SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
I can only speak to the faith that we profess as Catholics, but Christ is truly present at every Mass, in Body,Blood,Soul,Divinty as presented in the Eucharist. So yes, Jesus is there for the kids.
Personally, I believe it's important for family to worship together. Our faith isn't an individualistic faith, and I think it benefits children to learn, worship, and grow with their parent(s) as a family.Iowaggie said:SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
I can only speak to the faith that we profess as Catholics, but Christ is truly present at every Mass, in Body,Blood,Soul,Divinty as presented in the Eucharist. So yes, Jesus is there for the kids.
Is Christ not present in other parts of the church where teacher volunteers work with children? Or is Jesus not there?
PacifistAg said:Okay, I believe this is the first time I've ever heard Romans 14 used to justify not bringing children to adult services. I think it's a completely wrong application of those verses.Iowaggie said:cavscout96 said:This^^^SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
Take them with you, and anyone who complains, ignore them. Let the kids come to Jesus
I think this is too big of a sweeping statement. I do think if Jesus comes to visit anyone's town, you should take your kids with you to see Him. But that usually isn't the case, nor the culture we live in. I also think we should bring our children to meet the preacher, but that's not the same as sitting in church for a sermon.
If one's child is distracting the parent, or the people behind them, and there are other options, you should consider the "weaker brethren" (Romans 14) who might be distracted when your child turns around and stares at them during the service or is crying for 15 minutes.
I also want to ask people why taking your child to an adult service is coming to Jesus, but taking them to a kids service or class is not bringing them to Jesus?
Age-segregated services seem to be a fairly recent phenomenon within church history (post-Reformation at least).
Comparing age-segregated church to apps on a phone is a bit silly, don't you think? I don't think anyone is saying "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are", so you're arguing against a strawman. I'm pretty sure most on here have talked about how to handle those times when kids are becoming a "distraction".Iowaggie said:PacifistAg said:Okay, I believe this is the first time I've ever heard Romans 14 used to justify not bringing children to adult services. I think it's a completely wrong application of those verses.Iowaggie said:cavscout96 said:This^^^SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
Take them with you, and anyone who complains, ignore them. Let the kids come to Jesus
I think this is too big of a sweeping statement. I do think if Jesus comes to visit anyone's town, you should take your kids with you to see Him. But that usually isn't the case, nor the culture we live in. I also think we should bring our children to meet the preacher, but that's not the same as sitting in church for a sermon.
If one's child is distracting the parent, or the people behind them, and there are other options, you should consider the "weaker brethren" (Romans 14) who might be distracted when your child turns around and stares at them during the service or is crying for 15 minutes.
I also want to ask people why taking your child to an adult service is coming to Jesus, but taking them to a kids service or class is not bringing them to Jesus?
Age-segregated services seem to be a fairly recent phenomenon within church history (post-Reformation at least).
So are Bibles on phones, coffee in classes, and air conditioning.
I just don't think the "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are to everyone around me, including myself, I'm going to keep them by me" is Biblical either. We should be considerate to those who have a problem with it.
PacifistAg said:Personally, I believe it's important for family to worship together. Our faith isn't an individualistic faith, and I think it benefits children to learn, worship, and grow with their parent(s) as a family.Iowaggie said:SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
I can only speak to the faith that we profess as Catholics, but Christ is truly present at every Mass, in Body,Blood,Soul,Divinty as presented in the Eucharist. So yes, Jesus is there for the kids.
Is Christ not present in other parts of the church where teacher volunteers work with children? Or is Jesus not there?
Again, in terms of church history, age-segregation is fairly recent.
PacifistAg said:Comparing age-segregated church to apps on a phone is a bit silly, don't you think? I don't think anyone is saying "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are", so you're arguing against a strawman. I'm pretty sure most on here have talked about how to handle those times when kids are becoming a "distraction".Iowaggie said:PacifistAg said:Okay, I believe this is the first time I've ever heard Romans 14 used to justify not bringing children to adult services. I think it's a completely wrong application of those verses.Iowaggie said:cavscout96 said:This^^^SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
Take them with you, and anyone who complains, ignore them. Let the kids come to Jesus
I think this is too big of a sweeping statement. I do think if Jesus comes to visit anyone's town, you should take your kids with you to see Him. But that usually isn't the case, nor the culture we live in. I also think we should bring our children to meet the preacher, but that's not the same as sitting in church for a sermon.
