first

Second.

But all the evidence said I was first last time… 🙁

More to the point, scripture knows nothing of the isolated, self-sufficient local church fragment to which 9Marks and similar refer as “the local church”. Such a fragment is a faction, not the local church, and scripture commands us to have nothing to do with divisive or factional people.

If those who pen articles like the one quoted above really are serious about “submitting to leadership”, then let them repent of their generations-long rebellion against local church authority. Let them go to the rest of the local church in their city, and submit to its leadership, instead of scouring the country for remote networks that pat them on the back doctrinally.

Of course, that’s hard, messy and complicated. Tough. The man who craves a pulpit must be willing to take up his cross; it’s easy to suffer for the gospel when you get to pick exactly when and how!

@ roebuck:
Back when me and a buddy were visiting churches occasionally (research for a blog idea that never came to be) we had a term we used for churches like that: Skateboard Jesus Shows.

Dee quoting 9Marks:

Every Christian should join a church because Scripture requires it. Granted, there is no direct command in Scripture that says, “Every Christian must join a local church,” but two factors in Scripture indicate that every Christian should be a member of a local church.

…Scripture repeatedly commands Christians to submit to their leaders (Heb. 13:17; 1 Thess. 5:12-13). The only way to do that is by publicly committing to be members of their flock, and saying in effect, “I commit to listening to your teaching, following your direction, and to submitting to your leadership.” There’s no way to obey the scriptural commands to submit to your leaders if you never actually submit to them by joining a local church.

This is a great example of how they argue their points. Make a big assertion that Scripture commands something, then back off by saying the text doesn’t actually say that, but then say that the Bible “indicates” somehow that what they asserted is true. Of course, the “indicates” is in the eye of the beholder.

Then, offer up the proof-texts which do not bear on the point they really want to make but which might “indicate” that what they assert might be true. Then make yet more bold assertions like “the only way to do that” followed by the only way they can think of to do that. Oddly, that one and only way is the exact one that provides them with the most personal power and authority! What is that one and only way to demonstrate commitment? “There’s no way to obey the scriptural commands to submit to your leaders if you never actually submit to them by joining a local church.” Cue the Church Lady to play her role.

This is the same form of cotton candy argumentation you will find all over Grudem and Piper and Ware and Owen BHLH and Ortlund all of the other authoritarians in the YRR movement. The humidity of examination and reason makes them collapse with only a sticky residue remaining.

“(Did they really have to put the word “whoa uh x5″ on the screen?)”

XD. I, as a certified pup (18), completely agree. Why they think they’re being edgy and cool, I don’t know. I’d prefer traditional hymns to the current copycat mainstream soft rock/pop any day.

Dee, unless you are going to a strange (in the sense of odd) liturgical church, i cannot imagine anyone even suggesting that a church membership document is remotely part of the,picture.

Here’s what counts: baptism and, in some denoms, confirmation. That.is.all.there.is.

Kinda much more NT-ish, to my mind, than all these authoritarian “churches” that want people to dign contracts or else.

@ Corbin:
I heard the exact thing from a young, serious Christian man. He said that younger people are turned off by cheesy rock shows at church because they see much better entertainment at real concerts. Not that I think that liturgy itself is the cure because that has its own pitfalls. But at least you can think in a liturgical service, and you can hear the congregation singing.

Basically, the church does a very poor imitation of the world.

Thanks for brining to light these researchers with whom I was completely unfamiliar.

Although I’m not a “done,” I feel like I’m a “mostly checked out.” My church is small and thankfully lacks the distracting flashiness of a rock concert megachurch. Now, I’m all for rock concerts, just not so much every Sunday repeating the same 5 or 6 words about Jesus with a line of “woah”s in the bridge.

Anyway, my church is very sermon-centric… to the point that we, like many Baptist churches [used to], have three different sermons / services, two on Sunday and the third on Wednesday evening (I only attend the Sunday morning one, because I alternate between assisting and teaching at youth group in the evening, and I skip Wednesday altogether). So it’s all very teaching-oriented, with little opportunity for community unless you get out and make it for yourself by asking other folks out to lunch after church or something like that.

But what turns me off the most is the judgmental attitude that is all too common, and the “sky is falling” reactions every time some culture war topic blows up in the news. You can bet that I’m not looking forward to the next Sunday or two if the SCOTUS hands down a decision favorable to marriage equality, as the court is thought likely to do.

So judgmental attitudes and politics are the two most prominent reasons why I’ve pretty much checked out. After my term on the church board is up, don’t be surprised if I end up trying out a church down the street that I think might be less judgmental and politically focused – even though I’m sure they have problems of their own. If it works out, I’ll avoid being a “done,” but if not, I too may contribute to the bulge in that part of the Venn diagram.

@ Gram3:
You can even hear yourself think in most liturgical churches. 😉

Jenny wrote:

That describes an unfortunately high number of churches in southern California.

YES!!!!!

Thanks Dee. As always this post was very well “DONE.” Keep up the great work!

“Note to the Neo Calvinist pastors reading this: You guys aren’t putting churches in areas that don’t have your theology. You are putting them in any area that has folks with disposable income. I know- I see it all around me.”

You have accurately described the strategy used by Southern Baptist YRR church planters in my area. The primary driver on location appears to be more economical than evangelical. Planting new works in poor inner cities or unchurched rural communities is a tougher row to hoe … surely God wouldn’t call you to reach lost souls there! … surely the “elect” are clustered in prosperous suburbs rather than in desperate places! Coffee shops, cool bands, and hip preachers propped on a stool will attract a crowd, but not necessarily a congregation of the Lord. There are exceptions to this certainly, but appears to be the primary technique as the SBC grows its ranks via church plants not baptisms. An old cliche, but it fits: “What would Jesus do?”

