“True heroism is remarkably sober, very undramatic. It is not the urge to surpass all others at whatever cost, but the urge to serve others at whatever cost.” Arthur Ashe link
Today is Memorial Day. At the end of this post, TWW would like recommend a charity that we believe is symbolic of most of us who frequent this site. But first, here is a post demonstrating the reason why we chose to commend this charity to our readers.
The Land of Dominia
Imagine that you have decided to vacation in the mythical country of Dominia. You have rented a car and, as you begin to travel on the bumpy highway, you see a sign which states:
All Traffic Laws Enforced
Coming from the United States, you assume they mean things like speeding, failure to yield, etc. In fact, you are somewhat relieved because you visited Russia link and were appalled at the lax enforcement of traffic rules. Suddenly, up ahead, you see a downed tree, which is blocking the road. So, checking for oncoming traffic, you cross the yellow line and maneuver around it. In your rearview mirror, you see two police cars rapidly approaching and find yourself being pulled over. They claim you have broken the law by crossing the yellow line and will not listen to your explanation. You are cuffed and brought before the judge who pronounces a sentence of 6 months in jail.
You protest and they show you a book of traffic rules which includes a rule to not cross the yellow line. There are no exceptions. You ask to see what the recommended punishment is for such a violation and they say they have no such book. They decide on a case by case basis. Basically, you are hosed.
You made a big mistake. You assumed that you knew what they meant by "traffic rules." You assumed that they had laws that would be understandable and reasonable. You assumed that they would be like the United States, following legal precedent, etc.
The land of church discipline
Now, instead of traffic rules, insert the words "church discipline." The Apostle Paul highlights a grievous sin, one that gets the guy kicked out of the church. Most of us have no problem with this.
1 Corinthians 5:1-5 NIV Bible Gateway Link.
1. It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife.
2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this?
3 For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this.
4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.
Look carefully again at the explanation given by 9 Marks about church discipline that we posted last week here.
1. Should a member become guilty of sin that the church deems scandalous, the church may excommunicate him immediately and without prior implementation of less drastic means of discipline, such as private expostulation or public rebuke. 1 Corinthians 5 records the command to immediately withdraw fellowship from a man who was guilty of scandalous sin. See also Galatians 2:11-16.
2. The decision as to whether or not it is necessary for a repenting member to confess his sin to the entire church rests with the pastors (also called elders and overseers) of the church; but the general principle is: the repentance ought to be as public as the sin is notorious. That is, publicly known sins are to be repented of publicly.
3. Unless providentially hindered, any member who willfully and habitually absents himself from the appointed meetings of the church will be liable to church discipline.
4. Any member who seeks a transfer of membership or any other removal of his name from the church roll while subject to any stage of church discipline will not have his name removed from the church roll without the consent of the Elders. If he should leave during the discipline to attend another church, [church name] will communicate the nature and status of the discipline with the pastor of the other church.
5. Each member of [church name] agrees that he will not initiate or pursue legal action against the church, nor against the pastors, deacons, or church staff in connection with their performance of official duties. Any Christian considering legal action against another Christian is encouraged to heed 1 Corinthians 6:1-8
They give us 2 types of discipline. The first highlights the guy who was guilty of incest. Once again we have no problem with this so long as they have examined the man and ascertained that he was mentally sound.
Here is the rub. The next category is all of the others reasons for discipline. The only one they outline specifically is not showing up for church "willfully and habitually." They do not define what this is so apparently they get to define what that means.
All the rest……
From what I can tell, this is a huge category which is subject to the decision of a group of men (in these churches it is only men who decide). It is obvious that they are concerned about getting sued so they throw in the zinger about not suing them.
So, to what sins are they referring? There are lots of them in the Bible: pride, gluttony, cheating, lying, anger, lust, etc.
Surely these men will be reasonable, right? After all, they are elders. And aren't elders the godliest men in the church? Since godliness is no respecter of societal status, why do we seldom see sanitation workers, plumbers, or fast food workers who are elders? Why do most elder boards appear to consist of those who rubber stamp the pastor's agenda?
The problem
Church discipline sounds like a good idea but few churches carefully define the types of sins that are disciplined up front. They also do not define the method of discipline that is employed. In other words, you are subject to their decisions and their methods and have little to no say in the matter. You are just a "wee little sheep" in need of some punishment.
Wee little sheep and really big cheeses
How is the average church member perceived by church "leaders?" Since 9 Marks is the celebrated church discipline crowd let's take a look at what they say on their website link.
A wee-little sheep breaks through a fence and runs away. But unlike most parables, his shepherd doesn't’t find him (Luke 15:1-7). This little sheep wanders to and fro, far away from home, and eventually stumbles upon another flock. From that moment on, another shepherd is given charge over his life. Imagine the first shepherd picking up his cell phone and saying to the new overseer, “Hey, friend. There are a few things you should know about this wee-little sheep…”
I find this statement condescending and arrogant. We are the "wee little sheep" in need of protection by the shepherd. They are the shepherds. They spend a few years at seminary and suddenly they are the "really big cheeses".
They must get you to join their church in order to do their thing.
From the same 9 Marks article:
But to the extent that Christians float around as free agents, never committing anywhere, the examples cited above become more unrealistic. Keep encouraging everyone who walks through your doors to join a church, whether yours or someone else’s,
Once you check in, you may have a hard time leaving.
In the same article
Several months ago I was helping a couple in a troubled marriage, and the wife’s new pastor (from another church) called me. He said, “I’d really like to know how your elder board is thinking about this situation.” The pastor worked at a Bible-believing congregation in another state.
“Why?” I asked.
“Because I want to make sure my counseling falls in line with how your elders want to exercise oversight over this marriage.”
Note: A guy in another state wants to allow the former church to "exercise oversight."
You have a legal right to leave a church and to have them stop harassing you.
Slavery was abolished a long time ago. In fact, you are a bond servant to Christ, not to First Baptist, Dominia, no matter how much they try to convince you that they have the "authority" over your life. Here is a link to a post on how to leave a church that is abusing you.
Isn't most church discipline for bad stuff?
In many authoritarian churches, it's all bad stuff and they get to define it, not you. Here are two example mentioned in the last two days on our blog. We have hundreds of examples just like them.
True Story #1 Asked for help with a child bully
My husband and I were disciplined out of a Baptist church for a situation that involved very serious bullying against a child. The leadership did not properly deal with the problem, but instead told my husband to “man-up”, and accused us of “playing the victim.
We were shocked at the lack of compassion for children being hurt physically and how no serious intervention was made to prevent this from continuing to happen. In fact, the abused was made to look as if they deserved this or somehow brought it upon themselves.
An e-mail was sent to the church to address the problem of bullying. It was stated that:
“tattlers may have a heart issue of self-righteousness or fear”.
Also, the following quote from the same e-mail:
“It is easy to be judgmental and begin to excuse a bad attitude which displeases Christ by harboring anger toward another child or family that is not responding the way that you believe they should respond. This is a sin that is ultimately more dangerous to your family than the actual bullying. We as pastors are very aware of this snare that can trip up the best of families. Now, every parent assures us that they are the kind of parent that does not take up the side of their child with blind protectiveness. It almost is humorous….but it does mean that we, knowing our vulnerability to be blind to with our own children, have trust that the pastor is speaking to us about our child is doing it from a heart of love and even an eagerness to be fair on behalf of your child.”
This very long quote is just a small sampling of rude comments directed our way.
We decided to leave the church as their way of “handling” the problem was less than satisfactory. We were told we could not leave because they were the shepherds of our souls. Also, we were told we were being disobedient by not returning to church and that church discipline would be enforced if we did not return and receive counseling for our issues.
The leaders of our former church were very worshipful of CJ Mahaney, Al Mohler, Mark Dever, John MacArthur, John Piper, etc…. They loved attending Together for the Gospel conferences, Shepherd’s Conference, etc…
Story #2 Excommunicated from an EFCA church
I was excommunicated from an Evangelical Free Church a year ago. This church is Reformed and extremely authoritarian. I didn't’t realize that the EFCA churches are autonomous and without any accountability.
These elders insinuated themselves in a dispute I was having with a contractor I hired who had defrauded me (and whose license was suspended by the state board because of a complaint I filed). The elders told me I could not file the complaint, nor tell anyone about the poor work he did (because “it would impair his ability to earn a living”).
I wrote the EFCA district office to advise them how my elders handled this matter, and I was publicly disciplined for “slandering the elders in emails to the EFCA District Office.” Not only was my account entirely true, I did not share details with anyone in the church body. I was never given the chance to defend myself.
I let the EFCA district office and the national office know about the unjust steps the local church had taken against me and their response was: “Find a church home where you will be loved,” NOT repent and submit yourself to your elders. Unfortunately, in my small community, the pastors are a tight-knit group and I don’t believe I will be welcomed in anyone’s church. I never dreamed I would be without a voice or a defense in the body of Christ.
It took the church nine months to carry out the “discipline”. We were never notified of when it would take place, nor were we informed that it had taken place. The church waited until the week of our child’s birthday to carry out the discipline. Hmmm…makes one wonder if their intentions were entirely pure [;-)]
A message to those hurt by abusive church discipline
You are not alone. Many people have been hurt by churches. In the current climate of increasing authoritarianism, we believe that such stories will become commonplace. The only way to cut down on this nonsense is to speak up and tell your stories. Church membership is on the decline in the US. We believe it is stories like this which are contributing to the rise of the "Nones" in our country. These are believers who have left the organized church. As opposed to being disobedient, we believe that many of these folks have been treated poorly by wolves disguised as "pastors and elders."
The Wounded Warrior Project
From time to time, TWW has been asked if we accept donations. So, we have decided to recommend two charities. One involves human trafficking but more on that in the near future.
However, we also wanted a charity that would reflect what we try to do at TWW. We believe that Christ came to set the captives free from the legalism of the Law and the Pharisees who defined that Law. Many of you are dedicated to the freedom that you have found in the grace of Jesus Christ and help others to leave the bondage of manmade regulations.
The women and men in our military have fought hard to maintain the freedom of the United States.They, too, have fought against manmade philosophies such as Fascism and Communism that would restrict our pursuit of liberty and happiness. Many have died in defend that freedom and we honor them today. Others have returned home with terrible injuries, both physical and mental, and they are deserving of our undying gratitude.
We believe that it might be therapeutic to donate to The Wounded Warrior Project as a declaration that we are free in Christ and free from authoritarian churches. Many of us have been wounded by the church. This is one way to help others who have been wounded in the defense of another kind of freedom.
So, consider sending $5, $10, etc. and let it be a statement of your freedom and your rejection of abusive church leaders.
Here is a link to their site to learn more about the work of this organization. Here is a direct link to donate.
Then, as our wounds continue to heal, may we go on to find peace, love and joy in the arms of a Savior who has wounds on His hands, feet and side. Those wounds are beautiful. And, as you watch this video, consider this. I think the ones who have been wounded look cooler, fiercer and stronger because of their injuries. May it be so with you.
And know this, TWW will always stand by, and with, you.
Lydia's Corner: 2 Samuel 18:1-19:10 John 20:1-31 Psalm 119:153-176 Proverbs 16:14-15
This is a GREAT post! Thank you for writing it, and thank you both for taking so much time to the healing of hurt souls. Your voice is continually and increasingly becoming more important as time goes by. May the Lord encourage you both for the work He has given you. Be blessed in Him!
It is a characteristic of many humans to assume authority over others, not because of any legitimate grant of such authority, but because of their own sense of importance. There is a key verse n the bible that addresses one purpose of Jesus death and resurrection: to set us free. IT IS SIN TO GIVE UP THAT FREEDOM AND SUBMIT TO RULE BY SELF-APPOINTED PHARISEE LEADERSHIP. It is a greater sin to be the Pharisee leader that demands that you submit to his leadership.
@ An Attorney: I am of the same opinion!
Dee, is that the same Baptist church mention here: http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/08/08/two-churches-don-cameron-the-pedophile-and-me-am-i-nuts/
Here is another irony of the “church discipline” issue. Some gets “disciplined” over a silly issue but then it gets worse. The discipline is compounded when you don’t respond as they think you should. Or you get disciplined for having the wrong “tone”. Or you are rebelliuos because you did not agree.
If you start reading some of the documenation that goes on with these issues, it is incredible how banal they are. Does anyone remember reading the internal docs of the Petry’s being “disciplined” at Mars Hill? It was down right deceptive how they handled that.
It kind of reminds me of reading history and what it was like when a country is taken over and the young are put in positions of authority.
The irony of the Mars Hill docs on the Petrys is that a lot of those guys involved in “disciplining/firing” Petry are no longer working for Mark.
Now take a look at SGM and how many of the guys who carried out Mahaney’s vision for control are out?
Yet Mark and CJ still stand. I hope all the Mohler/ Dever sycophants are paying attention,\.
Perhaps whenever you encounter a church that goes out of their way to mention/emphasize that they “believe in church discipline”, that should be a red flag that they are placing an unhealthy and undue emphasis on it.
@ Nicholas: No. But the similarities point to the fact that they drink at the same well.
@ Nicholas: Ditto!
One thing I can say for certain – I will NEVER NEVER NEVER be a member of a 9Marks affiliated church.
Hope everyone is having a wonderful Memorial Day!
I’m thinking of 4 anecdotes– all involving real/scandalous sin so far as I know.
1st 2 told to me by Mrs A A hapened when she was young:
1: A pregnant girl was forced to stand in front of everyone and confess her sins. Meanwhile, Pastor’s sons were entertaining themselves by burglarizing homes, were never “disciplined” except by the State, and their sins swept under the rug.
