Dear Non-Churchgoer,
I have worked in the Christian church for the whole of my adult life. Church occupies many of my hours, most of my energy, and much of my imagination. At times in my life, church has been my all-consuming obsession. As a result, although I know you exist, we have seldom met.
But I know you are out there. In fact, you make up by far the majority of the population in the community in which I live.
Unfortunately, you and I do not talk often and never about anything more significant than the weather. This is probably mostly my fault. My world does not make much sense to you and I have seldom tried to explain myself in terms you might be expected to understand. Rather than seeking ways to bridge the gap between us, I have withdrawn into my secluded enclave of religious self-interest. Understandably, you have completely lost interest in what I do or what I believe.
In some cases I have actively driven you away. I have been arrogant, self-righteous, opinionated and demanded that you adopt my world view. I have drawn a circle around myself that excludes you unless you choose to enter by agreeing with me and conforming to my standards. I have failed to listen to you. I have not taken a genuine interest in the concerns and realities that shape your world. At my worst I have done violence to you, judged you, and rejected you as unworthy of the value and respect I demand for the people with whom I insulate myself from your world.
The sad thing is that I believe you and I are not all that different.
Like me, you love your family. You care for your friends and neighbours and you try to be responsible in your work. You seek to live an ethical life and to follow a high moral code. You want to be kind and gentle. You try to make a positive impact in the world. You are concerned about the well-being of the earth we all share and the damage we inflict upon our beautiful planet. You care about injustice and inequality. You value peace, truth, beauty, and goodness. Sometimes you struggle and you know we share a tendency to fall below the high standards of human behaviour to which we aspire. You believe in the deep mystery, beauty and wonder of life that exceeds any human ability to define.
But, except possibly for a wedding or a funeral, we never share in the enterprise I call “church.” You view me and my little church, at best, as completely irrelevant to your life, and, at worst, as an unhealthy force of manipulation and abuse.
If I was able to talk with you, I would want to ask you three questions:
1. Can you imagine anything I could do that might help rehabilitate your image of church?
2. Is there anything positive you can ever imagine church might contribute to your life?
3. Can you imagine yourself ever feeling drawn to share in a corporate expression of reverence for that deep sense of the mystery and wonder of life that we share?
I would like to ask you these questions, not as a thinly veiled scheme to coax you into my church, but because I believe my life would be enriched by our conversation. I believe I have a great deal to learn from you. I think our community as a whole would be enriched if we could trust each other and take joy in the many things we share in common.
I am sad that the way I have done church has contributed to you becoming so profoundly alienated from a community I cherish so deeply.
I know my church has failed you. It has let you down. It has betrayed many of its most deeply held values.
Yet, at the same time, in my experience, for all its failings, my church has been a place in which my heart has been broken open to the startling potential for beauty present in human community. I have been challenged in church to embrace the radical diversity of life and to persevere with people with whom I might never normally choose to be associated. Church has been a place for me in which I have encountered the ineffable presence of Mystery and the inexpressible beauty of the Divine.
I wish it was possibe for us to speak about ways in which we share in common experieces of the deep mysteries of life. I wish it was possible for us to recognize and affirm the connections that unite us in the extraordinary wonder of the human community. I hope you can help me learn to listen. I hope that, through listening to you, I may discover the many unexpected ways in which God is present in the world and at work in all of creation.
In A Spacious Place 
22 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 3, 2011 at 8:35 am
jaqueline
“1. Can you imagine anything I could do that might help rehabilitate your image of church?
2. Is there anything positive you can ever imagine church might contribute to your life?
3. Can you imagine yourself ever feeling drawn to share in a corporate expression of reverence for that deep sense of the mystery and wonder of life that we share? ”
I LOVE this letter….It is a humble letter and a necessary one. I had begun to put a link up on Facebook.
These questions are what stopped me from sending it to my non – churched friends.. please forgive me for seeing it this way: these questions still are about the churched not the non-churched.
They ask what advice, what feedback they can give us to make us more acceptable, more open….. “Give us honest feedback please because we know we have made mistakes with you and we need your help to get better”…It is still all about us.
And, sadly, while it is all about us I do not think anyone even wants to hear a question let alone offer a reply..and perhaps the reply may not actually be something that we want to hear.
I had challenged someone recently about his closed attitude to Spirituality Cafe, which he did not want to attend because it was lead by a minister. ” But don’t you see, it is a Christian wanting to be open to the rest of the world?” I asked him..”how can we demand Christians become open to the rest of the world if the rest of the world is closed to them??”
” but it doesn’t matter, we are in a post Christian world and no-one wants anything to do with Christianity any more”.
That reply stopped me short.
Are any of us really ready to hear that?