@ Adam Borsay:
Excellent post, Adam. I agree with you.

Adam Borsay wrote:

I obviously can’t speak to any individuals personal feelings/experiences, but in response to the “general” broad brush of the research concerning the “dones” I have a few thoughts….Knowing that I am in a minority position at TWW, but I always like and respect the conversations that occur here….
1- I would contend that the regular gathering of believers is an indication(I want to say ‘mark’ but that word seems somewhat….ummm….corrupted) of a Christian. The NT was written in the context for the community(outside of the personal epistles that were clearly included as part of the church at large). Going to ‘church’ doesn’t make one a Christian, but a Christian seems(according to the NT) to be in regular fellowship with other believers. And not just a random, lets go out to lunch, sort of way. But in a deliberate gathering in which teaching and worship occurred.
If anyone has had a difficult church experience I can understand the desire to “take a break”. But I can’t find my way to see a scriptural basis for a deliberately permanent removal from the description of a Christians life within deliberate community as portrayed in scripture. In our small town(less then 15k) there are dozens of churches that range from highly Charismatic, to rock and rollers, to liturgical and organ driven traditional. There are churches with less than 50, and about 3 churches(not counting the RCC) with 600+). There are Elder led, congregational led, arminian, calvinist, egalitarian, complementarian and everything in between. EVEN IN a tiny little place like ours, with a medium sized city at least 45 minutes away, virtually any expression and practice of the Christian faith is available!
Not to minimize suffering someone may have endured in an abusive church, but it strikes me as a sort of, “I dated this jerk in highschool and so I will never date again”.
2- As far as over priced church facilities and staffs, I can get why that is so distasteful to people. But as to the second half of point 2 and to elaborate more….The VAST majority of churches operate on a shoe string budget in tiny buildings with pastors who don’t even make enough to get off of welfare assistance. I don’t look over at good ole Rod Parsley’s(I would love to see posts on this crazy guy btw) empire in Central Ohio and say, man churches stink, I am done. Though saddened by what ‘those’ churches may do, they may be publicly visible to many, but they are a small fraction of the majority of churches.
3- As a millenial myself, I am in total agreement that less politicking in the church is to be contended for. It is one thing to say, we stand for pro-life and support our pregnancy crisis center, vs, claiming America needs to be Bible driven(even if it would be nice) and Obama/Clinton/Liberals are the anti-Christ.
4- If I found myself in an environment where there was legitimately zero faithful and healthy churches within a reasonable distance, I would start something myself.(though as I have stated, that is a hard argument for me to swallow) Even if it was only with a few people. If we would contend for the priesthood of all believers, than act like the priesthood. Share the Gospel, teach the word, disciple those God brings into the fellowship of His people. If God is in it than it will have a powerful and lasting impact. I say that to simply point out, if you are ‘done’ with what you view as the Americanized version of the church, start planting!(not A29 style obviously….)
There is no reason that a group of people can’t say, the local church here has been hurtful and we can’t go back, there are “x” number of us who feel/experienced that. The NT calls us to gather and have a part of our christian life and witness “these” things, so let’s do it.

Adam, wait until you’re 55+ and read what you’ve written. You’ll have a totally different look at stuff.

I’m not Done yet. I’m there with them on pretty much every issue outlined here, but there are still some little pockets of believers meeting in organized institutional churches that are being the Church (isn’t it sad you gotta make that qualification?). I think the missus and I have found one. It ain’t perfect, but it’s doing the job.

They’re just hard to find. Honestly, I think they always will be hard to find. The balance is hard. Good, genuine, spontaneous community is hard. The Baptists and neocals want to try to manufacture good community with some biblical-sounding get-ups, but I submit that you can’t.

Good post.

One other thought, and this is why I love the internet these days: Not only do churches need to reassess themselves and reach out to the Dones, but the Dones need to reach out to the Dones and be the community they want. That also is hard, but what is going on in this post is a start. Connection. Community. Not in the traditional way – no doors are being knocked, but this is how it’s done these days. I like it. If this church of ours doesn’t work out long term, I’m gonna be right there with the Dones.

@ Adam Borsay:
Adam Borsay you’re a pastor, right? I can appreciate you wanting people to stay attending your industry. It’s something that has to be potentially affecting your and many other pastors salaries and employment so it’s certainly a concern for y’all. Thanks for sharing your perspective.

Did anyone watch the movie Believe Me last year? This post reminds me of this scene:

http://riotstudios.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/jesus-x16.jpg

The thing is how these churches are hiding puritanical doctrine behind the fog machines and bejeweled jeans. One time a Catholic friend asked if I go to my conservative liturgical church, with its organs and robes, called [neighborhood name] [denomination name] Church instead of the “cool” 9Marks young adults church in town that holds its own logo over the cross because the latter was too “chilled out” for me. Oh, if only I had the time to answer that question.

@ Albuquerque Blue:

I don’t consider it “my” industry. 1- Because regardless of how many people attend this or that church here or there, it has no direct bearing on my “career”. Either I am faithful to do what I am called to do where I am called to do it, and God provides for me, or, not. I am speaking in more general terms to my personal contentiousness towards this idea that millions of people are in places in which there is virtually no possible way for them to have a Christ centered ‘church’ community.

dee wrote:

@ John:
Thank you. What resonated the most for you?

