What does "Church" mean to you?

[Publisher]

Publisher, thanks for sharing your faith tradition. Very interesting. I especially love the silence that you experience and that you are comfortable in that silence. It is something of which we are all in great need. It is in silence that we hear the voice of God and in this busy world, many of us find it difficult to find the peace found in silence.

We hold Sunday above all other days as it was the day that Christ rose from the dead. God set apart the Sabbath as as day of rest, but more importantly as a day to keep holy. When Jesus rose from the dead, however, a new era was ushered in; the new and everlasting covenant. It has been referred to by our Church as the “eighth day of creation” because through it we become a new creation in Him. However, we also celebrate Mass each and every day of the year with the exception of Good Friday.

Do you have any sort of “communion” in your community and if not I would be interested in how you interpret Jesus’ command to “do this in remembrance of me”? You hadn’t mentioned that as part of your Meeting and I have to plead ignorance as far as my knowledge of the Quakers.

Thanks.

As a Friend…I believe we live perpetually in that Escatological First Day of the New Creation…each day is holy…ALL days equally…not one day above others.

Jesus is now our Sabbath Rest…

We have “communion” each First Day…“after the manner of Friends”…we do not use bread and wine…symbols of his body and blood…we believe we commune with the Risen Christ who is present in our midst each First Day…we do not believe that Jewish rituals were to continue into the new “First Day of the New Creation”…we did not exchange an old set of rituals for a new set…

Friends have nothing against rituals IF it brings one closer to God…but it is our Testimony that God is immanent to each and every one of us…He is Truly Present among us.

 

[SteveVH]

As a Friend…I believe we live perpetually in that Escatological First Day of the New Creation…each day is holy…ALL days equally…not one day above others.

Jesus is now our Sabbath Rest…

We have “communion” each First Day…“after the manner of Friends”…we do not use bread and wine…symbols of his body and blood…we believe we commune with the Risen Christ who is present in our midst each First Day…we do not believe that Jewish rituals were to continue into the new “First Day of the New Creation”…we did not exchange an old set of rituals for a new set…

Friends have nothing against rituals IF it brings one closer to God…but it is our Testimony that God is immanent to each and every one of us…He is Truly Present among us.

Yes, we believe that Christ is present to each of us also, not exclusively in the Eucharist, but in a very special way in the Eucharist. Specifically, what do you think Christ meant went he said “do this in remembrance of me”?

Thanks.

 

[Publisher]

Yes, we believe that Christ is present to each of us also, not exclusively in the Eucharist, but in a very special way in the Eucharist. Specifically, what do you think Christ meant went he said “do this in remembrance of me”?

Thanks.

The early church consisted mostly of Jewish men and women…later Gentiles…Jesus was a Jew…who practiced Jewish customs…I don’t believe that he “instituted” a perpetual ritual…we did not exchange one set of rituals and ceremonies for another…also “in rememberance of me”…since He is Truly Present among us…we need no “commerative meal” …He is already present among His People…

 

[ESMDHokie77]

Publisher, what is the “this” that you do as instructed by Him?

 

[Publisher]

Publisher, what is the “this” that you do as instructed by Him?

I’m sorry…I’m dense at times…don’t understand your question.

 

[ESMDHokie77]

In Luke 22:19, Jesus does something and says something. Part of what he spoke was a command to his apostles. What did He tell them to do?

Peace,
Phil

 

[Publisher]

In Luke 22:19, Jesus does something and says something. Part of what he spoke was a command to his apostles. What did He tell them to do?

Peace,
Phil

Ahhh…he asked them to share in the Passover meal with him…

 

[elvisman]

We meet each First Day for worship. The tradition I belong to utilizes “un-programmed” Meeting for Worship.

Each of us wait upon the Lord to speak to us…we join with one another in a Living Silence…and if one of us is let to offer vocal ministry…he or she stands to offer the “Word of the Lord” to the Meeting.

Some Meetings there is no vocal ministry offered…instead we join one another in the “Living Silence” and Commune with God and one another as members of the Body of Christ.