February 3, 2011 at 2:12 pm
inaspaciousplace
1. please tell me what are the right questions.
2. please do not feel the need to protect me from any thoughtful contribution to the conversation around spirituality. Unfortunately the comment “no-one wants anything to do with Christianity any more” does not fall into the category of thoughtful contribution to the conversation.
I live in a city of roughly 400,000 inhabitants in the most secular province of a most secular country. Every Sunday 10,000 people in the city where I live choose to attend church. I am unclear how these 10,000 people represent “no-one.”
What other activity can you imagine 10,000 people voluntarily sharing in once a week for no monetary gain and without any social pressure to participate, in fact, often in the face of considerable opposition?
February 3, 2011 at 9:59 pm
jaqueline
I understand Christopher…yet we have been talking about the decline of church and we have been talking about how many find it irrelevant..and we will hear that, if we move beyond our group.
I am not sure I am protecting you. As a Christian it is an activity I admire and I was very perplexed by why he would be so dismissive. Here is a Christian starting something of general interest while he was accusing Christians of being closed to the world….
February 3, 2011 at 11:00 pm
jaqueline
As for questions: these are not ‘wrong’ questions and not unnecessary ones just not ones that I feel comfortable asking my friends ..yet.
I guess I would like church to be less interested in how the world sees us and more interested in how we see the world?
How does the way WE see the world affect our ability to be in it?
Perhaps this is as much a cause for the world’s lack of interest..not that we are irrelevant but that the world perceives that it has become irrelevant to us.
I am not talking about the things we are compassionate about ..
I am talking about every day people. Are we friends, involved with the non-churched? Have we at St Phil’s asked our neighbours over? 🙂
What about having a street party – a neighborhood BBQ, not just a ‘church’ BBQ?? ( imagine if the diocese rescinded the disestablishment and we had a party to celebrate? And we made an effort each one of us to hang with someone we didn’t know and introduce them to our friends etc???)
Can we just think for a little about what its like on the other side of this concern for decline? Might our isolation from non-churched people exacerbate an idea that we want nothing to do with them?
February 5, 2011 at 5:39 pm
allogenes
10,000 people is, I agree, hardly “no-one.”
10,000 out of 400,000 is, nevertheless, a rather small minority, compared with the by-gone days when church-going was considered normative by and for everyone.
There’s nothing wrong with this; the only problem is that many of us (churchgoing and non-churchgoing alike) have attitudes rooted in those earlier days. On the one hand, many nonbelievers are unnecessarily hostile, and perceive oppression even where none is intended. On the other, believers are puzzled that so many people don’t seem to “get it.” (I know I’m confusing two issues here, church and belief, but they’re not unrelated; as a Unitarian Universalist, I’m a regular churchgoer without a conventional “belief system” – but that’s a rarity.)
Try not to think of church as something people have somehow become alienated from; think of it as something you’ve found that works for you and some number of other people, and you’re happy to share with anyone who might be interested, but don’t take it for granted that most people ought to be interested. Like the way I feel about classical music, which has a very profound effect on me and a few others I know, but which I’m resigned to most people not “getting.”
Because back in those olden days, when there were full churches on every street corner, a lot of the people there really weren’t any more interested than their non-churchgoing successors today, they just went because it was the “thing to do,” a place it was good to be seen. (And this applies to my music analogy also.) The present condition of low attendance seems to me more natural, more authentic.
If you want to connect with non-churchgoers, there’s a lot of stuff at least somewhat more serious than the weather that you can talk to them about. It isn’t all or nothing, ultimate meaning or just the weather. Talk about politics, world events, music, art and entertainment, travel, sports (a “religious” topic here in Boston at least), their health and yours, how their kids or yours if any are doing, whatever. Try to understand people on their own terms before you think of addressing them in yours. Let them tell you what they value and address them in terms of that. That’s my advice.
February 6, 2011 at 10:04 pm
jaqueline
Allogenes, I am so thankful for what you and Timberwraith have shared….it warms my heart and gives me hope.
February 3, 2011 at 10:38 am
jaqueline
Hi Christopher,
I finally found an article written by the Moderator of the United Church back in 2007. It has come to mind often when reading your posts about church, and it came to mind again today.
http://www.hollyunitedchurch.ca/apps/blog/show/3848031-survival-of-the-united-church-not-a-priority
By National Post October 13, 2007 Be the first to post a comment
‘Survival’ of United Church not a Priority’
The leader of the United Church of Canada says his Church is too “preoccupied” with protecting its buildings, counting its money and recruiting members, and should instead devote its energies to helping the poor, the hungry and the sick beyond its walls.
