Who is the Church?

[Crimson_Silence]

This is just ridiculous. Nobody is answering my question. And they jump elsewhere, change the subject or simply ignore the matter altogether. It makes sense to me why the Clergy is the Church, because its the institution they run. But why are the laity the church, I’m still not understanding why.

Is a consumer of a product a part of the company? No, he’s the consumer; therefore he simply takes from the company; but is not of the company. That makes sense. How can someone be consumer of the Church and yet at the same time be of the Church?

 

[Oneofthewomen]

This is just ridiculous. Nobody is answering my question. And they jump elsewhere, change the subject or simply ignore the matter altogether. It makes sense to me why the Clergy is the Church, because its the institution they run. But why are the laity the church, I’m still not understanding why.

Is a consumer of a product a part of the company? No, he’s the consumer; therefore he simply takes from the company; but is not of the company. That makes sense. How can someone be consumer of the Church and yet at the same time be of the Church?

But we are not consumers and the Church is not a product.
It is a community of believers, some ordained, most not, and it is all part of the mystery of faith.

I really hope that you will take your issues to a priest/deacon or some sort of spiritual advisor, it is apparent that you have some very serious misunderstandings and misgivings about your faith.

 

[Filii_Dei]

This is just ridiculous. Nobody is answering my question. And they jump elsewhere, change the subject or simply ignore the matter altogether. It makes sense to me why the Clergy is the Church, because its the institution they run. But why are the laity the church, I’m still not understanding why.

Is a consumer of a product a part of the company? No, he’s the consumer; therefore he simply takes from the company; but is not of the company. That makes sense. How can someone be consumer of the Church and yet at the same time be of the Church?

Everybody has been trying to answer your question, pointing you to documents and explanations that show clearly that the Church has always included the laity, and has never been defined as solely being of the clergy. The problem is we don’t know what kind of answer you want - a document that defines the Church as including the laity, or some explanation why the Church must include the laity over your preconceived notion that the Church somehow only includes the clergy?

The laity do not exist apart from the Church. They exist as part of the Church, while benefiting from the Church. Let’s put it this way: Is a student of a school a part of the school? Yes he is. He takes from the school, but is also of the school at the same time. This is how the laity exist within the Church. The clergy may make up the authority and hierarchy of the Church, as do teachers in the school, but they are not themselves the Church. A school is not a school unless it has both students and teachers, and the Church is not the Church unless it has both clergy and laity.

 

[Abu]

Crimson_Silence #20
This is just ridiculous. Nobody is answering my question

.
Start listening.

CHURCH. The faithful of the whole world. This broad definition can be understood in various senses all derived from the Scriptures, notably as the community of believers, the kingdom of God, and the Mystical Body of Christ.

As the community of believers, the Church is the assembly (ekklesia) of all who believe in Jesus Christ; or the fellowship (koinonia) of all who are bound together by their common love for the Savior. As the kingdom (basileia), it is the fulfillment of the ancient prophecies about the reign of the Messiah. And as the Mystical Body it is the communion of all those made holy by the grace of Christ. He is their invisible head and they are his visible members. These include the faithful on earth, those in purgatory who are not yet fully purified, and the saints in heaven.

Since the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church has been defined as a union of human beings who are united by the profession of the same Christian faith, and by participation of and in the same sacraments under the direction of their lawful pastors, especially of the one representative of Christ on earth, the Bishop of Rome. Each element in this definition is meant to exclude all others from actual and vital membership in the Catholic Church, namely apostates and heretics who do not profess the same Christian faith, non-Christians who do not receive the same sacraments, and schismatics who are not submissive to the Church’s lawful pastors under the Bishop of Rome.

