Being "church" - is this Catholic teaching?

[Mimi]

I am re-posting my query since I got no replies; trying a different title (previous one was: “Catholic” and “catholic” difference).

I read something written recently about being “church”. After reading it I wondered whether this was theologically correct according to Catholic teaching.

It was a story titled “Small ‘c’ church”. The jist of it is that the church is really all the people who work to help those in need.

In the Gospel for this Sunday (Mt 18:15-20), Jesus speaks of the ‘church’, not the institutional ‘C’ Church, but the ‘c’ church that is you and me, human beings who struggle to follow Jesus. That is the important lesson of today’s Gospel: the ability of individuals who come together as disciples, inspired by the Gospel Jesus, to accomplish great works of compassion, reconciliation, healing and justice, reaching out to the needs of others. . .

Here is the scripture:

[15] "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

[16] But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
[17] If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
[18] Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
[19] Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.
[20] For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

In those days, there was no distinction between Church (the heirarchy) and church (laity) as in the story related above – right? And so it is today. It seems to me there is something “off” with the reflection on this Gospel. It sounds more like a Protestant point of view, or “newChurch” stuff.

I would have put this in the Ask an Apologist section, but I think they may be overloaded. It takes so long to get a response sometimes.

Thanks in advance to repliers.
Blessings,
Mimi

 

[PJM]

=Mimi;8337062]I am re-posting my query since I got no replies; trying a different title (previous one was: “Catholic” and “catholic” difference).

I read something written recently about being “church”. After reading it I wondered whether this was theologically correct according to Catholic teaching.

It was a story titled “Small ‘c’ church”. The jist of it is that the church is really all the people who work to help those in need.

Here is the scripture:

In those days, there was no distinction between Church (the heirarchy) and church (laity) as in the story related above – right? And so it is today. It seems to me there is something “off” with the reflection on this Gospel. It sounds more like a Protestant point of view, or “newChurch” stuff.

I would have put this in the Ask an Apologist section, but I think they may be overloaded. It takes so long to get a response sometimes.

Thanks in advance to repliers.
Blessings,
Mimi

***First a short and concise answer:

We “are the church” in two senses.

1. We are the “church militiant” [defenders of our beliefs]
2. we are the “Mystical Body” of Christ and thus “the church” meaning we are to 1. Know well what we beieve 2. Live it publically 3. Share it and defend it when the opprtunities are presented to us by God.

So that is what WE ARE called to be within this termonoligy.

What we ARE NOT is “the church” as in membership grants ownership. No, Christ Himself determined the hirearchy of the Catholic Church that flows from the “key’s of the gate of heaven” ]Mt. 16:19] given to Peter and his successors by necessity [Mt. 28:19-20].

We are SUBJECT to everyting that “the church”…Meaninf the Pope and Bishops “in-communion with Him”…[Obedient themselves to the pope] teach in regard to ALL FAITH-BELIEF issues and ALL Moral issues. Further we are SUBJECT to all other matters that tends to the salvation of our souls.

The post Vatican II theology that “we ARE THEE Church” is great error. We are members of, associated WITH, but have no ownership, and therefore limited rights of both governance and are restricted to the RIGHT roles of participation as defined BY ROME. ***

My friend if this raises any further questions, I’d be delighted to discuss the issus with you,

God Bless you,
Pat

 

[SonCatcher]

I think the person who wrote the bulletin comment misinterpreted the intention of “church” in this context. The bulletin writing is generally correct but the Gospel passage has to do with admonishing a sinner. As such, the Gospel writer intends that the one wronged report to the clergy who will determine the proper course of action (including warning the flock to avoid dealing with the wrongdoer, if necessary). Certainly Jesus did not suggest that we gossip to our fellow parishioners about someone.

 

[Mimi]

Then my thoughts on this are correct (to question the interpretation given).

This was written by someone who is in a (paid) leadership position in the parish. I think I should bring it to the attention of my pastor & see what he says.

I have heard Marcus Grodi (of the Coming Home Network ministry) speak about this passage many times. He says he really thought about what “take it to the Church” meant. Which Church – for one thing. This is one of the scripture passages which led him to eventually convert to Catholicism.

Yes, “take it to the Church” means someone ordained. In another scripture, The Church is wherever the Bishop is. I can imagine this would have been quite important for early Christians to know since they could not just walk up to the door of a large church building (since there weren’t any), go to Mass, and know they were in the True Church.

Thanks again!
Mimi

 

[SonCatcher]

Be careful how you proceed. Michelle Arnold recently addressed a similar issue in the AAA forum. You don’t want to set yourself up as a troublemaker if a major issue comes up later.

 

[Mimi]

Be careful how you proceed. Michelle Arnold recently addressed a similar issue in the AAA forum. You don’t want to set yourself up as a troublemaker if a major issue comes up later.

Too late!

We’ve already had major issues here and continuing minor ones. One of which is a priest who insists on giving a talk before the readings; on those Sundays, we get no homily. I spoke with him briefly about it (and v respectfully) after Mass, mentioning the GIRM. 3 other priests (one of which is Fr Pacwa) says this is liturgical abuse. Fr Zuhsdorf is another wdtprs.com/blog/

I cannot stand to see OUR Mass abused. There is so much talking before & during Mass, it is almost more than I can take sometimes. There are a lot of good people here, too. Good, strong pro-life group, for one. Too many are afraid to speak out.

God bless,
Mimi

 

[SonCatcher]

You might need to write to the bishop regarding the ongoing serious abuses, then.