If one's child is distracting the parent, or the people behind them, and there are other options, you should consider the "weaker brethren" (Romans 14) who might be distracted when your child turns around and stares at them during the service or is crying for 15 minutes.
I also want to ask people why taking your child to an adult service is coming to Jesus, but taking them to a kids service or class is not bringing them to Jesus?
Age-segregated services seem to be a fairly recent phenomenon within church history (post-Reformation at least).
So are Bibles on phones, coffee in classes, and air conditioning.
I just don't think the "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are to everyone around me, including myself, I'm going to keep them by me" is Biblical either. We should be considerate to those who have a problem with it.
Nobody is arguing that people shouldn't be considerate. Again, that's a strawman. They are just arguing about the merits of a more communal worship, and why that may be preferable to this recent age-segregation trend.
Iowaggie said:SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
I can only speak to the faith that we profess as Catholics, but Christ is truly present at every Mass, in Body,Blood,Soul,Divinty as presented in the Eucharist. So yes, Jesus is there for the kids.
Is Christ not present in other parts of the church where teacher volunteers work with children? Or is Jesus not there?
I guess I may need a lesson on what modifications to the church are allowed, and which ones aren't.PacifistAg said:Comparing age-segregated church to apps on a phone is a bit silly, don't you think? I don't think anyone is saying "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are", so you're arguing against a strawman. I'm pretty sure most on here have talked about how to handle those times when kids are becoming a "distraction".Iowaggie said:PacifistAg said:Okay, I believe this is the first time I've ever heard Romans 14 used to justify not bringing children to adult services. I think it's a completely wrong application of those verses.Iowaggie said:cavscout96 said:This^^^SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
Take them with you, and anyone who complains, ignore them. Let the kids come to Jesus
I think this is too big of a sweeping statement. I do think if Jesus comes to visit anyone's town, you should take your kids with you to see Him. But that usually isn't the case, nor the culture we live in. I also think we should bring our children to meet the preacher, but that's not the same as sitting in church for a sermon.
If one's child is distracting the parent, or the people behind them, and there are other options, you should consider the "weaker brethren" (Romans 14) who might be distracted when your child turns around and stares at them during the service or is crying for 15 minutes.
I also want to ask people why taking your child to an adult service is coming to Jesus, but taking them to a kids service or class is not bringing them to Jesus?
Age-segregated services seem to be a fairly recent phenomenon within church history (post-Reformation at least).
So are Bibles on phones, coffee in classes, and air conditioning.
I just don't think the "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are to everyone around me, including myself, I'm going to keep them by me" is Biblical either. We should be considerate to those who have a problem with it.
Nobody is arguing that people shouldn't be considerate. Again, that's a strawman. They are just arguing about the merits of a more communal worship, and why that may be preferable to this recent age-segregation trend.
Iowaggie said:I guess I may need a lesson on what modifications to the church are allowed, and which ones aren't.PacifistAg said:Comparing age-segregated church to apps on a phone is a bit silly, don't you think? I don't think anyone is saying "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are", so you're arguing against a strawman. I'm pretty sure most on here have talked about how to handle those times when kids are becoming a "distraction".Iowaggie said:PacifistAg said:Okay, I believe this is the first time I've ever heard Romans 14 used to justify not bringing children to adult services. I think it's a completely wrong application of those verses.Iowaggie said:cavscout96 said:This^^^SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
Take them with you, and anyone who complains, ignore them. Let the kids come to Jesus
I think this is too big of a sweeping statement. I do think if Jesus comes to visit anyone's town, you should take your kids with you to see Him. But that usually isn't the case, nor the culture we live in. I also think we should bring our children to meet the preacher, but that's not the same as sitting in church for a sermon.