2: Pastor’s 30-something son-in-law ran off with future-Mrs-AA’s 18 yo friend. They traveled to various churches and “led worship” for over a year, representing themselves as man and wife. When they came home, Pastor’s SIL repented, got back together with Pastor’s daughter, and was put back on stage immediately leading worship. The young lady was ignored, and went away, no longer attending any church.
3: The pastor announced that a man had been involved in immorality, had refused to repent when confronted, and was no longer welcome at church until he did so. I think this was the only appropriate handling of a I Cor 5 situation I’ve been a part of.
4: A man on the worship team stopped coming to church for several months. A pastor reached out to him, and the man said he was never coming back and wanted nothing to do with the church. His reasons matched one of the I Cor 5 sins. I agree that the things described were sinful. Other pastors went to him in the 2nd Matt 18 step and he was unconvinced. Pastors sent him a certified letter threatening “taking it to the church”. No response. A Members meeting was announced and I knew in my heart it must be about someone who’d already left the church. Almost everyone was there. People were rightly concerned and those who’d been close to him tried to contact him. Next Sunday, with still no response, another Member’s meeting was scheduled to revoke his membership, cast him out, and turn him over to Satan. I objected, on the grounds that it’s impossible to cast out someone who’s no longer in– impossible to excommunicate someone who’s no longer communing (or communicating, for that matter). Senior Pastor (close to my son’s age) disagreed with me in great detail and unassailable logic, reminding me of several previous complaints I’d made to leadership about other issues. I went to the Excommunication Meeting, which only about a quarter of the members attended. 10 minutes. The pastors said a few solem words, a pastor prayed, and that was that. I apologized to pastors for the additional distress I’d caused and went away quietly and permanently. IMO the church’s 9 Marks affiliation caused more harm than good in this situation.
@ Nicholas:
Very interesting. When I was a student at Southeastern (BTS), a (Calvinist) professor complained during a lecture about the lack of church discipline in The Episcopal Church (and Episcopal-type churches in general). I wondered (greatly) where the comment came from. This was about two years ago. I began to wonder then why some Southern Baptist churches were so “big” on the discipline thing. I’m beginning to see how it all fits together now.
Just spoke to a former student of mine this weekend who is now a student at Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville. He was home to Texas for the Summer….Within the first 5 minutes of the conversation he made the remark…” We’ve got to get the church into some sort of disciplinary structure. ” I was shocked and pretty much shook his hand and said “goodbye.”
I am still stunned….
K.D. wrote:
The goal of this blog is to prevent any sort of surprise. We know what is going on and therefore we can outsmart them. The best response will be to laugh at them.
Guiding Others On The Path Of God? Interested in becoming a Christian minister and starting your own 501c3 / nonprofit organization? The sky is not the limit. God so loved the world. Would you like to tell them? Inquire below.
___
References:
http://www.ministerregistration.org/
http://www.christiannationalchurch.org/
http://www.fgfservices.com/index.php/501c3-services/our-501c3-projects
—
Dave A A wrote:
I know a guy who communicated his concern about an excommunication meeting, believing it was getting out of hand. He showed up at the meeting and they excommunicated him! True story. He is still not attending any church.
Deb wrote:
They have already pre-excommunicated you.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2011-05-09-vienna-virginia-church-abuse-case-lawyers-insurers_n.htm
K.D. wrote:
Oh yeah… These wet behind the ears seminary grads are gonna whip us into shape….
LORD HELP US!!!
dee wrote:
I am so grateful for that 9Marks list of churches. It helps me be discerning…
K.D. wrote:
Welcome to what it has been like at ground zero for the last 8 years or more. They are still fighting acne but are experts on church discipline. Good job, Mohler and Dever.
To our wounded warrior–my family gratefully thanks you for your sacrifice.
“Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends. John 15:13-14
———–
As for pastors–sadly, many of them are hirelings and don’t care for the LORD’S sheep (as most of you know).
“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep.” John 10:11-13
As I’ve mentioned before, one of my first questions before joining my current church was when Chirch Discipline would be used. The pastor said it was difficult to define, but the only example he could think of was a guy who was abusive in his insistence that others follow his brand of Reformed Theology. The pastor said he and other leaders approached the man, but it never went further than that because the man ended up leaving. While it wasn’t a specific answer, I thought it was a good answer because it showed that protecion from abusive peoabusive natures were more important to te church than theology (as I understand it, both the pastor and the denomination agreed with the man’a theology). Our pastor then said treating people like that is grounds for discipline.
Anon 1 wrote:
Wonderful story! I wish all churches would do this!
dee wrote:
Dee,
I knew this boy for years, and thought he was smarter than this…it was like he was somehow brainwashed. It was somewhat scary. His eyes glowed like a cult member’s…
I am appalled with what is happening at certain Southern Baptist seminaries. The SBC is doomed if the current trend continues, but I am just a mere female so what do I know???
I’m not a big fan of firing off rounds of scripture, nor quoting chapter and verse (I prefer to quote chapter, and leave my readers to read the verse and context for themselves). But here’s one from Isaiah 60.
And I’ve failed to close off an html tag yet again… maybe I should go and sit on the blogging naughty step for a bit.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
You admit this repeated sin, eh? Hmm. I think we need some TWW discipline applied in this situation. [sarcasm off]
Everyone tells us not to tattle when we’re kids. Except when “tattletales” grow up, we give them a different name: “whistleblowers.” When they successfully expose corruption in major corporations, presidential administrations, etc. we laud them as brave heroes (at least when it’s all proven and over). Mixed messages, anybody?
Churches wanting to keep tabs on ex members in this way reminds me of guys who keep flirting with you, despite the fact you’ve made it clear over and over you have no romantic interest in them.
“No really, I’m not interested in you like that. Please stop calling me at home. Stop hanging out in my front yard. Stop following me at the grocery store. Stop calling my job…”
Daisy, it sounds like you’re describing a stalker! Scary creepy. Not the Holy Spirit, not someone sent to “help” by the Holy Spirit’s leading.
From the Original Post:
And:
That is so, so familiar. I was bullied in junior high a lot (in a secular public school).
I was bullied on a job in my early 30s by a much older boss.
In neither scenario did I get help, whether as a kid in school or a worker on a job, and in quite a few situations, I was blamed, even though I was the victim not the aggressor.
As a result, I did a lot of reading on the topic of bullying and abuse to try and learn why people act this way.
In my personal experience, and books by author confirmed this is pretty typical, the victim gets blamed (you, the victim, it is supposed or said, must have done something to deserve or “ask for” being smacked around or insulted), and-
Those in charge (teachers, principals, bosses on jobs) either usually ignore the whole thing (and tell you to just pretend no abuse is going on), or they side with the bully. (A lot of this is true with domestic abuse cases as well.)
These tendencies to side with the bully and protect the bully falls into other areas of life, not just churches, and I’ve read that it also happens in Japan, Australia, and Britain, not just the United States.
I think (American) churches, which are supposedly comprised of Christians, would be expected not to behave in this manner, but they do.
@ RB:
I’ve had a few very persistent guys like that in my teens and 20s.
Deb wrote:
I am hearing of some SBC churches which are cutting off funds to some of the semiaries by designating their CP giving. They are that opposed to what is going on at SBTS. I expect to see that increase since the T4G statement.
What is going on is indoctrination and let me tell you the younger guys cannot think when they get out. Literally. They have NO critical thinking skills. That is why you find when you engage them there can be no conversation that does not degenerate into ad hominem if you disagree. In no time, you find you do not believe God is Sovereign or that you are a wicked sinner. And that is that.
The only way to stop all this is cut off the money supply.
The OP:
Why? What business is it of theirs, even if the person mentioned in chit chat at church, “hey I’m having a dispute with a contractor.”
One of those elders must be related to, or buddies with, the contractor is all I can think of.
From the OP:
I wonder if these types of churches are merely power hungry, or if some of this springs from a reaction to the sad state of churches these days?
There are churches and denominations that veer too far in the opposite direction, where members never, ever get disciplined for anything.
Maybe some of the bossy churches are concerned about that, but they are going over board in trying to correct the problem.
Anon 1 wrote:
Amen.
From the OP:
I stopped going to a local church because I was hurt by insensitivity to emotional pain I was in, even in regards to a death in the family.
The cliches, platitudes, and judgement added to the grief I was in. There’s no understanding or compassion from church- goers if you have depression.
Churches not having any (as in, non- child- care- taking) roles for a never-married woman with no children is another factor for me being reluctant to go to church.
What bothers me is that folks like me who are hesitant or afraid about going to a church, or who feel like we don’t fit in,
-(because we’ve been hurt by a church or Christians in general; and/or we’re not married and/or don’t neatly fit into old fashioned gender stereotypes)-
get beat up all over again on some Christian blogs and Christian sites for not going.
We get raked over the coals, because we’re supposed to go to a local church no matter what, because there is some verse that says, “not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some…”
I will assemble with Iron Man, the Hulk, and Captain America for the Avengers, and I’ll even consider assembling with Voltron, but not with a church at this point. 🙂
Sadly I have learned that authoritarianism is not just an American problem. I experienced it with a South American pastor that planted a church here in the US. I’ll try to condense the story to a short version.
Left SGM church 3 years ago (accused of not leaving well, and pastor telling everyone to not talk to me). Went to EFCA church which seemed good and healthy on the surface. Made it clear to leaders we were hurt and broken from SGM and needed to heal. Six months in, experienced some ugliness, but felt there was too much good, so stayed. Found out they had a bilingaul eng/spanish ministry that we got involved in because sons are adopted from Latin America. Church elders announced
In addition to the Wounded Warrior project, there are charities that help military working dogs that take donations, and there are military members over seas who care for dogs and cats they find and need funds to have them shipped to the USA to be put up for adoption.
Here are some of those sites:
Mission Mahalo – donations and help for Military Working Dogs
Military Working Dog Adoptions
(they also take donations)
You should never, ever, ever, become an “official” member of any church. It doesn’t matter how nice the people are, or how nice the elders are, or what it says in the church’s documents (Though usually where that’s where all the scary and juicy authority is written down).
All becoming an official member does is make you another human sacrifice on the altar of elder righteousness.
I learned this lesson the hard way, as I share the same general story that countless others have related on this site and others, and I have witnessed it numerous times at other churches I have been to or through people I know. I will never officially join any church. And if that makes me an outcast in a church, then I will leave because they don’t deserve to be a church anyway.
Just say no folks. You won’t regret it.
@ JustSomeGuy:
I wonder if you, or Deb, or Dee or anyone who knows, can explain, why not just go to a church every week but don’t sign official membership papers – what benefits if any, are there to being an “Official Member(TM)”? Is there some kind of advantage to signing papers and being an “Official Member?”
(All Christians are members of the body of Christ any way, so I find the idea of making people sign papers to be the members of a local church building weird.)
Oops hit post by accident.
At end of first year there, Elders of CEFC announced plans to explore. Best way to merge bilingual into main church as a separate service. Five months into it, the senior pastor announced his departure, and a power struggle ensued. We quickly saw it was being led by the two calvanista elders. At the end of the year in an ugly congregational meeting where many including me got emotional the bilingual was voted to be a separate church plant. We decided to go with the church plant.
Things went well for the first year, but bilingual pastor refused to have church meetings to discuss what happened we were expected to forgive and still do things in partnership with the english only church. My husband was asked by the pastor to be an elder in the new bilingual church. He often came home from meetings frustrated because the other guys allowed the pastor to do whatever he wanted. They also kept dismissing his insights into what he felt God was speaking for the direction of the church. He felt there was a lot of talk without any action.
Last fall one elder stepped down for his unfaithfulness to his wife. The church was not told. When I asked the pastor and other elders why, I was told it would be gossip to tell the church. last several months, the bilingual pastor seems to have gotten caught up in his authority and getting legalistic. I yelled at the pastor of the english only church in a private phone conversation
K.D. wrote:
Was he wearing a Calvinjugend armband?
@JustSomeGuy
Just say no….love it! We will NEVER join another church either.
@Dee
The “wee little sheep” comment sounds far too familiar. The pastors of our previous church frequently attended the Together for the Gospel conferences and also the Shepherds Conference. I remember one Sunday just after they had all returned from one of the two, they were commenting and laughing from the pulpit about their favorite quote from the conference. “The pastor’s job is to lead and feed, the sheep’s job is to swallow and follow”….ummmm, no thank you…not for me.
Daisy wrote:
Bullies are THE most Popular kids in school. Every kid sucks up to them and sings their praises out of fear of becoming the next target/example. The message is clear: To be The Winner, BE THE BIGGEST BULLY.
Leigh wrote:
[[MOD Deletion]] Sorry HUG but this crosses my line. GBTC
Leigh wrote:
Seriously? That is one thing about the cavlinista movement is they see this as normal. In the mega industrial complex, that would have been said in private by the leaders. Never to those they saw as their followers.
Talk about red flag. The congregation should have walked out even though they couched it as humor. Are they aware that they are not only sheep, too but also “brides”? :o)
I should stop trying to comment on my phone…
The english pastor was being invited to preach regularly at bilingual church. I was objecting because elders at enlish church never came and aopolgized to bilingaul church for the racism and hurt the caused folks in the biligual church. The pastor of the english church reported to the bilingual pastor that I yelled at him. I texted back and forth with bilingual pastor letting him know of my concerns and my own hurt. I felt he was putting loving the english church above loving the memebers of his own church, so I sent him a note telling him that. The pastor and elders contacted my husband telling him to get me under control. My huband resigned as an elder.
