|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: What on earth (or elsewhere) is the point of church?
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
The "man-friendly Christmas" thread in the nether regions of this fine vessel have made me wonder about this question.
I suspect that it has many strands, and is probably not resolvable this side of eternity.
The first question is whether its existence is strictly mandated in the New Testament. This seems to be taken as a given, particularly by evangelicals, but I see it as growing out of the ministry described in the Epistles and Acts of the Apostles, rather than being an absolute linear continuation of it, or being a response to a direct command of Christ. This, for me, makes the church more provisional in a very helpful fashion, because underlines the pointlessness of excessive focus on being like the first-century church, which I'm not sure even existed in a form with direct comparability to life as a Christian now or throughout 95% of Christian history. We need to be informed by the first-century church, as by the rest of Christian history. It is not helpful or productive to be held to ransom to it.
The choice of a particular church is another question. In a consumerist world, it appears to equate to brand and to brand loyalty. At very least, it expresses identity on a collective and an individual level. Ego therefore becomes involved, and makes this membership as much about the members themselves as about the church/denomination or God. At times, God can become irrelevant, as demonstrated by some within the Sea of Faith movement, and by the experiments in secular "church" gatherings.
So, what are we part of and why? Does it have a purely spiritual function, a social one, both, neither? Why do we feel moved as part of our expression of being Christians to be part of such a thing/things?
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sandemaniac
Shipmate
# 12829
|
Posted
Well, the building is a handy place to hang bells to keep the ringers busy...
AG
--------------------
"It becomes soon pleasantly apparent that change-ringing is by no means merely an excuse for beer" Charles Dickens gets it wrong, 1869
Posts: 3574 | From: The wardrobe of my soul | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
I think it was Geza Vermes who said something along the lines of, Jesus proclaimed the immanent arrival of the Kingdom of God but what arrived was the Church. I've always rather liked that statement. In truth I think I hold more to Moltmann's theology which would also assert that Vermes statement to be true but that the church is a symbol of the breaking in of that kingdom. So yes, it has a social, political and spiritual function.
[ 11. December 2015, 12:35: Message edited by: fletcher christian ]
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I think it was Geza Vermes who said something along the lines of, Jesus proclaimed the immanent arrival of the Kingdom of God but what arrived was the Church.
According to Wikipédia it was French theologian Alfred Loisy: quote:
« Jésus annonçait le Royaume, et c'est l'Église qui est venue »
"Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom, but what we ended up with was the Church".
I had it as my sig. for a while.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Having got that out of the way, here are a couple more thoughts.
- It's important to distinguish between a local gathering of believers and the Church Universal - a distinction that gets blurred in millenial-leadning groups, as I can attest.
- Jesus promised to build the Church and enjoined us to seek the Kingdom. Often, people seem to attempt to build the Church themselves and assume Jesus will bring the Kingdom, which is exactly the wrong way round.
- When the above happens, churches and other Christian agencies get bloated with layers of organisation, administration, and power, and suck in resources. They become an end in themselves. My working illustration for this is "Church as Disneyland".
- My working vision of the local church is, not Disneyland but a service station/rest area: somewhere for believers to stop off and be resourced before heading off on their journey in the world.
- Having tried both resource-intensive and virtually-no-resources-at-all ways of church planting, I can assert on the basis of experience that "God made it grow".
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
One thing I like about churches is that they have no point. Of course, you can adduce plenty of points about them, but still, I recall the space and emptiness in the eucharist, where purposes and causes melt away. But maybe this is idiosyncratic.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Euty:
quote:
According to Wikipédia it was French theologian Alfred Loisy:
quote:
« Jésus annonçait le Royaume, et c'est l'Église qui est venue »
"Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom, but what we ended up with was the Church".
I had it as my sig. for a while.
Thank you.
You spiked my interest in locating this because I knew I hadn't read it in Loisy and found I had read it in E P Sanders (Christianity and Judaism, P91) and not Vermes (apologies). The exact quote is; " Jesus proclaimed the coming of the kingdom, but it was the church that arrived." Loisy is a good bit before Sanders; naughty plagiarist!
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
The choice of a particular church is another question. In a consumerist world, it appears to equate to brand and to brand loyalty.
I think it's actually the same question surely? Now, there's John Stuart Mill's point of course that if he'd been born in the Ottoman empire he'd be expected to be a Muslim, but as he's English he's expected to be CofE, but in the days where deciding to go in the first place is more of a considered decision I'd be surprised if it wasn't a bit more theologically grounded than brand loyalty.
If you have a high view of the sacraments, then of course church exists to receive the sacraments. Evelyn Waugh, deeply backwoods traddie that he was, was by no means alone in his view that the church exists to enable the sacrifice of the mass - everything else, social teaching, charity, is just peripherals.
