PLEASE HELP: Is church for everyone?

[Marnie]

Church is for believers; all believers.

Not quite. "Church" IS all believers. When we say the church is FOR all believers. We're saying it is something they can join or not join. It's something that's good for them. No. Church IS them.

Fellowship is for believers. It's good for all believers. But it doesn't have to happen in what we've limited "the church" to mean. We talk about the assembly of believers, and we think of a congregation of believers in some building someplace. The church is wherever two are gathered in his name. So, going to church (small "c") is not for all believers. Fellowship of some kind is, but the expression of fellowship we choose is infinite in expresion and may change with time and circumstance. No one need ever feel guilty or like a "failed Christian" for not "going to" church. (Not that Marnie was suggesting anyone should feel guilty.) In fact, they're not guilty of anything, even if they are not in fellowship. It's just that being in fellowship is important for all of us, for Christ's Spirit dwells in community; but that can be a community of two. When the institution of church has failed, it may be better for us to meet for coffee and prayer with a believing friend.

Not-so-"Failed Christian," I pray that you're able to find a new expression of fellowship that helps lift you through your present times. Allow creativity to bring about new kind of fellowship for you, and feel guilty (if you do) ABOUT NOTHING when it comes to fellowship.

By the way, that was a wonderfully expressive letter you wrote to your pastor/"church."

Are you just trying to argue? Do you just like to hear yourself talk, or what? Read the question... the question was phrased: Is church FOR everyone. My answer: the church is FOR all believers. Geeze man. The early church was often referred to as "the fellowship." Like I said, Theology 101.

[Floatingaxe]

I'm sorry but I have to throw my hat into the ring here....! If God is trying to grow us in the fruits of the spirit, how is he supposed to do that when at every slight test, you Leave...? Have you ever stopped to wonder how a church will ever change if all people do is keep leaving all the time....? I hear the same story all of the time.

Let me tell you about the woman who had been married seven times and at a session of counselling for her seventh divorce, she spoke of how awful her husbands had been and how she never seemed to be able to pick the RIGHT man. On hearing this statement the counsellor using his vast experience as a counsellor opened her eyes by stating one simple point.....

You have been in seven failed relationships now and you will probably have better luck in the eighth, and maybe you wont. But there is something here that you have glossed over, whether it is deliberate or through simple ignorance. There is a hard truth you must hear.

In ALL of your seven failed relationships there is and has only ever BEEN one common denominator.....YOU..!!

Often we are the last to see our own problems. I guess this is why Jesus said that it is not what goes into a man that makes him unclean, but what comes out of the man, for out of the heart the mouth speaks. We can give up smoking, alcohol, and all kinds of EXternal substances quite easily because they are what goes INTO a man. It is what is inside a mans heart however that causes the REAL bitterness and unforgiveness. The issues that he does NOT want to deal with, nor does he know HOW to...These are what makes him unclean, bitter and UNforgiving. These are what he needs to be set free from.

If all he wants to do is seek to focus on the flaws of others, he will never have to look upon himself. Jesus was very wise when he revealed that it isnt what goes INTO a man that makes him Unclean. It isnt food or drink because they simply pass through the body. Its what has happened to us in the past that we have locked away in the basement in the hope that we will never have to deal with it again..Perhaps we've even convinced ourselves that it never happened or even tried to become another person in order to deal with it.

Jesus wants to set us free. He wants to give us a new heart and a new spirit because he knows how badly damaged our hearts and spirits can BE. That is why he says, "Come to me you who are weary and heavy ladened and I will give you rest." He whom the son sets free is free indeed.That means inside AND out.

Often leaving a church or having an opinion about the church can simply be a smoke screen for the REAL issue. Growing HURTS so its often easier to RUN away. And it feels just a little bit better when you can gather around yourself people who can sympathise with you.

Can I please post an excerpt from a letter written in 1891 by a man who was relating some of the growing pains of the early church fathers. From the Roman Popery to the Protesters or early reformers (Protestants.) He spoke well about how our true attitude OUGH to be toward the church. His name is J.C Ryle. He is speaking of events that troubled the church in the 1500's. You see, even back then the church had issues. Nothing has changed people.

Men may call me an alarmist, if they like, for using such language. But I reply, there is a cause. The upper classes in this land are widely infected with a taste for a sensuous, histrionic, formal religion. The lower orders are becoming sadly familiarised with all the ceremonialism which is the stepping-stone to Popery.

The middle classes are becoming disgusted with the Church of England, and asking what is the use of it. The intellectual classes are finding out that all religions are either equally good or equally bad. The House of Commons will do nothing unless pressed by public opinion. We have no Pums or Hampdens there now.-And all this time Ritualism grows and spreads. The ship is among breakers,-breakers ahead and breakers astern,-breakers on the right hand and breakers on the left. Something needs to be done, if we are to escape shipwreck.