The leader of the United Church of Canada says his Church is too “preoccupied” with protecting its buildings, counting its money and recruiting members, and should instead devote its energies to helping the poor, the hungry and the sick beyond its walls.
Reverend David Giuliano, the Moderator, or spiritual head, of one of Canada’s largest Protestant churches, has sent a letter to United Church congregations across the country, urging them to worry less about “buildings and budgets” and become more concerned about the “suffering of the world around us.”
“Our hope is not for our survival or even growth,” Rev. Giuliano writes. “I am praying that our preoccupation with getting people into church is transformed by a passion for getting the church out into the world.
“I am praying that we welcome strangers with a radical hospitality that sees in them the face of Christ — not an ‘identifiable giver’ or a ‘potential committee member.’ ”
Rev. Giuliano’s plea comes in the midst of a difficult period for the Church and its roughly 600,000 members. Along with other mainstream Christian denominations, the United Church of Canada is experiencing a long decline in national membership; its congregational lists fell 39% between 1961 and 2001.
In July, the Church announced program cuts and layoffs at its national headquarters in Toronto due to financial pressures — including the closure of its audiovisual production office and the cancellation of its award-winning current affairs television pro-gram Spirit Connection, which will air for the last time on Vision TV on Dec. 30.
In an interview this week Rev. Giuliano acknowledged, “There’s a lot of anxiety in the Church about our institution –about money and numbers.”
He said the Church, which once boasted more than a million active adherents, was for many generations a source of cultural and social authority in Protestant Canada.
“Many of us are reluctant to give up [that authority]–even if it doesn’t really exist today –but I see the change as liberating, because we don’t have to hold on to that any more.”
“Jesus’s followers were not a huge group of people, and they were not prosperous,” he said.
“The measurement of a faithful community cannot be in its numbers.”
Rev. Giuliano said that as one example of the Church’s preoccupation with survival, too much money is spent maintaining Church buildings that serve little purpose other than to shelter a declining group of worshippers once a week.
“I think we have too much property,” he said. “We have places where we have three United Churches within three blocks of each other.”
He applauded one of the country’s oldest congregations, First United Church in Ottawa, which sold its old building last year and now leases meeting and programming space from a nearby Anglican Church.
Rev. Giuliano likened the Church institution to a treasured car that a proud owner might keep in their driveway.
“The Church is a vehicle intended to get us somewhere. If you keep it fixed and washed and waxed but you don’t ever take it anywhere, it doesn’t have much purpose,” he said.
“If what we do is ask the question, ‘How do we get big or even survive,’ I think we’ve lost our way,” he said.
“For me, the real question is, ‘What does it mean to be faithful?’ “
February 3, 2011 at 7:48 pm
Tress
I dashed off some thoughts ,on the Times Colonist Blog . this morning and rereading them they sound like nonsense!
I have honestly tried to answer your questions,and it is not that easy.
Question one
It seems to me that you are doing as much as you can to show openess to the disaffected, within the confines of the Anglican church and your own convictions.
Quesstion 2
The church has contributed to my life, but Unless there is more openess as to interpretation of beliefs and teachings, and less clinging to dogma,I cannot see how I can participate ,without being a hypocrite ,now.
Question3
This is a tricky question , because of the wording.
Great performances of sacred music arouse the feeling of experiencing Glory.
I am drawn to the feeling of unity in a communion service when there is the atmosphere of sanctity.
Jolly groups or meditations do not positively affect me.
February 6, 2011 at 6:23 pm
timberwraith
Actually, talking to you and members of your congregation here at this blog have worked toward rehabilitating my image of Christianity. This process started before I found your blog, but y’all have helped move that process a little further forward.
However, I should probably toss out a few general details that might be more helpful. These details aren’t aimed specifically at your church, but rather, are simply generalized responses to Christianity and organized religion:
a) Practice an open and affirming approach toward LGBT people. Don’t tell us that the loving bond we feel for our loved ones is a sin or is morally inferior to the relationships that heterosexual people experience.
b) Be inclusive in your sermons. Explain how spiritual teachings relate to the struggles of those who have been too often ignored or abused by Christianity: women, LGBT people, indigenous people, and so on.
c) Be sure to read/hear the words of those who have criticized Christianity because of its past and current abuse. Understand the historical and theological pitfalls that have lead Christianity to act as a source of oppression rather than a source of support and spiritual solace. Be willing to discuss and engage those who have been wounded by Christianity. Don’t sweep past and current abuse under the carpet. Healing does not occur in the face of denial and comfortable omission.
d) Discuss other religions and explore the universal aspects of spirituality that run through those bodies of belief and practice. Work toward bringing yourself and your congregation to a place of understanding other faiths. Do not approach other faiths as fearful competitors, but rather, try to approach them simply as gatherings of people who experience spirituality in their own way, in a way that is as beautiful as yours.