We do not believe “Sunday” is better than any other day…each First Day is “Resurrection Day”…as are Second Day…Fifth Day or Seventh Day…we as individuals and collectively worship daily…I personally 'enter into Meeting" every morning for about 30 minutes before I get ready for work…

We do have funerals…they are much like our “weddings”(I understand some may think I’m trying to be humurous…but rest assured…a “wedding” is not a prelude to a “funeral”…the casket or urn is placed near the “facing bench” and each of us waits upon the Lord and offer vocal ministry and celebrate the life lived.

While we all share in “rituals of life”…we do not ascribe to these “rituals” or “rites”…if they can be called that from a Quaker perspective…to dispense “grace” by participating in them…IF however you experience the Living Christ in your midst by participating in such rites and participating in such rituals…we have no issue…as long as the rites and rituals you participate in instill within you a sense of the Divine and Eternal…and inspire you to live in compassion and walk gently upon the earth…if such things make God “real” and “present” for you…wonderful…

It is the testimony of Friends that in Christ each of us has immediate and unrestricted access to God without need of rite or ritual or priest performing any rite on our behalf…All ritual requirements have been fulfilled in Christ Jesus…in Him and Him alone is where all grace and mercy flows and through Him we “live and move and have our being.”

Thanks for the explanation. It was indeed interesting - even though I personally disagree with your positions. I find that positions and practices such as these are nothing but spiritual anarchy. **

The truths of God are not subject to individuals but that ARE subject - in a sense - to the Church because it is the very Body of Christ. Also because the Scriptures refer to the Church as the* fullness* of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23) and the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15).**
This is not extended to individuals.

 

[Publisher]

Thanks for the explanation. It was indeed** interesting - even though I personally disagree with your positions. I find that positions and practices such as these are nothing but spiritual anarchy.

The truths of God are not subject to individuals but that ARE subject - in a sense** - to the Church because it is the very Body of Christ. Also because the Scriptures refer to the Church as the* fullness* of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23) and the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
This is not extended to individuals.

Friend you are welcome…we disagree…but I’m comfortable with you expressing Eternal Truth using your words and faith images. To me our experience with God is individual…we experience Him through our lives differently…He meets us where we are…if I have not yet arrived to the point where I can honestly believe that ritual requirements such as “sacraments”, “ordinances”, “rites” or “rituals” benefit me spiritually when my own experience tells me we are beloved children of God…and through us God is made known in this world…I am on the Path I believe God has placed me…as are you on yours for the same reason…God has placed you where you belong…I am at peace with that.

 

[SteveVH]

The early church consisted mostly of Jewish men and women…later Gentiles…Jesus was a Jew…who practiced Jewish customs…I don’t believe that he “instituted” a perpetual ritual…we did not exchange one set of rituals and ceremonies for another…also “in rememberance of me”…since He is Truly Present among us…we need no “commerative meal” …He is already present among His People…

Publisher, it is quite clear, as you say, that Jesus practiced Jewish customs and rituals. He did not condemn them. Now, Jesus did many things to upset the Jews. He ate with sinners, He spoke with Samaritan women, He harvested food and healed people on the Sabbath. But He never condemned them for their rituals of worship. At the Last Supper, Jesus and the Apostles were celebrating Passover, as you know. The significance of this cannot be overstated. Passover, while important in its own right, a commemoration of God’s saving power in bringing them out of exile, was a type, a foreshadowing of true salvation which would be fulfilled in the suffering,death and resurrection of Jesus. The blood of the lamb placed upon the Jewish homes was not enough. They also had to eat the lamb. If they didn’t, death would descend upon their homes.