Alternatively, the Puritans were rather keen on getting together to pray, others want to be "spiritually recharged", etc.
I'm not sure where the ego comes into it beyond having to sign up to something presented to you by one church or other. Ever since there ceased to be one church to sign up to or not (obviously some think there still is, including at least 2 of the churches themselves...) there has had to be an element of ego insofar as a decision is arrived at that one or other is "right."
I think that goes for many things in life though. Ego is surely more important if you're either starting your own (hello L Ron Hubbard), or in a position to be actively proselytising for whichever one it is that you're a member of - "join US, not THEM, because..."
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
To put this in software-development terms, I would say that "the church" is one implementation of Christianity but not the only possible one.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Felafool
Shipmate
# 270
|
Posted
HCH said
quote:
To put this in software-development terms, I would say that "the church" is one implementation of Christianity but not the only possible one.
I think it might be a more basic level, as in the binary system that underlies all other software - everything is coded using '1' or '0'. A very loose and unsatisfying analogy would be that 'the church' is like that, people are either in it or not in it, in Christ or nor in Christ.
At a different level, you can belong/participate/avoid any of the manifestations of the institution, but you may or may not be in 'the church'?
Going back to the OP, if 'the church' has any use, is it perhaps to be the body of Christ on earth, filled with his spirit, and continuing his ministry of declaring, demonstrating and welcoming the Kingdom of God on earth?
--------------------
I don't care if the glass is half full or half empty - I ordered a cheeseburger.
Posts: 265 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
God wants us to co-operate with each other and with God as we worship and as we serve. This has been made clear in every possible way in the scriptures, and is apparent in the teachings of Jesus and in the way the early churches formed and grew.
Love cannot operate alone.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
The purpose of the church is to prepare us for the Kingdom. To be both its agents and its recipients.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
The Church is the Body Of Christ through which he continues His work on earth. We do the local church thing because none of us is big enough to be the Body of Christ alone. (It's a slightly different matter when God providentially puts us in a situation of being alone; then He promises us what we need)
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
Many of the replies so far seem to me to set out what the church aspires to do, but I'd like to take them to pieces.
This will inevitably be offensive to some, but again I think there is something worthy of comment in that very offence. It arises, to my mind, from a very strong identification between a church and its members. We feel like part of the kingdom by being part of the church.
To my mind, and from my experience, the real problem with this comes from the fact that the church thinks it already is the kingdom, rather than being in search of it, or a stage in its building. This can make the church excessively self-satisfied and resistant to any kind of criticism or challenge to change, and therefore all too frequently to the holy spirit.
There's another aspect to this question which I'd like to raise. Is the church only the Church as body of Christ at the local level? Or at the universal level? Can one be an authentic part of the body of Christ without being part of an ecclesiastical body with a definite view of the wider picture?
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
To my mind, and from my experience, the real problem with this comes from the fact that the church thinks it already is the kingdom, rather than being in search of it, or a stage in its building. This can make the church excessively self-satisfied and resistant to any kind of criticism or challenge to change, and therefore all too frequently to the Holy Spirit
Wise words with which I agree. The Church has got an identity crisis on it's hands which began way back in the last Century. It does still provide a function for some, whether any one will notice or care if that function continues to decline looks debatable.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
To my mind, and from my experience, the real problem with this comes from the fact that the church thinks it already is the kingdom, rather than being in search of it, or a stage in its building. This can make the church excessively self-satisfied and resistant to any kind of criticism or challenge to change, and therefore all too frequently to the holy spirit.
That's interesting, I think the exact opposite. Most of the problems exist because we don't recognise the kingdom is here.
quote:
There's another aspect to this question which I'd like to raise. Is the church only the Church as body of Christ at the local level? Or at the universal level? Can one be an authentic part of the body of Christ without being part of an ecclesiastical body with a definite view of the wider picture?
Yes, I don't accept any institutions claims to have any kind of monopoly on truth or in being the one true holy church of Christ. Stated or unstated.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I don't think that evangelicals in particular take 'church' as a given ... if anything, evangelicals have often been accused of having a 'low ecclesiology' ... although in practice I think it's true that they do put a lot of emphasis on the communal aspect - particularly at a local level.
Rather, as has been pointed out, there are those around with a far more 'developed' ecclesiology - even if that isn't worked out on the ground in as close-knit a fellowship sense as is often the case among evangelicals.
One of the issues I have with threads like this - and I'm not accusing Thunderbunk of doing anything wrong - is that it can too easily focus on 'church' as 'them' and not 'us' ... as if somehow all the ills and foibles of churches as institutions are somebody else's 'fault' and nothing to do with us ...
If we didn't have Church (Big C) or churches - with small c's - what would we have instead? We'd have groups of people making similar mistakes only not recognising the fact themselves ...
