What is Church good for?

@sometime sun,

I think the function of church has adapted to the era of it's existence. It meets the need of society. If I were to guess, I would say the most primitive churches were purely and spiritually religious.

Flashforward to the Jihads, and any eminent Imam(I may be wrong) could sanction a Holy War. The mosque, or masjid or something, commanded power. It assured solidarity among muslims, therefore strengthening its own religious agenda.(Here I am naively purporting that the Koran beckons violence or protelyzation against infidels:/)

Hundreds of years down the road, the Pope could approve a crusade and carry out his or "god's" will. The church ensured security in turbulent times, because society NEEDED it. The church facilitated control of the overwhelming number of people it needed to suppress.(Redundant i know) Those were the dark ages.(My chronology is terrible, sorry)

American independence further shaped the function of the church. The church could not as ably fit the form of a society founded on the righteousness of your own person. The church grew smaller.(Incrementally)

World War 2 made America the most powerful nation on earth. There was little a church can offer in terms of security in post-war America. The church grew smaller.

Today, though Americans live under the banner of one nation under god, church membership is drastically low. Why? Some say the moral decay of TRUE american values.(Or at least conservative republicans) I believe the reason is there is little want for it. Plus those pews are so damned uncomfortable. Why do we see so many cell phones? Because the need for them is high. Because we are/were wealthy nation. And becaues i want a flipping cell phone! There is no longer much a church can offer. In an age of narcissism and commercialism(im generalizing) The church is being edged out as the Walmarts of America become almost religious sanctuaries.

Bereft of any data, pie charts, or line graphs,(and because I am an haughty self righteous American!) I will near groundlessly relate the facility of church to the only functions it can now perform: religion, community, weddings, funerals, and charity. And this is not to say the church monopolizes these concepts, but it is all it has to offer. Sooooo, nothing I would personally say, unless i can be contradicted, that the church offers almost nothing besides free parking and weathervanes.

0 Replies

@sometime sun,

I live in a large city and I find it funny how many churches this city has that are used so infrequently. It seems a little absurd that some of them are only used maybe at the most once a week. Doesn't that seem like a waste of resources or space? Can't we maybe use them as homes for the homeless or something? I bet there is one church for every ten blocks in this city. There is almost as many star bucks but we all know that coffee is quickly surpassing religious needs anyways so pretty soon, churches will have star bucks in them.

0 Replies

@sometime sun,

An important part of any religion is the description of how one should live one's life. When one meets in church, temple, or other gathering with members of one's own faith, one can share support for the effort to live a good life, to follow the moral precepts and observances which are part of the religion.

Most people have a need for some kind of meaning in their life. Religion helps provide a reason for carrying on with one's responsibilities, provides guidance when moral decisions need to be made, and generally provides guidance, or a foundation for how to manage such difficult, long-term commitments as partnering and parenting. Responsible clergy add to religious gatherings by describing how the scriptural foundation of the religion can be applied to daily life, and by encouraging adherence to the morals. (Some clergy, the sort which I shun, offer threats of punishment for disobedience. While I consider this to be a sort of tyranny, there are evidently some who seek this type of preaching.)

I personally am a member of a faith that has no clergy. In our worship we share readings of passages from scripture and use consultation to decide on community action. An elected assembly carries out various functions of leadership similar to those which are carried by clergy and "elders" in other religions.

1 Reply

@1CellOfMany,

1CellOfMany;120928 wrote:

An important part of any religion is the description of how one should live one's life. When one meets in church, temple, or other gathering with members of one's own faith, one can share support for the effort to live a good life, to follow the moral precepts and observances which are part of the religion.

Most people have a need for some kind of meaning in their life. Religion helps provide a reason for carrying on with one's responsibilities, provides guidance when moral decisions need to be made, and generally provides guidance, or a foundation for how to manage such difficult, long-term commitments as partnering and parenting. Responsible clergy add to religious gatherings by describing how the scriptural foundation of the religion can be applied to daily life, and by encouraging adherence to the morals. (Some clergy, the sort which I shun, offer threats of punishment for disobedience. While I consider this to be a sort of tyranny, there are evidently some who seek this type of preaching.)

I personally am a member of a faith that has no clergy. In our worship we share readings of passages from scripture and use consultation to decide on community action. An elected assembly carries out various functions of leadership similar to those which are carried by clergy and "elders" in other religions.