e) Get to know non-theists better. As you know, there are quite a few of us who are not out to “burn religion to the ground.” We probably share more in common with each other than many of us realize. Please realize, however, that you should get to know us because you really want to. Don’t approach us with the intent to convert us. We’ll figure out your intentions more quickly than you might realize. (From what I’ve read here on your blog, I can’t imagine that you’d try to convert us, Christopher. Again, I’m making really general replies to your question.)
f) Understand that pushing for a strict separation of religion and government institutions is helpful not only to atheists, but also any religious/philosophical minority (including minority Christian denominations). For example, here in the US, there is a very narrow, exclusivist version of Christianity trying to take control of our government. This has the potential to hurt many people, including Christians whose version of theology is dismissed as immoral blasphemy by those currently grasping for governmental power.
g) For goodness sakes, hold some of your Sunday gatherings outside. I hate sitting inside a building trying to engage in something spiritual with brick and mortar separating me from nature. For me, a great part of spirituality centers upon nature itself. Why not celebrate the beauty of God’s creation by holding your gatherings in the midst of nature’s beauty? Maybe once a month during the warmer seasons? Maybe more?
h) Have sermons and bible study that does more than limit itself to words in biblical verses. Explain the history and cultural context. Explore the social forces undergirding the particular verse and chapter in question. If there are multiple interpretations and/or there is theological disagreement over a particular passage, make that fact known and discuss it. Make the experience intellectually engaging as well as spiritually engaging.
i) Play music from a variety of genres and cultural traditions.
j) Discuss and explore how Christianity is practiced in other cultures and countries.
A deeper sense of community and insight into the ways that others practice and understand spiritual connection.
I’d attend a bible study or sermon if I knew it deeply incorporated items h and j as discussed above. I view religion with a sociologist’s curiosity. If the sermon was intellectually engaging, you might find me sitting in your pews (barring the thousand miles of distance between the Twin Cities and your church, of course).
On a spiritual level, I’m afraid there’s too much of a mismatch between my own form of spirituality and Christianity. I find that I have to do too much emotional, intuitive, and conceptual “translation” to make a Christian church service work for me. It’s like looking at the world through someone else’s glasses. It’s all sort of “spiritually blurry”. I’ve tried. It just doesn’t work for me. That’s not meant to be a criticism. It’s simply a statement of preference.
Some people like tea. Some like coffee.
Nevertheless, if you can engage me intellectually, you’ll get my attention.
February 7, 2011 at 3:10 pm
inaspaciousplace
thank you timberwraith.
You have outlined a beautiful program for a new Reformation of the Christian Church, or perhaps any community of faith. I believe there are churches/faith communities out there that come close to living many of your criteria for church. In our little corner of faithland we will continue to work towards realizing your magnificent vision.
February 7, 2011 at 7:14 pm
timberwraith
Oh yes, there are indeed such churches. Many of the ideas I presented are elements that I witnessed in a UCC church in Minneapolis that I attended for a bit.
February 6, 2011 at 6:50 pm
timberwraith
Oh, I’d like to add that I’d also find sermons that incorporated item d to be intellectually engaging as well.
What about holding occasional services in concert with other faiths in your city? That would be cool on so many levels.
February 6, 2011 at 10:02 pm
jaqueline
woo hoo !! yeah!! big, heart opening, hoorah and Amen….nice one Timberwraith ( touched again )
February 6, 2011 at 8:16 pm
Lindsay
Yes, love what you’ve put out there, Timberwraith!!
How do I type a BIG thumbs up?
February 7, 2011 at 7:15 pm
A conversation continues « Allogenes
[…] Christopher Page, whom I’ve mentioned several times, recently posted on his blog a Letter To A Non-Churchgoer; being impressed as always with his earnest way of thinking through the issues facing the church in […]
March 10, 2016 at 11:27 am
Dave (TruthForFree.com)
Wow, where to begin with this one… I guess let me start by saying, I was a deeply-involved church boy for 30+ years of my life. I’ve now been out of that environment for over 15. I am still a follower of Jesus and a member of the Family of God (which, in truth, is the only “church” referenced in Scripture). I appreciate the humble tones of this letter and it appears the author is manifesting good intentions; however, he fundamentally misunderstands the non-church goer on so many levels. I’m not sure I can blame his ignorance entirely. I’ve walked in those shoes too. I meant well when I did. The author’s understanding of church has likely been drilled into him by his environment… not by the Holy Spirit, unfortunately.
To his comment:
“But, except possibly for a wedding or a funeral, we never share in the enterprise I call church.”