If one's child is distracting the parent, or the people behind them, and there are other options, you should consider the "weaker brethren" (Romans 14) who might be distracted when your child turns around and stares at them during the service or is crying for 15 minutes.
I also want to ask people why taking your child to an adult service is coming to Jesus, but taking them to a kids service or class is not bringing them to Jesus?
Age-segregated services seem to be a fairly recent phenomenon within church history (post-Reformation at least).
So are Bibles on phones, coffee in classes, and air conditioning.
I just don't think the "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are to everyone around me, including myself, I'm going to keep them by me" is Biblical either. We should be considerate to those who have a problem with it.
Nobody is arguing that people shouldn't be considerate. Again, that's a strawman. They are just arguing about the merits of a more communal worship, and why that may be preferable to this recent age-segregation trend.
If I bring up classes on money management, divorce recovery, or for college students, is that another strawman argument?
My original point was if the child was a distraction to others, in love we should be considerate of others. It wasn't about the mere presence of children in a service
.
Iowaggie said:I guess I may need a lesson on what modifications to the church are allowed, and which ones aren't.PacifistAg said:Comparing age-segregated church to apps on a phone is a bit silly, don't you think? I don't think anyone is saying "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are", so you're arguing against a strawman. I'm pretty sure most on here have talked about how to handle those times when kids are becoming a "distraction".Iowaggie said:PacifistAg said:Okay, I believe this is the first time I've ever heard Romans 14 used to justify not bringing children to adult services. I think it's a completely wrong application of those verses.Iowaggie said:cavscout96 said:This^^^SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
Take them with you, and anyone who complains, ignore them. Let the kids come to Jesus
I think this is too big of a sweeping statement. I do think if Jesus comes to visit anyone's town, you should take your kids with you to see Him. But that usually isn't the case, nor the culture we live in. I also think we should bring our children to meet the preacher, but that's not the same as sitting in church for a sermon.
If one's child is distracting the parent, or the people behind them, and there are other options, you should consider the "weaker brethren" (Romans 14) who might be distracted when your child turns around and stares at them during the service or is crying for 15 minutes.
I also want to ask people why taking your child to an adult service is coming to Jesus, but taking them to a kids service or class is not bringing them to Jesus?
Age-segregated services seem to be a fairly recent phenomenon within church history (post-Reformation at least).
So are Bibles on phones, coffee in classes, and air conditioning.
I just don't think the "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are to everyone around me, including myself, I'm going to keep them by me" is Biblical either. We should be considerate to those who have a problem with it.
Nobody is arguing that people shouldn't be considerate. Again, that's a strawman. They are just arguing about the merits of a more communal worship, and why that may be preferable to this recent age-segregation trend.
If I bring up classes on money management, divorce recovery, or for college students, is that another strawman argument?
My original point was if the child was a distraction to others, in love we should be considerate of others. It wasn't about the mere presence of children in a service.
Again, nobody here has argued that we shouldn't be considerate of others.Quote:
My original point was if the child was a distraction to others, in love we should be considerate of others. It wasn't about the mere presence of children in a service.
PacifistAg said:Again, nobody here has argued that we shouldn't be considerate of others.Quote:
My original point was if the child was a distraction to others, in love we should be considerate of others. It wasn't about the mere presence of children in a service.
Quote:
My counter question to the bold: if a child is a distraction to you (not specifically you but any one that may be distracted)
Wouldn't it be better served to work on your own focus and assist the parent who may be struggling and in shame already due to a misbehaving child. Perhaps empathize with them and give that distraction to Christ to help on your own journey. Rather than complain, or make the parent feel worse or segregate a child from their parent for your own gain?
swimmerbabe11 said:
Zobel said:
The idea that worship is something you do by focusing your mind and attention is almost shockingly gnostic.
Of course a child crying can be part of worship, and the mother comforting them as well. The entire point of the worship is a sacrificial meal with our God, the breaking of the bread. YHWH is the God who feeds His people and always has been, going back to the manna and the show bread, culminating in the Eucharist. Asking a small child to leave would be like asking if it's ok for there to be a separate Thanksgiving meal somewhere else for the kids. Or no meal at all. In this case since Eucharist and thanksgiving are the same word it's actually kinda the same. Kids belong in church with their families because they belong in worship.
