I have often heard the argument against the church by using the verse that states that where two or more gather in the Lord's name, there he is with them also (Matthew 18:20). While I do not dispute the truth of this verse, I think, in this case, it has been taken out of context.
The local church is one of the most vital resources available to believers. It is the place where believers can go for fellowship, spiritual growth, and opportunities to serve.
In high school, I was in the well-known play "The Crucible." I was familiar with the storyline before the show, and most have heard other variations of the Salem witch trials. This play, in particular, makes two distinct points about the church that resonate with watchers.
The first is that churches are corrupt. It's an age-old jab that, unfortunately, has some validity to it. There are corrupt churches. There are corrupt people. But I believe the church is too important to stop looking for good churches after experiences with bad ones.
The second point is made by John Proctor who is boycotting the corruption of the church. I do not think there is anything wrong with Proctor's refusal to promote the corruption of the church, the problem is that he stopped going to church altogether. Proctor claimed he could have a church right in his house with just him and God.
The first time I heard that as a high schooler, it seemed to make sense. The words are nice and pretty, and it comes at a moment of high intensity in the play that makes Proctor the winner of the argument. It's an easy line to fall for if you are not careful.
The members of a church are often times made into an analogy of the body of Christ.
"But in fact, God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, but one body" (1 Corinthians 12: 18-20).
The rest of verse 12 goes on the explain how God has appointed each member of the body to a specific job. Some teach, some serve, some help others, and some administer. The local church is a complex body, much like ours, that depends on the role of each part.
"And if the ear should say, 'Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,' it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be?" (1 Corinthians 12:16-17).
Why do I bring this analogy up? Wasn't I just talking of The Crucible?
Because we need every part of the body for the church to function as it should. We need hands, feet, heads, arms, legs--the whole shebang.
The argument made by Proctor claims that he (as one body part) can essentially play the role of every part of the body of Christ. The church is designed to teach, disciple, lead, conduct outreach, promote the great commission, and many other responsibilities. One man cannot fill those responsibilities alone--and most who make this claim do not intend to fill those responsibilities.
I started reading C.S Lewis' famous book "Screwtape Letters" a few months back (It's been a slow journey because I am also reading like four other books--details.) The book is a fictional piece of writing that is set up as a series of letters between senior demon Screwtape, and his nephew and junior tempter, Wormwood. While I am not using this book as a source of credibility, I think Lewis uses these fictional characters to show how attacks are often wrought on Christians in ways we wouldn't expect.
The two demons have become assigned to a British man, only known as "the patient" who has recently become a Christian. The two demons write letters back and forth, corresponding on how well they are doing at destroying the man's faith and putting obstacles in his walk with Christ.
One specific letter addresses the subject of the church specifically.
"You mentioned casually in your last letter that the patient has continued to attend one church, and one only, since he was converted, and that he is not wholly pleased with it. May I ask what you are about? Why have I no report on the causes of his fidelity to the parish of the church? Do you realise that unless it is due to indifference it is a very bad thing? Surely you know that if a man can't be cured of churchgoing, the next best thing is to send him all over the neighbourhood looking for the church that 'suites' him until he becomes a taster or connoisseur of churches" (Lewis 2).
Let me explain for a moment that I do not think there is anything wrong with finding a church in which you agree with the philosophy and can stand behind their values and doctrine. I think you should find a church you can support and stand behind, as well as a church that bases their actions on scripture alone and not personal preference.
With that being said, Lewis brings up an interesting dynamic--being so picky about churches, that no church can suit your taste. I am not speaking of biblical concerns or differences in doctrine. But what I am addressing is disgruntles based on the kind of worship, the type of dress, the time of services, the way the pastor speaks, the way the church is decorated, or whether the church is a modern building or an old-style building.
While it is not wrong to have personal preferences, these qualities should not keep you from being a regular attendee of the local church, should not keep you from being involved and serving, and should not keep you from giving back to the local church to further the kingdom.