Dee, The fact that since I retired from the pastorate several years ago due primarily to health concerns and stress, it has been so difficult to locate a balanced, scriptural church that reverentially honors God. The Gospel is often watered down and the music is not uplifting and inspiring but just as described in the post, loud and entertainment driven, and noisy. Being a dinosaur, I want to hear the Word taught more verse by verse. Some churches just take off on themes like superheroes with pastors dressing up like superman and preaching baptism with an Acquaman theme. Lord knows what they preach when Spiderman Sunday comes around. I contend that all mis necessary to build a church is for the man of God to keep right and walk humbly with His God, preach the Word in truth with a broken heart and love and walk slowly among his people. No smoke machine can make up for that.

To add an addendum to my previous lengthy post….

According to the research there are millions of people who fall into the done category. My disconnect, to clarify my longer thoughts, is that why aren’t any of these millions of people establishing NT churches? Again, not to speak to any one individuals personal story, but statistically speaking, shouldn’t there at least be an observable trend of these dones establishing at the very least home based small churches that pursue the NT description of the life of a christian? IE, teaching the word, evangelism, discipling, serving their community, etc.

And I would contend that any gathering of believers that is walking in spirit in truth won’t stay “small” for long. Not to conflate pure numbers with being “right”, but that evangelism/the Great Commission was the hallmark and marching orders of the early church. Unless one would argue that they are a hardcore five point calvinist and that all the elect in America are already saved, there are endless possibilities of people in every single community that need Christ and through conversion would become active participants in your particular small church.

I admit, I am a done. We visited a mega church in our town a few times. It was lights, camera, action, and show. I watch them on tv. I am also handicapped. Believe me when I say that most churches in my area don't make it easy for a handicapped person to go to church. Said churches are more interested in all their special music programs, programs of every kind and lots of other things I won't go into to. I am closer to my Lord and Savior than ever before. Will I go back to church at sometime, I sincerely hope so.

Agree with all you said@ Leslie:

My family and I are Done. There is a church in my parents’ town that is nicknamed “Six Flags Over Jesus” by the surrounding community due to the many amusements offered by the church. My mom is now reading this blog and texted me earlier about this post and said she is done too. At our last church, nobody from the pastoral team could be bothered to visit us when various members of our family were in the hospital nor help us out after the hurricane despite the fact that we had spent many years volunteering and tithing there. There is such an emphasis on the minor issues that the majors have become lost. Churches are busy buying fog machines but can’t find time to take care of the least of them.

@ Bridget:

Sorry, that was not finished.

. . . SGM, another elder disfunction, elder quitting, pastor quitting. There was no congressional oversits allowed. The elders were the leaders.

I had been a Christian for about six years before the first church plant. So — yes, I’m a done with the institut ions known churches as we see them today.

What you propose is not as easy as you make it sound.

I am unabashedly a Christ follower but definitely DONE with church. Luckily Jesus doesn’t love me more or less because of my lack of local church attendance. I believe the church as most of us have known it is broken and twisted and no longer resembles anything we should support or invest in. My story is not much different than the rest with an upbringing in fundamentalist churches, serving as a paid staff member for a few organizations with the same cycle of manipulation, legalism, leadership abuses, spiritual abuse and passive aggressive tendencies that can be traced through it all. Finally I realized that all churches share a similar disfunction and I would rather have a relationship with Jesus on my own as part of His Church universal than have the church (local) destroy my perspective and relationship with Jesus.

@ Bridget:

No I have never planted a church. I would say the problem with the contemporary church planting model is that the “goal” is a brick and mortar church. And, when that “fails” it is devastating. Why can’t people “plant” without that brick and mortar being the goal? Instead make the goal, be faithful together and reach and love our neighbors. And then whatever does happen is fine. Modern church plants have an artificial man created goal in mind that is a reflection of a mid 20th century American organization vs a faithful ‘congregation’ of believers.

Oh, and Deebs, while I understand why you mentioned both Tullian Tchividjian and his wife both had affairs, I’d note that Tullian brought his wife’s adultery up in his public confession. It sounded a lot like, “The woman tempted me, and I ate.” (That is, Tullian blamed his fall on his wife.) I believe Tullian was *very wrong* to have done this. He should have only talked about himself. But that is Just My Personal Opinion.

P.S. Link to PDF of Ralph Winter’s address in 1973 on “The Two Structures of God’s Redemptive Mission.”

http://frontiermissionfellowship.org/uploads/documents/two-structures.pdf

@ mirele:
Agreed.

My husband and I are “dones” who grew up in church, were poster children for the conservative theo/poli position, met with a crisis of faith the churches of our backgrounds neither understand nor easily discuss.

We are smart, but do not hold ourselves higher than God. We do, however, see the need to engage our minds in our worship – a word that should never be limited to musical engagement.

Many churches only like to engage the minds of those who agree with their leaders. People with different visions are encouraged to see the light or live under suspicion. We are lonely in church buildings, so we seek small community where we can find it, though it’s hard to find others with our bent. It’s not like we all wear white carnations, etc.

Perhaps there can be a “Craig’s List for the Disenfranchised” or whatever. Like others, we are burned and wary, though not utterly without hope. My spirit is a candle the flame of which I do not own, and I am assured that one day we will find fellowship again.

And I would never have understood my own words before I transitioned. I think there are some things we only intuit if we’ve experienced them. I have never been able to explain my shift to someone who hasn’t felt it, already. Not sure what to do with that.

Adam Borsay wrote:

If the church wants to look like it used to “50” years ago then start behaving like it did 50 years ago. Namely, share the gospel. We can’t say it won’t happen if we aren’t even trying

And I ask (not sarcastically) what is that gospel? If it is what I grew up with in the IFBC, then it is: “To the unbeliever,come as you are, to the believer, why are you stil sinning so much? You should know better by now.”