Or else we'd end up with people in glorious isolation with a tendency to think that they've 'arrived' or are too mature / spiritual / wise [delete as appropriate] to bother with those nasty, compromised institutions we call churches ...
I'm not sure that any Church or church - Big C or small c - that I'm aware of thinks that it's 'arrived' or somehow 'IS' the Kingdom ... that's certainly not in any of their official teachings as far as I'm aware ...
From what I can gather, all Christian traditions - to some extent or other - believe the Kingdom to be bigger than the Church and see the Church as the Kingdom's agent and representative - alongside others which may operate beyond its own boundaries ...
That seems to apply - in different ways of course - whichever Tradition (Big T) or tradition (small t) we belong to - or even if we imagine ourselves somehow to be gloriously cut-loose from T/traditions and somehow not beholden to them - which is, of course, an impossibility - and not a viewpoint I see expressed here.
I'd say there was plenty of point to the Church (and churches) but they are by no means the only agency through which the Almighty 'works' as it were ...
There are equal and opposite emphases to avoid ... to be so fixated with churchy things that we do little else - or else we set so little store by the corporate element that we head off as lone-wolfs enjoying the sound of our own howls.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
Just to explain, I'm currently returning to this topic because I find myself forcibly but not entirely unexpectedly between churches, and am looking at what I am trying to achieve by being part of such a thing. So, at the moment, I'm kind of between first and third persons in this connection.
I'm also trying to tease out the effects of the different ways in which the word "church" can be interpreted.
Yes, the focus on evangelicals may be misleading, or indeed flat wrong - having been worshipping in anglo catholic circles for the last 20 years, I may simply have become too used to that version of near-ecclesiolatry to notice it, whereas I find it all too easy to detect that "this is what the bible says people did at the time it is talking about, therefore this must be exactly and directly what the church does now in order to have anything to do with Jesus" school of evangelical expression.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sorry to double-post, but while I think on't ...
An Anglican vicar once half-jokingly (half admiringly) observed to me of his local RC church that it reminded him of a 'filling station' - people stopped by to 'top up with Mass' on a Saturday or Sunday then skedaddled to get on with the rest of their lives ...
I quite like Eutychus's idea of the church as some kind of 'service station' along life's journey - a weekly 'equipping' as it were ... but wonder what form this can and should take ...
I mean, it's unlikely that everything that's offered at a particular gathering or service - of whatever style or stripe - is going to meet everyone's 'needs' or scratch where everyone itches ...
What are churches supposed to 'do' to equip people or empower them for the rest of the week?
If you spent one meeting/service, say, talking about work-place issues how does that help the retired couple or the old lady with Alzheimer's?
Surely it's as much about what we 'bring' as what we take away?
I read something the other day that gave me pause. An Anglican writer contributing a piece about Anglican worship for an old-ish second-hand book I have about various traditions/styles of worship, observed that Anglican worship - as originally conceived in the 16th century - had never really 'worked' insofar that most Anglicans went in for Sunday observance only, as it were, rather than following the pattern of daily offices of morning and evening prayer throughout the week.
That only 'worked', the writer suggested, in a college or other institutional context ... it didn't really work out in conventional parish life.
I can only speak as I find and whilst I do try to follow some form of daily office I find myself with some 'disconnect' whenever I attend a service that doesn't 'fit' with that overall pattern and which ignores the lectionary readings or the calendar for that particular time ...
Obviously, that's only going to be a problem for people like me - but I'm sure there are parallel issues with those who don't follow a set pattern of that kind.
I can't remember whether it was here or elsewhere but an Orthodox person once observed that church was like a gym - we didn't 'enjoy' it necessarily - it's not 'Disneyland' in the entertainment sense - but it did us good ... a hospital for the soul and so on ...
I'm not sure I 'enjoy' motorway service stations - although they have improved in recent years - but they're handy places to have a pee and grab a coffee.
The analogy surely only applies if we know what we're going to get - fruit machines (if we want them) one of those chair machines that give you a back massage (should you so wish), a newsagents/sweetie shop, a loo, a Costa or another coffee outlet ... a set of picnic tables overlooking the hard-shoulder ...
With the more sacramental traditions the round of services and prayer trundles along - it's happening round the clock in monasteries and so on as well as parish churches and cathedrals - you can dip in and out - take what you need.
With the newer or less formally sacramental traditions then you're setting out your stall differently each week - or imagining that you are ...
I'm not saying one is right and t'other is wrong, but there's a limit to what you can do for a few hours on a Sunday morning. However you cut it.
The bigger issue, surely, is how the Church/churches are expressing Christ throughout the week - in people's work-places, homes, schools, businesses etc etc.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Fair do's ThunderBunk ... I can understand this ...
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
Just to explain, I'm currently returning to this topic because I find myself forcibly but not entirely unexpectedly between churches, and am looking at what I am trying to achieve by being part of such a thing. So, at the moment, I'm kind of between first and third persons in this connection.