My Response:
The author may not even realize how accurately he indirectly described the reason why what he calls church is not what the Bible calls Church when he says, “the enterprise I call church.” The Church of Scripture is NOT an enterprise. It’s not a business. It’s not even a social club. Yet that is everything that today’s church program is… but, if someone cares about what the Bible presents, then “enterprise” is NOT it. According to Scripture, the Church is the body of Christ (the Family of God, the Spiritual nation of the Kingdom of God, the very PEOPLE who are born again and who live in Christ – regardless of whether or not they attend some man-made program we label as “church”).
Colossians 1:18 – He is also the head of the body, which is the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that he himself might have first place in everything.
Acts 7:48-49 – However, the Most High does not dwell in houses and temples made with hands; as the prophet says, Heaven [is] My throne, and earth the footstool for My feet. What [kind of] house can you build for Me, says the Lord, or what is the place in which I can rest?
The author of the article offers the following three questions, which I would like to offer some thoughts in response. I could expound on each of these at length, but I’ll try to be brief…
He says:
If I was able to talk with you, I would want to ask you three questions:
1. Can you imagine anything I could do that might help rehabilitate your image of church?
My Response: Short answer, no. My image of church does not need rehabilitation because it is fundamentally different than yours. You view church as a religious enterprise, a social club, a program that you feel should be attended weekly. Your image of church involves liturgy (i.e. a human-devised agenda), religious expectations, entertainment, and the delusion that God requires this.
My understanding of Church comes from Scripture, not my “image” of it. Scripture defines church, simply, as the body of Christ; that means the PEOPLE of God. This represents ALL of those who have been born again into the Family of God. The Family of God (in case anyone is unaware) is NOT a building. It is NOT a religious program. By virtue of even those two things alone, today’s “church” fails the test of Scripture. That doesn’t mean today’s “church” is (in all cases) evil, nor does it mean that all of those who support its existence are somehow sinning. It simply means that it is not biblical, nor is it required in the least by God. Movie theaters are not biblical either. They provide a lot of the same stuff churches do; entertainment, inspiration, comfort, face-to-back-of-head-style “fellowship”, gathering, etc. but are just as “essential” as churches. Yes, if you’re a sharp one you understood correctly that I was suggesting that churches are NOT essential. A person can grow spiritually and even thrive spiritually without ever setting foot into a church building. Not only that, but a follower of Jesus can enjoy true fellowship among the Family of God even without ever attending a church program! If I were to offer my own testimony, it would involve me sharing with you that my relationship with Christ and my process of spiritual growth has only increased after discarding the distraction of church world from my life… and note that I did not say I discarded relationship with Christ Jesus or true fellowship with members of His body.
2. Is there anything positive you can ever imagine church might contribute to your life?
My Response: I can imagine all kinds of things… but again, what’s with the appeal to people’s imagination?
2 Corinthians 10:5 – cast down imaginations, and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bring every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.
Wouldn’t it be better to concern ourselves with that which God wishes to contribute to our life rather than simply what we “imagine might”? And what is the purpose of even asking such a question? Is it so that the person asking can suggest another formula or idea to inspire that area that a person thinks might contribute to their life? This is what I hate about the “seeker-sensitive” church mindset. It doesn’t actually deal in solutions that God deems essential. It deals in trying to coddle and manipulate people according to their feelings. That actually might be evil on some level. Why not just apply the recipe of the Gospel, the Word of God, and let the Holy Spirit do the leading? Or don’t you believe that God is able to draw people to Himself without your “church”? I don’t know that you do believe that because of how central you make this anxiety about attending church to your life. Church folks are always trying to get people to attend their program. They even tend to understand “evangelism” in this context. Yeah, they believe evangelism is about winning souls for Jesus, but they also believe it’s about adding butts to the pews. I can’t tell you how many times (as a church goer) I heard people ponder how they might get friends or family to church so that they could hear the pastor introduce them to Jesus… Ugh! Instead of letting their own relationship with Christ manifest fruit unto righteousness, they are fixated on the program. Virtually every good thing we find in Scripture pertaining to the New Testament Church and life in Christ gets mixed along with modern concepts of man-invented religion until they become synonymous in the minds of the involved. Often times the church ends up occupying a more central role in their life than Christ Himself, yet the delusion leads them to believe both are one and the same. They are NOT!
3. Can you imagine yourself ever feeling drawn to share in a corporate expression of reverence for that deep sense of the mystery and wonder of life that we share?
