www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology What constitutes a Christian community?

I had a very unusual encounter recently. There is a community that calls itself a "Bible" church. They do not believe in and do not practice Baptism--at all. They also don't believe in commemorating or practicing the Lord's Supper, Holy Communion, or anything at all resembling it. They cite Bible verses to support these positions.

I don't know what to think. I wonder if these folks--whom I consider seriously misguided--are even people we can consider Christians. They do have a great devotion to Sacred Scripture and believe that one must "receive Christ as his personal Savior," but beyond that . . .

I can't get beyond the Great Commission about preaching the Good News to the ends of the earth and baptizing people. I can't get beyond "Do this (as an anamnesis) of Me."

Any thoughts??

Bob

The conciliar definition requires baptism.

They are, however, ignoring scripture.

In my understanding a Christian community, at a minimum, is a group of baptized people who pray together. If they are not baptized, they are not Christians, and if they don't pray together, they are not a community.

My understanding is the same as yours Latin Catholic, but I know of quite a few of these "bible churches" as they often call themselves. Seems the definition of Christianity to many of these types is to open up the Bible, declare Jesus as your personal saviour and you have a guarenteed pass into Heaven!

As a Lutheran, I am very partial to the definition of the Church found in Article VII of the Augsburg Confession.

For those not familiar with this document, this was a statement presented to Emporer Charles V by the Lutheran electors of Germany in 1530. The first 21 of the 30 articles were points of agreement between the Lutherans and Catholics--remarkably, these included the Sacraments, Confession, and Justification.

Article VII reads as follows:

"The Church is the assembly of believers in which the Gospel is purely taught and the Sacraments rightly administered".

An assembly gathered for Bible study alone--like a Sunday School--is gathering of Christians but hardly the Church.

What I have never been able to comprehend or appreciate about groups such as you have described is how people can claim to love Jesus but ignore His plain commands (as you rightly noted) and despise His Body.

Bob:

Do you recall which Bible verses they cite for their refusal to practice baptism and Holy Communion?

Ryan

The only small, and rather insignificant piece, that I can add to the conversation is the fact that in my previous churches they did not practice infant baptism, but instead held a service of "baby or child dedication." The baptism took place when the child/person had accepted Christ in a knowing way and knew the meaning of baptism.
abby
<*)))><

As one raised Southern Baptist, I truly appreciate everything that I received from the Southern Baptist Church, except the anti-catholism, which I think was just 'inbread' - not necessarily spoken of outwardly.

HOWEVER, I regret -even somewhat resent- that I was not Catholic (Eastern Catholic) all of my life. That I would have been Baptised through Sacramental Baptism, Chrismated, and received Christ in the Eucharist from an infant. That I may have received Jesus, not just in his Word, but Him as my Lord in the Eucharist.

Lord have mercy on us all!

Athanasius:

Actually, no. The conversation was rather quick, the minister was very defensive, and I thought it best to just stop it all at that point. After all, I want to work for and with his people professionally and can't afford to offend him or them. Ministers can be the end of one's professional relationship with a whole congregation so it's a delicate thing. One of the other directors pursued it a bit further and I might be able to get more from him tomorrow. (I've been away all weekend with my Father's Day daughter; she's now 26.) He's Protestant himself and a fundamentalist of another persuasion.

The other thing I have to be particularly careful of is that some Protestants get very defensive over any questions since they know I am a Catholic and part of their whole reference is anti-Catholic. When a Catholic asks a question and isn't immediately open to accepting everything they say or asks further questions, things sometimes get strained.

Bob

I'd say that like the Quakers (non-credal but the Christianity is understood) and the Salvation Army (the latter like the group you describe has no sacraments) they're eccentric Christians not apostates.

I don't believe the Salvation Army considers itself to be a church ... they're a far-reaching ministry but not a church.
abby
<*)))><

Actually, they do consider themselves a church. On the right side of this page, with the tenets of their faith, [salvationarmyusa.org] you see that they call themselves a church. I remember laughing at someone in college when I asked what church he went to and he responded "Salvation Army." I had no idea...

In all this, I was just curious about this particular stance. I know the history of the Anabaptist and Pietist movements and their stance that only adults should be baptised, but I'd never run into the idea that no one ought to be baptised at all.

I guess the next step is to try to discern where this stance came from and why.

Bob

Bob,

I don't know any history on this, but it is consistent with the Protestant idea that Baptism is not necessary for salvation.

Couple that with the old principle, "if it's not necessary, then why do it?" and ...


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Deacon Richard:

Thanks for your input. This same group doesn't practice any kind of communion either. Ideas?

Bob