I finally walked away when I realized that their Jesus was only able to freely forgive the sins of heathens. But his own sheep could not receive forgiveness as easily. There was some sort of penalty one would have to pay, usually emotionally. Even though emotionalism was a big no-no in the preaching, it was used and abused by the time the altar call was underway.

I realized with much Bible study on my own and some great mentors that Jesus died for our sins even after we were saved. It was as if the whole book of Galatians was ignored in all practicality. I am having a hard time finding a church in my area that separates the law from the gospel. Most of them have gone trendy with “live a better life by doing x y z.” And that is more law. I am not against the teaching of law. My flesh understands the law perfectly. But grace is foreign to the flesh. More law will never save a soul. It will never give hope to the struggling lambs in the fold.

If gospel to you is the answer to the law… If you are talking about a gospel that gives even the Christian hope, then I agree– we need more of that.

dee wrote:

You mean like endorsing Jim Crow and all that stuff?

Well, I was generically meaning, back ‘then’ things were ‘better’ not necessarily meaning exacty 50 years ago…..50 years ago a lot of the American church was what I like to call the Field of Dreams model….put a cross out front and wait for them to come……

But, your point is actually a good one….No matter the era, the Church has had problems. But it has survived and even thrived. Regardless of the absurdities and abuses at any point in history, Christ’s Bride keeps on keeping on. It is only been recently in our highly autonomous “me first” 21st century Western Civ have we seen this huge growth of “dones”. Is it a faithful and healthy response to sinful man made organizations, or, is it a reflection of modern society first with some spiritualism sprinkled in? I don’t ask that to try to infer what I think the answer is, I am not particularly sure…but it is an important one we should be asking…

@ dee:
I’m currently reading “One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America.” It’s enlightening, and in relation to this sub-discussion, the period 50 to 60 years ago (the one to which every nostalgic wants to return) was anomalous; church attendance was notably higher than it had been in, say, the 1800’s. And then of course, as you’ve pointed out, there’s the whole Jim Crow thing, and various women’s rights issues that weren’t settled until shockingly recently. And I know better than to expect a conservative Christian pastor to even believe that this was an issue, but the US government’s persecution of LGBT people was notoriously severe in the 50’s and 60’s (look up the new documentary “Uniquely Nasty” for more on that topic). So folks can take their half-century old culture and stick it where it belongs, 50 years in the past!

@ dee:
I would be VERY careful if i were in your shoes! That is pretty strange.

Christy, formerly known as Mandy wrote:

At our last church, nobody from the pastoral team could be bothered to visit us when various members of our family were in the hospital nor help us out after the hurricane despite the fact that we had spent many years volunteering and tithing there. There is such an emphasis on the minor issues that the majors have become lost. Churches are busy buying fog machines but can’t find time to take care of the least of them.

I gotta hand it to the Mormons, they really do take care of their own with regard to what you’ve described above. Independent Protestant fundagelicalism could learn thing or two from the Mormons on tribal community and what ‘community’ really means beyond the usual platitudes and rah-rah-sis-boom-bah.

@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
J. Edgar Hoover plus Sen. Joe McCarthy… Barbara Kingsolver wrote a novel about this (among many other things) that i think you’d like – The Lacuna. The central character is a gay writer who starts working for the Feds prior to WWII. he’s also a novelist and uses historical novels set in pre-Conquest Mexico to criticize both McCarthy and Hoover. It is set partly in Mexico. (And made me want to go to either Oaxaca or the Yucatan, or both,in the worst way ‘ and we’re not talking tourist traps, either.)

dee wrote:

Then maybe you could explain to me why “whoa uh” is actually sung in the song in a way that sound like “wuh oh.?”

It was originally written as “whoa uh” , but when you add in Gospel Passion to the Gospel-centered worship, it’s sung as “wuh oh”.

Adam Borsay wrote:

Christ’s Bride keeps on keeping on. It is only been recently in our highly autonomous “me first” 21st century Western Civ have we seen this huge growth of “dones”. Is it a faithful and healthy response to sinful man made organizations, or, is it a reflection of modern society first with some spiritualism sprinkled in?

I think it is a mistake to write the Done phenomenon off to a culture of individualism. I think that God saves individuals. I think the Holy Spirit indwells individuals and gifts individuals who then use those gifts for the benefit of the Body. I think that God works through individuals *and* through groups like local churches. But I think it is a mistake to think that God is restricted to acting mostly within a recognizable organization. That does not make sense to me personally. Honestly, I heard that individualistic argument a lot in former churches, particularly the last one. I’m not persuaded by that line of thinking because it just seems to me like more anti-culture than pro-Jesus.

The Bride of Christ keeps on keeping on because of the faithful Bridegroom, not because of organizations, structures, particular doctrines, etc. I agree with you that it is good for us to gather together to worship and pray and to do all the one-anothering. The problem is that those things have been crowded out by all the things that have been added as conditions for being included as part of the fellowship of a local church. I think of the conservative evangelical church like a kudzu landscape in summertime. You know there are trees somewhere underneath the tall, green monster shapes. But the thickness and pervasiveness of the kudzu hides the trees and eventually kills them while it crowds out everything else as well. Let’s not forget that the non-native kudzu was introduced because it was a very cheap food source for cattle. But good intentions produced a disaster of unintended consequences, and I think there is a lot of theological kudzu that is not native to Christianity that is smothering it and blocking the life-giving light.

numo wrote:

@ singleman:
I am so sorry to hear this. It’s wrong.

I agree.

When I joined my current church, I publicly affirmed my faith in Jesus Christ in accordance with the confirmation service format in the Book of Common Prayer. (The church was Episcopal at the time but left TEC several years later.) There was nothing along the lines of a modern-day membership covenant.

