Hey Vicki,
         You're right in many ways.  There are shallow people in the
world.  You would hope that they would start to dig a little deeper when
they become a Christian, but sadly, it doesn't happen very well.  For me
though, the biggest difference in the church today is that we all own the
word and very few read it.  So much good happened when people began to read
the word for themselves.  That's why the reformation really took
off.  Before the invention of the printing press, people had a genuine
excuse for their ignorance.  Now, the only excuses are laziness and
busyness and not caring enough to want to know the truth on its own.
         You could make that observation about so many things.  For
example, IN earlier times, people couldn't help it if they were mal
nurished.  Now, its a life style by choice.  I think that we're talking
here about a mind set more of society in general than something that
specificly pertains to the people who attend church.
Kathy


At 08:29 PM 3/1/2005, you wrote:
>Kathy,
>
>Yes, church history is pretty grim during some eras.  And, true enough about
>the church gaining wealth while peritioners grew poorer and poorer.  Even
>then, there were still those who had a deeply personal yet living
>relationship with the Lord.  But here's the difference in today's world that
>I see.  Our churches are often fostering spectators rather than participants
>by the entertainment that happens.  And if you're not teens, twenties, or
>thirties, or thin, or good looking, or extremely talented, or showy... Or
>maybe it's what you are that isn't accepted.  And the list goes on and on.
>My point being that members of Christ's body are rejected because they don't
>fit in to a particular mold.  Many people are quite content to sit back and
>listen to a good sermon or hear good music..  They've done their Sunday
>thing and they can go back to the world in which they live unchanged and
>lacking the ability, Christ in them, to change their world.  I've an idea
>these things aren't the original design.  But so often, this is what we see
>happening.
>
>
>
>Vicki
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Kathy Du Bois" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:09 AM
>Subject: Re: [ECHURCH-USA] Church On The Move
>
>
> > Actually Vicki,
> > even the spectatorship thing is pretty old.  Do you realize that if you
>had
> > lived in the middle ages that you would have never been allowed to take
> > communion?  You would have sat in the congregation and observed while the
> > priests enjoyed communion, intinction style, behind a scrim.  Since you
> > probably couldn't read, the only understanding of the word that you would
> > have had was from the morality plays that the church organized.  You
> > wouldn't have been allowed to sing, because you wouldn't have been
> > considered worthy and, besides, you probably wouldn't have known
> > latin.  You would have watched the church grow wealthier and wealthier,
> > accumulating property, art work and literature while you would
> > have  been  lucky to scratch out a living with your one ox and fourteen
> > children.  If you killed a deer for food from the king's forest, you would
> > have been found guilty of stealing and  you wouldn't expect the church to
> > come to your defense because the holy people would have been too
> > pre-occupied bellying up to his royal highness for certain favors.  I
>could
> > go on, but I think that you get my point.  The most blessed and most
>cursed
> > event in church history was to have   Emperor Constantine adopt
> > Christianity as the official religion of the Roman empire.  She had
> > problems before that, but at that point, she jumped in bed with the devil
> > herself and has been doing a lousy job of extracting herself ever
> > since.    Neveerthe less, she is still Christ's chosen bride.
> > Kathy
> >
> >
> > At 09:23 PM 2/28/2005, you wrote:
> > >Kathy,
> > >
> > >I agree that much of the behavior has existed from perhaps not long after
> > >the church was born.  However, this spectatorship, I can't help thinking
> > >that it came in as various para-church organizations started picking up
>the
> > >job of the church.  I'm not saying they are bad.  But maybe there would
>be
> > >less need for them if the church was being the church, or called out ones
>in
> > >function.    And thank God for the church.  Unless I miss my guess, and I
> > >could very well do that, I believe we'll see it rise up and function as
>it
> > >was meant to function one day.
> > >
> > >Promise not to smack me too hard Kathy.  Smile.
> > >
> > >Vicki
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Kathy Du Bois" <[log in to unmask]>
> > >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > >Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 3:20 PM
> > >Subject: Re: [ECHURCH-USA] Church On The Move
> > >
> > >
> > > > Well Vicki,
> > > > Truthfully, to answer your question about when the church stopped
>being
> > > > loving and accepting of others in their imperfections, I think that
>it's
> > > > pretty obvious from the history recorded in the bible that it began
>pretty
> > > > much at the beginning.  That's why so much is written to correct such
> > > > sinful behavior by James and Paul and Peter.  Satan has been working
>from
> > > > within since the get go.  After all, if he can destroy the church, his
> > > > problems will be solved, so he thinks!
> > > > Kathy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At 10:41 AM 2/27/2005, you wrote:
> > > > >Kathy,
> > > > >
> > > > >In so many places the church has turned to people showing up on
>Sunday
> > >and
> > > > >doing their thing as spectators.  I'd like to know when we quit
>accepting
> > > > >each other as brothers and sisters in the family of God with our
> > >limitations
> > > > >and imperfections as well as our God-given gifts.  I'm not
>specifically
> > > > >saying that of your church.  Just that this kind of trend has done no
> > >favors
> > > > >to the looks of Christ's bride.
> > > > >
> > > > >Vicki
> > > > >
> >