Is it a sin to not go to church?

[Michelle]

And while I am sure nobody here is advocating a complete removal from all Christian fellowship (the lone ranger Christian mentality, which I prefer to refer to as the decapitated Jesus model), I do think the overall anti-institutionalism of our culture (and perhaps specifically fans of Steve Gregg, including myself) may bring us into a mindset that it's better to meet with 5 radical Christians than 50 typical Christians. I don't agree.

My question is, if all the radical Christians leave the institutional churches to do their own thing together, aren't we doing a big disservice to our weaker brothers? I think it is a high calling to be a change agent in an institutional church. Perhaps not everyone's calling, but mine indeed.

I don't think it's that drastic. I'd characterize it more like: "I'd prefer to meet with 50 typical Christians than with 500 mostly non-Christians in a church setting." You seem to say that some of us are advocating elitism, which I don't believe we are (at least I'm not.) I find many, many hurt, wounded, bewildered,weaker brothers and sisters outside of the institutional church, but your mileage may vary.

I started this thread and I still am wrestling with some of the ideas posted here. For that reason, I'm going to take a break from posting in it in order to mull things over.

[mattrose]

My post was, indeed, aimed at the temptation toward elitism. I was not attempting to say that elitism has emerged on this board, only that it is one of the strongest temptations for Christians who make the choice to disassociate with institutional churches and do something 'more genuine and real'

In other words, I'm just trying to bring balance to the discussion. I'm a pastor in a denominational church, but obviously I have a lot of sympathy for the position that the institutional churches are largely un-Christian and that the desire for genuine fellowship is quite often best satisfied outside the boundaries of church property.

God bless!

[Sean]

My question is, if all the radical Christians leave the institutional churches to do their own thing together, aren't we doing a big disservice to our weaker brothers? I think it is a high calling to be a change agent in an institutional church. Perhaps not everyone's calling, but mine indeed.

I wish it really worked like that, or was really that simple. From what I have seen, you either say nothing about what is objectionable and help in the church as you are told (if you are going to help, that is) or actually reach out and help as best you know how and run the risk of doing or saying something that the pastor finds objectionable. When/if this happens is where it gets complicated because the weaker brothers then have to make a decision. Do they believe you or their pastor? Since most people make emotional decisions they usually side with the pastor, making you an outcast. Not only has this type of thing happened to people here, it nearly happened to me but I left first. The reason? I was most concerned about the small number of people who actually thought I was right and would leave that church over the issue but not be mature enough to recover.

It's much more complicated than just going to help others if the pastor sees any help from you as a power struggle.

Matt,
As an aside, I really like that you are here. Not only for what you say but because of who you are and what you represent. You really do show that there is hope for institutional churches and that leaders in them like yourself can be open minded. The people at your congregation are blessed to have you there.

[christopher]

Matt, thanks for your honest clarification.

I agree with you that elitism is wrongheaded and a poor motive to leave a community. I also believe, as you do, that the traditional local church is probably going to be most often the best chance for most Christians to find fellowship since they are the easiest to find and attend. And, I do admire your commitment to be a change agent and I thank you for your service.

But as Michelle said, there are a variety of legitimate reasons people don’t attend a traditional “church” and we can’t broad brush this or make assumptions about motives. Too often this becomes an us vs. them on both sides and I think the Church as a whole needs to realize that there are all kinds of legitimate church expressions, with or without walls.

Lord bless.

[mattrose]

Thanks for the dialogue guys.

I realize I have been blessed to attend (and now pastor) what I would consider to be a good church for the past 24 years. I cannot really imagine what my life would be like without this church family. Of course, it's by no means a perfect church (it includes all the downfalls of institutional churches), but I have always felt that there were at least a few dozen people that were genuinely following Christ with all their heart, soul, mind & strength.

If I try to imagine my life wandering from church to church and not finding many radical Christians and/or finding (Again and again) power struggles and politics, I'd probably be right on your side of this discussion.

In the end, I think I've just been blessed with a good church community.

God bless,
matthew

[christopher]

That's just it Matt, we've been blessed with good community too. It just has a little different look and feel to it at times.

I think what God has shown me in the last few years of my journey is that He is able to provide us with good Christian fellowship and community in many different ways if we just have our minds open to it and trust that he'll bring the right people into our lives.