Zobel said:
The idea that worship is something you do by focusing your mind and attention is almost shockingly gnostic.
Of course a child crying can be part of worship, and the mother comforting them as well. The entire point of the worship is a sacrificial meal with our God, the breaking of the bread. YHWH is the God who feeds His people and always has been, going back to the manna and the show bread, culminating in the Eucharist. Asking a small child to leave would be like asking if it's ok for there to be a separate Thanksgiving meal somewhere else for the kids. Or no meal at all. In this case since Eucharist and thanksgiving are the same word it's actually kinda the same. Kids belong in church with their families because they belong in worship.
PacifistAg said:
You're assuming the parent is doing nothing to soothe their child. That poster suggested assisting the parent. You know, like an act of service. You make it seem as if the parent in that example is being inconsiderate by doing nothing to help their child. As a parent, I can assure you the parent is wanting nothing more than to calm their child.
This reminds me of people who hyperventilate when a mother breastfeeds during the service.
PacifistAg said:Zobel said:
The idea that worship is something you do by focusing your mind and attention is almost shockingly gnostic.
Of course a child crying can be part of worship, and the mother comforting them as well. The entire point of the worship is a sacrificial meal with our God, the breaking of the bread. YHWH is the God who feeds His people and always has been, going back to the manna and the show bread, culminating in the Eucharist. Asking a small child to leave would be like asking if it's ok for there to be a separate Thanksgiving meal somewhere else for the kids. Or no meal at all. In this case since Eucharist and thanksgiving are the same word it's actually kinda the same. Kids belong in church with their families because they belong in worship.
Iowaggie said:PacifistAg said:
You're assuming the parent is doing nothing to soothe their child. That poster suggested assisting the parent. You know, like an act of service. You make it seem as if the parent in that example is being inconsiderate by doing nothing to help their child. As a parent, I can assure you the parent is wanting nothing more than to calm their child.
This reminds me of people who hyperventilate when a mother breastfeeds during the service.
Nice strawman. Would you also like to also assume that I'm standing up and pointing her out to others?
Why would I care about a mother breastfeeding? How is that a distraction?
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is how you evangelize!swimmerbabe11 said:
I hate the idea of children's church. I have no kids. I love seeing families with their little ones in church and love seeing them learn. (although sometimes it does make me green with envy) children learn by seeing their parents and adults and they start at birth. bring your kids!! if you need someone to help with them, come to my church in Houston, I'd love to be babysitter in the pews.
those that "have a problem with it" should be considerate of families....Iowaggie said:PacifistAg said:Okay, I believe this is the first time I've ever heard Romans 14 used to justify not bringing children to adult services. I think it's a completely wrong application of those verses.Iowaggie said:cavscout96 said:This^^^SoulSlaveAG2005 said:
Take them with you, and anyone who complains, ignore them. Let the kids come to Jesus
I think this is too big of a sweeping statement. I do think if Jesus comes to visit anyone's town, you should take your kids with you to see Him. But that usually isn't the case, nor the culture we live in. I also think we should bring our children to meet the preacher, but that's not the same as sitting in church for a sermon.
If one's child is distracting the parent, or the people behind them, and there are other options, you should consider the "weaker brethren" (Romans 14) who might be distracted when your child turns around and stares at them during the service or is crying for 15 minutes.
I also want to ask people why taking your child to an adult service is coming to Jesus, but taking them to a kids service or class is not bringing them to Jesus?
Age-segregated services seem to be a fairly recent phenomenon within church history (post-Reformation at least).
So are Bibles on phones, coffee in classes, and air conditioning.
I just don't think the "I don't care how big of a distraction my kids are to everyone around me, including myself, I'm going to keep them by me" is Biblical either. We should be considerate to those who have a problem with it.
Quote:
We should be considerate to those who have a problem with it.
I believe the full, proper name is "Orthodox Catholic Church." Close enough for government (or Protestant) work.Zobel said:
Who're you calling catholic?
Zobel said:
Who're you calling catholic?