The very life of the Church of England is at stake, and nothing less. Take away the Gospel from a Church and that Church is not worth preserving. A well without water, a scabbard without a sword, a steam engine without a fire, a ship without compass and rudder, a watch without a mainspring, a stuffed carcase with-out life,~11 these are useless things. But there is nothing so use-less as a Church without the Gospel. And this is the very question that stares us in the face.-Is the Church of England to retain the Gospel or not? Without it in vain shall we turn to our arch-bishops and bishops, in vain shall we glory in our cathedrals and parish churches. Ichabod will soon be written on our walls. The ark of God will not be with us. Surely something ought to be done.

One thing, however, is very clear to my mind. We ought not lightly to forsake the Church of England. No I so long as her Articles and Formularies remain unaltered, unrepealed, and unchanged, so long we ought not to forsake her. Cowardly and base is that seaman who launches the boat and forsakes the ship so long as there is a chance of saving her. Cowardly, I say, is that Protestant Churchman who talks of seceding because things on board our Church are at present out of order. What though some of the crew are traitors, and some are asleep I What though the old ship has some leaks, and her rigging has given way in some places! Still I maintain there is much to be done. There is life in the old ship yet. The great Pilot has not yet forsaken her. The compass of the Bible is still on deck. There are yet left on board some faithful and able seamen. So long as the Articles and Formularies are not Romanized, let us stick by the ship. So long as she has Christ and the Bible, let us stand by her to the last plank, nail our colours to the mast, and never haul them down. Once more, I say, let us not be wheedled, or bullied, or frightened, or cajoled, or provoked, into forsaking the Church of England.

In the name of the Lord let us set up our banners. If ever we would meet Ridley and Latimer and Hooper in another world without shame, let us "contend earnestly" for the truths which they died to preserve. The Church of England expects every Protestant Churchman to do his duty. Let us not talk only, but act. Let us not act only, but pray. "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."

I don't think anything more needs to be said...!

Regards,

Ben.

AMEN, Ben!

[David H.]

Is church FOR everyone. My answer: the church is FOR all believers.

If you're only saying that being in fellowship with other believers is good for all of us, then that's true. We all need that, and that's what's happening on this forum.

If you're saying fellowship is required, that's false. Paul was not adding to the Law. That's the last thing he would do, and many Christians are very legalistic about fellowship.

If you're saying "going to" church, as in attending one of those institutional bodies each week, is for all of us, that's also false. There may be less organized, less structured forms of fellowship, like meeting over coffee with a friend, that are every bit as good or even better for us than the Sunday School/morning service/listen-to-the-sermon models. "Going to church" tends to represent an extremely narrow idea of what fellowship is. It's the same model everywhere with minor variances for flavor -- a little less liturgy, a little different music; but it's still all sitting and listening to the preacher preach. Paul did not say, "Do not foresake listening to sermons on Sundays."

Edited August 11, 2006 by David Haggith

[Floatingaxe]

Paul DID say to not forsake the assembling of yourselves together, which runs the gamut of corporate prayer, worship, the giving AND receiving of instruction in the Word of God, and the giving and receiving of fellowship, encouragement and blessing. Everything we need! Of course it doesn't have to happen in a building or a house, but buildings are a good idea if it rains!

Blessings!

[David H.]

Paul DID say to not forsake the assembling of yourselves together, which runs the gamut of corporate prayer, worship, the giving AND receiving of instruction in the Word of God, and the giving and receiving of fellowship, encouragement and blessing. Everything we need! Of course it doesn't have to happen in a building or a house, but buildings are a good idea if it rains!

Blessings!

It doesn't HAVE to happen with any of those things. It CAN happen with them. My comments are not about whether or not fellowship happens in a building or outdoors, though outdoors is good. It's about whether it has to happen in an instutional body, whether it HAS to involve sitting and listening to a sermon, whether it HAS to involve singing hymns, etc. Every "church" everywhere follows the same essential model with just variations of flavor. They have governing bodies. They have sermons. They have people sitting in mass. They have business meetings behind the scenes. They collect offerings to support their organizational structure. They have employees. They have doctrinal statements and governing documents. Almost every single "church" in the world follows that corporate model like a bunch of lemmings. And Paul never commanded either fellowship or that particular model of fellowship. And yet people will judge your spirituality by whether or not your a member of one of those organizations.

[billie]

Who's judging?

[Floatingaxe]

Who said the first churches under Paul were not like that? They are our model!

[David H.]

Who said the first churches under Paul were not like that? They are our model!

