Virgie,
I really do think that is sad. Have you been able to find another church?
Vicki
----- Original Message -----
From: "virgie underwood" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [ECHURCH-USA] Church On The Move
> Hi Vicki and everyone,
> I went to a new church for a few months.
> When I went for the first time, I was welcomed warmly by the pastor.
> Maybe 2 or 3 people came and welcomed me also.
> It soon became very apparent that they really could care less if I came to
> church there or not.
> One should feel welcome in God's house, and unfortunately, I did not.
> I wonder if they thought that blindness is contageous?
> Was it the fact that I did not look the way they thought I should look?
> Whatever the reason, I am not attending this church any more.
> The sad thing is, the pastor have never called to ask why I am not
attending!
> Blessings to all!
> Virgie 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
> > > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >No virus found in this incoming message.
> >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> >Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.1 - Release Date: 2/27/2005
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.1 - Release Date: 2/27/2005
>
|