I am struggling with Borderline Personality disorder and lost both parents over winter so I have been emotionally vunerable. Pastor and elders met with me a couple months ago and told me I must only communicate verbally with them. I expressed that with BPD, writing gives me time to process and rsepond instead of reacting. They also tried to give me more responsibility (control tactic?). One elder summarized the meeting –basicaaly stating what they wanted while ignoring what I commincated I needed. I declined to take more responsibilty in church. I sent elders and pastor info on BPD, and tried to have conversation with pastor after church that week. He told me the info was of no value because it was from the world (psychology). He went on to tell me that I should not come to church when I am emotional and that Imy problem was sin and immaturity. I got up and told him I am tired of church telling me it’s a sin issue and I accidentally bumped my husband as I went to leave and he fell off his chair. The elders told my husband that pastor was upset that I pushed my husband out of his seat.
A month ago, pastor and the bible study teacher (pastor’s brother in law) both unfriended me on Facebook without warning or explanation. I sent the pastor an email a couple weeks ago asking why. He refused to tell me in writing. I got the elders involved and told them I am too emtional for a face to face, and I needed to have his explanation in writing. They insisted to have a meeting afte church in the sanctuary. I asked a female friend to join us. The first thing the pastor did was talk to my friend in SPANISH (SO I don’t know exactly what he said. She said he asked her to leave. It triggered me, and I yelled and made a scene in front of folks still in the sanctuary. On the following Monday, I got an email from elders asking for another meeting. On Tuesday I sent a note back explaining that meetings have been too emoitionally vunerable for me and have only made things worse. I tried to meet after telling them it wasn’t a good idea. I asked them to send what ever they wanted to say in a letter that I would process and work with my therapist to respond to in writing. They wrote back Weds telling me they would not communcicate in writing and I may not attend any church service or event until I agree to meet. We have no intention of ever returning and had decided that befor they told me I can’t…
“Pastor and elders met with me a couple months ago and told me I must only communicate verbally with them.”
They hate documentation.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
That sounds similar to the “Stockholm Syndrome.” In extreme power imbalances, a sort of bonding occurs between the hostage/captive or batterer/victim. They depend on each other; the victim for their lives/safety and the aggressors for their feeling of power.
Mrs Stretch wrote:
If you are members of the church, read this post, especially the section on How to Resign. There’s a resignation letter you might want to consider using: http://thewartburgwatch.com/2013/05/23/abusive-church-discipline-how-to-recognize-it-and-escape/
They still don’t have the church structure set up. There was no official membership. So there can be no official discipline…
The church hasn’t set up it’s structure so there is no memebership nor official discipline…
Anon 1 wrote:
That’s the truth. The guys won’t allow anything to be recorded or disclosed: http://abpnews.com/ministry/organizations/item/8529-using-secrecy-to-control#.UaQFle_D_mQ
Quote from the article: “Albert Mohler, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary president and task force member, claimed open meetings and records would “rob” history and create a “chilling effect” on other committees. Participants would fear recording meetings if people would have immediate access to the records.”
Daisy, my wife and I tried to do just that with a 9marks/SBC type church. After 4 months we were kicked out because we would not formally join. They make not signing their documents, a sin and then discipline for that. It's completely circular.
Nicholas wrote:
Soviet bureaucratic tradition.
AKA Plausible Deniability on steroids.
“If it isn’t written down, IT NEVER HAPPENED.”
If you are unfortunate enough to find yourself in an unfair church discipline situation, please, document EVERYTHING. Also, if the leaders are foolish enough to communicate via email, save every single piece of correspondence between yourself and them. This way, you have their exact words and repeating their exact words can never be called slander. They love to pull out that slander card. Also, remember, the less you respond to them the better.
Seth,
Thanks for your comment. I'd love to know more about your experience in a 9Marks/SBC type church.
Regarding what @ Leigh wrote:
And don't forget, we would be happy to share your testimony here. 😉
Daisy wrote:
There aren’t really any benefits I’ve seen, aside from being included in financial meetings and given the right to vote in some churches. On the scale of things the risk far outweighs the reward.
Seth
Fascinating. Bet you are doubly glad you didn’t join! This stuff is nuts.
Nicholas wrote:
Heh, of course it would cause a chilling effect.
A chilling out is exactly what they NEED.
Don’t say anything you regret, and you won’t regret saying it.
Guidelines for discerning a Bad Pastor by Kenny Pittman
dee wrote:
Could you imagine another member showing up to talk about the guy who was excommunicated over showing concern for the first guy being excommunicated, and that guy being excommunicated, and on and on?
Pretty soon churches like that are going to be down to a member of one.
Daisy wrote:
I know a church like this. It’s initials are BGBC. I imagine he’s had to be creative, though, because with less numbers = less tithe $$$ to support a pastor’s salary.
@ K.D.:
That does not surprise me one bit. I have many former college classmates at that seminary right now and I can honestly say that we have very little in common anymore. It is equal parts horrifying and disgusting what is happening at that seminary. My entire time in college I was in predominantly male Bible study groups and I held my own with the guys. They all learned that the fastest path to idiocy is to assume that I was inferior due to my gender. There is one incident from my freshman I remember so clearly. One of the Bible study leaders, a guy, was a very harsh Calvinista. I watched him “rebuke” a guy in the group for some supposed sin the freshman, D, had committed. D left the church and the faith and hasn’t been back. I told the leader bluntly that his words and actions were so far out of line and I would never attend any church he pastored. He is one of the bright shining stars at the seminary in Louisville.
As far as supposed benefits of church membership, there are a few in my neck of the woods. Most churches down here require membership for the “privileges” of baptism, marriage ceremonies and funerals held on property. The only times I remembered the congregation at my former church being allowed to “vote” were to affirm the proposed budget and to affirm the selection of a new pastor. The budget votes were always held during the evening service when it was usually just the deacon board who showed up so that was kind of rigged. And nobody dared to vote against a new pastor.
Mrs Stretch wrote:
I’m very sorry for your loss.
That makes me very angry that they told you that or that they think that way, but I’m not surprised, because a lot of Christians are like that.
I had clinical depression for years and anxiety/panic attacks. For the most part, I’m recovered from depression but not anxiety.
I know that many Christians are horribly ignorant about mental health problems, and do have a tendency to blame you for it, or have simplistic, wrong ideas about treatment (like if you just pray harder or more often, God will heal you).
Deb and Dee began a series related to mental health and how horribly most Christians/ pastors deal with it, specifically about Nouthetic counseling. You might want to visit those posts.
I bet the other posters are right and these guys at your church don’t want things documented, which is not fair to you, since your condition is such that writing is easier and less traumatic than verbal exchanges or face to face meetings.
@ Seth:
That is just wrong. Some churches aren’t acting like I would expect a church to act. 🙁
@ JustSomeGuy:
In light of that, I think I’d rather just show up every week and not risk signing some form.
I have seen several news reports about sex abuse (against girls or grown women) by preachers, and I noticed some of the churches referred to rape/ child sexual abuse as being “adultery.” I came across this a moment ago:
Call It What It Is: It’s Not Adultery. It’s Abuse.
.
@Daisy
I appreciate that Ed Stetzer wrote that, but he has been silent on abuse and coverup in the SBC and SGM. Here are two open letters that Christa Brown recently wrote to him:
http://stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com/2013/04/dear-ed-speak-up.html
http://stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com/2013/04/ps-to-ed.html
Ed has never acknowledged or responded to these letters. I e-mailed them to him to make sure he saw them, and he didn’t respond to my e-mails. I tried to post these links in comments left on his blog, and he refused to publish my comments.
Maybe this is one reason those churches are so keen on making people stay:
I reported his deletion here: http://thewartburgwatch.com/my-comment-was-deleted/#comment-94333
Also, search “Mahaney” or “Dever” on Ed’s blog, and you will see that he supports them.
Christa Brown also wrote an excellent open letter to Al Mohler: http://stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com/2011/12/dear-al.html
Like the coward that he is, he has refused to respond.
Found another related story on this guy’s blog:
Should A Pastor Rule Over You?
The intro:
Nicholas wrote:
Stetzer’s an opportunist. He apparently likes to be invited back to the mega-churches time and time again, and get those plum speaking slots at their conferences. If he started to name names or call leaders to account, what would happen to all those opportunities?
http://theresurgence.com/2013/04/06/we-re-thankful-for-ed-stetzer-a-q-a-with-the-man-with-every-title
http://marshill.com/2009/11/24/ed-stetzers-words-for-mars-hill-church
A little over a year ago, Stetzer wrote, Considering (and Surviving) Unhealthy Christian Organizations
Following Stetzer’s post, an anonymous commenter wrote:
Dear Ed,
Your post is welcomed and long overdue – but something is tragically missing. Surely, in your extensive research and your position as an “authority” of sorts on the church, you are in a position to call the abusers to account. Publically. Why don’t you? You certainly know who many of them are. Lifeway even promotes and sells some of their books.
Until men of authority, like yourself, who have a national platform, are willing to step up and name names, the abuses will continue, and in some sick way, you are complicit for not stewarding the position of prominence that you have been uniquely blessed with to give a voice to “the least of these” who have no voice – those who have been abused and wounded by the abusive “shepherds” and the organizations they lead. What are you waiting for?
What is Stetzer waiting for?
“How can you say, ‘We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us’?
But behold, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.
The wise men shall be put to shame; they shall be dismayed and taken;
behold, they have rejected the word of the Lord, so what wisdom is in them?
Therefore I will give their wives to others and their fields to conquerors,
because from the least to the greatest everyone is greedy for unjust gain;
from prophet to priest, everyone deals falsely.
They have healed the wound of my people lightly,
saying, ‘Peace, peace,’ when there is no peace.
Were they ashamed when they committed abomination?
No, they were not at all ashamed; they did not know how to blush.
Therefore they shall fall among the fallen; when I punish them, they shall be overthrown,
says the Lord.
Is there no balm in Gilead? Is there no physician there?
Why then has the health of the daughter of my people not been restored?
Jeremiah 8:8-12; 22
If this has already been posted on another thread, I apologize.
On Christianity Today:
After Judge Dismisses Sovereign Grace Lawsuit, Justin Taylor, Kevin DeYoung, and Don Carson Explain Their Silence
@ dee:
“Deb wrote:
I will NEVER NEVER NEVER be a member of a 9Marks affiliated church.
They have already pre-excommunicated you.”
That’s funny.
“Overlordship: An Iron-Maiden Beats Four T4G Officials?”
huh?
There is probably nothing more heinous than a group of ‘religious’ men seeking temporal power.
What?
Where have we seen this sad mis-carriage of power before?
History 101, perhaps?
rumblings?
“One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.” J.R.R. Tolkin, “Lord Of The Rings”
What are the consequence when ‘religious’ churchmen seek temporal power?
Wartburg Witch trials perhaps?
hmmm….
(sadface)
Not by force of ‘religious’ blows does Christ’s rule assert its claims. It is established by his devoted followers faithfully witnessing to the truth, by hearing it, and it extends its influence by the love whereby Christ, lifted up on the cross, draws all men to Himself. Did not Jesus bear witness to the truth, yet refused to impose the truth by force on those who opposed it. Should his devoted followers choose for themselves a different path; and bare the image of an anti-christ?
The christian church in America possesses not temporal power for a good reason.
Have we forgotten our history books, perhaps?
hmmm….
Sopy
—
Mrs Stretch wrote:
This is common. Men who rise through the ranks to eldership are typically those who look good in public settings, especially when they’re in the majority and are dealing with just one person. They are able to pass off their apparent emotional stability as maturity.
Now, naturally, they are unwilling to concede this advantage. Any “disciplinary” setting is tuned to maximise it: it must be face-to-face (which plays to their strengths) and not in writing, which would level the playing-field for the vulnerable person. It must be in the sanctuary, where they feel at home and have a high level of control over who can attend. God did it differently, of course. When the time came to utterly overcome human sin, he emptied himself, took on the form of a servant and was crucified in weakness (the story didn’t end there, of course).
Herein lies another important point when leaving an abusive or unloving church: play to your own strengths and do not allow yourself to be manoeuvred into a setting at which you will be disadvantaged. We have a surpassingly great Advocate in heaven: no “church” has the right to demand that we have none on earth.
Here are the major Christian news outlets that have not reported the allegations of child sexual abuse and cover up against C. J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries since May 14, 2013, when the detailed 200-paragraph list of alleged names, locations, and description of the sexual acts was released.
CHRISTIAN POST (Richard Land)
CHRISTIANITY TODAY (Harold Smith)
WORLD MAGAZINE (Marvin Olasky)
LIFEWAY RESEARCH BLOG (Ed Setzer)
—
(Christianity Today’s Gleanings blog mentioned the lawsuit in 2 articles since May 14, 2013, but it has not been mentioned in the main Christianity Today blog.)
—
Who else needs to be on this list?
Hester wrote:
I respectfully disagree. True tattletales are the kids who enjoy seeing their peers get into trouble for every little thing and make a point to see it happen. These kids grow up to be calvinista “sin-sniffers.”
Anon wrote:
That is how I would characterize it considering all the myriad positions he agrees with (organic church, mega church, yada,) and bad ones he also ignores yet he is an expert or church organizations. Keep in mind his boss at Lifeway is Thom Ranier who was working for Mohler before Lifeway.
In the SBC, when looking at the whose who, you can play the Kevin Bacon game subbing Al Mohler for Kevin Bacon. All roads in the SBC lead to Mohler.