During our "wilderness wanderings", my family has met many a fellow poor wayfaring stranger a long the way, and have developed some important and lasting friendships. As I said before, we're blessed that we now have a traditional church community to find commonality and mutual edification with. But even if we didn't, I trust that God would have us in fellowship with the right people at the right time.

It's important that we give people latitude to let God lead them in this area lest we suffocate them with unnecessary guilt.

[SteveF]

Matt wrote:

My post was, indeed, aimed at the temptation toward elitism. I was not attempting to say that elitism has emerged on this board, only that it is one of the strongest temptations for Christians who make the choice to disassociate with institutional churches and do something 'more genuine and real'

Matt, your concerns are not unmerited and I'm glad you raised it. Elitism can find its place in traditional churches and non-traditional churches. I don't have any reason to think participants at this forum are expressing elitism. I can say that until recently every person I met who was involved in the house church movement expressed elitism. Most of them would strongly imply that anyone involved in a traditional church was not really "doing church" and sinning. A few would even say outright it was sinful. In their efforts to be non-traditional they seemed to actually create a new tradition. The tradition of non-tradition.

That being said, I think Christopher has hit the nail on the head:

Too often this becomes an us vs. them on both sides and I think the Church as a whole needs to realize that there are all kinds of legitimate church expressions, with or without walls.

I think when we have a negative experience at a traditional church it can cause us to react. The rigid and unyielding experience we have at a traditional church is often reciprocated back towards the traditional church setting itself. Somehow we need to find a way to love each other and realize that nobody has the corner (if there even is one) on what the expression of a church should look like. That can be a pill that's hard for any expression of church to swallow. I do think, like Christopher was saying, it would be a positive step forward for everyone.

[anochria]

Trying to catch up on reading this lengthy thread.

Look2jesus wrote:

As I see it, one of the major obstacles that we face (I mean, we, the church) is an extreme lack of humility, both individually and as represented corporately in our local assemblies. I'm all for doctrinal purity but how did we get to this place where doctrinal differences, such as the type we see today represented in the many varied denominations (fundamental and evangelical) here in America, differences that, to my mind, should allow for honest disagreement if looked at objectively without adding or subtracting from the scriptures, have become the basis for disunity?

Just had to say an amen to this!

[anochria]

As a reader so far, I just have to say this is a great discussion and I'm very impressed by the points and counterpoints.

I have a little something to add, which is that one of the things that it means to be in Christian community is avoiding the temptation to always pick and choose which other Christians you want to associate with, or to choose to associate only with other Christians of a certain demographic. This can be a danger in a traditional church as well as in informal gatherings of Christians, but one thing I do like about being part of a "traditional community" is that it's a venue for me to be exposed to all sorts of other people- people I didn't necessarily choose to be associated with. And I think that's good and humbling and helps avoid the elitism.

[Michelle]

I appreciate the warnings about avoiding elitism. I agree that considering yourself somehow superior to any fellow Christian is sinful and I sincerely want to be rid of any sin in my life.

I'm still mulling over this whole thread. Honestly, it invades my thoughts at odd times during the day.

I came back to ask a question.

First I would point out that when Jesus said he would be present when two or three gathered in His name, it has to mean something more or different than His normal presence. The ancient Jews, of which Matthew was one, had sayings about this, such as: "Whenever ten persons assemble in a synagogue the Shikhinah is with them, as it is said: "God standeth in the congregation of God' (Ps 82:1)." "If two sit together and the words between them are of Torah, then the Shekinah is in their midst." "When three eat at table and do speak the words of Torah there, it is as though they have eaten from the table of God." These sayings seem to be parallel to Matthew 18:20. And Jesus is the new Glory of God among His people.

Homer, what is the "more or different than His normal presence" that Jesus promised? What would be different if, for instance (and I'm using a true life situation) I was talking with a friend about a life changing decision and said, "let's take it to the Lord and seek His will," but we were just talking, it was not during a prearranged, intentional gathering of Christian brothers and sisters; or if the same exact conversation took place after a church service, up front where prayer partners were available for prayer? What has Jesus promised about His presence that would be missing from the first situation? Or is His presence when two or three are gathered in (or into) His name only about binding, loosening, and agreeing as listed in Matthew 18?