@ Adam Borsay:
Adam, it has zip to do with the things you think it is about. Zeto. Nada. People have had it, and they’re leaving. Many of them have tried so hard to be part of the church, and given a LOT of themselves in the attempt.

I think sometimes thr only sane thing we can do is to walk away. It doesn’t mean people cease to believe, rather, that they’ve bern burned and judt aren’t going to subject themselves to it anymore.

@ Gram3:
Although we don’t have kudzu up hete, and i hsve never seen how it csn take over if allowed, i think your analogy is all too accurate.

numo wrote:

@ singleman:
Yikes! But are they AMIA, or something similar? Cause that should not be happening and i doubt the Anglican Communion id being helped by these sorts of impositions.

Church of the Ascension is affiliated with PEARUSA, a province of the Anglican Church in Rwanda. PEARUSA is also affiliated with the Anglican Church in North America.

Church of the Holy Spirit is affiliated with the Anglican Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic, also part of ACNA.

I don’t know if there are any other Anglican churches which use membership covenants or similar documents, but their very presence is scary indeed.

About the original post.
I’m single and a lady. Churches don’t care about singles, especially not childless, single ladies. They prefer married couples, especially ones who have children.

Churches won’t allow women to serve or volunteer in areas that interest them, but will usually insist on placing them in the children’s nursery, which I’m not interested in, or tell them that certain tasks are for men only.

Struggles and grief were met by church-going Christians (some I met actually at churches, as well as family members who attend other churches) with cliches, platitudes, shaming.

I was told to stuff the pain of my loved one’s death down and just go work at soup kitchens. There was no willingness to sit and “weep with those who weep,” but a demand that you get through the grief and pain alone in private, and do it quickly.

The years I had depression I got similar responses from church-goers: got cliches, platitudes, was told by some churchy people that “real Christians” don’t experience depression, or told to just read my Bible and pray more.

I am turned off by the attempts by churches to be cool and relevant, like with the laser light shows, rock bands on stage, and the hipster fashions, and all because churches are desperate to win over the youth. They don’t give a fig about people past 35.

Those are just a few of my reasons.

@ singleman:
Are they affiliated with the Moore College/Sydney Anglicans? That would make the church covenant make some sense, I think. From what I understand, the Sydney Anglicans are a different breed of Anglican/Episcopalian, and there is quite a bit of cross-pollination with SBTS and SEBTS which effectively means with Acts29 and 9Marks as well.

Gram3 wrote:

I think it is a mistake to write the Done phenomenon off to a culture of individualism. I think that God saves individuals. I think the Holy Spirit indwells individuals and gifts individuals who then use those gifts for the benefit of the Body. I think that God works through individuals *and* through groups like local churches. But I think it is a mistake to think that God is restricted to acting mostly within a recognizable organization.

One of the things I’ve kept hearing for 20+ years is how people are tired of being squeezed into program-oriented “ministry” roles, where all that’s really needed is some warm body to volunteer and it is not spiritual-gift-based ministry. I’m not against volunteerism, but when programism and institutionalization replaces and negates spiritual gifts and the Holy Spirit’s leading, something is *seriously* wrong.

The “dones” seem to be one of the most recent manifestations of that business-model, limited-pedagogy approach to “doing” church. When there is little freedom to innovate indigenous ministry, and the only service accepted involves implementing some out-sourced program, what is the point? The human element is gone; it’s in essence just a machine and the people are but cogs therein to keep the institution going.

Irrelevant..I ma hope my east Coast Mom will be okay with this. I wrote a post the other day about my involvement in Mormonism and my cognitive dissonance

https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/my-descent-into-mormonism-my-cognitive-dissonance/

Adam Borsay wrote:

How would 20 more years of life convince me otherwise?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

It will.

@ numo:
Yep, that’s the Lavender Scare, the lesser known companion to the Red Scare.

@ numo:
If an Anglican church in the United States has affiliated itself with an African Anglican church, I’d run away as fast as my moderately out of shape legs could carry me. Americans, notably among them Scott Lively (whom I don’t think has any connection to Anglican denominations per se), who stirred up anti-LGBT animus in Uganda, leading to the passage of a vicious bit of legislation over there. I don’t understand the culture to be able to know what drives this intense animus, but regardless, this is why I don’t trust African-affiliated Anglican churches for a split second!

Gram3 wrote:

…is that when you have lived through the ups and downs and especially the really deep and seemingly bottomless downs, you come to see that some of the things about which you were so very certain are not quite as high-res as perhaps we thought when we were younger.

Yep.
I also agree with the rest of your post.

So far as I remain in the faith at all, my beliefs sound pretty close to yours, but Southern Baptists really limit women, so I don’t find SBs very welcoming or appealing.

Christy, formerly known as Mandy wrote:

At our last church, nobody from the pastoral team could be bothered to visit us when various members of our family were in the hospital nor help us out after the hurricane despite the fact that we had spent many years volunteering and tithing there

Oh yes, this is very, very common. This is one thing I find very disturbing about so many churches today, and I have read similar stories as yours by many other people on other blogs and in books about why people are leaving churches.

People can spend years at a church, donating their time and money, but when they need the members of that church or the preacher to help them, that help never comes. This is a very common problem. I see it mentioned quite a bit by other Nones or Dones.

One more for your list, dee.

10. The elevation of secondary issues to the level of essential doctrine.

Being told you’re “not really saved” because you are egalitarian, don’t hold a young earth perspective on creation, or can’t attend a shepherding group with nary an absence, also makes heads (and hearts) tilt toward exit doors.

Gram3 wrote:

@ singleman:
Are they affiliated with the Moore College/Sydney Anglicans?