Anon wrote:
For it blow over. It aways does. They don’t want the money drying up anymore than it has. Keep the plebes ignorant. If Setzer said anything it would become even more well known. He is really more of a PR guy trying hard to make the SBC look relevant. He sticks his finger in the wind of political gravitas.
Making Mohler look bad by even mentioning it, would be a death knell for Setzer. Guys like that don’t go around giving up 6 figure salaries in order to support victims of molestation.
IMO, there may be some unintended irony between in mentioning those in the wounded warrior project and those of us abused in the church with ‘discipline’. I say this after twenty five years of having been hired by (and having in-depth conversations with) those who work for just about every department of the State (MD) and Federal Gov’t…CIA, DOD, DOJ, NSA, IRS, SS, FBI etc…you name it, and also having researched the issue when our second oldest wanted to join the armed forces.
The amount of deception, lying, dishonesty, fraud, fleecing the people and lusting after power is at an all-time high with our Gov’t – they are waist high in it (maybe more). Those that take the unqualified oath of allegiance are really putting themselves (ignorantly) at the mercies of those in power and are advancing their causes. Dishonest and un-American objectives are framed as ‘protecting Liberty and Freedom’ etc.. The enlistees intent may be good, but they are ultimately being used as pawns for unrighteousness in too many instances.
Obviously there are many similar parallels between joining the military and becoming members of a church. I feel badly for victims of both.
Kristin wrote:
And get patted on the head and rewarded by those in power whom they tattle to. Good little brown-nosers.
Forgot to mention – it’s the absolute necessity for survival or prosperity to ‘turn the blind eye’ in both the church and the gov’t that sours it for me.
Daisy wrote:
Next step: Stone the five-year-old WHORE. God Commands It!
Mandy wrote:
Good Little Party Member with the Calvinjugend armband and a brown nose?
Anon 1 wrote:
But these insiders are always welcome to turn on their proxy servers and post their true thoughts and sympathy for sexual abuse victims here when they aren’t on their employer’s computer network.
Rev DeYoung spoke at the SGM Transfer conference (Sunday, I think) The Big Idea?
“Gender makes no difference in how much God loves you. Gender does make a difference in how you love God.”
My response, paraphrasing JP,
“(chuckles) Oh my!! Part of that answer is clearly going to depend on what kind of love we’re dealing with here.”
@ ken:
Ken I have to agree. When I read the Ft Hood doctor who murdered all those people he was supposed to care for has collect about 300,000 in salary but the families of the dead have received nothing I was shocked. Our entire system is upside down. Many military families are barely making it. I am seeing more and more of a divide between the government upper management and a plebe. Even those in middle management of corporations have much less pay and perks of middle to higher level government worker. For security and higher pay with tons of great benefits that are exempt from obamacare, government job is where to be.
“Gender does make a difference in how you love God.”
There is a pink and blue ways to love God? Did he give examples?
I remember reading C. Peter Wagner’s book “New Apostolic Reformatiion” 15 years ago. PDI/ SGM had its own chapter if I recall correctly.. It was titled “Snapshots from Redemptive history: The Apostolic Brickroad to Dominia”.
Anon 1 wrote:
Of course! 🙂
“Eager Posture – “The woman is intentional to find ways to help and is eager to accept the role as a helper, and the man is intentional to find ways he might lead and accept the responsibilities of a leader…The central exhortation in the complementarian position is not for women to sit down, but for men to stand up.”
Body – “Even our own desires must be subordinated to God’s will…Who you are as a man or a woman has everything to say about what you do with your body.”
Appearance- “There are things that are ‘not natural’ for the sexes. Men are to be men. Women are to be women…Ladies, God doesn’t say shame on you for wanting to be beautiful, He says let me show you what true beauty is.”
Demeanor – “When Paul chooses to use an illustration on what it means to be gentle, he uses a nursing mom. And then he uses the analogy of a Father for what it means to exhort and charge.”
Crown – “The crown for a woman is a true beauty. The crown for a man is true strength…There is something present in a man to be strong and lead; just like there is something present in a woman to be pure and beautiful.”
Anon 1 wrote:
The terms are Aristocrat and Commoner. Our Betters and the Common Rabble.
Were you born the son of a government worker? That’s becoming the only way to get into a cushy government/aristocratic job — inherit it from your father. In France, they’re already there — were you BORN into a government family?
Dave A A wrote:
Hey Dave – are these quotes from him? Aaaaaaaarghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, if so. I am a woman who is a leader at work – I accept the responsibilities of a leader & through this I am helpful…why did God give me leadership skills? How do they fit into his paradigm? I HATE this prescriptive thinking, I’d far rather see all of us given instructions on how to live lives of love then these pink & blue roles. I just never fit, not intellectually, not emotionally, not in any way.
@ Dave A A:
“There is a pink and blue ways to love God? Did he give examples?”
“Of course!”
+++++++++++++++++
what artful ideas.
@ Beakerj:
You “fit” into God’s scheme. Don’t worry yourself with fitting into the complementatian paradigm. You are doing what you are gifted to do. You are being helpful in that realm. You are doing “good” and not evil. You love God. 🙂
Jesus didn’t fit into the religious worldview of his day either.
@ Kristin:
I can see your point, but it can be both ways. When I got called a “tattletale” growing up, it was because my peers were actually doing something they weren’t supposed to do. It wasn’t me delighting in seeing them get in trouble, it was because they were actually breaking the rules. (Or it was my way of getting help when I was being teased, etc.) The resulting behavior in the peer group doesn’t change much between children and adults: I got caught, therefore you (who reported me) are a “tattletale.” Just swap out “gossip” and “divisive person” for “tattletale” and you have the same accusations thrown at TWW and SGM Survivors.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
HUG, a friend of mine spent the summer in France a few years ago. HIs first week the coat check workers were striking in the streets. The second week the Anesthesiologists were stiking. They are government workers, btw. Something to look forward to here, I suppose.
Addendum @ Kristin:
See also the concomitant attitude of “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.”
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
I can understand why Kevin DeYoung would feel the need to make up Talmudic prescriptions for a pink and blue way to love God. :o)
Oops, last comment was for Dave. Thanks for giving us Kevin’s examples of how we can do this. Now, you think he will define in specifics what sort of “strength” he is prescribing for men?
We will all need specific lists of do’s and don’ts so we can spend our time making focused on and making sure we are loving God in our respective pink and blue ways. It is not enough to abide in Christ, you know or be guided by the Holy Spirit. We simply must follow their Talmudic rules and formulas to truly love God. These men always know what is best for us, right? They are the Holy Spirit for us. (GBTC-That is sarcasm)
Hester wrote:
Look how far that got O.J.Simpson.
Far as I know, he sure “Stayed in Vegas”.
Anon 1 wrote:
Because under those “Talmudic prescriptions” what’s between his legs makes him Top Dog?
Hester wrote:
Yeah, it goes both ways. I guess it depends on who is in charge!
Beakerj wrote:
Is that a woman or a trained dog?
So whether you have an X or Y chromosome (and your genotype matches your phenotype) is 100% of your Destiny?
“Exhort and charge”?
Filtered through this guy, is that anything like “Colonize, Penetrate, Conquer, Plant, Colonize, Penetrate, Conquer, Plant”?
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Yep! The phallocentrisic Gospel. Elevating the biological to equal the spiritual. Ergo, pink and blue salvation.
Women really have it tough, because our Savior is male. Who are women to emulate? Thankfully the Holy Spirit is spirit so we can fudge a bit there. But Luke really messed it up in chapter 8 when he mistakenly let the cat out of the bag about women. We have both single and married women not only financially supporting Jesus but galvanting around Palestine with him! Now how was this being intentional about helping Chuza back at the palace? Joanna was Chuza’s “helpmeet”. I cannot for the life of me understand why Jesus allowed it.
(sarcasm)
Dave A A wrote:
Gahh. It never ceases to amaze me how “submit to one another” and “the greatest among you will be your servant” and “consider others better than yourselves” has been interpreted to mean “men are exhorted to stand up and take their place.”
Dave A A wrote:
So, my whole job as a woman is to be ornamental?
@ Dave A A:
There is a partial transcript, or paraphrase on this page of the audio:
Transfer | God’s Design | Kevin DeYoung [Audio]
Christians should, IMO, stop bringing up physical appearance in regards to women, for many reasons I won’t get into here. If they’re not going to lecture men to stay pretty for women (and they seldom do), they need to stop doing this to women ()even under the guise of “it’s okay to want to be pretty ladies”).
Re the “Demeanor” section. Paul at least acknowledges that some women are single and childless; most gender complementarians assume all women are married with a kid (or will be), and they keep using these mom and baby examples.
As someone who doesn’t have kids myself, I can’t quite relate to: “what it means to be gentle, he uses a nursing mom.”
My own mom did not breast feed me, so I can’t even go in that direction. They need to stop or decreased the number of mom and parenting references out of respect and empathy to the non moms and non parents out there.
This was also on the page:
Not sure what he means by “true beauty.” Is he harping on physical looks, or is this one of those sappy “spiritual inner” beauty type things?
Either way, he’s confining women too much. As a woman, I sometimes have to “be strong and lead.” Being strong and leading are not innate male characteristics, or limited only to males.
I also don’t have a husband who can be “strong and lead” me, and even if I was married, I would not want to be overly reliant on a spouse, as that would not be healthy for either one of us.
@ Daisy:
Daisy, I often wonder about the application of this teaching when in 40 years or so when Kevins wife has to take leadership over him changing his Depends?
Oh to find a Churchwhere Christians practice this:
Marks of the True Christian (Romans 12)
9 Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. 10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. 11 Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit,[g] serve the Lord. 12 Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. 13 Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality.
14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly.[h] Never be wise in your own sight. 17 Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. 18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. 19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it[i] to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” 20 To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
@ Dave A A:
Does anyone else hate being addressed as “Ladies”?
Anon 1 wrote:
And everyone. Perhaps he does– I’ll listen for those when I have time to listen to the whole talk. I would love to love God today by giving Kevin a little fatherly charging and exhorting. Like, “When are you going to act like a man and stand up as a leader, and charge and exhort your friend C J, who has gone down the wrong road?”
But I don’t have time to love God today. I’ll be busy caring for little children and cooking and cleaning. Tomorrow and Thursday as well. Maybe I’ll be able to love God Friday!!
I thought of quick Biblical examples on the Crown topic. Isaac chose his strong son, Esau, but God chose the Mama’s boy, Jacob. Then Jacob chose the beautiful Rachel, but God chose the weak-eyed Leah (to be multi-great grandmother of Jesus).
Yes 🙂 as in “Ladies’ Meeting, Ladies’ Gathering, Ladies’ Retreat” yada yada yada . . .
We were named woman and man. Why not just use the given name? We don’t call events “Gentlmen’s Meeting, Gentlemen’s Gathering, Gentlemen’s Retreat.”
Why the need to make women’s events sound like a social club gathering – but not men’s events?
Blah!
I love the music video of Gavin DeGraw singing Soldier, which is dedicated to the Wounded Warrior project. The words of the song also really speak about standing up for those who need it. My post has the video embedded here: http://virginiaknowles.blogspot.com/2013/04/soldier.html
I also just compiled a long list of links related to the SGM lawsuit here:
http://watchtheshepherd.blogspot.com/2013/05/sovereign-grace-and-saving-face-amended.html
Virginia
elastigirl wrote:
I do! Was also offended when old guy boss adressed my recently-mixed-gender office as “little gals… Er…uh… And guys…down here”.
Reminded of Withers’ speech in That Hideous Strength, “Tidies and fugleman–I sheel foor that we all–er–most steeply rebut the defensible, though, I trust, lavatory, Aspasia which gleams to have selected our redeemed inspector this deceiving. It would–ah–be shark, very shark, from anyone’s debenture…”
OK seriously– no more o’ dis Blue God-Loving for me today! Gotta feed everyone lunch!
@ Bridget:
…or a public restroom (that has a vending machine).
“Ladies”…. prim, proper, ankles crossed, little white gloves, contorting shoes that impede walking…. a gaggle of geese, a pack of hens…
i much prefer Boadicea.
Anon 1 wrote:
I’ve said it before (on an older thread), but all Christians of both genders are called to emulate Christ, all of Christ, and Christ showed qualities of what many would consider ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine.’
Jesus could be a tough, macho, strong guy, but turn around the next moment and weep, cry, have compassion for people, be very gentle, and compare Himself to a mama hen bird looking after her baby chicks.
If I’m a Christian, I am supposed to mimic all of that, not just the “girly” attributes if I’m a female, or only the “manly” parts if I’m a guy.
elastigirl wrote:
I prefer 'ladies' over 'girls'.
@ Dave A A:
Dave A A you’re a star. I highly suspect you’re an Incredible behind that secret identity.
Tough call, I’ve been referred to as many things… but I suppose by comparison, being called a lady isn’t so bad. 🙂
Fendrel wrote:
LOL! 🙂
Anon 1 wrote:
Christian women are supposed to emulate Christ.
The issue is not that Christ has/has a physical male body but He had, and displayed, the full range of emotions and characteristics God gave to both genders.
God gave men the ability and traits of being and feeling gentle, tender, touched, crying, being sentimental, adoring cute puppies, etc., but they are socialized in many cultures to repress all that and act like tough he-men at all times.
My brother mostly lives up to the tough guy image, but I’ve seen him cry at sad movies.
It’s the same with women: God gave women the traits and capability to feel and express anger, be violent, be tough, lead, but they have been socialized by secular and religious societies to repress and hide all anger, etc, but only display a sweetness and light, pleasant personality.
If you look in the Bible, you will see women, with God’s apparent approval, acting on traits the gender complementarians consider manly, such as Deborah leading men in Israel, and going into war.
