women should stay home (like they did), if you want to start a Bible study in a church that has none but they believe only clergy can teach Bible, or you would like a few hymns in the mix but the chief clergy person believes exclusively modern worship music is essential to attract younger people to come visit and join, or etc - if you don't fit the existing self-image, doesn't matter how active you are or on how many committees, your voice will be ignored.
And in some churches what matters most is whether you grew up in that town and they've known you all their lives, or are you a stranger, not "one of us." A friend said he was in his church 5 years, on committees, in choir, on PCC, but any suggestion he made was not even responded to, as if he was the wind. Church consultant Lyle Schaller wrote a book about that kind of church, functionally closed to newcmers, which is common in small town USA (and in some city churches too).
A web page sums up the book, including good aspects of a small church, but this including this important part: quote:
Once people have as many ties as they want or can handle, they may remain congenial to newcomers, but will offer them only superficial friendliness. Such churches become "closed."
This may explain Schaller's frequent claims that it is harder for older churches (measured by the average number of years members have attended the church) to add new members. In "older" churches, most members already have many close ties within the church....
summary of The Small Church Is Different
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