Your church sounds good and does good, you have done me good by knowing you are there and are good.
Church affirms teaches and gives to goodness.

1 Reply

@sometime sun,

Modern religious institutions, especially religious groups, offer a forum were many individuals can come together to work through similar challenges to similar goals. Negative connotations aside, church groups aren't dissimilar from Alcoholics Anonymous meetings in that people can gather to overcame emotional, physical, and spiritual challenges with the help of others.

On the other hand, these large scale religious organizations imply that most of their followers have similar beliefs. I know for a fact that most individuals morals are not always perfectly in line with their religion of choice, so to some degree religious institutions require us to compromise our personal morals in order to gain a community in which to celebrate other values.

Depending on your point of view, a harmonization of beliefs could be usher in a better society or further diminish the individual's power in his or her own life.

0 Replies

@sometime sun,

"Community" is a completely acceptable answer to this question. The fact that community can be found elsewhere doesn't mean that it isn't an important part of belonging to a particular religion. And even if community is available elsewhere, churches offer a particular kind of community. In many religious traditions, God is encountered in other people and individuals are responsible in an important sense for one another's salvation. For these traditions, membership in a church or religious community isn't an option that can be tacked on to the other aspects of being a believer; it's an essential part of the religious and spiritual life.

0 Replies

@sometime sun,

sometime sun;120626 wrote:

What is church/temple/mosque/group good for?

What does it facilitate?

What does it add that cant be gotten any where else?

Mainly, I'd say Church is a place where people can meet and agree with each other and carry out the rituals that reinforce <whatever>. While I'm sure there are other ancillary reasons and effects, this is what I believe is its main impetus. Faith can be difficult to maintain in a vacuum; flocking with others of like feathers helps reinforce views, beliefs and other values. Add to this the susceptibility of humans to grand halls, soft music and ritual, and that reinforcing effect gains momentum.

If reality stares me in the face each moment, telling me something other than my faith dictates; assuming I want to keep that faith, wouldn't it be nice to have that reinvigorated now and again?

So yea... that's what I believe to be the main focus/purpose of "churches"; a reminder and reinforcing agent.

Thanks

2 Replies

@Khethil,

It seems a lot of us see the benefit as community.
Its interesting that we've arrived at this conclusion given that a pew research poll from 2009 showed a growing number of people moving from organized religion to nondenominational and private services.

Does this mean that we're shunning that community element? Or is that changed simply based off a greater need for freedom in one's religious practices?

1 Reply

@Sam I Am phil,

Sam I Am;122575 wrote:

It seems a lot of us see the benefit as community.
Its interesting that we've arrived at this conclusion given that a pew research poll from 2009 showed a growing number of people moving from organized religion to nondenominational and private services.

Does this mean that we're shunning that community element? Or is that changed simply based off a greater need for freedom in one's religious practices?

Yes,as the disease of individuality spreads so does the community crumble. We can indeed pray and worship from home from within but we forget that the best worship there is to be had is in these communities is an mass.
But thinking now that faith and religion are all just a persoanl pursuit means we forget that others are praying next to us because they are no longer sat there.
Religious practices hmmm, i think it defeats its purpose if all of these are easy and selective. Religion has a lesson plan even if it is we who experience the lesson, we cannot teach oursleves everything we need to know, but nowadays we think that faith is easy so we have made it easy listening to oursleves rather than listening to others.
Individual is that which hears them selves above any one else and this includes God.

1 Reply

@sometime sun,

sometime sun;122831 wrote:

Individual is that which hears them selves above any one else and this includes God.

Perhaps that's a good thing. The concept of religion began as a way for man to explain phenomena we didn't understand. Later, it became a tool to bend our actions to a certain moral path.
Is an individualization of religion possible just humans evolving to a point where we can face the realities of life without the crutch of religion? Where we can make moral decisions simply for the sake of morality and not to avoid everlasting damnation?

Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not calling organized religions weak or foolish. I simply see a lot of worth in a society that treats faith as a personal endeavor.

