Evangelical Congregations ?

24

Comments

  • PuzzlerPuzzler Shipmate
    I like the sound of that, as long as there can be good music too.
  • ZappaZappa Ecclesiantics Host
    meh ... music schmusic :wink:
  • Zappa wrote: »
    meh ... music schmusic :wink:

    *sharpens pitchfork and lights torch*
  • You do that, whilst I stack the firewood under his feet...
    :naughty:
  • Be careful, it's been very dry lately.
  • Be careful, it's been very dry lately.

    Not here. Fortunately I have charcoal in the shed.
  • ZappaZappa Ecclesiantics Host
    :innocent:
  • As a cradle and non-triumphalist RC it always makes me grind my teeth when RCs refer to other Christians as “non Catholics” - to my pedantic mind it is a polite way of calling a fellow adherent of the Nicene Creed a heretic.
  • tclunetclune Shipmate
    edited September 2020
    As a cradle and non-triumphalist RC it always makes me grind my teeth when RCs refer to other Christians as “non Catholics” - to my pedantic mind it is a polite way of calling a fellow adherent of the Nicene Creed a heretic.

    Are you trying to inflame our Eastern Orthodox brethren? ;)
  • tclune wrote: »
    As a cradle and non-triumphalist RC it always makes me grind my teeth when RCs refer to other Christians as “non Catholics” - to my pedantic mind it is a polite way of calling a fellow adherent of the Nicene Creed a heretic.

    Are you trying to inflame our Eastern Orthodox brethren? ;)

    Far be it from me to create Outrage with the Orthodox brethern. I’ll get me coat.
  • tclune wrote: »
    As a cradle and non-triumphalist RC it always makes me grind my teeth when RCs refer to other Christians as “non Catholics” - to my pedantic mind it is a polite way of calling a fellow adherent of the Nicene Creed a heretic.

    Are you trying to inflame our Eastern Orthodox brethren? ;)

    Far be it from me to create Outrage with the Orthodox brethern. I’ll get me coat.

    Is coathook!
  • As an ex-conservative evangelical the ongoing use of the phrase 'local church' being substituted and emphasized in sermons when the bible simply says 'church' used to make me grind my teeth. I am (and was then) interested in denominations and the variations in Christian belief and realized how it was being used ...

    - Subtle undermining of the whole universal church in its wonderful variety
    - Subtle messaging 'those other Christians are generally inferior to us' and 'some of them are not really Christians unless they have doctrinal distinctives like us'
    - Pretty overt messaging - Catholics are not Christians (Mary, idols, yada yada yada, whatever)

    Far be it from me to say, but some could form a view it's manipulative and isolationist ...
  • JuanaCruz wrote: »
    As an ex-conservative evangelical the ongoing use of the phrase 'local church' being substituted and emphasized in sermons when the bible simply says 'church' used to make me grind my teeth. I am (and was then) interested in denominations and the variations in Christian belief and realized how it was being used ...

    - Subtle undermining of the whole universal church in its wonderful variety
    - Subtle messaging 'those other Christians are generally inferior to us' and 'some of them are not really Christians unless they have doctrinal distinctives like us'
    - Pretty overt messaging - Catholics are not Christians (Mary, idols, yada yada yada, whatever)

    Far be it from me to say, but some could form a view it's manipulative and isolationist ...

    (The late) Rev. Prof. Dr. Marty Luther (1483-1546 C.E.) was so so so so so KEEN on getting The Bible into the language of common people and into every household so that every person could read -- and INTERPRET/understand -- The Written Word of God for him/herself ... Part of the idea/hope/claim/goal was that this would wipe away ALL doctrinal confusions/disputes/heresies ... and schisms ...

    Uh huh ...

    (1) "Every man his own priest before God" combined with (2) the Enlightenment dogma/ethos of the "autonomous individual" ... has yielded up literally THOUSANDS of separated mutually recriminating denominations ...

    The story is told of a fella who was castaway marooned on a remote uncharted tropical island for several years ... Over time he constructed a fairly comfortable almost civilized life for himself -- a passably nice house and even a small chapel where he worshipped every Sunday (as he figured the calendar) ...

    When he was eventually rescued, his perplexed helpers asked him about the run-down older chapel building near his little settlement ... "Oh, I quit going there after a couple years -- doctrinal controversy, you see ... "
    !!! ktttsssccchhh !!! (cymbal crash) ...
  • The version I had involved three makeshift churches - one he went to, one his split from, and one which he would never ever go to.
  • A variant of that joke is common in Wales: "That's my chapel and the other one is the chapel I never go to".