At the Second Vatican Council this concept of the Church was recognized as the objective reality that identifies the fullness of the Roman Catholic Church. But it was qualified subjectively so as to somehow include all who are baptized and profess their faith in Jesus Christ. They are the People of God, whom he has chosen to be his own and on whom he bestows the special graces of his providence. (Etym. Greek kyriakon, church; from kyriakos, belonging to the Lord.)
Modern Catholic Dictionary
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl

 

[Brendan_64]

This is just ridiculous. Nobody is answering my question. And they jump elsewhere, change the subject or simply ignore the matter altogether.

Perhaps because you are not listening.

The Church IS the Body of Christ on Earth, the People of God. The Church is also an institution.

My wife and I are physically separate people, yet we are also one body joined together by God. As well as being one body, we are also each other’s spouse.

It makes sense to me why the Clergy is the Church, because its the institution they run. But why are the laity the church, I’m still not understanding why.

That is because you are only willing to accept that something can only be one thing. This is not the case.

Was Christ God or was he human? How can He be two things at once?

Is a consumer of a product a part of the company? No, he’s the consumer; therefore he simply takes from the company; but is not of the company. That makes sense. How can someone be consumer of the Church and yet at the same time be of the Church?

The Church is not an organisation providing a service to consumers. We do not ‘take’ from our Church to satisfy our own ‘needs’. Is a family the equivalent to a company providing a service, with the father being the CEO and the children the consumers? Are the children then not part of that family?

So many people have tried to answer you, yet you seem to refuse to listen. It’s as if you have made up your mind already and will only listen to an answer that tells you what you have already decided.

Read Avery Dulles book, “Models of the Church.” It’s not heavy going., it’s quite short and (in my opinion) he nails the very question you are asking. If you want to find out answers, you need to be prepared to do at least a little bit of work yourself.

 

[Joannm]

I suggest you read 1 Corinthians 12:12-30. St. Paul sums it up beautifully.

 

[Crimson_Silence]

Everybody has been trying to answer your question, pointing you to documents and explanations that show clearly that the Church has always included the laity, and has never been defined as solely being of the clergy. The problem is we don’t know what kind of answer you want - a document that defines the Church as including the laity, or some explanation why the Church must include the laity over your preconceived notion that the Church somehow only includes the clergy?

The laity do not exist apart from the Church. They exist as part of the Church, while benefiting from the Church. Let’s put it this way: Is a student of a school a part of the school? Yes he is. He takes from the school, but is also of the school at the same time. This is how the laity exist within the Church. The clergy may make up the authority and hierarchy of the Church, as do teachers in the school, but they are not themselves the Church. A school is not a school unless it has both students and teachers, and the Church is not the Church unless it has both clergy and laity.

And I have been listening. But I’m not being understood; nor am I understanding. Is there a document that says that the laity is like a school?

.
Start listening.

CHURCH. The faithful of the whole world. This broad definition can be understood in various senses all derived from the Scriptures, notably as the community of believers, the kingdom of God, and the Mystical Body of Christ.

As the community of believers, the Church is the assembly (ekklesia) of all who believe in Jesus Christ; or the fellowship (koinonia) of all who are bound together by their common love for the Savior. As the kingdom (basileia), it is the fulfillment of the ancient prophecies about the reign of the Messiah. And as the Mystical Body it is the communion of all those made holy by the grace of Christ. He is their invisible head and they are his visible members. These include the faithful on earth, those in purgatory who are not yet fully purified, and the saints in heaven.

Since the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church has been defined as a union of human beings who are united by the profession of the same Christian faith, and by participation of and in the same sacraments under the direction of their lawful pastors, especially of the one representative of Christ on earth, the Bishop of Rome. Each element in this definition is meant to exclude all others from actual and vital membership in the Catholic Church, namely apostates and heretics who do not profess the same Christian faith, non-Christians who do not receive the same sacraments, and schismatics who are not submissive to the Church’s lawful pastors under the Bishop of Rome.