I'm still involved - just about - with my evangelical Anglican parish but do visit the liberal-catholic one here from time to time, as well as churches of other traditions ...
I'm not at all clear what I am 'achieving' or not achieving through my involvement - although they're grateful for the work I do on the church magazine and for my leading the prayers/intercessions about once every 5 or 6 weeks.
I've no idea what the answer is. I've not hung around Anglo-Catholic churches that much - I've probably got more contact with RCs and Orthodox than Anglo-Catholics ... so I can't comment on that. Some of them seem overly obsessed with rubrics, tat and doing things 'properly' ... I visited an AC parish in South Wales in the summer and it seemed to be run with military precision ... the incumbent was on holiday and everyone seemed to be breathing a huge sigh of relief ...
Evangelicals, in my experience (that's been my background) are equally obsessive but in different ways ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
Again "trying to achieve" is a limited account of what I'm thinking about - just a shortcut really to expressing what I actually mean.
What I mean is something like this:
- At what level does the church exist - individual congregations? Denominational structures? The church universal? All/none of these?
- What is the church's account of its members and how they play a part in its life?
- What is my presence is doing/saying to me?
- What I am doing/saying to other people by being there?
- How does all of this relate to what I do outside the church - both in terms of secular employment and my personal devotions and other things I am starting to do?
To engage with what you are saying, I can theoretically see the point of the "filling station" but as an experience I find it utterly repellent and alienating. It lacks any sense of gathering, which to me is essential to worship. Church is not a spiritual utility; it's an expression of faith, an engagement with God, and God is not to be delegated to priests, being far too precious for that.
Having said that, liturgy for me is vital to the way I live and express my faith. I find the structure hugely helpful both in expressing collectively something that otherwise only finds internal, intangible expression and in providing a structure through which things which don't see daylight otherwise can do so, as other things are held "out of the way".
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tortuf
Ship's fisherman
# 3784
|
Posted
In societies where people no longer live their lives in a fixed location churches are a place to encounter, or create, a community.
A church is where people who have not spent a lot of time thinking about what their God calls them to do can hear from people who have spent that time.
A church is a place to make contemplation of God intentional and focused.
A church is a place where people gathered together can accomplish good in ways that individuals cannot; carrying out - however imperfectly - the command of Jesus to "follow me."
Are churches always like that? They are gatherings of us imperfect humans. So, no.
On the other hand, so what?
I have come to the conclusion that we get closer to God as we realize our own imperfection. Not because being imperfect is a way to excuse bad things, but because we are less apt to build barriers between ourselves and God.
So, our churches are imperfect. We are imperfect and that is how we are created by God. Churches can be a unique experiment in a group experience of being OK with our imperfection and a concurrent realization that God loves us just as we are.
That is not going to be accomplished by scholastic discussion. It may not be accomplished by the time the Earth disappears in a giant explosion caused by an expanding Sun. It can be started by humble people acting out their faith in a church of their choice and letting others see how good that can be.
Jesus didn't say "Be perfect for me." Jesus didn't say "Come up with a set of rules by which you can judge your performance as well as the performance of others." Jesus said "Follow me." That is enough.
Posts: 6963 | From: The Venice of the South | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
All good questions and observations - none of which deserve trite answers - but it's hard not to sound trite when trying to engage with them ...
When we're dealing with God, the meaning of life, the universe and everything then whatever we do or don't do, what 'church' has to 'offer' or doesn't 'have to offer' ... is going to sound pretty trivial ...
I don't think Eutychus's 'service station not Disneyland' model - or ideal - obviates the communal aspect ... what he's saying is that churches are not the destination in and of themselves, but rather like an inn or an oasis - if we want to use an old travelling analogy rather than the rather anonymous one of a petrol filling station or motorway cafe ... they are there to help us on our journey.
I s'pose the answer to the question whether the church 'exists' or can be perceived boils down to the thing about those 'born of the Spirit' being like the wind - you can't 'see' the wind but you can feel its effects ... so it is with the divine agency of the Kingdom - through the Church and elsewhere ...
I'm not sure that sacerdotal/sacramental traditions are 'saying' that the divine afflatus etc is the sole preserve of priests ... although what has certainly happened is that the 'God-stuff' tends to be left to the 'professionals' in the popular imagination - if we can still talk about such a thing.
It's often said about people around here that they are not against religion - provided someone else is doing it ...
On one level, I don't think you're going to find the answers to your questions - because not only is all this 'too precious' to leave with priests - as you put it - but it's also too precious and too profound to admit of easy answers.
What 'good' did it do hermits (or anyone else) for the Desert Fathers to do what they did?