Not as far as I know. Although it’s worth noting that John Yates, rector of The Falls Church Anglican, is a member of The Gospel Coalition’s council.

Sorry folks, but it’s after midnight here and I need to hit the sack. Goodnight.

@ dee:

One other small detail of his confession or statement that bothered me (other than him seemingly saying, “Hey, you can’t blame me for cheating on my wife, she did it first!”).

If I am recalling it correctly: I think he said after his church elders confronted him about an affair only then did he admit it and step down.

If he was a preacher, I would hope he would have gone to his elders and confessed the sin, not waited for them to rat him out and hold him accountable. But I guess that is human nature.

@ Daisy:

Another neo-Cal cheating in his wife. Although she was supposedly cheating on him first. Not that that amounts to a hill of beans.

Bilbo Skaggins wrote:

I finally walked away when I realized that their Jesus was only able to freely forgive the sins of heathens. But his own sheep could not receive forgiveness as easily

A lot of Christians do seem to teach or believe this.

@ E.G.:

Yes, I saw the news stories about him admitting that his wife had an affair and he had one, and that he resigned, I just thought there had been yet another development I had not heard yet, but thank you.

Adam Borsay wrote:

But I am convinced that the NT clearly indicates that the regular, organized and deliberate gathering of believers is the normative

I’m convinced that a regular gathering of believers in pews or chairs to listen to a lecture has nothing to do with the Christian community.

I have a lot of reasons to be “done” with the institutional church but I’m still trying, this portion resonated

The Dones say they left because they wanted to come to their own answers about God through dialog and struggle, not though prepackaged lectures and the predetermined conclusions of their church leaders.

I’ve grown in understanding reading and interacting here than in the hours of lecture I’ve sat through over the years, correction decades.

From “The way Church Was Meant To Be” by Terry Stanley:
“An organization tends to replace relationships. People relate to the organization rather than each other. People belong to the organization, instead of each other. People depend on the organization instead of only depending on each other. People give their money to the organization, instead of giving to each other. People invite others to be a part of their organization, instead of inviting others into their lives. People invest in and build up the organization, instead of investing in and building up one another.”

I disagree with Stanley on some things but this paragraph took the words out of my mouth.

mirele wrote:

Tullian Tchividjian and his wife both had affairs

It is interesting that this is what took him out of leadership. In my former denom it would also have readily removed a pastor. The problem there was that several authoritarian pastors drove off over half their members and that didn’t cost them their jobs. In my book that type of divisiveness and pride is just as bad and it certainly affects a lot more people. I recall that as Tullian took over half the congregation left.

Daisy wrote:

@ E.G.:
But what if you can’t serve where you feel led, gifted, and interested because the church won’t permit you, and because of your gender?

Then leave, yes. Definitely. But work to find a fellowship that will include your gifting.

Excellent post. Thank you for writing this. I’ve been a done for several years for all of the reasons listed above. I’ve been a member of several churches in the past as well as two missionary organizations. I quit because women were becoming more and more sidelined as 2nd class citizens under men, because politics became as important or more important than the gospel (“if you’re a Christian you must be a staunch Republican” – ignore the fact they have affairs and gay relationships too) and the last straw being the bordering on hateful attitudes towards the GLTB community, Muslims and other minorities. I sincerely miss the sense of community and ability to debate theology that I experienced in at least one church (which ended up in a spit when the pastor went neo Cal) and YWAM, which at the time was very open to all, multi cultural and not discipline oriented. Sadly, I’m now in very poor health and don’t hold out much hope of finding anything local that I can participate in. Finding communities like Wartburg Watch has been a godsend.

I would love to know the percentage of people who, given the option, would check this response (quoted in Dee’s article):

“Often, those who do come back view these worship groups as the only viable option in a sea of religious organizations that they find to be otherwise dissatisfying.”

Thanks for writing this article Dee, great job!

This is a subject I have been doing much reading on lately. I am currently reading the book “Church Refugees” and, as the back cover of the book states, “If you’re among those done with church, look for your story to be echoed here. You’re not alone – and at last you’re understood.”

I am not quite a “Done” but fairly close to that status. I am definitely “done” with heavy-handed, authoritarian pastors and their plurality of “yes-men” who demand you sign their documents of conduct prior to allowing you to become one of them. I think the only church I would ever consider formally joining is Emmanuel Baptis in Enid, OK!

I have been attending an Anglican church located right next door to the 9Marx/Mark Dever knock-off I fled a few years ago. I must say it has been quite refreshing. The sermon is only about 20 minutes in length, but I have decided there is nothing said in a 60 minute sermon that cannot be said in 20 minutes. If forces the pastor to focus his thoughts and not overwhelm the parishioners with his vast knowledge of scripture. Besides, most people mentally check out after about 20 minutes anyway.

I have also appreciated the meaningful partaking of the Lord’s Supper, the liturgy, confessing of faith through reciting the Nicene or Apostle’s Creed, confession of sin and the reading of four passages of scripture. The focus is not on the performance of the pastor, but rightly placed on the Triune God.

Here are a few good quotes from Church Refugees:

“In this book, we take up the task of understanding the dechurched as church refugees. They’re people who’ve made an explicit and intentional decision to leave organized religion. They didn’t drift away casually. They didn’t move to a new city for a job and never got into the groove of church in a new community. They didn’t marry agnostic spouses and give up on convincing them. No, at some point, the dechurched decided, in a very intentional way, that they would be better off leaving the church altogether.”