At the Second Vatican Council this concept of the Church was recognized as the objective reality that identifies the fullness of the Roman Catholic Church. But it was qualified subjectively so as to somehow include all who are baptized and profess their faith in Jesus Christ. They are the People of God, whom he has chosen to be his own and on whom he bestows the special graces of his providence. (Etym. Greek kyriakon, church; from kyriakos, belonging to the Lord.)
Modern Catholic Dictionary
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl

But this is not telling me why.

Perhaps because you are not listening.

The Church IS the Body of Christ on Earth, the People of God. The Church is also an institution.

My wife and I are physically separate people, yet we are also one body joined together by God. As well as being one body, we are also each other’s spouse.

That is because you are only willing to accept that something can only be one thing. This is not the case.

Was Christ God or was he human? How can He be two things at once?

The Church is not an organisation providing a service to consumers. We do not ‘take’ from our Church to satisfy our own ‘needs’. Is a family the equivalent to a company providing a service, with the father being the CEO and the children the consumers? Are the children then not part of that family?

So many people have tried to answer you, yet you seem to refuse to listen. It’s as if you have made up your mind already and will only listen to an answer that tells you what you have already decided.

Read Avery Dulles book, “Models of the Church.” It’s not heavy going, it’s quite short and (in my opinion) he nails the very question you are asking. If you want to find out answers, you need to be prepared to do at least a little bit of work yourself.

Avery Dulles’ book is out of print. And I am doing some work, I have Catholicism for Dummies with me. And I have not decided, but am questioning. I’m trying to understand, but people give definitions of what it is, not why it is.

I suggest you read 1 Corinthians 12:12-30. St. Paul sums it up beautifully.

Paul only explains what it is, not why.

 

[Brendan_64]

Avery Dulles’ book is out of print. And I am doing some work, I have Catholicism for Dummies with me. And I have not decided, but am questioning. I’m trying to understand, but people give definitions of what it is, not why it is.

The Church is a mystery, our Faith is a mystery, Christ is a mystery, the nature of God is a mystery. There are many things to which we cannot truly understand why. Our limited, flawed human intellect cannot fathom why these things are. That is where faith comes in. If we understood everything then faith would become redundant. We let go of our security blankets of knowledge and reason, and trust in God.

If you’ve got a kindle you can get a kindle version of Avery Dulles ‘Models of the Church’. amazon.com/Models-Church-Avery-Dulles-ebook/dp/B000FC1JD0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390146309&sr=8-1&keywords=models+of+the+church

 

[Filii_Dei]

And I have been listening. But I’m not being understood; nor am I understanding. Is there a document that says that the laity is like a school?

Why does there need to be a document that proves that the Church is like a school in order to understand my analogy? I do not understand why you insist on documents. Does my explanation bear no merit unless it has been put into formal writing? For that matter, is there a document that says the Church is like a company and the laity are its customers?

But this is not telling me why.

Avery Dulles’ book is out of print. And I am doing some work, I have Catholicism for Dummies with me. And I have not decided, but am questioning. I’m trying to understand, but people give definitions of what it is, not why it is.

Paul only explains what it is, not why.

It does tell you why. The what is the answer to why. The reason the laity are part of the Church is because the Church has been established from the very beginning to include both the laity and the clergy, and the Church has always been defined to include both the laity and the clergy. There is no special reason why the laity has to be part of the Church because the Church has always been defined to include the laity. We do not ask why students are considered part of the school, nor do we ask why children are considered part of the family. They are because that is how they are understood to be.

The problem here is that you have a misconception of the Church as comprising only the clergy - as though the school comprises only the teachers, or that the family comprises only the parents. It is mistaken, because the well-being of the Church depends very much on the faithfulness of its believers, the bulk of whom reside in the laity. We cannot exclude the laity because their faith is and has always been central to the Church. While the clergy may teach and direct, the faith and actions of the laity are what determines the faith and actions of the Church.

 

[Crimson_Silence]

The Church is a mystery, our Faith is a mystery, Christ is a mystery, the nature of God is a mystery. There are many things to which we cannot truly understand why. Our limited, flawed human intellect cannot fathom why these things are. That is where faith comes in. If we understood everything then faith would become redundant. We let go of our security blankets of knowledge and reason, and trust in God.