2 Replies

@Sam I Am phil,

Sam I Am;122849 wrote:

Perhaps that's a good thing. The concept of religion began as a way for man to explain phenomena we didn't understand. Later, it became a tool to bend our actions to a certain moral path.
Is an individualization of religion possible just humans evolving to a point where we can face the realities of life without the crutch of religion? Where we can make moral decisions simply for the sake of morality and not to avoid everlasting damnation?

This has been my argument and is what I support. You can see evidence of damning humanity from recovering addicts all the way up to politicians. The believer insists that you can not solve your problems alone. Or that any accomplishments you achieve must be handed to god for your success. It insults humanity and the human ability to do that.

0 Replies

@Sam I Am phil,

Sam I Am;122849 wrote:

Perhaps that's a good thing. The concept of religion began as a way for man to explain phenomena we didn't understand. Later, it became a tool to bend our actions to a certain moral path.
Is an individualization of religion possible just humans evolving to a point where we can face the realities of life without the crutch of religion? Where we can make moral decisions simply for the sake of morality and not to avoid everlasting damnation?

Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not calling organized religions weak or foolish. I simply see a lot of worth in a society that treats faith as a personal endeavor.

Perhaps we need bending?
Perhaps we need to hear something other than the self alone?
Perhaps we are more likely to fail if there is not someone else with the means for us to triumph?
And of course you cant have religion with out a single parishioners participation.
Religion is not just a crutch, that which keeps you form falling, it can be a ladder, that which can be keeps you climbing.
We can all face life without religion but the more who do so the less they think there is to learn and less there is to be.
Believe it or not we need the commandments we need more than law, we need all the help we can get, we need more to live by than just the self and a cold law, people need help, alot of it.
But in saying this i still agree with you mostly, you have a good message and i just learnt something from you that was not from just myself.
I suppose the individualism is the frigid type that is nothing but the self for the self before anything else.
We gotta learn some respect, and this is something i dont think we can even do for our selves, self respect is a myth if there aren't others to impress (ion).
You still need to believe need to participate in the religion, it is useless without you.

1 Reply

@sometime sun,

sometime sun;122865 wrote:

Perhaps we need bending?
Perhaps we need to hear something other than the self alone?
Perhaps we are more likely to fail if there is not someone else with the means for us to triumph?
And of course you cant have religion with out a single parishioners participation.
Religion is not just a crutch, that which keeps you form falling, it can be a ladder, that which can be keeps you climbing.
We can all face life without religion but the more who do so the less they think there is to learn and less there is to be.
Believe it or not we need the commandments we need more than law, we need all the help we can get, we need more to live by than just the self and a cold law, people need help, alot of it.
But in saying this i still agree with you mostly, you have a good message and i just learnt something from you that was not from just myself.
I suppose the individualism is the frigid type that is nothing but the self for the self before anything else.
We gotta learn some respect, and this is something i dont think we can even do for our selves, self respect is a myth if there aren't others to impress (ion).
You still need to believe need to participate in the religion, it is useless without you.

I don't disagree that the church provides important commandments and builds a structure of some respect. But I think it is more meaningful to reach the conclusion that respect and good works are a necessity to life for natural reasons, arrived at on your own, rather than being told like a child.

Its the same as teaching a man to fish versus giving him food.
The church gives us food, but it offers no space to develop, be self-sustaining, or to account for situations it can't cover.
Learning on your own allows for a greater understanding than "if I don't do this I'm going to hell" or "I'm doing this because God wants me to."

Yes, its true that some people won't reach these conclusions on their own. Failure is part of life and in a society where everyone is succeeding, no one is succeeding because the fit are bending over backwards to lift up the ignorant. No growth can be achieved this way.

0 Replies

@Khethil,

Khethil;122325 wrote:

Mainly, I'd say Church is a place where people can meet and agree with each other and carry out the rituals that reinforce <whatever>. While I'm sure there are other ancillary reasons and effects, this is what I believe is its main impetus. Faith can be difficult to maintain in a vacuum; flocking with others of like feathers helps reinforce views, beliefs and other values. Add to this the susceptibility of humans to grand halls, soft music and ritual, and that reinforcing effect gains momentum.

If reality stares me in the face each moment, telling me something other than my faith dictates; assuming I want to keep that faith, wouldn't it be nice to have that reinvigorated now and again?

So yea... that's what I believe to be the main focus/purpose of "churches"; a reminder and reinforcing agent.