“The church, they feel, is keeping them from God. According to them, the church, not God, is the problem, and they’ve stayed in the church long past the point that it ceased to be fulfilling or even sustaining.
Furthermore, they flee the church not because they hate the church. They have, in fact, worked tirelessly on behalf of the church. They flee for their own spiritual safety, to reconnect with a God they feel has been made distant to them by the structure of religion as practiced in organizations.”

“Since 2010, though, when we finally left the church, we’ve just done house church where we create and do things with others rather than for them. I’m done with the top-down, institutional church. I thought we could fix it from within, but we got beat up pretty bad. I know we didn’t always handle things the best way, but at the same time, we kept showing up and volunteering because we felt the church was God’s home.
I don’t think that’s the case anymore. The church is wherever God’s work is being done, and too often the way we were treated and the things I saw happen in the institutional church to other people just weren’t in alliance with what we thought God wanted.”

“Perhaps more than anything else, what people want out of a church is a community of people who are experiencing God together.”

“But much of the way they feel institutional church tries to construct community, by focusing on uniformity over unity, is counterproductive to what they feel is true and authentic community.”

“Our respondents often claimed that church should be a place where people are loved collectively rather than judged individually.”

“Community happens when people share life together, when they see each other repeatedly and share experiences. These commonalities lead to a feeling that people can be counted on and to a shared sense of reality and values.
Sociologists have long understood these to be the fundamental traits of community formation, but for some reason churches seem to often get this equation backwards. Instead of understanding that shared life leads to shared beliefs, churches frequently want to make sure that everyone signs on to a common belief system before they can begin to do life with each other.”

This is from another good book on the subject, titled “So You Don’t Want to Go to Church Anymore: An Unexpected Journey.”

“Why do people go to your church, Jake?”

“Because we’re supposed to have fellowship. We need it to be fed, to stay accountable to others, and to grow in God’s life together. Are you saying that’s not right?”

“So if someone doesn’t attend anymore, what happens to them?”

“They should find another local church and get involved, or they will wither spiritually or fall into error.”

“Listen to yourself, Jake. You’re using words like ‘need,’ ‘should’ and ‘supposed to.’ Is that the body life God’s called you to?”

“I thought so.”

“Scripture doesn’t use the language of need when talking about the vital connection God establishes between believers. Our dependency is in Jesus alone! He’s the one we need. He’s the one we follow. He’s the one God wants us to trust and rely on for everything. When we put the body of Christ in that place, we make an idol of it, and we end up wrapped in knots over such a situation. Religion survives by telling us we need to fall in line or some horrible fate will befall us. We share body life together, not because we have to, but because we get to. Anyone who belongs to God will embrace the life he wants his children to share together. And that life isn’t fighting over control of the institution but simply helping one another learn to live deeply in him. Whenever we let other factors get in the way of that, we only use love to get our hooks into people. We reward them with affection and punish them by withholding it.”
(p. 74)

Quote from “Finding Church: What If There Really Is Something More?” by Wayne Jacobsen

“Realize that the hope of reformation often falls on deaf ears. People like it that way or they wouldn’t be there. If you find you no longer fit in, feel free to move on. A commitment to a congregation is not a life sentence. When it ceases to inspire your life in Jesus, it is time to move on and see what else God has for you. That may come in seasons of great pain, as you come to realize what God is stirring in you no longer fits the group you’ve been in; it may come with great joy, as God draws you into other opportunities more consistent with his work in you. It would be best not to leave with a volley of condemnation, nor to try to drag others with you. Just follow him as he leads you. Those who are worried only about the success of their group rather than building up the whole body of Christ will find this discussion threatening. They have even coined the accusation “church hopping” to discourage people from considering leaving their group.” (Kindle Locations 2586-2593)

Quote from “Finding Church: What If There Really Is Something More?” by Wayne Jacobsen

“His church is coming together in ways that transcend our capabilities. It won’t be at a specific location, under any particular organization, or behind some charismatic leader. It will be in him. As you learn to live there, you will find yourself in proximity to others on a similar journey. Cooperate with his working by engaging the relationships he invites you into and watch what he can do. Wherever you find an act of self-sacrificing love, a group of people who care for one another with generosity and compassion, you’ll find his church. Whenever you engage a conversation that illuminates the work of Jesus in your life, you’ll find his church. However you can relax into the reality of his working, rather than trying to accomplish his work on your own, you’ll find his church. How do you find his church? By drawing to him and seeing where love leads you. Every morning I ask him, “Who are you asking me to love today?” Then I live with heart and eyes wide open to the people I cross paths with and those he places on my heart to contact. Follow him there and in the end you won’t have to find the church. He’ll make sure she finds you.”
(Kindle Locations 2977-2986)

Quote from “The Importance of Being Foolish: How to Think Like Jesus”
by Brennan Manning

“The last desire that hinders us from putting on the mind of Jesus Christ is the lust for power. In his ministry, Jesus rejected any display of power except the power of the Holy Spirit. Unlike “the kings of the Gentiles [who] lord it over them” (Luke 22:25), the disciples were not to exercise authority. The Lord himself performed the menial service of the slave at the door by washing the dusty feet of his disciples, then required them to do the same. “Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you” (John 13:14-15).”

1. “Church” (as the word is typically used) is a business.
2. CHURCH is not a business.
3. In “Church” things are never as they appear on Sunday mornings. (Think “Wizard of Oz)
4. CHURCH is real.
5. “Church” wants your money…always…no matter how things appear…or what you think…(see #1 above).
6. CHURCH wants your heart. Cares about you as a person…not your ability to fund the biz.
7. “Church” isn’t safe. No matter how things appear…or what you think. NEVER LEAVE YOUR CHILDREN NOR SPOUSE ALONE AT A “CHURCH.” (Yes, that’s a period at the end of that sentence…this is an absolute statement)
8. CHURCH is a safe haven.
9. “Church” will disappoint you unless your vested interests are being met, i.e. business connections, lust for power (think SS teacher, elder, deacon, choir, etc.) Once your vested interest is compromised, there’s disappointment. Sorry, this is just the way it is.
10. CHURCH will not disappoint.
11. “Church” has a man at the center.
12. CHURCH has a Man at the center.
13. “Church” (by the increasing numbers) requires a signed contract.
14. CHURCH requires nothing, except your entire being. It takes you at your word. No contract necessary.