How can anyone - a monk in a cell, a youth worker on a housing estate, someone house-bound through age or illness - ultimately 'know' whether what they are doing has any 'value' as such?
How your experience of church - or lack of it at the moment - relates to your work, your domestic life, your spiritual life/devotions isn't anything that any of us can answer nor prescribe - and I'm not sure it 'admits' of any definitive answers you might come up with in your own exploration.
Yet there's always the exploration. There's always 'the journey' to use a trite cliche.
I find myself identifying with aspects of what you say - the liturgical dimension, for instance. But for that structure to be in place there needs to be some kind of gathering or community aspect - unless one were to work one's way through a daily office in splendid isolation.
All of which is a round-about way of saying, 'I have absolutely no idea ...'
However, we might see through a glass-darkly, but we still 'see' ...
Whatever our experience of Church or churches has been, we 'see' something ... surely?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
A place where 1% of the village focusses 1% of the time.
Where it takes an eternity to 'this do in remembrance' of Him. Waugh was right. But more is less.
New Year's 4 years ago my new final wife and I had two village churches ALL to ourselves. I tear up remembering it. Sublime. I LOVE empty churches.
Where grandiose things are declared in song and prayer and preaching.
I like the Peace. And the 'fellowship' afterwards.
Monday night, home group. Often good. When me missus comes. Church is increasingly meaningless to her, she has no sense of 'duty', which is not a criticism. I do. Which is a hollow thing. Habit. Custom.
1st Tuesday in the month, men's group. Starts too early. Good when I can make it. Men's talk!
Last Saturday in the month, men's breakfast, NOW you're talking! I do the best. BLACK PUDDIN'! Awesome speaker last time. A former terrorist. The plot to kidnap Blair's children was taking too long. The one to blow him up in a suicide attack would have worked just fine.
Friday night. The homeless and vulnerably housed. Where I met my friend Peter. Who I AM church to. And my wife. The God slot is SUCH a challenge. I missed it last night. Summoned home by the missus. And I did miss it. The challenge of being inclusive where utter twaddle is being said. Which I'm working out on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday too ...
Here. This is church. For me.
Two thousand years of most dubious battle. 30 years of cultic cul-de-sac. And now this mediocrity, enlivened by the emergent and Francis' first year or so, but fading back to full un-blown mediocrity.
Which I MUST remember to thank God for.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
I don't see discussion as a matter of coming up with answers, or at least not final, complete answers. Rather, I see it as a way of avoiding foreclosing on questions. My purpose in starting this discussion was to air my answers and the questions I have been avoiding asking.
In that sense, I see this really as having characteristics of a deceased equine, in that it is a discussion that is played out every time Christians get together - and arguably every time we do something individually in the consciousness that others elsewhere are doing the same thing - or when we do the reverse with any degree of self-consciousness.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
The purpose of the church is to prepare us for the Kingdom. To be both its agents and its recipients.
That'll do for me. Very nicely put.
Most of the argument relates to the subordinate "yes but what and yes but how" questions viz;
What is the Kingdom?
How do we become recipients?
What does our agency responsibility mean for our behaviour (both individual and corporate)?
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
Again "trying to achieve" is a limited account of what I'm thinking about - just a shortcut really to expressing what I actually mean.
What I mean is something like this:
- At what level does the church exist - individual congregations? Denominational structures? The church universal? All/none of these?
- What is the church's account of its members and how they play a part in its life?
- What is my presence is doing/saying to me?
- What I am doing/saying to other people by being there?
- How does all of this relate to what I do outside the church - both in terms of secular employment and my personal devotions and other things I am starting to do?
To engage with what you are saying, I can theoretically see the point of the "filling station" but as an experience I find it utterly repellent and alienating. It lacks any sense of gathering, which to me is essential to worship. Church is not a spiritual utility; it's an expression of faith, an engagement with God, and God is not to be delegated to priests, being far too precious for that.
Having said that, liturgy for me is vital to the way I live and express my faith. I find the structure hugely helpful both in expressing collectively something that otherwise only finds internal, intangible expression and in providing a structure through which things which don't see daylight otherwise can do so, as other things are held "out of the way".
Perhaps the best definition of 'church' is in terms of 'the community of believers within which God wants me to serve at the moment'.
I don't belong to a church of my choice, but to the one God led me to. I had to learn to get used to ways of worship that do nothing for me, and to have patience with those who don't behave in ways or use words which extend the loving kindness I would hope for, but it remains where God wants me to be for now, as has been affirmed in many ways.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I tend to be wary of talk of God 'leading us' to this that, or the other church ...
Increasingly, I tend not to see it as a case of the Almighty micro-managing our course through life -- but I certainly still have room for providential threads and strands.
If I go to church X, Y or Z then it must surely come down to personal, individual choice - even if I choose an option that doesn't necessarily 'fit' in a conducive sense ...
