I could write a bunch of snide sarcastic comments about how “they” are doing things wrong too. But I won’t waste my time. I would rather be a part of the solution. Too often we get hung up on the complainers and those who are unhappy. But the ones who used to be the congregation or whatever they want to call themselves aren’t the people we are called to reach anyway. Go ahead and be unhappy with the way “we” are doing church. But I for one am going to continue to pursue Christ and try with the help of the Holy Spirit to share the gospel with more people, to love them unconditionally and to improve the way I lead my people. The criticism isn’t new and it isn’t particularily constructive so I’ll just change the channel now.

Wow, Kent, what a humble and real response.  Well said.

Sounds like a ‘root of bitterness’ to me.  Nobody’s perfect, and we’re all trying.  If you look at the growth of the ‘attractional’ churches, there are obviously a lot of people who don’t feel the way this writer does.

Even if you’re right, Brent, this kind of “rant” STILL should be listened to. And the fact of the matter is, if we are creating church cultures that foster this kind of “complaining”, chances are they are NOT cultures rooted in Ephesians 4 equipping, which is what we pastors need to do. We EXIST to equip the saints for ministry, not put on programs to fill their schedules.

I_am_not:
When you said, “any time our thoughts and feelings didn’t jive with the pastor’s take on things, we were dismissed, told to find another church or told to pipe-down and submit to the pastor’s authority.” I truly felt for you. I am growing disturbed that pastoral ministry is increasingly monarchial (a general) and less and less communal (a shepherd among sheep). If folk feel like they are “managed” at arms length or “suppressed” I guess I can see the justification for some of the angst. Nonetheless, we still need to honor Christ’s perception of how we’re connected and not abandon the body.

When I read something like Bill has written I can only imagine what would have been written about the first century church.  Humans being human, we can just imagine what was said after Peter preached and 3,000 were added:  “We are getting too big!!  or I like a small church Family!!” Who couldn’t pick apart Peter’s sermon!!  Or how unqualified he was to be preaching it!!  I know I was capable of that and did that.
But when I started doing something to help get the message of who Jesus is and how he can change your future, my critiquing became less critical.  When I started helping those by visiting with the sick or homebound and coming away feeling humbled because they were ministering to me more than I was ministering to them.  If they were not complaining but rejoicing in their place in life, it made my critiquing seem pale and small.  If “the least of these” can look forward to eternity with joy and anticipation in there heart and on there face, why I am complaining about this grain of sand in eternity.  I have a saint in my church that has had three strokes and she still laughs and praises God.
I have been a part of a mega church and a small church.  They both can minister to people, and have people in the congregation that are looking for the perfect church.  I don’t believe they will find it this side of the 2nd coming.  May we all minister IN CHRIST.

Hmmmm.  Sounds like a baby-boomer complaining about a specific type of mega-church possibly with an authoritative style leadership.  I’m assuming Bill has spoken to plenty of folks who expressed the sentiments in his post.  Some legitimate gripes I pick up on:

* Sappy, entertainment style music or worship. 
* A lack of buy in to the vision of the church.  This can disconnect a person who is serving and tithing. 
* Inadequate discipleship and teaching methods.  If a person only attends worship and no other teaching function of the church, it becomes easier to pick apart a pastor’s sermon. 
* Fellowship seems to be missing.  A gathering of people is not a fellowship.  Fellowship connects.  Again, I suspect that some of the complainers may not be part of a small group process within the church they complain about.

A “program oriented” sometimes church produces people who easily disconnect.  Size does not matter because people can disconnect in big and small churches.  If people are not connected into the body life like a family and community...they will become discontent and leave.  This is why I believe Jesus emphasized shepherding so much.  Care, guide, discipline, and inspect the flock to keep the sheep healthy...healthy sheep reproduce.

Dave,

Sadly, you have missed the heart of this post, making assumptions about the author that are neither fair nor accurate.  Yes, there is emotion in this post, emotion that very well might translate into statement that are in themselves unfair on some level.

That being said, can’t we pause and consider the possibility that there is truth in this wounded polemic?  Can’t we resist the impulse to dismiss or defend long enough to see the seeds of possibility within the word- possibility for something truer?  Have we arrived at such ecclesial perfect that we cannot open our hearts and minds to the truth regardless of the attitude or emotion that it is delivered with?

I happen to the know the author personally.  He is not self-obsessed.  He is not a complainer who simply did not get his way.  His a faithful, genuine servant of Christ who has given so much of Himself in service to Christ and His Church that he deserves better than your public judgment.

Even if your entire judgment of this man and this article were accurate, do your words offer the love and grace that any reproof by a brother in Christ should offer?  I encourage you to read it again, looking past the legitimate concerns you may have long enough to see the heart behind them.  If you genuinely do this, I think you might reconsider your words here.  At least, I hope you do.

In His Peace,
Jamie Arpin-ricci

Jamie, thanks for your reply.

I did not assume that all of what the author wrote reflects his own experience or even his own attitudes; instead, I assumed he wrote with a certain perspective in mind, perhaps working in things he has seen or heard from others, in oder to make a point.  However, I stand by my points as well.

