During the attending of church several important ‘rites’ occur: the receiving of the Blessed Sacrament which brings them closer to God (this is extremely important for Roman Catholics), before Roman Catholics can receive the sacrament they have to seek absolution by confession, the Bible is read and then explained (by the Priest). If you are not a Roman Catholic and you want to become one; you have to be baptised in the font of a church which is always at the entrance of a Roman Catholic Church to remind the worshippers of their entry into the ‘church’, their baptismal vows and what they are there for. The receiving of the Blessed Sacrament is so important to Roman Catholics because they believe in transubstantiation which the belief that once the bread and the wine are blessed and consecrated, they actually become the blood and the body of Jesus.
All these provide very valid reasons for the Catholics’ need to go to church. The receiving of the Blessed Sacrament has become the point of which the actions done in the church revolve around because it symbolises the Last Supper: in I Corinthians ch.11, Matthew ch.26 and Mark ch.14 – “(Drink/Eat ye all of this for this is my blood/body of the new covenant) do this in remembrance of me”, where Jesus took bread and wine, offered it to his disciples and told them that this was his blood and body of the new testament. So this plays a very important part in the going to church, particularly for a Roman Catholic and if you are a Roman Catholic and you miss a Sunday or two: you quite possibly can be exempt from the Roman Catholic Church. A Roman Catholic has to seek confession before mass so he is cleansed to receive the Blessed Sacrament.
Going to church is not just to keep up a worshipper’s partaking of the Holy Communion; it helps a worshipper to meet other Christians to share their beliefs and prayers with. It also gives them the chance to offer or receive advice, guidance and support.
On the other side of the argument the “no” people say that all that is not necessary and that the bible contains all you need to know: that there is no need to talk to anyone else about it.
Carrying on with the “yes” people’s discussion, in a church, the environment is conducive (lends itself) for worship as there are no distractions, there are objects to focus on and there is a structured liturgy: all this makes the whole ‘experience’ more inspiring for those attending.
The “no” people believe that all this can be achieved without the action of going to church: as long as they believe, it doesn’t matter if there are any distractions or objects to focus on, the only thing to focus on is their belief in Christianity.
A new point on the “yes” side of the discussion is that going to church prevents heresy of the religion and keeps ‘everyone’s’ beliefs uniform.
As reply to the previous point from the opposite side of the discussion is that as long as the worshipper keeps believing in Christianity then there will be no need for heresy and their beliefs will not have to change because they (their beliefs) cannot be changed by anyone as there will be no one to change them.
A new point on the “yes” side is that the worshipper (while attending church) is able to listen to the Ministry of the Word – read by the Priest – which will include bible readings especially from the New Testament which makes the comprehension of the Bible a lot more easy than if the worshipper is reading the book by themselves. The Priests sermon will provide inspiration for the worshipper present at church to go and carry out the good deeds of which they has heard of and it will also provide the vital explanation that they need to think upon and to use it to provide others with it (which will be the next point).
Answering to that point the “no” people suppose that as long as God is on their side they will be able to understand everything there is to know (contained in the Bible) because he – God – will help them. They do not need Priests, they just need God.
The next point put forward on the “yes, you do” side is that what you learn from attending church, you can spread around to others so they to can “see the light”, which is known collectively as evangelism (although I do not believe in evangelism as it is not for the congregation of a church to spread the word of God: it is for the Priests to do and it is not fair on the people being ‘evangelised’ as it puts them under pressure to do something they might not otherwise do). The type of event where evangelism takes place is in Sunday schools and Bible study groups where groups of people are ‘taught’ by a ‘non-priest’.
The argument against this on the “no, you don’t” side is that God will teach the worshipper all they need to know so they can go out and evangelise (which is generally the ‘pink’, low church approach).
All this arouses two main questions to be asked: “What is a Church” and “What is a Christian”. To deal with the former first: a church is not, as many seem to perceive, just a building but it is generally encased by a building. A “church” as I see it is basically a place where like minded people unite and worship; this is quite similar to what God says but is written by St. Matthew ch.18 v.20: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them”. Although a church is not specifically a building, it is most convenient to use as it creates central place of worship which demonstrates the points mentioned on the “yes, you do” ‘side’ of the discussion. Moving on to the latter question (“What is a Christian”) is in my mind the most ill perceived and misunderstood question of the two. Many conceive an answer thus: that a Christian is simply someone who believes in God, Jesus Christ, the Resurrection and in the contents of the Bible. I believe this to be incorrect, though it is not wrong as a whole because to be a Christian you do have to believe in those things but you have to act as demonstrated by those ‘things’ (i.e. follow Jesus’ and God’s footsteps and carry out the good actions completed in the Bible). This is how the answer to these two questions link: going to church will demonstrate how to believe and to carry out these ‘things’ and going to church is part of being a true Christian which brings me on to my conclusion.
I conclude that “yes, you do have to go to church to be a Christian” for several reasons. The first being that why on earth should sit there lazily, saying that they believe in God and everything when according to the Bible you have to go to a church. I know that a church does not have to be a building but why try to be lazy and avoid the issue of ‘church’; it’s that pathetic, left wing, immature and Low Church attitude. They have tried to avoid the issue of ‘church’ by adding soft chairs and carpets to modern, flimsy and white painted buildings which obliterates any possible atmosphere that is important – if you want to ‘worship well’ then a certain atmosphere is almost necessary. These soft chairs, unlike wooden pews, make the ‘worshipper’ lethargic which prevents the total concentration and focussing of the mind on what is ‘going on’ during the service. The next reason is that if you really want to learn and obey what Christianity has to offer then why not go to church if you can which brings me on finally to a point in my conclusion (it was mentioned earlier on) that is one of the most twistable and “conclusion altering” variables in this entire discussion. It is the answer to the question that asks what happens if a ‘worshipper’ is not able to go to or reach a church to worship. My answer is the following. If a ‘worshipper’ is not able to go to or reach a church to worship then they cannot just twist the rule book (the Bible) to suit them self and if they cannot fulfil the required requirements then they can’t be a Christian although they may converse with God. They are close to being the definition of a “Christian” but if they are not quite then they cannot be – a miss is as good as a mile.