My Response: Your implication is that if I don’t attend church than I cannot possibly share in any corporate expression of reverence for that deep sense of mystery and wonder of life. Okay, aside from the fact that this question is worded very oddly and I’m not exactly sure what the “corporate expression of reverence for that deep sense of mystery and wonder of life” is, I’ll take a stab at it hoping you’ll forgive me for some presumption. I assume the author is basically referring to the benefits of corporate worship, prayer, etc. I am not opposed to “corporate expressions” of worship. Those can happen a number of ways (and they often do) without a church organization being involved. I can gather with folks in my home. No, I am not talking about “doing house church”. I am talking about members of the Lord’s body (which itself is the only Church there is) who may, at times, find themselves together for various reasons (where in a home, a bus, sitting by the river, talking over the phone or Internet, etc.). Jesus said that when TWO or THREE are gathered He is there. Guess what, that would indicate that if only my wife and I were together or a close friend and myself, the Lord would manifest His presence among us. One might even argue that Christ himself could count as one of those two! I have enjoyed many occasions of sweet fellowship with the Lord when it was just Him and I conversing. God Himself is a Triune fellowship! Even before any of us existed, the “TWO or THREE” Jesus referred to was in full expression. God, in His graciousness, has now invited us into this fellowship!
But expounding on this a bit further, we need to understand that the Scripture nowhere indicates a description of “Church” as being a programmed assembly, a religious meeting or a special building – so those definitions are just OUT. You can flush them right down your spiritual toilet. Every time I find myself together with a fellow brother and sister in Christ, and we are sharing fellowship about the Lord, there is always a mutual reverence for the blessing of Christ who is manifested in our gathering. No church is needed because WE ARE the Church that Jesus is building. As a follower of Christ I myself also have a “deep sense of the mystery and wonder of life” because I am compelled by my relationship with an amazing God. I recognize my family in Christ as the CHURCH, whether or not they attend something called a church… AND I remain a part of them even if I am not able to physically gather with them. Attending a man-made program in a special building does not define Christianity or the Church – NOT EVEN CLOSE!
The truth is I resent it when man puts a label on something and presumes it to be essential when God has NEVER done so. With the case of church, the matter is perhaps even more concerning because, in this case, Scripture clearly defines one thing as “the Church” and then man comes along and says, “Yeah, but I call this other thing church too… AND I’m gonna tell people they should or need to belong to it too… AND, I’m not gonna associate with people if they don’t attend this thing I call church… AND, I’m going to write guilt-trip articles to try and compel them to attend it if they’re not interested.”
Now think about this… In the first Century, Christians did not attend churches, nor did they build anything known as churches. This is 100% historical fact. The word “church” in our Bibles is actually a Greek word (Ecclesia) that means “a called out assembly”. In context, this “called out assembly” is represented by those that have been called out of darkness into the light of Christ (1 Peter 2:9). The early Christians held absolutely no concept of “attending church” because they understood that THEY were the ones who had been “called out” into the “assembly” of the Family of God (Hebrews 12:23; Ephesians 2:10). Therefore, wherever they met, THERE was the Church. The Church (to their thinking) was NOT the place they met or the location or the building or the meeting… Rather it was literally THEM! THEY WERE THE CHURCH! The meeting place and location and meeting were irrelevant to this understanding. How different things are today!
The word “church” also did not even come into existence until long after the apostles of Jesus had all died. The origin of the word “church” actually has nothing to do with “a called out assembly” but has everything to do with a “religiously dedicated building”. The English word “church” is actually from a Greek word that is NEVER used in Scripture! The Greek word that is used (Ecclesia) translates “Assembly”, not “Church”. When the Roman Emperor Constantine took power, he confiscated the temples of the pagans and designated them for Christian worship and made “Christianity” the religion of the state. But Christianity wasn’t a “religion” at all (at least to the minds of those who counted themselves part of the Family of God) and neither did it need a human ruler to authorize, qualify or re-define it. Their ruler was Christ Jesus and they were His body. Constantine (and others during this period) began to bring in this other influence of religion rather than understanding this was life itself for those who had embraced the revelation of the Gospel of Christ. It was after this time (in history) that Christians began to trade (subtly at first) their understanding for “Ecclesia” in exchange for Constantine’s introduction of “church” as a religious meeting place, program, and building (i.e. temple or worship house). This plagued understanding remains with us until today, but it was NOT this way from the beginning. The early Christians of the first century had no churches and there is not a single passage of Scripture that tells anyone to join something called a church organization or to attend one. Not even one! Jesus also NEVER instructed any of His apostles to go into the world and build churches. The entire fascination with “churchianity” is completely beholden to the wisdom of man, not Christ. THAT, my friends, is most significant to my understanding.