I know people who have been very badly hurt by churches, but that is not an excuse to abandon any and all trust in Christian leadership, though some use it that way.  The author’s implication that the only decent fellowship occurs in the park or around the dinner table is very harsh, and I believe, an unjustified attack on the very concept of the church itself.  Has he (figuratively) checked out all the local congregations and they are ALL bad?  Or is he justifying his own (figurative) desire not to attend?  And a desire to hold on to money. If Malachi 3 is taken as only applying to priests, apparently because chapter 2 starts with an admonition to priests, does that also mean that when God says “I hate divorce” in 2:16 that it only applies to priests?  C’mon, it’s just an attempt at an excuse not to give.

I guess the heart of my reaction to the article is centered around the unavoidable implication that God has not put honorable men (or women) in positions of authority and leadership in churches. Is that because God is not involved?  Or because he is unable?  Or does the real problem have more to do with a defiant and bitter attitude?  I don’t see any willingness to forgive leaders that may have made mistakes, even hurtful ones.  But the fact that we’re hurt is not an excuse to allow bitterness to fill our hearts.

I also know that there are many churches with poor leadership and frequently, equally poor laity.  Sometimes people pursue vocational ministry for the wrong reasons, in oppositions to God’s leadership. But there are many fine churches out there. 

I have been involved in a church that was split by gossip; by accusations similar to those in the article and by unjustified and inaccurate assumptions about motivation.  It destroyed the ministry of the church for years.  Such things are no more “Christian” than whatever real or perceived problems occured in the church to begin with.

BTW, if an author decides to make a public statement, he/she should expect public response.

I stand by my original points, not specifically or personally aimed at the author, but indeed, aimed at the points he makes.

Dave

Hey Jamie,

Thanks again for your reply.  Sorry mine has been delayed - hectic schedule - no time.  I don’t want to get into details about exactly what was or wasn’t said, but I will say say that perhaps I read more into some of the statements than I should have, especially regarding church leadership in general.  However, if fellowship is taking place only outside of a “church” then I must assume that a suitable church has not been found.  Also, while we’re all aware of problem churches, in my experience, I would not call such problems a generality or a trend.  In the first paragraph, the author claims to speak for millions.  I find that to be pretty ambitious.  But really, I guess my biggest concern is not with specific wording or statements, but with the overall tone as evidenced by those words and statements.  But onto my response.  BTW, this will be my last post on the topic, the last word is yours if you want it.

In my former church we had a group who disagreed with the pastor on something and the whole situation ended up creating attitudes similar to what the article portrayed.  People began to “fellowship” outside of the church, but that fellowship time was generally spent talking about how horrible and evil the leadership was.  It was a time of gossip.  This group stopped giving to the church, saying they couldn’t support corrupt leadership.  They began sending unsigned letters to the congregation ridiculing and viciously attacking leadership.  Because thery were so hurt and angry, they eagerly embraced any report or hint of wrongdoing, no matter how far-fetched.  They eagerly looked for things that could cast the church in a bad light, then they’d report that to the local newspaper, with no regard for the impact that had on individuals and their families.  They spread unfounded rumors to other churches in the area, including an outright lie that we had homosexuals in charge of ministry groups.  They rigged an election of elders in an attempt to talke over the church. There is NO excuse for such actions.

Now, with that said, they were indeed hurt.  But that is no excuse!!!  I have been badly hurt by churches.  In one church, I had the worship pastor make it clear that I was not needed and not really wanted in that area of ministry.  But, since I believed that I was where God wanted me to be, I humbled myself and waited on God.  Within a few months, I was approached by another congregation to become their worship leader - in a paid position.  I was there for 7 years.  That was the church that had the disgruntled group, who in a touch of irony I’m sure they missed, called themselves “The Unity Group” as they attempted to split the church.

But eventually, in that church, I was told (falsely) that church policy (major denomination) precluded me from any sort of church office, even though I had been nominated by the congregation. I felt that I had been told I was officially a second class citizen.  But, again, since I believed that I was where God wanted me to be, I humbled myself and waited on God. 

Before too long, I was approached by another congregation to become part of their pastoral staff; initially in a ministerial role, but with the intent of that position assuming full pastoral duties and responsibilities.  When we leave ourselves in the hands of God, he deals with all this stuff for us.  When we humble ourselves, he will lift us up into something better than we initially hoped for.

I know another local church that went so far as to escort “undesired” congregants out of a service.  Others were sent letters revoking their membership.  Many of those people are now at my current church, where an effort has been made to get them to respond to all that in a truly Christ-like, forgiving manner.

So, I say all this to illustrate the fact that I CAN understand where the author is coming from.  I just cannot support where he ended up.

Let’s assume that the author was truly wronged and the actions of leadership were really inappropriate, selfish or whatever.  Even in that case, the author is not responsible for those things.  That leadership WILL answer to God and God will surely deal with the situation in the best manner, even if it is not in our preferred timeframe. 

The author is, however, responsible for his own actions and his own words.  Assuming again that the author is representing a group of real people who have been really hurt, the method of dealing with that is clearly laid out in scripture.  Again, even if someone is really hurt, why air that on a public forum in front of the whole world?  Someone may not (or maybe so, I’ve seen it before) be going to court over these issues but 1 Cor. 6 still applies.  “Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.”

The author’s position is no better than that of those he accuses. Instead of humbling himself and waiting on God, he has chosen to try to bring other Christians down, in front of the whole world.  Will God honor that?

Allow God to separate the wheat from the weeds - it is not our job. 

Finally, Mark 11:25 certainly applies.

Dave

Wonder if Martin Luther was alive today, would he have refrained from writing something like this?