I dunno ... perhaps I'm reacting against my more pietistic background. My mum-in-law, who became charismatic in the early days of the charismatic renewal in the CofE - always felt drawn towards the Pentecostals in the town in the north-west of England where she ended up ... 'For two pins I've have headed to the Penties,' she would say, 'But God called me to remain at the parish church ...'
Even in my more full-on pietistic days I couldn't see why this would be and what the outcome would have been one way or another ... I couldn't quite see what she 'achieved' by remaining Anglican over and against what she might have done had she become some kind of posh Pentie ... (she's pretty middle-class) ...
Nor vice-versa - what would have been 'better' about being a Pentie?
Neither her old parish church nor her nearest Penties are going particularly great guns from what I can see ...
Perhaps I'm just cynical or have been round the block too many times ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I tend to be wary of talk of God 'leading us' to this that, or the other church ...
Increasingly, I tend not to see it as a case of the Almighty micro-managing our course through life -- but I certainly still have room for providential threads and strands.
If I go to church X, Y or Z then it must surely come down to personal, individual choice - even if I choose an option that doesn't necessarily 'fit' in a conducive sense ...
I dunno ... perhaps I'm reacting against my more pietistic background. My mum-in-law, who became charismatic in the early days of the charismatic renewal in the CofE - always felt drawn towards the Pentecostals in the town in the north-west of England where she ended up ... 'For two pins I've have headed to the Penties,' she would say, 'But God called me to remain at the parish church ...'
Even in my more full-on pietistic days I couldn't see why this would be and what the outcome would have been one way or another ... I couldn't quite see what she 'achieved' by remaining Anglican over and against what she might have done had she become some kind of posh Pentie ... (she's pretty middle-class) ...
Nor vice-versa - what would have been 'better' about being a Pentie?
Neither her old parish church nor her nearest Penties are going particularly great guns from what I can see ...
Perhaps I'm just cynical or have been round the block too many times ...
If we are in God's service, it's not about what we achieve but about what God is doing through our service. That won't always be apparent to other people.
I understand why you are wary, and it is right to be wary, as we can lead ourselves all over the place if we allow our imaginations to run riot, but if we are in God's service, spending time in prayer and doing our best to listen to God, in whatever way God blesses us with his guidance, we will conform to his will and forget about satisfying ourselves (except that we are satisfied if we are carrying out God's will).
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
If we are in God's service, it's not about what we achieve but about what God is doing through our service. That won't always be apparent to other people.
I understand why you are wary, and it is right to be wary, as we can lead ourselves all over the place if we allow our imaginations to run riot, but if we are in God's service, spending time in prayer and doing our best to listen to God, in whatever way God blesses us with his guidance, we will conform to his will and forget about satisfying ourselves (except that we are satisfied if we are carrying out God's will).
All of that is fine, but it leads us into "holy" drone territory. We are created as we are, and it seems to me to be wrong to ignore the signals which come from our nature. We are beloved children of God, made in God's image, and that image is sufficiently trustworthy to tell us when we are slogging ourselves to death rather than doing anything life-giving, to ourselves or those around us.
Or at least, this is what I am currently trying to learn and/or tell myself. There are many brick walls against which I could hurl myself until I was nothing but a mush. Or I could look until I find something which is a door leading to life. In a season like Advent, it seems to me that the better course is the latter.
[Edited to restore Raptor Eye's words]
[ 12. December 2015, 16:29: Message edited by: ThunderBunk ]
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
@Thunderbunk. Of the many questions you've listed, which one, if answered, would make the most difference to what you do next?
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
The core issue (as others have alluded to) is defining what you mean by "church".
If you mean a continuing number of Christians who talk to each other, then yes, there is a mandate and a point. The point being mainly to learn from others, support others and help others.
If you mean a systematic structure that dictates what is acceptable to believe then I believe the answer is no, it was not mandated and the main point is to give people a chance to be sanctimonious and religious, while ignoring the actual teachings of the originator.
I know from where I stand, the church as an organisation, the buildings, the clergy, the ceremony and suchlike, no point. And yes, this is from an evangelical perspective, but also from the perspective of someone who has been hurt and damaged by the church.
--------------------
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
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Truman White:
@Thunderbunk. Of the many questions you've listed, which one, if answered, would make the most difference to what you do next?
Impossible to say at the moment, I'm afraid. They're all mixed together in a general feeling of "what do I do next, where do I go and why does it matter?" The latter, of course, in a personal context - it clearly doesn't matter to the rest of creation what I do or don't do, but it matters to me, and I believe that it at least partly matters to God.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Go where you're needed nearest to your door mate. Go where you can give want you need to get.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I get that, ThunderBunk ... and I get Truman White's questions too ... but sometimes there ain't no single, straight-forward answer ... in fact, I'd suggest that most times there isn't ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
quote:
Originally posted by Truman White:
@Thunderbunk. Of the many questions you've listed, which one, if answered, would make the most difference to what you do next?