The bottom line here is that “church” as we know it today, is NOT from an origin of Scripture… It is NOT essential to faith, the Christian life, spiritual growth, or to satisfy fellowship among Believers. It is, as we have already stated, man’s answer to these things, irrespective of God’s leadership. It is, in essence, another mediator besides Christ and therefore, in many ways, devolves to a type of anti-Christ. It bears the appearance of godliness but actually denies the power thereof, because it inserts itself as the very method by which God is expected to operate in the life of every believer. These are ALL man’s ideas… NOT God’s! Therefore “church” as we know it today is utterly irrelevant.
This is not to say that good things don’t sometimes occur in a church environment. Good things may occur because God is not a respecter or persons and certainly not places. Many people are participants in ignorance. Many have been deceived through years of false concepts that have been handed down concerning this subject. God, however, is not ignorant about this… and He reaches into our mess with goodness, patience and love to wake us, break us, heal us, and restore us.
Church today is little more than a man-made social club with Jesus as its mascot. Social clubs aren’t always bad things (they can even be entertaining, serve inspiration, and provide an physical location for people of like minds and hearts to come together) and if ever there was a good mascot to have it would certainly be Jesus… but I would much rather cherish the fact that I am a member of Christ’s body and that He is not merely my mascot, but my Lord, Savior and closest friend. He is God, not merely the figurehead of something people refer to as “the Christian religion”. Jesus did not come to earth to establish an organized religion. He came to seek and to save those which were lost and draw all men unto Himself. That is something MUCH bigger than any prospect of a mission to church everyone. When Jesus said that he was building his Ecclesia (Church) on the Rock, He said that the gates of hell would not be able to prevail against it. He wasn’t talking about an organization or a religious corporation. He was talking about HIS ASSEMBLY! This and only this is the Family of God. There are not many families of God, just as there are NOT many churches. There is only ONE! Membership in one of man’s so-called “churches” affords you nothing in the scope of eternity. It guarantees you NOTHING in terms of the promise of spiritual growth or the development of a closer relationship with God. Only submission to the Lordship of Jesus Christ through a personal relationship with the Father by the Holy Spirit will get you any of that!
This anxiety over church is absolutely ridiculous. Go or don’t go. It doesn’t matter! Really, it absolutely does NOT matter! What matters is that you listen to the voice of the Holy Spirit and allow Him to guide you AND to assemble you with other members of His Family as He sees fit. Perhaps that will be among a traditional “church” setting on occasion, or perhaps it may not. But even if it is among a traditional church setting, don’t mistake the true definition of “Church” according to the Scriptures. Remember that God’s people are the only “Church” (i.e. Assembly in Christ) there is. This author means well, I’m sure. He sounds a lot like I did when I was still plugged in to that system, thinking it was essential, important and desirable. I used to feel sorrow for those outside it and though I never would actually say that someone had to attend church to be a real Christian, the truth is that I pretty much held that mindset. I was a slave to that mindset. I was ignorant of the Bible… Actually, no… I was very aware of the Scriptures (just as I believe many of you reading this sense an identification with the truth I am talking about) and sometimes the Scriptures troubled me because what I observed in the Bible looked so different from what I called “church”. So I really had allowed myself to become deluded to a certain extent and I learned to manipulate semantics to justify man’s definition of church because I really didn’t understand the Bible’s and I was comfortable in my cozy religious environment. I don’t think I had any wicked intent. But I was wrong. I was deceived. I was led astray and bought the error of religion and churchianity. I embraced man’s imagination and set aside the search for God’s better calling. God still met me where I was. He was good to me. He still afforded me spiritual growth though I think my religious mind often served as more of an obstacle than a help. He still communicated with me and taught me, though some things I inevitably tuned out because of the faulty mindset I was still holding on to. Once the light of the Lord understand pierced through, I repented and God set me free.
I hope this brother will do the same. I pray only God’s goodness and grace to him and all those who have been persuaded by this nonsense concern over organized religion under the label of “church”. Be free my friends!!! Live unto the Lord! Discover the great joy there is in pursuing only His glorious Way! God bless!!!
March 10, 2016 at 12:09 pm
Letter To A Non-Churchgoer (My Response) « Article By Other Author « TruthForFree.com
[…] to woo them back into the fold. You can read the article yourself if you’re interested by clicking here. The following is my personal response to the post, which I also shared on the author’s […]
March 14, 2016 at 10:41 am
Neil Girrard
Hello Christopher! A pleasure to e-meet you!
You wrote:
>If I was able to talk with you, I would want to ask you three questions: I would like to ask you these questions, not as a thinly veiled scheme to coax you into my church, but because I believe my life would be enriched by our conversation.
I’m a non-“church”goer. I bailed 20 years ago and I’m more on fire for Jesus now than ever before. So let’s get to your questions.