    I'm not quite sure I agree with the comment on "local church" vs. "Church", partly because I in fact think there are three "levels" (at least) of Church, i.e. local congregation, denomination, and Church Universal. The second is slightly iffy as, in my experience, many congregations in Britain these days often seem to have stronger links with other congregations in their locality (from different traditions) than with their parent denomination - although I doubt if that's true for RC or Orthodox.

    I do agree that there have often been Christians - and not just Evangelicals - who (a) don't seem to recognise that they are part of the Church Universal and (b) write off believers from other traditions as being "not proper Christians" or, at the very least, errant in some way or other. That includes the folk who decry all denominations as being outside God's plan and so only stick together with their own kind - thus creating a new, if nameless,denomination of their own!
  • I think @JuanaCruz is spot on. What she is talking about is not that there are local church congregations, of course there are and should be, but the way that phrase "local church" can be used to undermine other levels of church.

  • Well, yes. If there ever an 'ideal' church - and such a thing does not exist - I'd suggest it should combine non-conformist style sermons with some sacramentalist ceremonial.

    Getting the balance right would be the tricky part.

    That's 1970s Methodism (probably in a big town church that used to be Wesleyan) then. And the music would be good. Sadly history suggests that the enthusiasm for such a place expressed on this thread, was not widespread (or maybe it was just that the enthusiasts left for the local charismatic used-to-be Baptist church, everyone's kids went away to university, and the rump congregation just got older 'till it died.)
  • Totally agree with the comments about the way the magic words 'local church' are used in a certain strand of con Evo churches (for me it was the Grace Baptists). It was like a codeword for 'everything we stand for' not like those who look primarily to their heirarchical denominations for identity.
  • I grew up in a Baptist church (Scottish Baptist) and my sister and I, in our teens, used to make a note of how often one minister in particular used the phrase "we Baptists", which we thought should be written as wee Baptists...
  • That sounds like the response I always want to give to the question, "How big is your congregation?" - "Most of them are between about 5'2" and 6' ".
  • We were nastier: we meant small minded.
  • To me the real weasel world is "mission". Not only can that mean "doing something for God is a place far away", but its use can vary between all shades of evangelism, service to the community, social work ... the list is endless.

    By the way I had a Methodist friend from Yorkshire who (c.1975) was invited to tea in Glasgow by some strict Scottish Evangelical Christians. They asked him, "So what church do you go to" and he replied, "Oh, I don't go to church, I go to the chapel". They nearly threw him out as, to them, "chapel" meant "Roman Catholic".

    We Quakers don't have churches or chapels or tabernacles or temples or steeple houses; we have Meeting Houses where we have Meeting for Worship. We are a Religious Society not a Church. We are members of the Church alongside other members both visible or invisible. That's the traditional view, at least, many Twenty-First Century Quakers might introduce a few more nuances.
  • I prefer the term 'local congregation ' to 'local church '.

    Our Place houses one of the local Anglican congregations, the nearby community centre houses one of the two local Baptist congregations, and just up the road is the local URC congregation - all parts of the Church, and witnessing in our different ways to a common faith.

    There are others in the area - Methodist, Nazarene, independent Evangelical, Anglican - though at the moment the RCC isn't represented (that may change when the current priest retires).

    There are regular meetings of the various local leaders/ministers/clergy, and all seem to get on fairly well with each other.
  • PDRPDR Shipmate
    By the way I had a Methodist friend from Yorkshire who (c.1975) was invited to tea in Glasgow by some strict Scottish Evangelical Christians. They asked him, "So what church do you go to" and he replied, "Oh, I don't go to church, I go to the chapel". They nearly threw him out as, to them, "chapel" meant "Roman Catholic".

    BWAHAHA! I hear you. I grew up just across the river from Hull and CofE was Church, and Methodist was Chapel there too. If you were anything else (and there was precious little of that) you referred to yourself by the name of the denomination - Catholic, URC, etc.. Those rules do not apply in Scotland or Ulster, though I never found out the hard way - I was WARNED!

