Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site reed.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!reed!purtell
From: purtell@reed.UUCP (Lady Godiva)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Peter and churches
Message-ID: <1289@reed.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 10-Apr-85 16:36:31 EST
Article-I.D.: reed.1289
Posted: Wed Apr 10 16:36:31 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Apr-85 03:42:59 EST
References: <8368@watarts.UUCP> <1015@cbosgd.UUCP> <1084@topaz.ARPA> <1237@reed.UUCP> <1131@topaz.ARPA>
Reply-To: purtell@reed.UUCP (Lady Godiva)
Followup-To: Root
Organization: Reed College, Portland, Oregon
Lines: 86
Summary: 

In article <1131@topaz.ARPA> root@topaz.ARPA (Root) writes:
>This depends upon what you mean by a church.  If you mean an organization
>that is into exercizing power over people, and excluding people they don't
>like, then he is right.  This is exactly the kind of organization that
>arranged for Jesus to be crucified.  

   I agree with this most definitely. But I can't really speak for my
professor, so I won't say what he may have meant one way or the other.
Although I do plan on asking him about it, so if what he says would seem
to be of interest I will post it.

>But it would certainly be going too far to say that Jesus was somehow
>opposed to people gathering in congregations to worship together.  

I agree. I think that there is nothing wrong with people getting
together and worshiping. I find that with the right group I have had
wonderful experiences both in worshipping God, and in sharing with the
people in the group. But I do question it when these groups start
excluding other church groups because they disagree on one or two minor
points. Or, I should say, what I consider minor points. I strongly
question the "Christianity" of the different protestant groups. This is
NOT to say that I think that all church groups are non-Christian, or
that the Catholic church is the only "right" church, or even a better
church. (I am not Catholic). But I do question why these denominations
insist on being separate from one another. Even within certain
denominations there are different factions, i.e. within the lutheran
church. I guess what really bothers me is not so much the fact that
there are different denominations as much as the degree to which some of
them dislike the others.

>In summary, I think it would be more accurate to say that Jesus was opposed
>to the sort of things that religious (and other) bureacracies do all too
>often, but not to the idea of people gathering together.  

I agree. But you can see why when there are so many problems in
churches, (and then there's the moral majority which is not thought of
too highly around here, including by me) that someone would say what my
teacher said.

>The idea that you can be a Christian by sitting at home reading the Bible is
>absurd.  Christianity is about your relationship with other people.  The
>problem is that dealing with people is difficult.  So is keeping groups of
>people in line with their original ideals, and resisting the natural
>pressures that make organizations grow rigid and intolerant.  But just
>because something is difficulty doesn't mean we can avoid it.

I don't know if I agree entirely with the first statement. I mean, I
tend to think that we all have different reasons for "being", so to speak,
and I don't think that everyone is meant to go to church every Sunday,
or lead the choir, or work in social organizations. There are many
different ways to spead the gospel. I think that Bach (as well as many
others) did it through his music, C.S. Lewis through his writings, and
Mother Theresa through her life. But we are not all Mother Theresas,
and I don't think we can hope to be. I'm sure that we're not always
meant to be out there, making friends and helping people, we need some
time to ourselves and some time alone with God. This may be just fifteen
minutes every morning, or it may be a few years in some sort of
seclusion (monastery, cabin in the wilderness, etc.). John the Baptist
spent quite a few years in the wilderness before he began preparing the
way for Christ.

>To answer your original question, I think Christ assumed that his followers
>would gather together, and made some provisions for the worship and
>leadership of the resulting body of believers.  However I do not think he
>had anything specific to say about church organization.  I do not see that
>he either supported or opposed nationwide bodies, or organizations such as
>the Council of Churches.  He most certainly opposed many of the things that
>such bodies do, however.

I do agree. And I think that the things that they do now that he opposed
are judgement, bigotry, self-righteousness, a desire to "take control of
this nation (moral majority), putting too much emphasis on the Bible
(not to say that it should be ignored, but it shouldn't be the ultimate
end either), and putting too much emphasis on the Holy Spirit. (This is
for charismatics mainly, of which I would basically consider myself one.
The explanation that I gave for my comment about the Bible applies here
too.) But, please take note, that these are just general statements and
I don't necessarily mean them to apply to all Christians (after all I am
one), all churches (I do attend a church regularly), and possibly not
all religions.

Any other thoughts anyone?

elizabeth g. purtell

(Lady Godiva)