Jesus is the Lamb of God. He is the Lamb which we must eat in order to have life. He broke the bread, blessed it and gave it to his disciples saying, “take this and eat, this is my body which will be given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” At the end of the meal, he took the cup, saying, “Take this, all of you, and drink. This is my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant which will be shed for you. Do this in remembrance of me”. Does it not seem that Jesus went to a lot of trouble if this didn’t mean anything? Just as the Jews would forever remember Passover, we were to “remember” his saving sacrifice, but more than by just sharing memories, we were to “remember” him by eating his glorified, sacramental flesh and drinking his glorified, sacramental blood. The sacrifice would be made present to us in a very real way. He would be present to us in body, blood, soul and divinity.

Regardless of your belief in the the sacrament of the Eucharist, I would think you would at least have to consider why he commanded us to do this. What did he mean?

 

[Curious_Seed]

One, very common theme that floats around this forum is the notion that the only thing that really matters is a relationship with Jesus or God. While there is obviously some truth to this, IMO it is used as an excuse to go ahead and believe anything we wish.

Nearly all posters on this forum attend one church or another. Why? What does “Church” mean to to you. Is it important that you attend this particular church or is any “Christian” church just fine as long as it helps me have that personal relationship?

I propose that Christ started a Church for one purpose; the union of God with man in Jesus Christ. The Church, then, is not just an institution which exists to lead people to salvation, but, in truth, is itself salvation. It is through His Church that the divine offices of priest, prophet and king are communicated to His people. As I said, there is truth in the notion that all that matters is a relationship with God, but it was Christ who decided that this “relationship” with him would forever mean a relationship with His Church.

I welcome your comments.

I agree that Christ started a Church for the purpose of the uniting of God and man in Himself.

I disagree to extend that the Gift of Salvation comes from the Church, however.

I believe the Gift of Salvation only comes from Christ, and without Christ, the Church can do nothing.

At present, the Church is unified, in belief of Christ as its Head.

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members, whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant have not detracted from that unity.

The difficulty in discussing the concept of Church, with some Catholics, is their belief that the term is of their exclusive domain – anything else is an organization or collective or following or small “c” church.

Some Catholics shutter at the notion of the terms Catholic denomination or Catholic Christian, used by some Protestants.

Who of God’s called are correct, in their varying interpretations and statements?

Well, only God knows and His Church, in all its current manifestations [Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox], is in the process of learning to know.

 

[elvisman]

Friend you are welcome…we disagree…but I’m comfortable with you expressing Eternal Truth using your words and faith images. To me our experience with God is individual…we experience Him through our lives differently…He meets us where we are…if I have not yet arrived to the point where I can honestly believe that ritual requirements such as “sacraments”, “ordinances”, “rites” or “rituals” benefit me spiritually when my own experience tells me we are beloved children of God…and through us God is made known in this world…I am on the Path I believe God has placed me…as are you on yours for the same reason…God has placed you where you belong…I am at peace with that.

I’m glad you’re at peace with your beliefs even though I disagree (like I said before).
**I DO want to say one last thing to you on this topic. Our experience with God IS individual - to a point. BUT - it is only through the Church that we experience the family of God. **

**The message of the Gospel is not one of Lone Ranger Christians, but the Mystical Body of Christ that can only be experienced together. The Scriptures DO speak of our individual salvation but they express us as the people of God much more.

 

[elvisman]

I agree that Christ started a Church for the purpose of the uniting of God and man in Himself.

I disagree to extend that the Gift of Salvation comes from the Church, however.

I believe the Gift of Salvation only comes from Christ, and without Christ, the Church can do nothing.

At present, the Church is unified, in belief of Christ as its Head.

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members, whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant have not detracted from that unity.

The difficulty in discussing the concept of Church, with some Catholics, is their belief that the term is of their exclusive domain – anything else is an organization or collective or following or small “c” church.

Some Catholics shutter at the notion of the terms Catholic denomination or Catholic Christian, used by some Protestants.

Who of God’s called are correct, in their varying interpretations and statements?

Well, only God knows and His Church, in all its current manifestations [Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox], is in the process of learning to know.

Sorry - but you’re wrong.

---

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members have done nothing BUT work to bring disunity to the Body of Christ. The truth is not multiple choice - it stands alone. Jesus is truth itself (John 14:6) and certainly cannot be separated - neither can his Body be separated.