    By temperament I am somewhat sympathetic to Evangelical Anglicanism, though I was happier when they used the BCP or something modern language that was BCP shaped. I tend to regard English Evangelicalism as being Christ-centred, conversion-centred, somewhat activist - in the sense of having causes, and slightly Calvinistic Augustinian if its theology rises above generic Protestantism with bishops. Many of the Free Evangelical Churches, whilst checking many of the same boxes seem to go in for the sort of emotionalism that scares me about American Revivalism. Its biggest problem is authority - when it is 'me and my Bible' a church split is always just around the corner - sadly.
  • LydaLyda Shipmate
    With the shrinking of congregations here churches share spaces. Our little church has four congregations: our Episcopal church, an Adventist church that worships on two Saturdays and proselytizes on the other two or three, a non-denominational-evangelical, and the coolest :sunglasses: Ethiopian Orthodox, which is the largest. We are one stop ecumenical!

    The Adventists, of course, have Saturdays. The Orthodox worship from 5:00 to 8:30 AM then fellowship in the parish hall until 9:30. Us Piskies start choir practice at 9:00 in the sanctuary, then worship from 10:00 to 11:30. Fellowship from 11:30 to 12:45 when the Evangelicals arrive to set up music and sound systems for the afternoon.

    All this before Covid-19. But when worship was okayed for outdoor worship with social distancing the Orthodox were immediately on the case and have been having services in the labyrinth garden for weeks. I'm not sure about the other two. We Episcopals have been Zooming Morning Prayer every Sunday morning. and have started having late afternoon Eucharist every other Sunday outdoors.
  • In RC parlance local church refers to one within a specific bishops conference. In the British Isles there are three local churches, Scottish, England and Wales, and Ireland (including both parts.) To get more local you get to the "model" church, the bishop as symbol of unity/authenticity surrounded by his clergy and people.
    Though people sometimes refer to the family as the domestic church which always sounds unbelievably pious to me.
  • Alan29 wrote: »
    In RC parlance local church refers to one within a specific bishops conference. In the British Isles there are three local churches, Scottish, England and Wales, and Ireland (including both parts.) To get more local you get to the "model" church, the bishop as symbol of unity/authenticity surrounded by his clergy and people.
    FWIW, I have frequently seen “local church” used by RC publications in the US, to mean “diocese.”


  • Well, yes. If there ever an 'ideal' church - and such a thing does not exist - I'd suggest it should combine non-conformist style sermons with some sacramentalist ceremonial.

    Getting the balance right would be the tricky part.

    What Gamma Gamaliel wants is Kings Weigh House Chapel under W.E. Orchard. The service of the Word was conducted according to Nonconformist Rules, then the curtain at the front would roll back to reveal an altar and the Eucharist would be conducted according to a version rites of Roman Catholicism.

    You actually sound as if you would be quite at home in the Society of Free Catholics. It is a pity it closed in 1928.

  • For RCs, as Alan 29 suggests, the idea of 'local church' could be conveyed in a more political (not party political) sense by the various Bishops' Conferences of countries but as Nick Tamen rightly says ,in RC language the' local church' means the individual diocese. One of the Eucharistic Prayers allows for mention of that 'local church' in my case here 'the Church of St Andrews and Edinburgh' As Alan29 tells us the 'local church' is that unit of the 'Church' under the guidance of a bishop. In theory all bishops are equal and those who are more equal than others, such as archbishops, are only there for administrative reasons.
  • Jengie Jon wrote: »

    Well, yes. If there ever an 'ideal' church - and such a thing does not exist - I'd suggest it should combine non-conformist style sermons with some sacramentalist ceremonial.

    Getting the balance right would be the tricky part.

    What Gamma Gamaliel wants is Kings Weigh House Chapel under W.E. Orchard. The service of the Word was conducted according to Nonconformist Rules, then the curtain at the front would roll back to reveal an altar and the Eucharist would be conducted according to a version rites of Roman Catholicism.

    You actually sound as if you would be quite at home in the Society of Free Catholics. It is a pity it closed in 1928.

    Combine non-conformist sermons and sacramentalist liturgy and one thing you've definitely got is a very long service.
  • That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!
  • Totally agree with the comments about the way the magic words 'local church' are used in a certain strand of con Evo churches (for me it was the Grace Baptists). It was like a codeword for 'everything we stand for' not like those who look primarily to their heirarchical denominations for identity.

    Very much so. At my old place it was considered (and the minister said openly 1-2-1 and in sermons) you shouldn't change churches unless moving local areas, yet most of the congregation weren't even local. A requirement that members must not disagree with new doctrinal distinctives was the final straw so did my "exit interview" being as polite and non-critical as possible and ... moved on not looking back.

