Do we leave Middle Earth to its fate?
What do you do when you know you're not happy with your church - I mean really not happy, persuaded that it's losing sight of something vital and selling itself out to 'entertain the goats instead of feeding the lambs', finding yourself unable to really get on board with the direction it's going, and finding its leaders unreceptive to those who try to point this out?
Do you leave and go and find one that seems to be achieving things you would like to be a part of?
Do you start your own church?
Do you stick it out and just put up with the problems, knowing that no church is perfect, and submit to the leadership in obedience (since, after all, you know they're as earnest as can be in seeking God, though it seems to you they're missing something nonetheless, perhaps weighed down by fears of some kind)?
Do you stay and just keep trying to make the leadership see what you mean, since you are so persuaded it's right, and persist until something happens?
Or do you just not worry about it, and do what you can at the church you are at, making sure you yourself are doing what you believe to be right, saying 'as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord', and continuing to pray that you as well as everyone else will seek and find and obey God's will?
How long can one support discrepancies like this? And how important are they anyway?
Do you leave and go and find one that seems to be achieving things you would like to be a part of?
Do you start your own church?
Do you stick it out and just put up with the problems, knowing that no church is perfect, and submit to the leadership in obedience (since, after all, you know they're as earnest as can be in seeking God, though it seems to you they're missing something nonetheless, perhaps weighed down by fears of some kind)?
Do you stay and just keep trying to make the leadership see what you mean, since you are so persuaded it's right, and persist until something happens?
Or do you just not worry about it, and do what you can at the church you are at, making sure you yourself are doing what you believe to be right, saying 'as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord', and continuing to pray that you as well as everyone else will seek and find and obey God's will?
How long can one support discrepancies like this? And how important are they anyway?
posted by Kat | 4/12/2005 08:47:00 pm
12 Comments:
I don't know what I would do. I guess it would depend on what the actual circumstances were and what the issues were. Hmmmm.
I've never really been in that situation.
I am increasingly convinced the answer is option A:
leave and go and find one that seems to be achieving things you would like to be a part of.
Why? Several reasons...
1. I've found from a lot of experience that people tend to be overly hopeful in thinking that we can influence people more than we really can. If church leaders are unreceptive to an ideas of change at first then it is certain you will never convince them so you are wasting your time if you continue trying.
2. You contribute better when you are fully committed. When you are in total agreement with a churches goals, methods, beliefs and practices you will do better at anything you do in connection with the church.
and most importantly:
3. When you disagree with what's happening in a church it increasingly rubs you the wrong way and you end up not enjoying church, and that filters through to your entire Christian life, you end up not enjoying God. There are plenty of people out there that lost their faith because they grew apart from their church.
People are always growing and changing, and it happens that people grow apart from their church and become ready to move on, the church that once was perfect becomes the wrong place for them to be. Staying in one church too long tends to cause stagnation. Jim and I were chatting about this the other day and we reckon 3-5 years is the ideal length to go to any one church, and that people ought to move churches at the end of that period.
I would like to throw up a counter-argument here. (Not that I don't agree with you Andrew).
Surely Church is as much about people as it is about doctrine? (Waiting for the lightning bolt for that comment!)
If you are already doing stellar work helping people within your church, (like leading the creche, or being a known person that people can talk to), then isn't helping other people more important than our own spiritual comfort?
Hmmm - I'm not sure if I am comfortable with this tendency of defining a church by only its doctrines/teachings.
I would tend to agree with Andrew, assuming you are really not happy with what's going on.
I would also suggest not making this decision lightly - you should consider the fact that what is happening now is a minor problem in the general scheme of things. So ensure you have plenty of time to think over it (which in your situation, I take it your probably already have)
I would also support the last option ('not worrying') concurrently with any of the other options. Have a thick skin towards others, not expecting much, but keep yourself 'on short accounts' with God, expecting a lot of yourself. An attitude such as this is good, and you should have it regardless of what you choose. I also believe such an attitude will help guide you towards the correct decision.