If you’ve got a kindle you can get a kindle version of Avery Dulles ‘Models of the Church’. amazon.com/Models-Church-Avery-Dulles-ebook/dp/B000FC1JD0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390146309&sr=8-1&keywords=models+of+the+church

And what happened to faith and reason?

Why does there need to be a document that proves that the Church is like a school in order to understand my analogy? I do not understand why you insist on documents. Does my explanation bear no merit unless it has been put into formal writing? For that matter, is there a document that says the Church is like a company and the laity are its customers?

It does tell you why. The what is the answer to why. The reason the laity are part of the Church is because the Church has been established from the very beginning to include both the laity and the clergy, and the Church has always been defined to include both the laity and the clergy. There is no special reason why the laity has to be part of the Church because the Church has always been defined to include the laity. We do not ask why students are considered part of the school, nor do we ask why children are considered part of the family. They are because that is how they are understood to be.

The problem here is that you have a misconception of the Church as comprising only the clergy - as though the school comprises only the teachers, or that the family comprises only the parents. It is mistaken, because the well-being of the Church depends very much on the faithfulness of its believers, the bulk of whom reside in the laity. We cannot exclude the laity because their faith is and has always been central to the Church. While the clergy may teach and direct, the faith and actions of the laity are what determines the faith and actions of the Church.

Yes, I think it would make sense for someone to explain; especially in a document. Students are part of a school because they’re enrolled in it. This means that they are, to put it crassly, both property of the school and its consumer. Does this make more sense?

 

[Filii_Dei]

Yes, I think it would make sense for someone to explain; especially in a document. Students are part of a school because they’re enrolled in it. This means that they are, to put it crassly, both property of the school and its consumer. Does this make more sense?

Unfortunately, there is no such document, so you will have to satisfy yourself with my informal explanation. I apologise I am unable to provide you with anything greater.

We are also enrolled in the Church by virtue of our baptism. I’m not sure which book of law you’re reading from, but students in a school are not its property, so that explanation is not only crass, it is incorrect. No human can be the property of another. Children are not the property of their parents either, by the way. The parents exercise guardianship, not ownership.

Regardless, students of a school are not simply consumers. They may consume teaching from the school, but their activities and achievements also define the activities and achievements of the school. Likewise, we consume teaching from the Church, but our actions and faith also define the action and faith of the Church.

 

[Brendan_64]

And what happened to faith and reason?

Yes we are given reason, but our human powers of reason are not sufficient to know everything. There are things that are beyond our reason, God is a mystery, the incarnation of Christ is a mystery, the Eucharist is a mystery, God is a mystery.

If you man is capable of understanding all things through the power of human reasoning, then you are in effect holding up man as the supreme being, as a god.

Is a field mouse capable of understanding quantum mechanics? Why not? Does it then follow that quantum mechanics is not valid because the field mouse is incapable of understanding it?

When you compare mankind to the divine, and the infinite distance between man and God, how can we possibly hope to use our reason to understand God?

 

[thomas_jd]

Yesterday ,( Saturday ) after the morning Mass a group of parishioners and guests marched 1/2 mile in the 15 degree cold in a March for Life Procession. The marchers ranged from the teens carrying a banner to those in their eighties.

That is the CHURCH

 

[Crimson_Silence]

Yes we are given reason, but our human powers of reason are not sufficient to know everything. There are things that are beyond our reason, God is a mystery, the incarnation of Christ is a mystery, the Eucharist is a mystery, God is a mystery.

If you man is capable of understanding all things through the power of human reasoning, then you are in effect holding up man as the supreme being, as a god.

Is a field mouse capable of understanding quantum mechanics? Why not? Does it then follow that quantum mechanics is not valid because the field mouse is incapable of understanding it?