You ask who of God’s called are correct in their interpretations? The ONE entity that he gave authority (Matt. 16:18-18, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23) under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-15)- his Church. This guarantee was not given to individuals, but to the Church.

**You are right when you say that Salvation is from Christ alone. Cowever, it comes THROUGH the Church. Don’**t minimize the importance of the Church that Christ established. He alone saves - but he saves through his Church.

Finally - you speak of different “manifestations” of what is considered his Church. There is only ONE Church. Anything less than that one Church are ecclesial communities in need of full communion with that ONE Church.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Salvation does come only through Christ but He chose to use the Church as His vehicle for that salvation to come to us—a conduit of sorts. The Sacraments, which bring sanctifying grace and salvation to us tangiably, are given to us through the Church and the Holy Orders that God felt necessary to sustain the sacraments for us. The Church didn’t invent the Bible, it was given to the Church through divine inspiration. The Church is the custodian of the Scriptures and Christ uses the Church to keep it well-interpreted.

I will concede to you that Catholic media focuses too much on the Church and defensive apologetics and not enough on daily life lessons and good preaching. That was and is something I ADORED about being Protestant (Anglican) and I still miss it. The Catholic media groups are so into defending Church teachings and explaining the Church (because it has been so slandered and misunderstood for decades in the secular and protestant West) and the institution, the ecclesiastical stuff that they fail to just preach…to have shows about the Gospels, shows about how to survive a tough marriage, shows about how to love your enemies, shows about how to kick addictions, etc. There aren’t good preachers on EWTN or Catholic Answers, just people who explain and explain. That I’ll grant you. And I wish that would change. The protestant radio channels around here don’t talk about ecclesiastical matters and institutions, just how to live a daily walk with Christ and how to deal with all sorts of pastoral situations in daily life, how to love Christ, how to forgive, how to heal, how to cope, etc. I appreciate that from Protestantism. And I’m sure the Lord would as well.

I agree that Christ started a Church for the purpose of the uniting of God and man in Himself.

I disagree to extend that the Gift of Salvation comes from the Church, however.

I believe the Gift of Salvation only comes from Christ, and without Christ, the Church can do nothing.

At present, the Church is unified, in belief of Christ as its Head.

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members, whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant have not detracted from that unity.

The difficulty in discussing the concept of Church, with some Catholics, is their belief that the term is of their exclusive domain – anything else is an organization or collective or following or small “c” church.

Some Catholics shutter at the notion of the terms Catholic denomination or Catholic Christian, used by some Protestants.

Who of God’s called are correct, in their varying interpretations and statements?

Well, only God knows and His Church, in all its current manifestations [Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox], is in the process of learning to know.

 

[JVSantos]

I. The meaning of the Church: 1. The word Church means literally a calling forth or assembly. In Scripture it is applied especially to the faithful, that is, to the society of all those who worship the true God in piety and holiness. 2. Other names by which the Church is designated in Scripture are the “house of God,” “the flock of Christ,” “the body of Christ.” 3. The Church is defined as the union of all the faithful who, being baptized, profess the same doctrine of Christ, have the same sacrifice, partake of the same Sacraments, and are governed by their lawful pastors under one visible head on earth.

II. The members of the Church: 1. There are three principal parts of the Church–the Church militant on earth, the Church suffering in purgatory, and the Church triumphant in heaven. 2. The Church militant is composed of two classes, the good and the bad, both professing the same faith and partaking of the same Sacraments. The former are those in sanctifying grace, or the living members; the latter are those in sin, or dead members. 3. There are four classes of people who do not belong to the Church: (a) those unbaptized persons who never belonged to the Church, such as, pagans, Jews, atheists; (b) heretics, or those who, by denying some of her doctrines, have left the Church, such as Protestants; (c) schismatics, or those who have deserted the Church by rejecting her authority, such as the Greek church; (d) excommunicated persons, that is, those whom the Church has cut off from her communion, until they repent.