I would also raise an objection to Andrew's last paragraph, particularly the 3-5 years idea of moving on. How on earth is the church going to survive if people are only round for that length of time? Apon reading this it strikes me that what you propose is self-centered, and grounded in consumerism.
Shouldn't we have an attitude of 'how can I help the church?' rather than 'how can the church help me?'
One last thought:
Perhaps going to another church in the evening that you really disagree with will make you appreciate your own? :D
yeah. enough.
Thank-you for updating Katherine. I thought you had neglected your blog:) Lets see. I would leave. I don't tolerate churches that go against the bible. If you're church is going against the word, then I would leave. I don't support churches that do what is wrong.(I don't know what is going on in your church so I really shouldn't say that, but it's true.) I actually define a church by it's doctrine. So I have to respectfully disagree with you, Mike. A church is only as much as it's doctrine teaches. I will admit, I am a SDA(Seventh Day Adventists. Yeah, that's right. Not like David Koresh. He split off from the SDA church and fell away from God as well. Our church has it's doctrines and follows them. That is why I like it. Yes, we go to church on Saturday only because the commendments say so and that is what the Jews and Isreal(God's chosen) worshiped on. Katherine, it is your decision, but you have to follow your beliefs and to an extent, your heart. God will tell you what is right. Pray. Keep posting,
-CT
Good comment Conversation Terms. When I said I didn't think the differences between various denominations were that important, obviously there are some things that churches need to agree on to do. For example, I would be a bit sceptical of a church that didn't do communion - however I don't see the need to get hung up on *how* communion is done..... bread first or wine first, one cup or lots of cups, wine or fruit juice.... if you understand what i am saying.
If you get right down to it - in the wider protestant community - especially the one here in Christchurch, there isn't a lot of difference between an Anglican service, a Baptist service, a Pentecostal service, a New Life service or a Bretheren service. (I am only relating types of churches that I have been to)
Sure the songs that they sing might be in a slighty different style, but more often than not they will be the same ones, and I would hazard that the teaching you find at any of them would be equally valid - insofar as any teaching you get at church - regardless of which church you go to - should be tested yourself - either by lining it up with the bible, or simply by asking if it makes sense.
This is why I don't think that doctrine is the only thing that we need to look at when assessing a church.
Doesn't it say that a good tree will be known by its fruit? And a bad tree cannot bear good fruit? I submit that if a church is doing good work in the community and making a positive difference in people's lives, then it must be a good tree - regardless of how its doctrines line up with my own.
My thoughts after a week of rumination:
I'm currently leaning towards option E - the one I generally come out with when I think about this (have been considering the possibility of leaving for a couple of years now). I'm thinking just because I don't agree with everything that goes on at my church, that's no excuse for me not to serve its people, or to stand back being cynical instead of getting in and doing what the church is there to do.
I may never get the personal fulfilment I could perhaps get at another church, but I don't think that should be my top priority. And perhaps it will encourage me to pursue God all the more diligently on my own. Besides which, surely serving God/people will bring a deeper kind of fulfilment anyway. Seek ye first the kingdom and all that.
Having the option of church-hopping is a privilege afforded only to big-city dwellers in countries with a decent sized Christian population - everyone else just puts up with whatever their church happens to be like.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more I realise that, if people like me and my family, who have these concerns, were to really start filling the gaps we're observing, the church leaders would actually be thrilled. And things wouldn't have to be so manufactured anymore, because there would be real stuff happening. I guess the leaders are afraid to stop the manufacture until there's signs of organic growth to take its place. And I guess I'm perpetuating this whole trend as long as I do nothing different. Not that I mean to start a new 'program' or agenda. My job is what it has always been - to do all things for the love of God. That's where all the good stuff we're longing for springs from.