Now here is the part of my blog where things get a little bit awkward and I have to admit that bad experiences happen in churches--trust has been broken, corruption has been revealed, and members of the body have not shown and demonstrated love as they should.
Let me say right now that I recognize that what you may have gone through in past churches is valid and you have every reason to feel hurt and angry. I cannot for a minute say that all churches are standing on the truth of the word and the gospel. But please do not let bad experiences in churches keep you from church altogether.
Yes, leave the old church.
But, please, find a new one.
Church, in the way God designed it to be, is too important to boycott altogether. Nothing excuses the actions of a church that corruption is prevalent in, but nothing excuses our disobedience to the commandment to serve, give, and be in fellowship with other believers.
"Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God which he bought with his own blood" (Acts 20:28).
What this verse is saying is that we, as Christians, are responsible for the church. We are shepherds over the congregation and the body of believers. We should defend the mission of the church like a shepherd defends his sheep against all outside threats. A shepherd has one job and one mission--protect his sheep.
Their entire livelihood and income depend on these bleating wanderers.
You can imagine how hard you would defend and fight for something that determines whether you have money for food. That is the kind of diligence Christ asks us to have for the church.
Christ asks us to fight with everything we have to keep the church because he gave everything to give it to us. It says he bought the church with his own blood. Not lots of money. Not all his possessions. But his life. A death on a cross and a sentence he did not deserve. Why then are we content with half-hearted attempts to attend church once every so often and call ourselves Christians?
I would argue it is impossible to be in Christ and behave that way.
A somewhat similar scenario is where someone has been burned or hurt by a past significant other. It's a cheesy analogy and maybe it's a stretch, but I'm trying to lighten the mood. You hear the callous remarks that all men are pigs because one man proved to be such. Or the flippant jokes that all women are crazy because of a bad experience with one singular woman.
Family and friends soothe the heartbroken now-single person and assure them not everyone is like that. Eventually, that person will piece back their timid and fragile trust and try again.
Sometimes they meet another less-than-steller match. Yes, it's heartbreaking and frustrating, and annoying. But it happens. But they pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and try again. Because eventually, the person realizes that their callousness is not worth being alone.
While the subject of singleness is another argument entirely (see my last blog post), this offers a nice lead into the point that without a church we are essentially like a 16-year-old without a significant other--forlorn, lost, and utterly miserable that they don't have someone and everyone else does.
We are designed for fellowship. We are designed to worship. To give. to serve. When we become Christians we are given a new heart and a new mind and everything within us craves the church. There are those across the world who have no opportunity to attend a regular church--Christians who are so persecuted they cannot worship and serve like they want to. But that is the point--they cannot because of their circumstances, not out of a lack of desire.
I have often heard friends argue that going to church does not make them a Christian. And not going to church doesn't mean they aren't a Christian. Technically this is correct. There are many who walk into churches every Sunday who are not truly Christians as I am sure there are Christians who do not go to church every Sunday.
But this is technical and corner-cutting and I do not think that is really the Christianity that we should be striving for. That is not the kind of love God desires from us. You may be a Christian and not attend church, but I would question how much you are growing as a Christian. I would question the strength of your walk with Christ.
You should go to church because you want to, not because you are supposed to. Actions of obedience should always be performed as a display of love and willingness, but it doesn't mean that if you don't feel like going to church, you shouldn't.
"And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another--and all the more as you see the Day approaching" (Hebrews 10:24-25).
Yes, we are commanded to be involved in church, but it is for our benefit. (As most commands are, we surely find).
When we are truly in Christ, we desire what he desires. And he desires the local church. He desires to give, to serve, to be involved, to worship. I might be concerned at the state of your relationship if you desire none of these things.
As Christians, we shouldn't be asking ourselves whether we can still be a Christian and not go to church. That is entirely the wrong question. We should constantly be desiring to serve and love Christ--to love the local church, to serve, to give, to fellowship. The question is never how much can I get away with and still get to heaven, but how can I most please the Lord and serve him while I am on earth.