    Looking back with hindsight they were very conservative evangelical and I'm told have become more so.

    It takes a certain type of mind to long-term and continually mould swathes of mind-bending inconsistencies in conservative theology and interpretations into a coherent faith, a kind of self-blinding and double-think.

    Sorry rant over :wink: but happy to contribute.
  • Pendragon wrote: »
    That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!

    I know people who still have the mental scars.
  • ArethosemyfeetArethosemyfeet Shipmate
    edited September 2020

    Pendragon wrote: »
    That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!

    Stamina or a lack of other things they were permitted to do?
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    Pendragon wrote: »
    That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!

    I know people who still have the mental scars.
    Also back-ache ...

  • Pendragon wrote: »
    That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!
    From what @Lyda has said, it sounds as though the Ethiopians still do.

    Thank you @Alan29 for what you've said about RC terminology. I didn't know that and would never have guessed it. In the CofE one would assume that anyone talking about their local church means the parish church they usually go to and whose electoral roll they are on. It would never mean their diocese or province.

  • Enoch wrote: »
    Pendragon wrote: »
    That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!
    From what @Lyda has said, it sounds as though the Ethiopians still do.

    Thank you @Alan29 for what you've said about RC terminology. I didn't know that and would never have guessed it. In the CofE one would assume that anyone talking about their local church means the parish church they usually go to and whose electoral roll they are on. It would never mean their diocese or province.

    Actually among RC non-theologians it is much the same - ones nearest church. But theologians are good at drawing a veil over normal speech.
  • Pendragon wrote: »
    That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!

    Stamina or a lack of other things they were permitted to do?

    One of my older clerical friends dates the participation fall-off from when sports began to be broadcast (this is Ontario) on Sunday mornings. Mind you, he agreed that it was not so simple.
  • Another popular opinion in the UK is the decline occurred due to The Forsyte Saga on TV. Not sure how accurate, we were only returned to the UK after it had started and did not have access to a TV.
  • Alan29 wrote: »
    Enoch wrote: »
    Pendragon wrote: »
    That was back in the day when people had the stamina to spend all morning in church!!!
    From what @Lyda has said, it sounds as though the Ethiopians still do.

    Thank you @Alan29 for what you've said about RC terminology. I didn't know that and would never have guessed it. In the CofE one would assume that anyone talking about their local church means the parish church they usually go to and whose electoral roll they are on. It would never mean their diocese or province.

    Actually among RC non-theologians it is much the same - ones nearest church. But theologians are good at selectively drawing a veil over normal speech.

    Fixed :wink:

    I found my branch of evangelicals loved talking about reading the plain meaning of the bible, unless it didn't fit in with their preferred systemic theology, then all sorts of theological somersaults and back-flips and convoluted interpretations and contexts magically became okay to justify the systemic theology + biblical inerrancy* + "this is how we do church"

    A lot of church and religious and theological language is imo highly codified and loaded so they're hardly alone in this?

  • Forthview wrote: »
    As Alan29 tells us the 'local church' is that unit of the 'Church' under the guidance of a bishop. In theory all bishops are equal and those who are more equal than others, such as archbishops, are only there for administrative reasons.

    One rector here used say: "I'm the diocesan (arch)bishop's deputy, while the regional bishops are simply his curates."

  • I agree with Juana Cruz that a lot of religious and theological language is highly codified.
    It is my impression, and it's only my impression, that in certain evangelical circles, the earthly source of authority, the pastor's explanations of biblical truth, is very close to the ordinary parishioner/attendee who has to agree or get out.
    The same thing happens in the Catholic Church, but that source of earthly authority, the pope and his explanations of biblical truth, are so far away from the average parishioner, that they don't actually affect most attendees.
    There are some people who have to face up to a conflict between what the Church teaches and the realities of their personal life but I would say that many Catholics, simply by their indifference, are spared these difficult decisions.
    For many, many people, irrespective of their denomination or indeed their religion, it is the sense of community, as well as sometimes honour for the past and help for the future which leads them to attend religious rites, rather than the details of theological perspectives.
  • Forthview wrote: »
    I agree with Juana Cruz that a lot of religious and theological language is highly codified.
    It is my impression, and it's only my impression, that in certain evangelical circles, the earthly source of authority, the pastor's explanations of biblical truth, is very close to the ordinary parishioner/attendee who has to agree or get out.
    The same thing happens in the Catholic Church, but that source of earthly authority, the pope and his explanations of biblical truth, are so far away from the average parishioner, that they don't actually affect most attendees.
    There are some people who have to face up to a conflict between what the Church teaches and the realities of their personal life but I would say that many Catholics, simply by their indifference, are spared these difficult decisions.
    For many, many people, irrespective of their denomination or indeed their religion, it is the sense of community, as well as sometimes honour for the past and help for the future which leads them to attend religious rites, rather than the details of theological perspectives.