III. The authority of the Church: 1. Only in the Church of Christ is salvation to be found; hence the Fathers compare her to the Ark of Noe. Only in the Church is there a true worship of God; hence she is compared by the Fathers to the City of Jerusalem. 2. The ninth Article of the Creed commands us to believe the Catholic Church, that is, that her origin is divine, and that her powers and privileges are likewise divine. 3. It is impossible that there should be more than one true Church and one true doctrine, because truth is one and cannot contradict itself. The Nicene Creed points out four marks by which the true Church may be known–it is One, it is Holy, it is Catholic, it is Apostolic.

CONCLUSION. Our duties to the Church are to have faith in her teachings, to show obedience to her laws and authority, and to have respect for her ministers.

 

[SteveVH]

I agree that Christ started a Church for the purpose of the uniting of God and man in Himself.

Good, that is a great place to start.

I disagree to extend that the Gift of Salvation comes from the Church, however.

The Church IS the union of God with man. Why do you think Jesus actually went to the trouble of starting a Church? I think you are trying separate the Church from Christ, which you cannot do any more than you can separate your head from your body and still live.

I believe the Gift of Salvation only comes from Christ, and without Christ, the Church can do nothing.

And you would be correct. See my comments above. But the Church is the means of that salvation. It is Christ’s presence on earth because He is present within it. It is Christ who feeds us, forgives us, heals us and saves us but this is done through the sacraments which Christ Himself instituted. It is how He is present to us.

At present, the Church is unified, in belief of Christ as its Head.

And which Church would that be? To use the words “the Church” in the context of all Christian denominations consisting in oneness is, at best, wishful thinking. Using Paul’s analogy of the “Body of Christ” Christ, the body must be unified in all respects. Think of taking a step, a seemingly simple exercise. If one foot said "I don’t believe I was made for this purpose and I refuse to move, could the body function? If a finger said I believe we should all be tongues, could the hand function. No, we must be unified in belief so that the entire body may function as a whole, each part performing its function as directed by the Head.

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members, whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant have not detracted from that unity.

You wish to equate the one Church that Christ founded with those started by men according to their own understanding and preconceived notions. Sorry, it just doesn’t fly. Christ said “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you will have no life within you.” Now, if the body rejects this, saying, no I believe the Head is telling me I only need to breathe and rejects the food, the body dies. Do you see what I mean?

The difficulty in discussing the concept of Church, with some Catholics, is their belief that the term is of their exclusive domain – anything else is an organization or collective or following or small “c” church.

It is not of man’s exclusive domain, it is Christ’s exclusive domain because it is HIS Church. He started a Church. You cannot equate churches started by men with the Church started by Christ. Every single non-Catholic church can be traced back to a man as its founder, yet we have been warned not to lean upon our own understanding. This is the reason that I started this thread. Do people really understand what is meant by “The Church”?

Some Catholics shutter at the notion of the terms Catholic denomination or Catholic Christian, used by some Protestants.

Yes, because the word “denomination”, by its very definition, is just plain incorrect when applied to the Catholic Church. I don’t really have a problem with the term “Catholic Christian”, other than it is just redundant, as if “Catholic” could ever be considered “not Christian” given that it is the Church founded by Christ Himself.

Who of God’s called are correct, in their varying interpretations and statements?

The one started by Christ Himself, who promised that He would remain with it until the end of time and would send the Holy Spirit to guide it into all truth. Unless one believes that Christ does not keep His promises.

Well, only God knows and His Church, in all its current manifestations [Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox], is in the process of learning to know.

You have lost me here. But thanks for your comments and welcome to the forum.

 

[Evan]

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members, whether Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant have not detracted from that unity.

As long as differences in doctrine and dogma are not a bar to unity you should have written

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members, whether Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Deist, Pagan, or Atheist have not detracted from that unity.

 

[SteveVH]

As long as differences in doctrine and dogma are not a bar to unity you should have written

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members, whether Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Deist, Pagan, or Atheist have not detracted from that unity.