You wrote:
>1. Can you imagine anything I could do that might help rehabilitate your image of church?
I would have to ask you, can you imagine anything I could do that might help you understand the deceptions that go into the image of “church”? It is probably the hardest message to present that Jesus is the truth but “church” is a lie. I have found it very useful to begin by comparing the definitions of “church” and ekklesia. “Church” in English means 1) building, 2) clergy, 3) religion and 4) people. Ekklesia in Greek (most often mistranslated “church”) means only people. 3 parts lie, 1 part truth – tells the story very well. If anyone can recognize this linguistic difference, we now at least have a communication basis by which to begin to discuss which is original and genuine and which is appended or even counterfeit.
You wrote:
>2. Is there anything positive you can ever imagine church might contribute to your life?
I would have to ask you, is there anything positive that you could ever imagine that not attending “church” might contribute to your life? You made great strides by confessing that you (and I presume you speak on behalf of other “church”-ites like yourself) have ostracized people like me by being “arrogant, self-righteous, opinionated”, etc. I confirm your confession and commend you greatly for your honesty and boldness! But outside of the “church” box, I have found that 1) the world is less like this than the “church”-ites are and 2) that I can discuss and even confront such things (especially in myself!) much more freely and with much better fruit than when the first things that must always be preserved are the “church” box and the “pastor’s” salary.
You wrote:
>3. Can you imagine yourself ever feeling drawn to share in a corporate expression of reverence for that deep sense of the mystery and wonder of life that we share?
Can you imagine yourself ever sharing in a corporate expression of reverence in any other setting than inside a “church” building? God does not live in buildings made by human hands – we, the people, are His building! He is the Creator-God who is not very well represented in the architecture of the “church” building. The building and the professional staff and all the carnal, religious squirrel cage accoutrements are simply man-made appendages that cripple and handicap us in our race to press on to the goal of the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.
I do look forward to continuing this conversation as, like you, I too “believe you and I are not all that different.” However, my loyalty is no longer divided between Christ and the “church” as I can freely serve His people who have been freed from the bondages the “church” represents as readily as I can serve those who are still ensnared in those bondages. Do you not hear His call to “Come out from among the ‘Christian’ idolatry and idolaters”? Or do you just drown out His still small voice with “church” routine and busy-ness and by turning the volume of the “worship” music up?
In His love,
Neil Girrard
paidionbooks.org
March 22, 2016 at 6:11 am
Christopher Page
five years is a long time. At this time, I am no longer in a position to enter into a protracted conversation on this issue. Suffice it to say that, over the years I have found in the admittedly flawed corporate expression of Christian faith traditionally called “church” deep nurture for my faith in Christ and a profound vehicle for loving service.
March 22, 2016 at 9:19 am
Neil Girrard
If I had seen your post sooner, I would have posted sooner! ;o) But I am deeply saddened that you won’t be able to discuss this – you seemed like one of the few who might actually have been able to do so!
You wrote:
> I have found in the admittedly flawed corporate expression of Christian faith traditionally called “church” deep nurture for my faith in Christ and a profound vehicle for loving service.
Most are willing to call the “church” flawed but few indeed are willing to acknowledge the nature and source of the flaws and take the steps necessary to cut away the appendages and counterfeits that keep the corporate expression of faith from being able to more deeply and more truthfully nurture the faith of upcoming generations and to be a truly profound vehicle for loving service to so many more. In addition, I and so many others have also experienced the exact opposite of what you say – so much so that we cannot help but see that most of what calls itself “church” is simply the apostasy, the falling away from the faith that occurs before Christ’s return. (2 Ths. 2:3, Mt. 24:5)
Be blessed, sir, and we’ll see if anyone else steps up to the plate on this discussion.
April 3, 2016 at 11:43 pm
Eugene
Whether it’s ignorance or a willful disregard for embracing who the body of Christ is (born again believers i.e. People not some program or corporate expression taking place only in a building) your article has missed it on so many levels. You seem sincere, but please take time and seriously study who (not what) the bible say’s constitutes the true Ekklesia. Don’t reverance buildings (idolatry) above the living Christ and His body? Our worship, joy, love and fellowship is found in The Lord and amongst other believers i.e. People. This shouldn’t be limited only to a building.
April 4, 2016 at 9:14 am
Neil Girrard
You’ve touched on one of the fundamental errors of the “church.” Long ago, under the influence of Augustine, the “church” ruled that it would always be a mixed multitude of saints and sinners. (see Augustine vs. the Donatists in church history!) But the ekklesia (original Greek word mistranslated “church”) is ONLY ONLY born again people. The “church” is therefore very different from the ekklesia.