I believe King David cried and mourned over his dead child, and wrote touchy feely songs about loving God, traits many would consider feminine. But God seemed okay with that.
has/has a physical male body
That was supposed to be “has/had“
@ Deb:
Deb:
I was thinking that ‘ladies’ was a somewhat geographical (as in the South) phenom, although it seems common in the church as well. It leaves a bit of “not grown-upness” or “not quite capable” tase in my mouth. Maybe ‘ladies’ is a step up from ‘girls’ or ‘gals’ in the southern regions???
No More Perfect wrote:
No, you are also expected to wash sinkfull of dirty dishes by hand. 🙂
But be ornamental while doing so, preferably wearing a dress and a pearl necklace and pumps.
Deb wrote:
Yes!
elastigirl wrote:
I prefer ladies to girls. And I see RED when women/ladies are referred to as “chicks.” UGH!
@ elastigirl: Me!
@ Bridget: Thank you – I’ve long thought the same.
@ elastigirl:
Are most public bathrooms like that as well – ‘men’ and ‘ladies’? I hadn’t paid much attention on that front. I’m thinking that soon there will only be pictures.
@ Fendrel:
hmmmmm….. it’s the equivalent of this:
Chairman of the Board John visits a facility, passes Sharon the Engineer Product Manager in the hallway, introduces himself, extends his hand for it to be shaked and asks, “And whose secretary are you?”
Now substitute Sharon with Fendrel.
@ elastigirl: Mmm hmm! 🙂
@ Bridget:
those pictures crack me up.
@ elastigirl: Same here.
And they’re very Western – in a lot of countries, women wear billowy pants and tunics instead of skirts (of any length).
@ elastigirl: Of course, there are also places where lots of *men* wear “skirts” (sarongs, lava-lavas, etc.).
Not to mention kilts.
@ Anon 1:
Interesting point 🙂
I would guess that Gender complementarians will still say he’s the head and the wife is properly submitting, even if for all practical purposes she is doing all the leading because he is too weak or feeble to do so.
Like with this couple…
Well shoot, I can’t find the page here on Wartburg Watch (I was going to link to it for you but can’t find it), but Deb and Dee did a post about a married couple where the husband had brain damage (I think) and was in a wheelchair or something, but was it Piper and/or some gender comp group that still spun the story as the injured husband was still the lead/head of the relationship, even though the wife was doing all the work.
Bridget wrote:
Because calling them “gentle” men would not work. :o)
@ numo:
yeah. i’ve been doing a very quick ruminating here, and am stymied. what’s the solution? what communicates across cultures?
Or, perhaps just go with the outworkings of the british empire and that fact that most people recognize the words “Men” and “Women”.
@ Anon 1:
…blasted european aristocracy…
@ elastigirl:
(Sarcasm) Well, I don’t know, Elasti. It might cause a major problem in the American church. The top dogs are so used to ‘men’ and ‘ladies,’ they may not be able to make the move to men/women. They could end up in the wrong stalls or at the wrong retreat!! (sarcasm off)
@ Anon 1:
. . . some ‘gentle’ might do some of “them” good! I vote we have Dave A A put together a teaching on how to be a ‘Jesus’ man as opposed to a ‘Real’ man.
elastigirl wrote:
Trivia: where did the term Aristrocrat came from?
Answer: Aristotle. Started out as term for philospher kings that knew best for the peasants and thought for them. Evolved into being born a Royal. :o)
Sorry guys, I call them “bully boys” because they come into our churches and tell us we are not biblical because we have women deacons or allow little old ladies to teach in mixed groups.
We just smile sweetly and say, it looks like you won’t be happy here. :o)
Anon 1 wrote:
Technically, the Greek word “Ariston”, which means “the best”.
So “Aristocracy” originally meant “rule by the best men”.
Your mileage may vary on the definition of “best”. It WILL definitely vary from that of “the best men” themselves.
Victorious wrote:
I thought “chick” might trace back to the Spanish word for young woman, “chica”.
You may be interested in the latest Rachel Held Evans post:
http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/some-words-of-support-for-the-victims-of-abuse
Dave A A wrote:
And Withers’ speech reminds me of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas — specifically HST’s description of an ether binge. (Drinking the ether, not huffing it.)
@ Anon 1:
sounds like devolution to me.
but very interesting!
elastigirl wrote:
Pass out the hats & glasses — “WE ARE DEVO!”
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
It’s also a good pop song. 🙂
The Best, by Tina Turner
.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
I’m not very disturbed by being referred to as a chick or lady and sometimes use those terms myself. It depends on who is using it and how – if it’s a sexist guy calling me a “chick” or “lady” in a condescending tone of voice, I have a problem, but if it’s a guy who’s normally respectful to women, I don’t take it as a put down.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Geez Hug, you are like a walking encyclopedia! Guess my source was wrong? It was in some history book I cannot remember the name…
That brings me to another question. Did Aristotle change his name to be a derivative of the “best”?
Growing up I spent summers up North and both sexes were referred to as: Youse guys.No real distinction. I kind of liked it and adapted it.
http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/whats-being-said-about-the-sgm-scandal
Anon 1 wrote:
I was a kid genius and natural-talent speedreader. By the time I was 10 years old, I’d read more adult-level stuff than most people do in a lifetime — with no idea how it all fit together. (As Stephen King put it, “When you’re that old, most of your bingo-balls are still floating around in the draw-tank.”) Result was this massive mental database with no working search engine, only random linked lists. Literally any reference causes a random cascade of related data, and it’s really hard to pick out which is which.
I like the word “ladies.” If we’re talking about bathroom icons, I’d put my vote in for Minnie (and Mickey for the men). You know–like the fun icons they have in the happiest place on earth. 😉
@ Anon 1:
The “you guys” phrase comes from the fact that our English language doesn’t have a different plural form of you (it’s “you”). So the different regions invented their own forms like “you guys” and “you all” (y’all).
OT, but reading a thread with Boadicea and kilts in it really made my day.
Thanks, everyone! 🙂
Forgiven Much
Growing up in Massachusetts, when you wanted everyone to come with you to get a pizza you would say, “C’mon youse guys.”
Greetings to you all! I am the Janet of the EFCA excommunication case. First, the idea to redirect pain into an effort like the Wounded Warrior is truly lovely. Thank you for that idea. Second, as I read more of these abuse cases (and mine was nothing like the horrors perpetrated at SGM)I hear things that I thought were unique to my case: I was accused of “playing the victim” which appears to be standard operating procedure (as it directs attention away from the perpetrator); and the only written documentation is mine! They truly put nothing in writing! That makes it so easy for them to say. “It never happened.” Even in the two sermons which address me and are still online, my name was not mentioned until after the recorder was stopped. I had been considering litigation as I resigned in good standing prior to
the discipline process but I realized there is so little tangible evidence of their actions. Who would have thought it was by design? Thanks for the forum….the shame is lifting!
@ ForgivenMuch:
that’s the ticket!
@ ForgivenMuch:
i thought it came from The Electric Company.
Janet, Thanks for coming over! Welcome! The documentation thing is tricky if they refuse to email you. I tell folks all the time to “skip the star chambers”.
Janet wrote:
Soviet bureaucratic tradition, Comrade Thoughtcrime:
“If it’s not written down, IT NEVER HAPPENED.”
You know me .. but after seeing it, I can only say..if wishing only made it so…
https://twitter.com/vickstew2000/status/339495401159790594/photo/1
I’m not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but Tim Challies has posted a review of a book about sexual assault. No comments allowed. Timing is everything.
http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/rid-of-my-disgrace#disqus_thread
I haven’t had a comment go into moderation at WW for some time. Weird!
Caleb
It is far too late for that. The statements from this crowd have been universally panned throughout the blogosphere. It was a serious misstep. All of them claim to care about abuse but have shown by their actions that there is a disconnect. They have lost the moral highground and will need to deal with that for a long time to come.
Fendrel
Yeah, it is a bit hard to say I am praying for it when one is an atheist.
Dee,
They must think we are really dumb. I’m pretty tired of being insulted like that. I get the sense that a growing number of others are too.
@ Caleb W:
Challies wrote: <blockquote? Based on what I understand from the Bible, I prefer to define forgiveness in such a way that it requires the participation of both offender and offended; in this way forgiveness must include reconciliation, even if the consequences of the offense are not removed. That being the case, I would be hesitant to encourage a person who has been sexually abused to forgive someone who has sinned against them unless that person desires to be forgiven. I’ve read that some victims don’t find it necessary to forgive their abuser, but that many remain trapped if they do not.
Also, it seems to me that attaching reconciliation on to forgiveness is a false belief.
You can forgive someone, but that does not mean you have to have them over for Sunday supper each week.
@ Daisy:
I messed up my quote, his quote ends at the line,
“I would be hesitant to encourage a person who has been sexually abused to forgive someone who has sinned against them unless that person desires to be forgiven.”
My comments start at,
” I’ve read that some victims don’t find it necessary to forgive their abuser, but that many remain trapped if the…”
2 comments deleted by editors. There was nothing wrong with the commenst but they were a political statement and we have decided to stick away from that for this blog. We cause enough trouble thoughout the blogosphere speaking about churches, church movements and church leaders. If we add politics to the mix, we will only get more people miffed off.
Caleb
We have added some new words to our list that surround stuff that can be used to hurt/threaten people. We are very concerned that trolls will try to slip things in to show that we are threatening to harm people. Yes, these bird loving, dog rescuing adroable blog queens are under scrutiny. These are weird times.
You said absolutely nothing wrong. There was a trigger word that threw it moderation. We are trying very, very hard to view all comments but some come in when we are sleeping in our mothers’ basements and we do need our beauty rest. Please hang with us as we navigate this tricky road.
No problem Dee. That is completely understandable. I read your note about the use of certain words but it didn’t click with my own comment!
You are kidding?
You had shoddy work done by a contractor, wanted to sue and the elders of the church got involved?
Surely this is a joke.
This is not what elders are supposed to do.
They could suggest the name of a good attorney, but even then, that would only be individual, knowledgeable elders who might do that. They should not do that as a group.
Caleb W wrote:
Yes, they do. That is what happens when you stay within your ghetto never venturing out to take other view points or consider other arguments. Add to that you become a sort of mini king in your little kingdom of followers and it is a recipe for thinking people outside your ghetto are dumb. When the truth is….the opposite.
Caleb W wrote:
Two years ago, a good Reformed friend of mine recommended I read Tim Challies’s blog regularly. This morning I gave her an update on who is speaking out for Mahaney and who is silent. She was disappointed, and called the them “imbalanced.” For this dignified Christian, that’s strong language.
Daisy wrote:
Anybody else see the contradiction in Challies’ statement here? The first part seems to be a bit of a bone thrown to Mahaney for cover calling it “biblical” when the molester and victim participate in reconcilation. But the second part seems to come up with all sorts of considerations.
Forgiveness does not mean reconcilation or fellowship. If the creep molester claims repentence (which is even more questionable if they were a long time professing Christian while molesting children) then only jail time is the real answer. Knowing if one is truly repentent of such a heinous crime takes a lot of time and watchful eyes. I am certainly not taking his word for it! We seem to have lots of naive pastors out there like Tim. Maybe he should spend some ministering time in the Pedophile population of a prison near him to get educated a bit.
Forgiveness means you personally not seeking vengence. No eye for an eye unless you live in the Middle East and that is their law. :o). It certainly does not mean giving up a criminal charge cos the monster said “sorry”. Sheesh. The more they try to cover for Mahaney, the worse they look.
Anon 1 wrote:
Yes, in my opinion, Tim is well-meaning and naive. He’s exactly the type of person who gets conned by high-functioning child molesters. They confound people by being open and giving candid reports and acting remorseful. Sex offenders are bright and manipulative. But they cannot fool the people who run court-appointed sex offender programs.
Tim needs to know when he’s out of his league and hand it off to a pro, or he bears the culpability when the molester does it again. To quote one expert: “There is nothing in the literature that supports the notion that pedophilia ever goes away.”
@ Anon 1:
For me, two of the signs of genuine repentance are a willingness to face the full cosequences and no expectation (let alone demand) of reconciliation or even forgiveness….
Jeannette Altes wrote:
I think you are spot on.
Anon 1 wrote:
Agree 100%
Being from the South, I have no problem with the term “Ladies”, and have used the term “Gentlemen” in emails before. (Only men as recipients and not wanting to list each by name in the salutation). Result: some gentle verbal kidding. I have also used it orally for the same reason.
I also use the term “Ladies” when I refer to my two technicians. They’re in their 20’s so girls doesn’t fit, nor do they seem old enough/mature enough for the term women. And I don’t like the expression “Peeps”
Daisy,
You are not forsaking assembling with the Church, you are here, the Internet Monk, and other places (I presume) sharing your life with other people, other believers. Sounds like a safe place to be.
Mrs. Stretch,
I like communicating with others via writing, especially when I am trying to point out a problem. I don’t get tongue tied, when faced with a forceful personality. I have the time to make sure it says what I want it to say, and even have it reviewed by another mature Christian. It also allows me to trust God about when it is read, so that it has the effect that we (God and myself) would like.
I’ve gotten into hot water because of that myself, being accused of not being Biblical because I didn’t confront the pastor face to face orally. (He called me at work and in the course of the long conversation, I felt that I was battered. Fortunately, I had already started the process of changing denominations, and from that time on, I considered Fr. Bruce as my shepherd)
Daisy wrote:
I was thinking about this Sunday–I was wearing a sleeveless dress to see some churchy people I know whose organization disapproves of women wearing sleeveless clothing. My thought was: “It’s Arizona, it’s hot already and d’ya think Jesus is going to understand it when I have a menopausal power surge?”