Paul also never lifted up any of the first churches as a model for others to follow. And I seriously doubt they all followed any model. Other than that they tended to evolve around the existing synagogue model because people follow what they're used to. I'd like to know where you see a liturgy written in scripture of an opening address, followed by an opening song, followed by an opening prayer, followed by announcements, followed by a prayer and/or hymn of invocation, followed by an offering, followed by a scripture reading, followed by a sermon, followed by a closing song and perhaps a closing prayer. Yet, almost every church in the world follows that liturgy with minor variations in the kind of music used and the level of formality.

I'd like to see where in scripture Paul commanded that all fellowship (which he asked us not to foresake) must include sermons or where it even says that all early churches had twenty-minute sermons as a model for us to follow!

I'd like to see where Paul commanded that gatherings of believers always take up an offering and that they always have paid pastors.

They CAN do those things. Scriptures don't forbid it. There is, after all, freedom to organize. But they certainly don't have to. Yet, nearly all of them do, and those who do, all follow the same pattern.

Lemmings.

Then to make matters worse -- and I've witnessed it many times -- the members judge others who choose not to participate in their corporate model as being unspiritual, "out of fellowship."

Lemmings.

And don't mistakenly say that I'm juding them for being in that kind of fellowship. I'm not. I'm judging them for insisting that it is the only way and others who do not follow their way are backsliding. If they want to do everything the same way everyone else does, that's fine. There are a lot of good things such organization can accomplish. (You can't, for example, enjoy using your singing talents in a choir if you don't have enough organization to form a choir. And it's fair and reasonable for the choir director to expect regular attendance if you're going to participate so that you don't sing sloppy; because you have a choice of coming to that church and not participating in the choir if you don't want to follow the choirmeister's rules. But if they were to ask you to leave the church, that would be stupid.) The efficiency of organization explains why a single model has risen to the top as the standard. That particular model happens to be very efficient at covering all the bases. It's also very Catholic in its origins. Nevertheless, no organizational structure is scripturally commanded. It is not scripturally modeled either, as you claim it is; and there may be other ways that are better for other people. So, if not-so-"FailedChristian" never casts his shadow across the threshhold of a "church" again, he's just as spiritual as anyone else.

This is not a minor quibbling. The vast majority of Christians think you have to "go to church" -- as if it's something you go to -- namely the kind of organization I described in my earlier post that has professional leaders, sermons and liturgy and organizational structure. If you don't, they start talking to you like you're "backsliding." Is participation in that kind of structure "forwardstepping," instead of "backsliding," or is it just "lockstepping"? What I'm trying to do is break open the box that fellowship has been stuffed into.

Next, you'll say that Paul mandated a particular organizational system. Not exactly. He gave guidelines for chosing leaders because human nature is to organize. Human nature is to move toward civilization. Some house churches were already institutionalizing on their own; i.e., forming organizational structures. Paul laid out some guidelines for choosing the leaders; but he never said people should institutionalize the church. He certainly didn't command it. He just said, if you're going to do it, here's how to do it well. And some division of labor would be helpful so people can focus on serving in the area where they are gifted. Even that's pretty vague, and it's not a command. And there's no prescribed liturgy, even though every church today follows a nearly identical liturgy to all the others -- including all those that think of themselves as non-denominational and non-liturgical.

Edited August 11, 2006 by David Haggith

[CoramDeo]

There are many types of "organized religious institutions" that I would not call a "church." The church are the "called out ones," those that identify themselves with the Lord Jesus Christ; they are His disciples, those that love Him and follow Him. Therefore, when believers are gathered anywhere (in the home, a restaurant, or even in the mall), there is the church. It's the people - it's the gathering together and the intimate fellowship that is important, not the building nor the political structure.

[Floatingaxe]

Being part of a local body is part of being a follower of Christ. People who opt out of relationship with other believers and remain outside of it tend to, over time, fall into error, as there is not anyone usually there who is able to bring correction. They tend to become a little wierd. I have seen it, and it is sad.

As error compounds into more and more error, and no correction or reproof is given, then the Christian becomes ineffective, and can be "tossed about by every wind of doctrine."

We have a responsibility to align ourselves with people of like faith in order for spiritual growth and for use in the Kingdom! That is why Paul tells us not to forsake that assembling. Why argue with that?

Yes, the church is the people of God, the called out ones. Yes, we don't need a building, but it helps us. There is nothing wrong with us coming together to corporately pray, to corporately worship God with all our hearts, and to hear what the Lord has given our shepherd to teach us. In our church, we all meet in homes throughout the week in cells, much like the NT church, and on Saturdays and Sundays, we come together to celebrate what the Lord has done and is doing! Absolutely nothing unbiblical about that. Even the early churches met in homes and leaders took time to teach, just as the people took time to humbly listen to God's Word expounded.