But what on earth can I do though? Where does one start? I need to stop hiding behind this notion that I am unambitious by nature, and start dreaming and doing. But not for the sake of 'doing something' in itself, but because my love for God will not allow me to keep still. If my love for God does not motivate me in that way, then I need to seek Him more.
Hm, I should also mention that I have possibly overstated the gravity of the situation. I don't think there's seriously flawed doctrine involved - it's more just the emphasis placed on uber-enthusiasm as being our duty, feel like it or not, for the sake of winning converts, and this being pushed to the point of false-frontedness (I feel). There is also somewhat of a lack of decent bible teaching, discipleship, whatever you like to call it. And I'm sure we spend an excessive amount of money on lighting and sound equipment...
But in fact there's a lot of good stuff in my church too. Just had a baptism this morning of a woman who's terminally ill and came to our church looking to sort her life out before the end. She and her partner have been deeply touched by God in the last few months, have been inspired to fix broken relationships within their families, and have been overwhelmed by the love and acceptance they've found in our congregation. So maybe I'm wrong - maybe we're onto something. Maybe 'creating an atmosphere' does bring people to God and direct them to His ways. Or maybe it does the job for people that suit this style of things, and maybe that's most people these days so I need to repect the majority. I dunno.
Let me get this straight. Church?, on thursday? But that is not even the day God set aside. If you want to do that sort of thing then why go to any church at all? It was set aside so we could worship God, on His day, not ours.
I like this: "entertain the goats instead of feeding the lambs" Heh heh, so apt an analogy. I always enjoy your eloquent descriptions of your thoughts.
But I really like this: "[I need to] start dreaming and doing. But not for the sake of 'doing something' in itself, but because my love for God will not allow me to keep still." That's a great attitude! And I think that's how it should be - it's how I feel anyway.
I am currently dissatesfied with my church and have resolved to discuss matters with 1) the music pastor 2) the senior pastor. I have generally been one for sticking to it - for I don't think a consumer-church mindset is healthy.
Yet, my patience wears thin. I have tried to input into my church - they let me preach twice, and what I said was on safe doctrinal ground... it was challenging teaching, but I feel the church needs challenging lately. Having expressed interest to preach again, I have been rejected. I have discussed some of my many concerns with the asssociate pastor, only to have him 'agree' with me and actually disagree with me in almost the same sentence.
I believe we must voice our concerns for the benefit of the church. But, if we are ignored, then perhaps we are like a prophet it his own town - not heeded. Jesus had the same problem in His hometown, and so He went elsewhere to tell those who would listen.
In fact, Jesus didn't really waste time trying to change those who were against Him - rather He tried to teach those who wanted to hear.
I rant, getting back on track...
You seem to be comparing "serving my church" verses "serving your own interests" - but that's not really valid. Firstly, you're clearly not wanting to selfishly serve your own interests. Secondly, it's not "your" church - it's God's church, and other churches are part of His church too. As Andrew said, there is much to be said for going where you can be effective in serving God. If your current church is hindering you in that, then both God and you may be better helped by you going elsewhere.
However, I hear what you're saying about church-hopping being a luxury. I agree, but say in the extreme case that your local church was full of heretical an unscriptural teaching - it may not be wise to stay. Furthermore, I must agree with Andrew that the power structure and culture of of most churches is not easily ruffled. Furthermore, if the althorities of the church don't want to hear or do what you're saying, it can be very difficult indeed to be of much use.
For I have found that in order to be a respected voice in many churches you need to be high up the heirachy. Yet, to be promoted up the heirachy you need to be saying things that they agree with. Hence, there is no-one in the heirachy that disagrees with the leaders and therefore the church is locked in a rather dangerous cycle. That's why I like churches that listen to individuals of the congregation and give them heed - and why I detest the organisation of my own church which I have found thoroughly inpenetrable.
In my case, I have expressed my wishes - they know that I wish to lead and teach and disciple others... yet they keep the door firmly shut in my face. I don't like that.