It’s funny but it’s also serious, because Jesus is set up as the uber-perfect human, and that perfect human is a male human being. Rosemary Radford Ruether asked a few decades back “Can a male savior save women?” To me the question is, if God is continually portrayed as male, and the wholly God-wholly man human being is portrayed as male, where does that leave us women? (In light of that, I can totally understand why Catholic women have looked to Mary as an example of perfection.)
But seriously…how much can a incarnated male deity understand human females? (And no, my boyfriend’s answer of “Well, he created them” doesn’t work. I can create something and not fully understand it.)
Southwestern Discomfort wrote:
It’s Jesus’ humanity that enables Him to understand human females. You might like this post entitled “The Emotional Jesus: His Ups & Downs” here:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/robertcrosby/2012/06/the-emotional-jesus-his-ups-downs/
I found it to be a wonderful, insightful look at Jesus!
numo wrote:
Finally listened to DeYoung talk– in emphasizing how men and women should look different, so as not to get confused, he assures men that manliness doesn’t mean you HAVE to be like William Wallace (the Mel Gibson Version, I presume). IE to look manly you’re not REQUIRED to have long hair, no facial hair, and wear a skirt!
Anon 1 wrote:
Detroit?
@ Lynn:
Further North. St Clair Shores.
Anon 1 wrote:
Rochester? Buffalo? Syracuse?
@ ForgivenMuch: In Pittsburgh, PA, it’s “yunz”; in central PA, it’s “you’uns.” (and “us’ns,” though it’s probably been over 30 years since I last heard that!)
@ elastigirl: I think that works!
@ Anon 1: first known use 1789 – ?
Something got lost in translation, perhaps?
@ Headless Unicorn Guy: weren’t the hats actually flowerpots?
@ Anon 1: I think his parents named him that (not joking). Aristo- + telos, per a page cited by the source of all “truthiness” (per S. Colbert).
Southwestern Discomfort wrote:
I couldn’t help but get a chuckle out of this, not at you, but at the Biblical narrative where the Good Lord asks Adam who told him that he was naked. I think it’s astonishing the things that got hatched out of that early narrative. “Spiritual death”, “broken fellowship with the Almighty”, “inherited sin”, and the list goes on, stuff I no longer subscribe to, but agreed to with no questions asked at one time. Melville’s book Typee comes to mind as well.
@ dee: In Brooklyn, it used to be “youse,” by itself. (Please forgive bad pun; I am feeling a bit punchy …)
@ elastigirl:
o.O
@ Caleb W: I think we think that they are really dumb. (In addition to all the rest.)
Dave A A wrote:
… AND with a William Wallace mention, it’s a trifecta today! 🙂
Looks like TGC Justin Taylor deleted his snarky Titus 3 tweet about divivise people. :o)
numo wrote:
On the Electric Company in the 70’s, Rita Moreno played characters that always yelled “Hey, you guys!!!” in silly skits.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p08p2qBN80
@ Anon 1:
Anon1, just so people don’t get confused, because I forget to close the last part of the blockquote comment in my post, part of my comment got stuck onto the last part of Challies’ comment, making it look like his words.
It should read:
Challies said,
Part of my reply to that began with (these were my words, but they got stuck on to the end of his quote by mistake):
Anna A wrote:
I guess I had never thought of it that way before. 🙂
I’m that way too. I’ve always felt more comfortable, for different reasons, communicating via writing than face- to- face or on the phone.
@ Jenny: Oh yeah – thanks for that!
(big Rita Moreno fan here, btw…)
Anna A wrote:
And communicating in writing left a paper trail. Face to face orally allows Plausible Deniability, Gaslighting Denial sub-type.
Remember the first rule of Russian bureaucracy:
“If it’s not written down, IT NEVER HAPPENED!”
Janey wrote:
Remember: SUCCESSFUL PEDOPHILES AND SUCCESSFUL SOCIOPATHS ARE MASTERS AT CAMOUFLAGING WHAT THEY ARE. IF THEY WEREN’T, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN EXPOSED AND CAUGHT LONG AGO.
And pedos don’t just groom the kids they molest. They groom the adults around them, especially those in authority. This way, they have the adults on their side. Remember what they always say when a serial killer gets caught? “He was such a NICE man — wouldn’t hurt a fly.”
And I have personally seen a sociopath turn the remorse on and off like a light switch. Click ON! Click OFF! Click! Click! Click!
@ Southwestern Discomfort:
If you look at how Jesus treated women, He didn’t seem to have any hang-ups, like a lot of gender complmentarians do. He was not condescending, rude or patronizing to women, but treated them fairly and with respect.
Jesus compared Himself to a mother bird who wanted to gather her chicks to her when looking over Jerusalem in concern. There are examples of God in the Old Testament using similar examples of Himself, or the Holy Spirit via Moses or David or whomever, writing of God in that way.
God said in Genesis He created both male and female in His image, which means females are like Him, too.
(But I wish Christians would be careful on that point, because as a woman who has never married, I flinch when I hear preachers say that it takes a man and a women married to equal one whole person or a unit that reflects God. I think I alone reflect God as-is, I don’t need to be married to be a guy for that.)
Jesus being in a male body never did bother me, for some reason.
Maybe one reason is that I always took it as a given that He loves and respects both genders equally (as evidenced by how He is recorded to have treated people), it’s only male humans (and the occasional female) who try to make a big fuss over maleness, or give more weight to one gender than the other.
Dave A A wrote:
I don’t remember the Bible teaching that.
I’m not sure you could stretch the “women shouldn’t dress like guys” verse (or is it “women shouldn’t wear pants”) verse to get there.
I’m not an expert on all things biblical culture, but didn’t most of the men way back when 2,000 and more years ago in Mid East wear tunics and robes, which basically looked like dresses? And the women wore those things too.
Anyway, as to the “Men and women should look different” comment:
It’s Just Pat!
What does he do with people like that, in the video (which is clean there is no smut in it)?
There are people out there who don’t neatly fit into a male or female box, and they’re not doing it on purpose to confuse people.
numo wrote:
I used to live in Texas. There, it’s “y’all” 🙂
numo wrote:
Are you referring to Devo?
When I was a kid, I said to my brother (who is a few years older than me) as we watched Devo on TV their hats looked like upside down flower pots.
My brother got angry, corrected me and said, “Those are not flower pots. Those are energy domes.”
Devo Hats (energy domes) on Wikipedia
@ Daisy: Yep, and there were flowerpots just like that on the market at that time.
I figure they picked some up from a garden center.
@ numo: … and then had the “energy domes” made, based on the flowerpots.
I bet some of the stories on that Wiki page are a bit, err… fabricated. 😉
@ Dave A A:
. . . that just clears everything up then (eye roll) . . .
I don’t know if it’s been mentioned, but on Sat. (hmmm) Justin Taylor posted an article by a pastor discussing the proper response by a church to a report of sexual child abuse. And, surprise, comments are closed. I guess he fears the wrath of Mahaney in case a less than flattering comment about him or SGM manages to get through.
@ Jenny:
I know it well. i was wondering if any other ’70s children would say “oh,yeah, I remember that”. I was in a quirky mood this afternoon.
JeffB wrote:
JeffB — A number of people made comments about his blog post under a different thread on TWW: T4G, Facebook and the Games People Play. Taylor linked to a blog post by Brad Hambrick, who discussed Summit Church’s sexual abuse response plan, which had the input of numerous professionals. He gave a link to the plan, but the plan was so bad (for example, no definition of sexual abuse), it was hard to understand how anyone with a medical or psychological degree would ever sign off on it.
Anon 1 wrote:
Close enough for language purposes. 🙂
Daisy wrote:
Wow. When these TWW threads get long they sure can go down some weird rabbit trails, huh? Well, seeing as how this thread has been almost hijacked into a discussion of Devo (which was short for “de-evolution”), here is a brief diversion of levity that will surely make you smile…
http://youtu.be/toPY9dxns8Y
I wonder if there were a blog called “9 Marks of an Abusive Church” if it would appear in searches for “9 Marks” sites and possibly provide a more robust (as they like to say)view of 9 Marks churches. One can always hope. Here is a starter list. Feel free to run with it.
9 Marks of an Abusive Church
1. Emphasizes complementarianism
2. Authoritarian (possibly the elder board is weighted with men of military background)
3. Fosters a culture of silence (and shame)
4. Emphasizes the fact that they practice “church discipline”
5. Secretive. When a conflict arises between leadership and flock, it is dealt with behind closed doors and without records (either taped or written).
6. Emphasizes the need for church membership
7. Pharisaical. Always going God one better, as in “God deserves more (from you).” Exhibits a false “high view” of God.
8. Characterized by clearly demarcated levels of importance and social availability within the church body:
a. Leadership…Also known as the inner circle or top tier.
b. Deacons and other important men (women may be included only if they are spouses of the important men). Important men are those who are affluent, business savvy, or charismatic (“born leaders”). This group also includes those men whose children are home-schooled.
c. “Real families” (Two parent homes, no problem children)
d. Singles (productive squared away young adults)
e. Other families (blended, single parent, adopted children, kids gone sideways)
f. Others (older singles who probably won’t marry, adults without leadership potential)
g. Leftovers/losers (divorced, homeless, needy, troubled)…if they even remain in these churches.
9. Denies (in practice though possibly not in word) that each member (including women) is conferred by God gifts which are indispensable to the healthy functioning of the church, and without which the body is sorely handicapped. The gifts given to women in 8.c. to 8.g. are restricted to cleaning, cooking, and watching the kids. And the more (perceived as) important gifts (such as teaching, administration, etc.) are restricted to the women in 8.a. and 8.b.
Daisy wrote:
At least it isn’t just me…
🙂
Daisy wrote:
I’ve read that some victims don’t find it necessary to forgive their abuser, but that many remain trapped if they do not.
Also, it seems to me that attaching reconciliation on to forgiveness is a false belief.
Anyway, seriously now. And apologies if I’ve mixed up quotes from Daisy, Caleb and Tim Challies in the above… this difference between forgiveness and reconciliation cannot be stressed too much or too often when it comes to support for victims of abuse.
When the victim forgives the abuser in (as I understand it) the sense that Jesus instructed – nay, commanded – us to:
* It comes from within the victim, never at the instigation of others
* It takes great strength of character – indeed, it proves that the victim has character
* Most importantly, it benefits and frees the victim, not the abuser
Reconciliation, on the other hand, benefits the abuser. It should be used with great caution because, as several commenters have pointed out on this and other threads here, paedophiles and other abusers are often very adept at appearing repentant. I don’t think too many YRR leaders would be too quick to reconcile, for instance, with a woman who had attempted to teach in their church, or with a person who had openly questioned them on a doctrinal issue. Nor was the Mars Hill establishment very quick to reconcile with the young man who, infamously, confessed to sexual sin and eventually left when he could no longer stomach the protracted process of punishment and confession he was expected to submit to.
Daisy wrote:
Daisy – I’m not storking you, honest – you just put a lot of interesting comments in while it was night here in the UK! (NB – deliberate mis-spelling of stork, to keep within the letter and spirit of the current deleteration rules.)
I too have those conversations from time to time, when Christians who don’t know me very well find out I “don’t go to church”. I’m working on a series of “elevator pitches” in response. For one thing, it is unlikely that in that person’s home town all the Christians assemble together in once place regularly. In nearly every case here in the UK, the local believers all head off to their respective “churches” (plural) which, like corporate “lone-ranger Christians”, deliberately don’t assemble together. In other words, assembling together is precisely what the whole local church has forsaken over the years.
I believe that this is something we need to begin to call out. There are many groups of believers (so-called “churches”) that emphasise their distinctive doctrinal or historical identities and consistently criticise and dissociate themselves from other large bodies of believers worldwide. They would be better-advised to pay attention to what they themselves are living, than to judge believers for not attending a group that meets their approved definition.
“They spend a few years at seminary and suddenly they are the ‘really big cheeses’.”
Or, worse, they don’t go to seminary or bible college at all, and still consider themselves to be a “big cheese.” 🙂
As for the EFCA story, Dee, I am so sorry. I have close ties with them and it saddens and disappoints me to hear this. It makes me want to make some calls, although it sounds like you took it as high up as you could.
Janet wrote:
Janet — Your list reminds me that most of us would never work for a corporation that did these things. Why would we put up with a church like this? Aren’t Christians supposed to be known for our love for one another? When churches treat people with less respect than a Fortune 500 company, we are missing the mark.
Great news! The SGM child sexual abuse and cover-up story is getting more attention online. Here are some recent posts that discuss the allegations:
Wow! CharismaNews speaks up! http://www.charismanews.com/us/39648-evangelical-leaders-stand-by-pastor-accused-of-abuse-cover-up
Associated Baptist Press’s very scathing post – http://www.abpnews.com/culture/social-issues/item/8537-sbc-leaders-stand-by-accused-colleague#.UaX8dutAtzY
Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY and Southern Indiana) – http://blogs.courier-journal.com/faith/2013/05/29/mohler-other-calvinist-leaders-back-mahaney/
Patheos – No Longer Quivering – http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2013/05/sovereign-grace-ministries-and-abuse-time-to-speak-out/
Rachel Held Evans – http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/some-words-of-support-for-the-victims-of-abuse
Hot Dogma – http://hot-dogma.com/2013/05/28/the-christian-sex-abuse-scandal-you-havent-heard-about/
Mr.H wrote:
“He has NO book larnin’, and He Is LOUD!”