Thanks

I also think it makes the group in many ways introvert,an extended family of like minded folk. It was strange occurrence Methodists and Baptists gathering together to pray. It was like two tribes trying to be friendly.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;123201 wrote:

I also think it makes the group in many ways introvert,an extended family of like minded folk. It was strange occurrence Methodists and Baptists gathering together to pray. It was like two tribes trying to be friendly.

Yea, I could see that.

Its funny; because we do this kind of thing all the time. Whether in our social relations, work-pals or what have you, we flock towards those who think like we do (in some common-denominator way). The upside is it helps make us feel good about whatever that common-thread is (religious, political views, bird-watchers, etc.) but it also has the potential for further polarization - depending on the theme.

That introversion - that narrowing of perspective - that you spoke of, I think, is the price we pay for the warm fuzzies.

Thanks

0 Replies

@sometime sun,

Khethil wrote:

That introversion - that narrowing of perspective - that you spoke of, I think, is the price we pay for the warm fuzzies.

I like it, nice way of putting that!

1 Reply

@Zetherin,

Sam I Am;122849 wrote:

The concept of religion began as a way for man to explain phenomena we didn't understand. Later, it became a tool to bend our actions to a certain moral path.

Any evidence of this? Do you really believe it to be so simple?

Think about the cave paintings at Lascaux, for example. Are they needed to explain phenomena we did not then understand? And why would they be painted in caves so deep into the earth instead of easily accessible caves, where the explanations would be readily available? Why make the process of getting to the paintings such an ordeal?

As for later religion, is the only purpose of spirituality ethics? Do we have to elevate JS Mill to the status of Jesus or the Buddha because he created a remarkably brilliant ethical system? There seems to be quite a difference between Mill and the Buddha.

Sam I Am;122849 wrote:

I simply see a lot of worth in a society that treats faith as a personal endeavor.

But faith has typically been understood as a personal endeavor.

Let's remember, though: just because the task is personal, it does not follow that we cannot have some help along the way. Imagine the sculptor- his work is his own, he must personally shape the stone. Yet, he has probably had teachers who instructed him in technique, and he probably studied the works of masters before him in order to develop his own aesthetic vision. Still, when he sets to shaping his own stone, it is his unique, personal endeavor.

This is very much like religion, the way religion has been and is seen. There are some who have and would disagree, but they are a minority. Each person must seek God, whatever, on his own, but each person can also make use of scripture and teaching. People can come together for worship, but each must open his own heart- no one else can do it for him.

1 Reply

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas;123322 wrote:

But faith has typically been understood as a personal endeavor.

Let's remember, though: just because the task is personal, it does not follow that we cannot have some help along the way. Imagine the sculptor- his work is his own, he must personally shape the stone. Yet, he has probably had teachers who instructed him in technique, and he probably studied the works of masters before him in order to develop his own aesthetic vision. Still, when he sets to shaping his own stone, it is his unique, personal endeavor.

This is very much like religion, the way religion has been and is seen. There are some who have and would disagree, but they are a minority. Each person must seek God, whatever, on his own, but each person can also make use of scripture and teaching. People can come together for worship, but each must open his own heart- no one else can do it for him.

The value I saw in the individual religion is that they understand the basis and find it for themselves. When small children are exposed to religious teachings, does someone explain to them why they should give to the poor? Or why they shouldn't kill? What about lie? They are just told that they are wrong.

I realize that in many religions there is a concept of "confirmation," where the individual affirms and explores their religion. To the few that actually do this, that's wonderful. But I think the vast majority just coast along and accept it because that's what they've always done.

In total, I'm not a against a sort of religious tutelage that you seem to describe, where the community helps the individual grow spiritually. But I would argue that more often than not the community simply gives the answers.

A great math teacher gives you the tools to answer the problems, not the correct answers.

1 Reply

@Sam I Am phil,

So, your criticism is not against religion, not against the teaching of religion to children, or anything like that. Your criticism is about common failures in the way religious communities carry out their mission.

There is a huge difference here. We have to be very careful when we generalize, especially about such a large and diverse body.

It is difficult today when the extremists, the violent, the hateful get so much exposure while the pious, devout, and holy are essentially ignored. It takes some digging around to find them, but they are all over the place.

1 Reply

What is Church good for?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know