Impossible to say at the moment, I'm afraid. They're all mixed together in a general feeling of "what do I do next, where do I go and why does it matter?" The latter, of course, in a personal context - it clearly doesn't matter to the rest of creation what I do or don't do, but it matters to me, and I believe that it at least partly matters to God.
Sleep on it mate. Look back over your questions and pick three. Doesn't matter which ones - not a question of getting the "right" question to get the "right" answer. More about finding the next bit of the question to explore. You can go back to t'other questions anytime, so's more a case of what you want to focus on first.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Bugger. What.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
All of that is fine, but it leads us into "holy" drone territory. We are created as we are, and it seems to me to be wrong to ignore the signals which come from our nature. We are beloved children of God, made in God's image, and that image is sufficiently trustworthy to tell us when we are slogging ourselves to death rather than doing anything life-giving, to ourselves or those around us.
Or at least, this is what I am currently trying to learn and/or tell myself. There are many brick walls against which I could hurl myself until I was nothing but a mush. Or I could look until I find something which is a door leading to life. In a season like Advent, it seems to me that the better course is the latter.
[Edited to restore Raptor Eye's words]
To give ourselves to God does not take away our personalities, quite the opposite. We do take account of our feelings, God also guides us through our feelings, but that does not mean that we are constantly looking to satisfy our own desires. Rather, we look to serve God even though we might not like the kind of liturgy or people in the church where we currently worship. For all we know, it might be going to change soon and we will be in place to be one of the people who help when it does. God knows, we don't.
Doors close too, however. Sometimes God is clearly saying that we are to leave one church and go to another. Prayer and discernment are our constant companions as we search for the door that leads to life in service. If busy-ness is taking away our prayer time and we are not serving God but the system, God is not being invited to grow the kingdom through our work, as you have said.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I tend to be wary of talk of God 'leading us' to this that, or the other church ...
Yes, I think that is indicative of a failure to take responsibility for our own actions as adults. We're not pigs with rings in our noses that God pulls around. We are his "rational sheep" (in the words of the Orthodox liturgy) and are responsible for making decisions and acting as free, unforced agents.
Flip Wilson played a character whose constant refrain, when caught doing something wrong, was "The Devil made me do it!" (Geraldine? I think that was the name of the character.)
We need to stop playing like we're babies, or like we're horses "who need bit and bridle before they will come near you." We're moral agents responsible and accountable for our actions. Infantalizing talk, and blaming our decisions on God or on the Devil, are an abdication of the responsibility that is ours alone.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
God is indeed the one whom to serve is perfect freedom (possibly the first time in my life I have quoted St Augustine). The question is how not to exchange that freedom for slavery to that which is not God.
To hone it a little further, my particular dilemma is having a side that is very sensitive to structure and appreciative of its role, and another which wants to cast structure aside as an impediment to the relationships that are the basis of all true human interaction. I am also increasingly suspicious of the claims of ecclesiastical structures to facilitate the work of God in creation; they seem to me primarily, and sometimes exclusively, to serve their own preservation. The more they perceive a threat, the more this is true.
How do others walk that line? I am asking both those who are ordained and those who aren't - either side of that line there are compromises and paradoxes to walk/live with.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by ThunderBunk:
quote:
I am also increasingly suspicious of the claims of ecclesiastical structures to facilitate the work of God in creation; they seem to me primarily, and sometimes exclusively, to serve their own preservation. The more they perceive a threat, the more this is true.
Sometimes the church as an institution is great and sometimes it sucks, but I think when it has truly sucked in the moments I recall, somewhere in all of it I think I have perceived that God has worked in spite of us. That can be read in two senses and perhaps both are true.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Structures draw the needy to huddle in their shadow, if they're big enough.
We can lift a little finger in their direction. Over that line.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes - that ...
Both what Mousethief wrote and what Fletcher Christian observed ... I'm afraid it's one of these both/and things.
On the leading/guidance and discernmnt thing - the older and uglier I get, the more I think it boils down to making informed choices based on available evidence and consideration of consequences rather than any 'promptings', feelings or combinations of 'providences' and what might be 'confirmation basis'.
That's not to denigrate the 'spiritual' side - but it is to obviate an overly dualistic approach.
On the issue of whether Church or churches are 'self-serving' institutions - the same could be said of any group - or we ourselves as individuals.
As has been said, God works inspite of us - I don't see any grounds for believing that the Church or individual Churches are going to get things right all the time - but if we see the Church as the Body of Christ and therefore possessing both human and divine characteristics at one and the same time, then we can put up with foibles and not expect perfection.