— highest complement you can pay to a preacher in rural Kentucky
Janey wrote:
Fear of the alternative? Public sin-sniffing, followed by shunning, followed by Eternal Hell?
Janey wrote:
The “numerous professionals” were all members of Summit Church? Pastor’s Yes-Men?
Daisy wrote:
It’s because the only thing they can brag about is what’s between their legs.
Like some trailer-trash Ku Kluxer bragging about his white skin.
In addition to the 6 I posted above, more organizations are speaking out about the SGM child sexual abuse and cover up story! This isn’t going away. It’s getting bigger.
SNAP – Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests – doesn’t pull any punches. Has some stern advice for those who wish to stand by Mahaney: http://www.snapnetwork.org/md_prominent_ministers_back_accused_wrongdoer
Sojourners – http://sojo.net/blogs/2013/05/28/evangelical-leaders-stand-pastor-accused-abuse-cover
Internet Monk – http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/whats-being-said-about-the-sgm-scandal
@ Janet
Glad to hear that the shame is lifting. It angers me that these men can even make us feel any shame at all. However, we do because they slander us, tell lies about us, and sway public opinion while we are given no platform in the church to voice the truth. The bullying story is mine….it involved and seriously affected one of my children. When we were disciplined out, the leaders did not even have the decency to let us know the excommunication was taken place and they never contacted us to notify us that any action had been taken. They waited nine months from the time they first informed us church discipline would be enforced….they waited nine months and finally took action on the week of our child’s birthday. Why did they wait until that particular week? Makes one stop and wonder….hmmm. The leaders running these institutions are narcissistic, control freaks. Our sin was never told to the congregation, but rather the leaders informed them our sin did not need to be publically revealed, because they wanted to show grace toward us, and quoted the verse about love covers a multitude of sins. They also read the verse about handing us over to satan. There was NO grace involved in that. They KNEW, that if they shared the truth it would make them look bad. They left the congregants to conjure up in their own imaginations what sin we had committed. The shame I felt was due to that in particular…I wondered what heinous sin the other members thought we were guilty of.
Keep holding your head high….I certainly am now. This is becoming an epidemic in churches and I am truly sorry for what you experienced. We can use our experience to help others who go through similar situations.
@ Deb and Dee
Thank you for being courageous enough to be an encouragement to so many who feel or have felt as though they are bearing the Scarlet Letter. Your blog has been highly instrumental in helping me over the past three years.
@ Leigh: That is what this is all about. So many people think they are alone when they are hurt in various ways in churches and parachurch ministries. You are not alone. At the very least, you have Deb,the people here and me caring about you. The Associated Baptist Press said it best: TWW is tracking troubling trends!
And another one…
http://unsettledchristianity.com/2013/05/boys-scouts-evil-but-molestation-okay/
Phoenix wrote:
Oh, that’s a good one. I love some of these lines …
Boys Scouts evil but molestation okay?
“Come now Al [Mohler], surely you have something more to say than “he’s a good guy” especially when you have said so much about every other issue on the planet,..”
[…]
Mahaney wasn’t just the guy in charge of the organization that allowed this to go on and sought to keep the victims quiet. According to Tchividjian,
“Why no mention that CJ Mahaney was actually the Senior Pastor at one of these churches where all of this horrific abuse allegedly occurred AND that [he] discouraged these families from bringing this matter to the God ordained civil authorities?”
@ Leigh:
“Our sin was never told to the congregation, but rather the leaders informed them our sin did not need to be publically revealed, because they wanted to show grace toward us, and quoted the verse about love covers a multitude of sins. They also read the verse about handing us over to satan…. They KNEW, that if they shared the truth it would make them look bad. They left the congregants to conjure up in their own imaginations what sin we had committed.”
++++++++++++++++++++
That is quite a weapon.
Leigh– so sorry for this experience.
You were gravely misrepresented to all. Seems to me there is no wrong in clearing the air, and communicating to all the church members the truth of the situation. (by letter?) I know many would say this is inappropriate, or “unbiblical” (like a million & 1 other neutral things). To me, it is reasonable.
Janey wrote:
Because The Humble One is a god and a god can do no wrong.
(Plus all the perks of conferences with The Humble One and other CELEBRITIES! I’M A CELEBRITY TOO!)
Leigh wrote:
During the Korean War, the Norks used to attack on enemy holidays, figuring the enemy would have their guard down and it’d hurt the worst.
Leigh wrote:
Knowing the milieu of American Evangelicalism, probably something SEXUAL(TM). (And always the Other’s sexual….)
@ Anon 1:
The insurance company’s advice in this article explains a lot, doesn’t it? The last few paragraphs where they are saying “give us dirt on the abused” and implementing the “statute of limitations”, sounds awfully familiar.
Some Spiritual leadership, eh? – capitulate to whatever your insurance co. tells you to do.
I’ve been thinking about this for some time–doesn’t the position of church pastor, by it’s very nature,attract someone who is very confident and has strong leadership skills? Perhaps some start out with a love for the Lord and a “calling”, but then the pride creeps as they feel they are doing “the Lord’s work.” (If Christ has set up residence in your heart, *you* are doing the Lord’s work.) Oftentimes people surrounding them place them on a pedestal which may help bring about their downward spiral into narcissism. Many pastors may have control issues to begin with and the pastoral culture may exacerbate this weakness. And, I believe that satan is working diligently to destroy the Bride of Christ.
I grew up attending a Catholic elem. school and I have seen the protestant churches enslaving Jesus’ sheep just as the Catholic churches have. I think that Christians often forget that the veil has been torn and we have direct access to a relationship with God by way of the blood of Jesus. No one else need apply. 😉 Many of us are still expecting an earthly high priest to help us atone for our sins and make us worthy when we have a new High Priest who has made us worthy. Can we ever stop setting up earthly kings? Must we always have something tangible?
Perhaps we’ve complicated the simple sacrificial love of Jesus with all our intellectual ponderings. Are we unable to accept God’s amazing, pure love for us?
I know this may sound trite, but Christians have to read the Bible for themselves. And not one time and you’re done, but all the time b/c it truly is the Living Word that is timeless. Don’t trust what others tell you…be like the Bereans and comb through the words yourself and talk to God yourself. And develop your own direct relationship with God–you don’t need an earthly middleman–Jesus has taken care of that!
Forgiven Much — You’ve given us a lot of wise reminders. Thanks.
JustSomeGuy wrote:
After reading TWW for a bit, I am being educated on the abuse of church membership that I was unaware of previously. I can see how easily it can be done now. But just in case an experience with church membership abuse leads you to like the practice of Calvary Chapels who have no membership, let me warn you about that, too:
The reason CC’s do not have membership is so that the “attenders” cannot hold the leadership accountable and that the “attenders” then have no legal right to see the financial books, nor say in how the money is spent (or stolen.) This is a HUGE issue. The result is the senior pastor has all the control and not any accountability. He makes all the decisions, owns all the assets (ultimately,) and absolutely no one can legally remove him or discipline him. (Some senior pastors have experienced what looks like discipline, but it was something that others were able to coerce him (blackmail in some cases) into to avoid further humiliation. Many have gotten off scott-free from discipline over adultery, embezzlement, spiritual abuse and much more … )
Be forewarned whether you become a member or go to a church that doesn’t allow membership.
Warren Throckmorton speaks out cautiously without taking sides, and is wisely bringing the discussion to the table.
http://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/the-sovereign-grace-ministries-scandal/
+ + + +
Intelligent Christians need to understand the basics of this news story otherwise we look uneducated and backward to the rest of the world.
Who has already run this news story?
Huffington Post – “C. J. Mahaney Scandal: Evangelical Leaders Defend Pastor Accused Of Abuse Cover-Up”
Washington Post – “Evangelical leaders stand by pastor accused of abuse cover-up”
Boz Tchividjian – grandson of Billy Graham – “Where are the Voices? The Continued Culture of Silence and Protection in American Evangelicalism”
WJLA TV (ABC TV) – “Church Sex Abuse Allegations” Search for: My World News|WJLA|Church sex abuse allegations| 5-17-2013
@ Nick Bulbeck:
I was the one who wrote this:
I have read books by secular therapists who swear up and down that it is not necessary for a victim to forgive and (they claim) it may even be detrimental to the person to do so.
The secular therapists say these victims benefit from staying angry and not forgiving because if they do not stay angry, they will blame themselves and remain stuck in the abuse in that way.
I don’t know if that thinking is right or wrong, or how true it is.
My view is more like the second position: if you have been wronged, you will probably recover faster if you forgive the abuser.
Forgiveness is a choice you make and should not based on feeling (if you keep waiting for a warm and fuzzy feeling to arrive before you feel you can forgive, it will almost never arrive), and forgiving is not a one time event.
You may have to forgive the person who did you wrong daily for the next 50 years.
IMO, reconciliation is not a part of forgiveness and is optional, but a lot of Christians present reconciliation as though it’s mandatory.
Katie wrote:
Because whether it does or doesn’t, a Pastor/Dictator can use it to put his boot on your neck either way. All in God’s Name.
Katie
Don’t get me going on CC. Not joining a church solves a few problems but not all problems in all circumstances. Deb will be discussing this in a post later tonight.
Katie wrote:
So in other words it’s basically the same as churches with membership then, lol.
As always, it’s the people that matter not the rules. However avoiding becoming trapped in rules usually used for entrapment is a wise move. The purpose of not signing on the dotted line is to protect you from the church, not protect the church from itself. They can harass you all they want, but they can’t say you asked for it.
There is no system of rules that can overcome authoritarianism, only hinder or enhance it.
Janey wrote:
Ain’t that the truth. Mr. Culture warrior. Was on the board of Focus on the Family, too. And now his legacy is one of protecting those who protect child molesters. Mohler has done nothing but show he does not think it is a big deal that his Apostle colleague thought it best not to contact the “ungodly” government to report crimes on his watch. Way to go, Al. What a culture warrior!
Val wrote:
Yeah, I read that. It makes sense cos Christendom is big business here in America. But from an eternal perspective it should scare them but they are “elected” no matter what they do. Right?
Anon 1 wrote:
Because raped children are of little importance when compared to Taking Back America and Making It Back Into a CHRISTIAN Nation, Bringing Back and Enforcing CHRISTIAN Morality, Evangelizing the Lost, and Stopping Those Fags and Democrats and DEMONS. Culture War Without End, Amen.
“You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.” — Josef Stalin
(In case you can’t tell, that was a snark on Culture Warriors.)
dee wrote:
I think I can take up the slack for both of us. I live near where CC started, and CC used to take up most of the airtime on Christianese AM radio in the late Seventies/early Eighties. “Pastor Chuck” of CC Costa Mesa (or was it Santa Ana) ranting about Star Wars, “Pastor Raul Rees” of CC West Covina regurgitating anti-Catholic denunciations and anathemas, CC after CC after CC.
And I have always gotten this “vibe” from CC that something was wrong about them. Nothing I could put my finger on and say “AHA!” but a general feeling of something WRONG. Like they embodied all these ways an independent Evangelical church could go extremist and extremely sour. Of course, broaching this subject without hard evidence to a Calvary Chapelite just meant going over the top into a barrage of Bible Bullets until I was beaten back down.
Anon 1 wrote:
Predestined Elect from before the foundation of the world. Amazing what a pre-signed “Get Out Of Hell Free” card can do to turn Eternal Security into Arrogance. (My writing partner has had some recent run-ins with local Hyper-Calvinists and describes them as arrogant, overbearing, and abusive to others. One True Way all the way.)
and this….http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nakedpastor/2013/05/how-much-carpet-does-sovereign-grace-ministries-have/
dee wrote:
I’m looking forward to that topic. Say you have a young, local church and they decide to institute church membership. Many in the congreg agree w/the idea b/c there are some in that church who are professing to be Christians but make no attempt to live like one so the “pro-membership” people want to weed people out…or put pressure on them to help out in the kitchen and other “Christian church duties.” But then you have other Christians in that local church who feel a strong conviction against signing any type of church membership/covenant form, not to mention the terms of the covenant itself. So now you have division. (Which reminds me that I’ve read someplace: “If it can be divided, it’s not the body.”) So now you have members and non-m (M and NM). Don’t you think the M are going to look down on the NM for not signing the agreement…or be suspicious of them and their faith? Don’t you think the M will expect perks that the NM don’t have (they’ll think: “after all, why did we become members?”) Don’t you think the NM will be given some type of a deadline or ultimatum in joining? Won’t it make the pastor look foolish if he doesn’t “do something about those NM?” Don’t you think he’s going to regularly berate the NM from the pulpit until you get them to sign or force them to leave?
And then, over time, you’ll be right back where you started. Oh, you’ll have compliance for a while. But the pastor can’t keep it under control indefinitely. Some yrs ago John Piper had his church make a re-commitment to their membership. (Just ridiculous.) So, when things start unravelling again, the pastor will have to make everyone display their loyalty again.
I can’t see any good coming from a situation like that. Breaks my heart…and I’m sure it breaks the heart of Jesus too.
Phoenix wrote:
Heh Heh Heh. That’s a good one.
Hey, @GuyBehindTheCurtain, would you please add a “Back to Top” button to the left of the “Post Comment” button? It would really help those of us who view this site using a smartphone. Our index fingers are getting tired of repeatedly “swooshing” 20 times to get to the top of a post.
Or maybe the rest of you have figured out a better way of dealing with this…
@ Janey:
I hit the back key for my browser and start at the TWW home page. It takes less finger action. On the other hand, when I enter a thread I also have to swipe (for ever, because their are so many wonderful comments per thread) to get to the end of the thread. So, GBTC, top of page AND bottom of page would be nice. Not holding breath on that though.