    Yes to this. And of course it is perfectly possible for members of large denominations to disagree with its stated teachings while happily continuing to attend. I know no RCs who shun birth control for example. No matter what the clergy say, it is simply a non-issue.
  • Alan29 wrote: »
    Forthview wrote: »
    I agree with Juana Cruz that a lot of religious and theological language is highly codified.
    It is my impression, and it's only my impression, that in certain evangelical circles, the earthly source of authority, the pastor's explanations of biblical truth, is very close to the ordinary parishioner/attendee who has to agree or get out.
    The same thing happens in the Catholic Church, but that source of earthly authority, the pope and his explanations of biblical truth, are so far away from the average parishioner, that they don't actually affect most attendees.
    There are some people who have to face up to a conflict between what the Church teaches and the realities of their personal life but I would say that many Catholics, simply by their indifference, are spared these difficult decisions.
    For many, many people, irrespective of their denomination or indeed their religion, it is the sense of community, as well as sometimes honour for the past and help for the future which leads them to attend religious rites, rather than the details of theological perspectives.

    Yes to this. And of course it is perfectly possible for members of large denominations to disagree with its stated teachings while happily continuing to attend. I know no RCs who shun birth control for example. No matter what the clergy say, it is simply a non-issue.

    I never pried into such matters for obvious reasons but the number of children in RC families of friends of mine from school would certainly suggest at least a sparing use of contraceptive measures and likely their total absence. When the youngest sibling was born my friend's mum was informed in no uncertain terms that another pregnancy would not be a good idea health-wise.
  • I was not trying to imply that all RCs are either completely indifferent to religious teachings ,nor would I think of suggesting that those who wish to live by the details of some of the religious teachings are wrong.
    I would say, however, that in every religious community, indeed whatever the religion or denomination thereof which it might be ,you will find four broad categories of adherents

    1.those who find in the religious community a way of relating to the outside world, but
    imbued with the particular spirit of that religion -in the case of Christianity it would be faith, hope and charity (and much the same in other religions)

    2. those who are open and tolerant seeking always the common good whilst maintaining their own positions

    3. those who look to the strengths of the past and tradition and draw their strength from this and their fidelity to what they see as the tried and tested ways of the magisterium (and that is not just the RC idea of magisterium).

    4. those who claim through family, school, culture and national history some sort of notional identity with a particular religious group and may indeed have at some time in the past, present or even future have taken part, do or will take part in religious rites of that particular group.
    These groups can be identified more easily in religious communities which are large such as the RC Church or indeed the CofE in England.
    They will also exist in these smaller, more independent evangelical groups, but with smaller numbers and more locally based you are more likely to find greater numbers of group 1 and group 3.
  • Forthview - I want to add something about 'seeking ongoing salvation' - but I might be missing the point of your post.
  • Do other religious traditions have glossaries to help newcomers understand what folk are going on about? We Friends have things like this: swquakers.org.uk/content/quaker-glossary.

    Sadly it does not have the rather ominous phrase, "That would not have occurred to me" , which can put the mockers on virtually any proposal
  • Do other religious traditions have glossaries to help newcomers understand what folk are going on about? We Friends have things like this: swquakers.org.uk/content/quaker-glossary.

    Sadly it does not have the rather ominous phrase, "That would not have occurred to me" , which can put the mockers on virtually any proposal

    Fascinating!

    In the (conservative) evangelical circles in which I started Discernment is a normally a codified and politely veiled insult to tell you are wrong as in "With discernment you will come to understand that ...'

    It has a sub-text of "You are not a mature christian". Mature Christian being another heavily codified phrase ...

    Alas, if I wrote one, I feel the FIEC or Evangelical Alliance might not approve my version :wink:
  • In Anglican-speak, "pastoral discretion" tends to mean a bishop's bloody-mindedness.
  • cgichard wrote: »
    In Anglican-speak, "pastoral discretion" tends to mean a bishop's bloody-mindedness.

    Or Archbishop's in Sydney.
Sign In or Register to comment.