So, I will talk with my pastors - for I feel it would be wrong to leave without at least telling them my concerns. I don't expect any change though, I have seen that the culture of my church runs far deeper than I knew before. That is why I expect I will leave before the end of this year. But I do not want animosity, for they are trying and they certainly love God. Nor do I wish to blackmail them by saying "change or I'll leave".
I wish to leave for reasons other than doctrinal ones also. I want to find a church in which I can serve God most effectively and not be quashed. I would like to go to a church where people are actually genuinely freindly and loving and not shallow. I would like a church that doesn't just talk about themselves, but one that's helping to save people caught in the chains of the world. I want to be part of building a community of believers the people can look at and say, "Look at how they love one another - they must be Christians", and I wonder if I should be a part of a lukewarm self-centered church that seems much like the church of Laodicea.
Look at what God said to them: "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I would that you were cold, or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I am about to vomit you out of My mouth. Because you say, I am rich, and I am made rich, and I have need of nothing, and do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked... As many "as I love, I rebuke and I chasten." Be zealous, then, and repent. "
Yes, be zealous, and not lukewarm.
I write so much for I am trying to sort this out myself also... Let me give you an analogy.
Imagine you are like a cup of new, delicious wine. If you mix into a jug with many cups of wine that has gone bad, and is bitter and bad to drink, what difference with you make? Yet, if you mix into a jug of fresh wine, you will add to its flavour and volume, so that more may drink.
It is for this reason I seek a church of fresh wine, and leave a church that I feel is bad to drink. For, as Christ said, a house (or church) divided against itself cannot stand. Perhaps it is also what He had in mind when He said, "Do you think that I came to give peace in the earth? No, I say to you, But rather division.
For from now on five in one house will have been divided, three against two, and two against three." Also check out Micah 7 (and perhaps the whole of Micah) - where he was clearly in similar woes.
What do you think of all this?
I appreciate your comments Reuben. I would like a church that doesn't just talk about themselves, but one that's helping to save people caught in the chains of the world. I want to be part of building a community of believers the people can look at and say, "Look at how they love one another - they must be Christians" Yes, very well put.
It's funny actually, a lot of the things you said you're looking for in that paragraph, my church actually does pretty well, or at least is making significant progress. I guess it's mostly the teaching and the music that are bothering me. And something else I'm having trouble putting my finger on.
I'm not really any closer to a decision after all this discussion. All the arguments, despite being contradictory, seem to be defensible. (In fact I deliberately worded the different arguments in the original post to avoid a bias and try and show the validity of each.)
I should like to discuss the matter with you sometime.
Cheers to everyone who's commented or talked this over with me. It's much appreciated.
Let me get this straight. Church?, on thursday? But that is not even the day God set aside. If you want to do that sort of thing then why go to any church at all? It was set aside so we could worship God, on His day, not ours.
It appears that you have appraised my viewpoint entirely. I could throw the argument out there that if the only thing that is important about church is the day you go, then why go to any church at all.... which seems to contradict your argument..... but I won't, as it is fundamentally not the point I want to debate (not to mention that we would both find that argument to be nonsensical).
I find it incredibly hard to believe that the 7-day cycle has never been broken since the dawn of time. If it has been broken - even once..... then all the days of the week that we observe to be "sunday, monday, whatever" will map to different ones in the past.
I put it to you that the point isn't what day we observe "sunday" to be - as long as we do observe one day out of seven to be holy and put aside. So, in answer to your question, yes. I would think that a church that decided to call "thursday" their holy day, would be equally justified as a church that called Saturday, or Sunday or Monday their holy days. (And there are churches that do).
I must make myself clear here when I say "justified". I mean that they have every justification to observe thursday as a holy day, set aside for God, as long as they do it every week. What I am not saying is that automatically means they are justified as a church. Getting back to our previous discussion, I would take a long hard look at their doctrines, beliefs and their work in the commujnity before I would call them "Justified" as a church.
Post a Comment
<< Home