That's not to take us off the hook of course.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Yes, I think that is indicative of a failure to take responsibility for our own actions as adults. We're not pigs with rings in our noses that God pulls around. We are his "rational sheep" (in the words of the Orthodox liturgy) and are responsible for making decisions and acting as free, unforced agents.
Flip Wilson played a character whose constant refrain, when caught doing something wrong, was "The Devil made me do it!" (Geraldine? I think that was the name of the character.)
We need to stop playing like we're babies, or like we're horses "who need bit and bridle before they will come near you." We're moral agents responsible and accountable for our actions. Infantalizing talk, and blaming our decisions on God or on the Devil, are an abdication of the responsibility that is ours alone.
I agree that our decisions are ours and that we are wholly responsible for what we say and do. We are free to do so. We have minds capable of rational thought and therefore of discernment.
That said, we are influenced: by our culture and upbringing, by our own genetic make-up, by 'the media', and also by God and by the devil, where the devil might be tempting us in the form of a supernatural being or in the form of our own harmful tendencies, take your pick.
We are also influenced by God, whether we like it or not. God is constantly there guiding us to do what is good and right. When we are ready to willingly serve God, we may continue to do what we think, but we might also learn to listen to God and over time find ourselves more attuned to God's influence. Through discernment, we learn how to filter out our own imaginations and desires. This is not playing babies, rather it is maturing into spiritual adulthood.
I maintain that God will lead us to where we are best able to serve, if we are willing to listen.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
This is in danger of turning into my blog, which is not what the Ship is for.
I'm not quite sure what to do, other than to note that temporary shelter within structures, as extended to me by the cathedral this morning, can be very welcome. It felt very gentle.
Just have to see how my understanding and this thread develop.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think if I lived in one of the old cathedral cities, I'd certainly be inclined to take refuge in one ...
What's not to like? Why wouldn't we? Good choral music, intelligent preaching, no-one trying to mess with your head ...
But we don't all live in cosy cathedral cities, and some, like Eutychus, are 'pioneering' in less salubrious conditions.
However, from what ThunderBunk has told us the cathedral sounds like a tonic for the time being.
As for God calling us to churches where we can 'serve' - how does that apply to those who feel their prime 'vocation' lies in 'the world' rather than the church?
If I understand Eutychus correctly, his 'vision' is for the church to help facilitate believers' mission in the world rather it being a 'crash-pad' or the place where Christians spend an inordinate amount of time.
I think both ends of the ecclesial spectrum can absorb inordinate amounts of time and energy, if we're not careful - and prevent us from active and meaningful engagement in the world around us. I'm less involved with church now than I've ever been since my evangelical conversion in 1981. I still 'believe' in church and supporting / serving a local congregation in some way but my focus is also on local politics, on community arts activities and developing links in creative writing and so on - as well as juggling family and freelancw work responsibilities.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
As for God calling us to churches where we can 'serve' - how does that apply to those who feel their prime 'vocation' lies in 'the world' rather than the church?
If I understand Eutychus correctly, his 'vision' is for the church to help facilitate believers' mission in the world rather it being a 'crash-pad' or the place where Christians spend an inordinate amount of time.
I think both ends of the ecclesial spectrum can absorb inordinate amounts of time and energy, if we're not careful - and prevent us from active and meaningful engagement in the world around us. I'm less involved with church now than I've ever been since my evangelical conversion in 1981. I still 'believe' in church and supporting / serving a local congregation in some way but my focus is also on local politics, on community arts activities and developing links in creative writing and so on - as well as juggling family and freelancw work responsibilities.
As ever, it's both/and and not either/or. We serve as the body of Christ, the Church, within relationship with our brothers and sisters in Christ, both receiving and giving in our church communities.
We not only serve by helping the organisation to thrive but also by reaching out to others in every way we can, in whatever proportion God calls and guides us into service.
Naturally, any one of us can only do so much, and there's the problem. If others are not doing their bit, it all falls on some who end up straining and in the end failing to hear or to know what God is calling them specifically to do. All they can see is what they think needs to be done. It's surprising how if they stop doing it, God brings someone forward to fill in, lets it fold as it was not necessary in the first place, or affirms in their hearts that this is the service they are currently called to. Faith grows.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I wish I could share your sunny optimism, Raptor Eye.
What I tend to see are people immersing themselves in church-life to the extent that they are so heavenly minded to be of little earthly use ...
Others becoming so earthly minded that they are of no heavenly use ...
Or the onus on keeping things afloat falling on the same people over and over again to the extent that they eventually buckle under the weight ...
Of course, things aren't as stark as I've painted them ... there's a balance somewhere ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
So, what are we part of and why?
The Kingdom of God. Because it's good for us.
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
Why do we feel moved as part of our expression of being Christians to be part of such a thing/things?
Because it's easier than doing it alone. And it moves it from the mystical to the concrete.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