My comment on the Alabama Baptist never got posted. Take a look at this interesting comment. At least the people on TWW read and think and can converse sensibly most of the time 😉
http://www.thealabamabaptist.org/print-edition-article-detail.php?id_art=27580&pricat_art=1
By the way, hundreds of first-time visitors come to this site every day and lurk, so we need to make sure we are very clear when we comment.
(That’s my guesstimate. I have no insider knowledge.)
@ ForgivenMuch:
The need for membership is usually explained to the effect that it allows the leaders to know who they are responsible to serve (like that is necessary). The members are asked to serve the pastors by making things clear for them. So, the people serve leaders/pastors so the leaders can serve them. (Got that?) It is sad indeed.
Just want to offer another perspective:
Our church is in a major city. We do membership and it is a one sided piece of paper with clipart and bullet points that pretty much align with what it means to be a part of the Body of Christ. Honestly a lot of people just don’t know. Very basic tenants of faith, commitment to personal spiritual growth, evangelism, service, etc. (For the record, discipline is not on the list) So for us I think “membership” really does help everyday people, new believers understand what it means to practically be a Christian and engaged in a local body. It also helps the church leadership (which includes my husband and I) keep track of people, in the very basic sense that maintaining hundreds of relationships is pretty difficult. In the city people are constantly coming and going and it can be overwhelming. The papers are in a drawer somewhere but definitely have NOT been read by a lawyer. The only thing we really use them for is we require that anyone working with children goes through membership process (along with background check, etc).
So I dunno. These legal documents that authoritarian churches use scare me, and although ‘membership’ is not a requirement to be a good church by any means I do think there is a place for it and it can be helpful.
Caleb W wrote:
I’m not knocking the book he endorses, but I noticed that it shares his own theological perspective and is published by his own camp. Would Challies endorse (or even read) This Little Light by Christa Brown or How Little We Knew by Dee Ann Miller? Would he review any book that discussed the issues of rape or abuse in the context of the church?
Yes, yes. After all, if we didn’t have a membership roster, how would we know who our members are?
Gospel Coalition blogger Kevin DeYoung has posted “Should I Start a Grassroots Movement to Change My Church?” which is really a list of things you ought to do if you’re not happy with your church — which is — nothing.
His bottom line? He says, “What I am saying is that practically you should not spend your life trying to do what has very little chance of success, theologically you should obey and respect your leaders, and spiritually you should not be divisive.”
• Notice the “No Talk” rule — Point #4
• Notice the implication that your pastor is “God’s Anointed” and you’d better just be quiet. – Point #7
• Notice he reminds members of their “vows” of “unity, purity, and peace.”
• Notice that if you disagree with the “entire history and identity of the church,” (which presumably only his church teaches) it’s best not to try to do anything. – Point #7
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2013/05/29/should-i-start-a-grassroots-movement-to-change-my-church/
Janey wrote:
Excerpt from the article:
Bloggers following the scandal reacted to the statement with disapproval. The Wartburg Watch, started by North Carolina bloggers Dee Parsons and Wanda Martin to track troubling trends in evangelical Christianity, accused Mahaney’s supporters of “utter disregard” for victims and called their defense “absolutely unconscionable.”
Amy Smith, Houston representative of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, called it an example of “selective outrage,” where Southern Baptist leaders speak out on issues like opposition to same-sex “marriage” and allowing gay youth to be Boy Scouts but are silent when it involves one of their own.
Joel Taylor, a Virginia minister who blogs at 5 Pt. Salt, compared statements of support for Mahaney to Tammy Wynette’s country music classic “Stand By Your Man.”
Stand By Your Man — LOL ! ! !
Anon wrote:
I suppose another option is to just cap the church when it reaches a certain size and say “sorry…no room, we can’t maintain this many relationships without resorting to a list.”
Anon wrote:
You’ve got to look at this guy’s post. It’s incredibly funny.
http://5ptsalt.com/2013/05/24/mohler-dever-duncan-carson-taylor-deyoung-aiken-support-of-c-j-mahaney/
Anon wrote:
Okay — I get it. I guess I’m a little slow on the uptake. I didn’t get my afternoon coffee.
The comment by Jules Diner oughta make anyone sick to their stomach.
Albert Mohler speaks:
“Both men had credible knowledge that young boys were being sexually abused, and neither did anything effective to stop it. Most crucially, neither man did what they should have done within minutes of hearing the first report — contact law enforcement immediately.”
Oh, wait…he said this about Joe Paterno and Jerry Sandusky in regard to the child sexual abuse at Penn State. I guess the standard for coaches is different than the one for pastors.
Anon wrote:
Yes, this tells us a lot.
Anon wrote:
You would actually know them as real people with names and personalities? I know that is hard to do with hundreds or thousands but maybe that is the point?
Janey wrote:
Janey, I want to read it but then I don’t. I mean, I have seen their arrogance and twisting of scripture for so long I can hardly stand it. They are digging in as if their voice carries weight after that ridiculous statement of support for a charlatan who protected molesters from the ungodly government. They have no moral gravitas.
They sound like tin pot dictators of a banana republic. Which they are , if you think about it. Just how are they going to get people to OBEY them in droves and for how long? The social media they used to grow is showing them for who they really are.
Somebody with less revulsion to them should analyze it. I live at ground zero. I am surrounded by guys like him day in and out.
You wanna hear something profound? A few years back as we were driving past SBTS my then 7 year old said, “Is that the cemetary, mommy?”
Out of the mouth of babes.
Janey, I am shocked the Alabama Baptist ran that story. Has anyone seen anything about it in the official Baptist media organ: Baptist Press? Al pretty much controls that, too. Along with most of the SBC entities.
Anon 1 wrote:
As I understand it, the whole point of the ekklesia was that Christians would be in intimate relationship with one another–encouraging each other, helping each other “press on” and be overcomers. I think today’s paradigm is all wrong. That’s why we have to retrofit the institutional church with “fellowship time” and “life groups” to make it appear like we’re living as New Covenant called-out ones.
@ Anon 1:
Would DeYoung say that his advice applies equally to those who are carrying out Reisinger’s “Quite Revolution” in the SBC? 😉
@ Janey: I like warren’s writing very much – he’s much more conservative than I am, but extremely level-headed and willing to speak out against very real injustices.
I suspect he’ll have more to say, and that it will be very much pro-plaintiffs. As he says in the post, he only just became aware of the lawsuit and controversy.
ForgivenMuch wrote:
Bingo!
Janet, Thanks for your 9 Marks of an Abusive Church list. It was very creative and captured the spirit of pushing against the wrong emphasis that some church communities hold as being crucial to the Christian faith, but are instead quite harmful.
I had an idea. Maybe you’d like to contact me through my website email: info@ChurchExiters.com. All the best!
Anon wrote:
Deb and Dee will never, ever run out of material on that. 🙂
numo wrote:
Numo — We shall see. We shall see. He hasn’t been afraid to take unpopular stances before.
Anon 1 wrote:
I don’t think you’re alone. You were lucky to get away. I have a good friend at ground zero too who cannot say anything without losing his job. I should keep him in prayer tonight.
I think that Amy Smith’s blog, Watch Keep, should be added to the TWW blogroll.
Leigh: Thanks for the details of your excommunication…they are uncannily similar to mine…almost as if there’s a manual floating around somewhere about how to do really bad “biblical” church discipline. Like you:
1. The elders waited 9 months to formally announce it to the church and did not let me know when it would happen (a church insider gave a non-attender friend a heads-up when the excommunication announcement would take place. This friend took a large tape recorder but the announcement was then postponed.)
2. They let the congregation know I was living in “blatant, unrepetent, entrenched sin” (I actually just sent an email the EFCA district office explaining that the elders used unrigteous methods in their “mediation” between me and a contractor I hired: they wouldn’t let me view the contractor’s written statement of his version of events because they had promised him they would keep it a secret from me. This prompted the EFCA to tell me I would have received more justice in a civil court.)
Although they did say I had slandered the elders in my email, who knows what else the congregation imagined the extent of my “sin” to be?
3. They also “delivered me over to Satan for the destruction of my flesh”! And then they pronounced a curse on me!: I would either “come to my senses, seek their forgiveness and be reconciled to the elders” or I “would meet an early death.” And then they sealed this by saying what they had just “bound on earth was bound in heaven” and had the “full support of Jesus Christ”.
Interestingly, the pastor also said that innocence is not a defense to church discipline.
You’re in my prayers, Leigh.
@ Janey:
“Notice that if you disagree with the ‘entire history and identity of the church,’ (which presumably only his church teaches) it’s best not to try to do anything. – Point #7”
I can sorta see this if he means, for instance, that a Baptist shouldn’t attend an Episcopal church and campaign to turn it into a Baptist church. But as others have pointed out above, it doesn’t stop these guys from trying to turn Arminian churches Calvinist, so even here there’s a double standard.
Anon 1 wrote:
The early church added 3000 on day one, So it’s not necessary to be anti numbers. When they had the problem of widows being overlooked they developed a system to help care for everyone. And I imagine there was probably a roster of sorts to make sure no one was overlooked. Just a guess.
I understand the beef with modern day “membership” and the institutional church but any community of people is going to have some sort of system and some churches have a roster called membership. So, what? It’s not the list that matters or the small groups or fellowship activities but how it is used.
The problem is when these authoritarian churches twist that idea into a power structure to control people.
I understand being careful when signing the dotted line but I don’t think it necessary to assume the motives of every church or pastor that has a process you disagree with.
@ Janet:
good grief. what happened to my religion? when did this sort of thing become so commonplace?
is there a historian in the house???
Kristin wrote:
Yes.
And they have come up with software to help them do just that. Have you seen some of the “community building” software that’s on the market? You should check and see how much your church is spending on it. Mark Driscoll’s organization developed a program called “The City” so that leadership could control communications between members. Zondervan bought the program from Mars Hill for $millions and now markets it to church organizations everywhere. Check and see if yours is part of “The City” or considering doing so.
Anon wrote:
This is really serious. I hope Dee/Deb are reading this.
Janey
We are reading it and have been doing some reading and will do a post at some point.
dee wrote:
It might be good to get a statement from Zondervan as to the levels of privacy and the governance on this.
http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/religion/article/53369-new-harper-christian-division-head-schoenwald-says-everything-is-under-review.html
Re: “The City”
See also these older but interesting articles —
http://churchm.ag/zondervan-acquires-onthecity/
http://churchm.ag/the-city-acs-technologies/
I just *briefly* looked at the city online… onthecity dot org if I’m looking at the right place…so I know virtually nothing about it. But it looks like a church equivalent of facebook. Can’t you just simply say that you don’t want to be connected online like that? What happens if you don’t want your info on there? Surely you must have some rights to privacy. Our family doesn’t do FB, texting, etc. Frankly, I don’t want to be contacted and communicated with all the time and everywhere I go… I don’t have the temperament for all that “noise” in my life and my brain needs lots of down time. I know this sometimes upsets people (either within our church circle, or extended family, friends, etc.) b/c we’ve become a people who need to have others respond to them immediately. But I digress…
The concept of the city is mind boggling to me. I had thought we couldn’t get much further from the Biblical concept of Christian community than we are now, but obviously I was wrong. Someone has figured out how to enmesh the local church institution with the tech age and fool the sheep into believing they’re practicing Koinonia.
@ ForgivenMuch:
I have done a little researchh and got the same impression as you.
To Janet: Yes, our stories are eerily similar. It does seem as if there is some church discipline manual floating around…they all attend the same conferences, they read the same authors, they tweet about their favorite pastor icons, they read the same blogs, They share links on their blogs from the same favorite pastor icons, and they ALL drink the same 9Marks Kool-Aid. That IS their manual and they are following it to the letter.
I am so sorry for your negative experience. It is unconscionable that they declared a desire for you to meet an early death!!! That makes me soooo angry. It’s almost as if these people aren’t even human! They have no compassion whatsoever. God will have an especially harsh judgment for these rude and abusive “men”. HUGE hug….you’re in my prayers also. Yes, I still pray…their declaration of handing my family over to satan does not necessarily make it so. Wishing you the very best!! 🙂
Kristin wrote:
I never assume motives because it is not necessary. I simply look at patterns and trends. Motives don’t matter. What people do, does matter.
The Acts mega church reference is a non sequitur. The Diaspora Jews in Jerusalem for Passover went back to their homes eventually which is why we are hearing about the Hellenistic widows. The Jerusalem church would obviously be the largest butwhen mega churches use that passage to make mega churches look biblical it pays to look a bit deeper at the historical context. That does not mean small churches are biblical, either. But there are problems inherent in mega churches that become institutionalized a lot easier.
Anon 1 wrote:
I have seen it all over the country. Mega churches become predatory. They set up satellite churches around the corner of a healthy well-balance church and decimate it because they have programs, music and glitz. The young people switch over and the mega church claims it is growing.
I have a new idea. Why don’t we measure the number of Christians in church in a given area.Then when megas move in and claim growth, we have numbers to see if its is growth or merely church shift.
numo wrote:
Yeah. Devo liked jerking people’s chains around.
Janet wrote:
“O GREAT CHEMOSH! O GREAT BAAL! RAIN DEATH AND DESTRUCTION UPON THESE MY ENEMIES!”
— some Cecil B DeMille Bible Epic
Lynn wrote:
Dat above Da Bridge in da U.P., or still down in Da Mitten?
(I used to know a guy from Port Huron; he cued me in to the local tribes, from “Terrists from Detroit” to “Jackpine Savages”.)