When you compare mankind to the divine, and the infinite distance between man and God, how can we possibly hope to use our reason to understand God?

So you wish to equate knowledge of why the laity is the church to divinity itself?

 

[Crimson_Silence]

Unfortunately, there is no such document, so you will have to satisfy yourself with my informal explanation. I apologise I am unable to provide you with anything greater.

We are also enrolled in the Church by virtue of our baptism. I’m not sure which book of law you’re reading from, but students in a school are not its property, so that explanation is not only crass, it is incorrect. No human can be the property of another. Children are not the property of their parents either, by the way. The parents exercise guardianship, not ownership.

Regardless, students of a school are not simply consumers. They may consume teaching from the school, but their activities and achievements also define the activities and achievements of the school. Likewise, we consume teaching from the Church, but our actions and faith also define the action and faith of the Church.

But they are responsible for the children aren’t they? Isn’t the Church responsible for the laity?

 

[Brendan_64]

So you wish to equate knowledge of why the laity is the church to divinity itself?

You really don’t get it do you? The Church is the Body of Christ on Earth. “He is the head of the body, the Church” Colossians 1:18.

The Church isn’t simply some man-made organisation, the Church was founded by Christ to be His body on Earth and the Holy Spirit moves within the body of Christ on Earth (i.e. the Church) to connect us in mystical communion.

The Church is the body of Christ. The Church is the bride of Christ. The Church is a mystical communion. The Church is the Kingdom of God on Earth. Yes, the Church is divine.

 

[Crimson_Silence]

You really don’t get it do you? The Church is the Body of Christ on Earth. “He is the head of the body, the Church” Colossians 1:18.

The Church isn’t simply some man-made organisation, the Church was founded by Christ to be His body on Earth and the Holy Spirit moves within the body of Christ on Earth (i.e. the Church) to connect us in mystical communion.

The Church is the body of Christ. The Church is the bride of Christ. The Church is a mystical communion. The Church is the Kingdom of God on Earth. Yes, the Church is divine.

And yet no one has come up with a proper understanding, let alone, a reason or explination for why the laity are the Church. So I don’t get it. I’m trying. But it’s the failure of others to explain that’s the problem.

I was warned that Catholic Answers had a bad reputation. Now I know why.

The only answer should come like this: The laity are the Church because…[answer].

 

[Brendan_64]

And yet no one has come up with a proper understanding, let alone, a reason or explination for why the laity are the Church.

I was warned that Catholic Answers had a bad reputation. Now I know why.

The only answer should come like this: The laity are the Church because…[answer].

Because we are Christ’s Body on Earth as outlined by an earlier poster. In Corinthians 12:12-30, St Paul tells us that we, the laity, are the body of Christ on Earth and individually members of it, and then in Colossians 1:18 he tells us that the Church is the body of Christ on Earth.

Paul tells us that we, the followers of Jesus are the body of Christ and that that body of Christ is the Church. Now unless you are going to argue that Christ has two bodies on Earth it therefore means that the followers of Christ, are the Church.

Is that really all that difficult to work out?

 

[Crimson_Silence]

Because we are Christ’s Body on Earth as outlined by an earlier poster. In Corinthians 12:12-30, St Paul tells us that we, the laity, are the body of Christ on Earth and individually members of it, and then in Colossians 1:18 he tells us that the Church is the body of Christ on Earth.

Paul tells us that we, the followers of Jesus are the body of Christ and that that body of Christ is the Church. Now unless you are going to argue that Christ has two bodies on Earth it therefore means that the followers of Christ, are the Church.

Is that really all that difficult to work out?

But if the body of Christ are the followers, then wouldn’t that give the followers the opportunity of being persona Christi; regardless of priesthood or not?

 

[Filii_Dei]

But they are responsible for the children aren’t they? Isn’t the Church responsible for the laity?

The school is responsible for the children because they are minors. Most of us are adults, so in that sense we would be closer to a university.