That’s a great point. The history of the Church is fraught with heresy. I don’t know of any heresy, however, that completely denied Christ. It was their idea of Christ, in many circumstances, that constituted the heresy. Should we accept any belief that springs from the mind of humans as long as they profess Christ; whether or not they believe He is divine, or whether or not they believe He was fully man, or whether or not they believe He was “just a prophet”? At which point do we draw the line, past which one cannot be considered Christian? Thus, the importance of unity in doctrine and dogma.

 

[Curious_Seed]

Sorry - but you’re wrong.

---

Differences of doctrine and dogma among the Church’s members have done nothing BUT work to bring disunity to the Body of Christ. The truth is not multiple choice - it stands alone. Jesus is truth itself (John 14:6) and certainly cannot be separated - neither can his Body be separated.

You ask who of God’s called are correct in their interpretations? The ONE entity that he gave authority (Matt. 16:18-18, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23) under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-15)- his Church. This guarantee was not given to individuals, but to the Church.

You are right when you say that Salvation is from Christ alone. Cowever, it comes THROUGH the Church. Don’t minimize the importance of the Church that Christ established. He alone saves - but he saves through his Church.

Finally - you speak of different “manifestations” of what is considered his Church. There is only ONE Church. Anything less than that one Church are ecclesial communities in need of full communion with that ONE Church.

Your response is quite colorful.

 

[Curious_Seed]

Good, that is a great place to start.

Good

The Church IS the union of God with man. Why do you think Jesus actually went to the trouble of starting a Church? I think you are trying separate the Church from Christ, which you cannot do any more than you can separate your head from your body and still live.

Christ can live without His Church.

And you would be correct. See my comments above. But the Church is the means of that salvation. It is Christ’s presence on earth because He is present within it. It is Christ who feeds us, forgives us, heals us and saves us but this is done through the sacraments which Christ Himself instituted. It is how He is present to us.

Christ is the means of salvation.

And which Church would that be? To use the words “the Church” in the context of all Christian denominations consisting in oneness is, at best, wishful thinking. Using Paul’s analogy of the “Body of Christ” Christ, the body must be unified in all respects. Think of taking a step, a seemingly simple exercise. If one foot said "I don’t believe I was made for this purpose and I refuse to move, could the body function? If a finger said I believe we should all be tongues, could the hand function. No, we must be unified in belief so that the entire body may function as a whole, each part performing its function as directed by the Head.

His Church - the Body of Christ - Assembly of the Way - the Catholic Church - the Protestant Church - the Orthodox Church: all who profess Christ as their Lord and Savior.

You wish to equate the one Church that Christ founded with those started by men according to their own understanding and preconceived notions. Sorry, it just doesn’t fly. Christ said “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you will have no life within you.” Now, if the body rejects this, saying, no I believe the Head is telling me I only need to breathe and rejects the food, the body dies. Do you see what I mean?

No.

It is not of man’s exclusive domain, it is Christ’s exclusive domain because it is HIS Church. He started a Church. You cannot equate churches started by men with the Church started by Christ. Every single non-Catholic church can be traced back to a man as its founder, yet we have been warned not to lean upon our own understanding. This is the reason that I started this thread. Do people really understand what is meant by “The Church”?

Yes.

Yes, because the word “denomination”, by its very definition, is just plain incorrect when applied to the Catholic Church. I don’t really have a problem with the term “Catholic Christian”, other than it is just redundant, as if “Catholic” could ever be considered “not Christian” given that it is the Church founded by Christ Himself.

Now, you are on it. Christ did found a Church. You may hold that it was the Catholic Church that He founded upon Peter. I agree that He founded His Church on what Peter answered, so deciding to call it Catholic or Protestant is fine. Fine, because His Church is manifested in all of those denominations.

The one started by Christ Himself, who promised that He would remain with it until the end of time and would send the Holy Spirit to guide it into all truth. Unless one believes that Christ does not keep His promises.

Sorry

You have lost me here. But thanks for your comments and welcome to the forum.

Thanks !