**The bottom line: Your spiritual life is the most precious thing you possess on this earth. Guard it like you’re guarding your aorta. NEVER place the care of this most precious commodity in another’s hands.

dee wrote:

Adam Borsay wrote:
What would I see differently? Not at all meaning to sound facetious. But I am convinced that the NT clearly indicates that the regular, organized and deliberate gathering of believers is the normative. How would 20 more years of life convince me otherwise?
Sharon wrote:
K.D., I’m curious what you think Adam will think differently when he’s 55
I would like to answer this question since i ditto’d KD’s comment. I am one who can speak to this because I used to believe that, in general, all churches were like the ones I had been in-great pastors, elders who actually disagreed and spoke out, church members who were encouraged to start ministries and Bible studies, women were allowed to teach and churches which actually looked at child sex abuse and domestic violence as despicable as opposed to being debatable. (Did that really happen? Maybe the wife egged him on? )
Then, about 8 years ago, I encountered a church which poorly handled a pedophile situation and then attempted to chase my husband and me to another unrelated church to discuss our (along with many others) call to repentance for not disclosing the full truth of the matter. In other words, they tried to pull retroactive church discipline on the wrong people.
God was so good to me. He allowed me to see the dark side of churches. Oh, in case you were wondering. one of my former pastors is on TGC’s council which says a lot about how TGC views child sex abuse failures. I needed to see this stuff up close and personal so that i would know what is going on in churches today.
In our area, the so called faithful churches push CJ Mahaney’s books, hire ex pastors from SGM, support SGM by flying down and giving sermons in churches, think Gary Ezzo is incredible and tremble if John Piper is within 50 miles. I have written this blog for 6 years. Right now, I have about 10 stories backed up that we will post of well known, “faithful” churches which act like jerks their treatment of people who ask the wrong questions.
We are currently looking into another well known church which has covered up the despicable child sex abuse business of one of their beloved members. I have just finished dealing with TVC which would never have apologized if a couple of us hadn’t disclosed the story. The same goes for Sovereign Grace Ministries, James MacDonald and Mark Driscoll. Most people just kept their mouths shut until, of course, the end was in site then everybody agreed that there were problems.
I have changed in these years, The *Dones* are primarily middle aged faithful church members who are well versed in Scripture and have gotten sick and tired of the nonsense going on in many churches today.
So, you have got my name on this blog and I am one who can give you a full history of my Pollyanna view of churches through most of my life until God decided to slap me upside the head to see the pain and sorrow which many people have suffered at the hands of arrogant church leadership.
So, remember KD and me when you are 55 and let us know if you get it then. It took me a long time to get it as well.

Exactly

Sharon wrote:

Daisy wrote:
Adam Borsay wrote:
How would 20 more years of life convince me otherwise?
Daisy wrote:
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
It will.
Not necessarily. (And it doesn’t seem very helpful to be laughing at someone here.) I’m 50+, and I agree with Adam.
Just because SOME churches have been abusive doesn’t mean that ALL churches are.

You have gotten lucky where you are….or you are just not seeing what is going on.
It took my mother a while. She is well educated,( EdS.) but has a blind spot as a SBC. In the last few years her eyes have been opened to what is going on…..now she isn’t leaving because of the ” community” but she is starting to see. Mom turns 84 in October.

Gram3 wrote:

I think of the conservative evangelical church like a kudzu landscape in summertime.

Very apt analogy!

…Scripture repeatedly commands Christians to submit to their leaders (Heb. 13:17; 1 Thess. 5:12-13). The only way to do that is by publicly committing to be members of their flock, and saying in effect, “I commit to listening to your teaching, following your direction, and to submitting to your leadership.” There’s no way to obey the scriptural commands to submit to your leaders if you never actually submit to them by joining a local church.

This is so far away from what Jesus said and from the spirit of the NT that I wonder how whoever wrote that can say that with a straight face. Maybe that’s why they write so much about it: so that we can’t see their faces.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%205:2-3 ,
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+20:25-28

Why I am done, con’t

Later, my husband and I became members of a Missouri Synod Lutheran church. The membership classes passed over most real-life questions and it bored me. Meanwhile, I slowly fell back into PTSD collapse (since it had not been dealt with in my 20s). I went into the psychiatric floor of local hospital. My pastor saw me walking in and asked if I needed help. I said, “please, yes. Come visit me?” and he promised, but he didn’t. A unitarian hospital chaplain was very kind/helpful.

In between, I was on the board of a local community theatre run by Christians and sponsored by a Church of Christ church. The young director of the theatre was discovered using the theatre’s computers for extensive porn use. Everyone wanted to schlep it under the rug and a friend was made a scapegoat for making a stink about it. I confronted the pastor who promised that he would counsel the young man, saying he had education/experience in that field. I later found out that he had no education beyond some nouthetic stuff and that he saw the young man for three sessions.

Eventually I left my marriage for good. All my Christian couples’ friends (including above-mentioned Baptist assistant pastor/wife) except one, took the side of my husband. My depression was deemed lack of faith in God. Also, it “takes two to tango/tangle”. I was left alone with my daughter even though I was still in the throes of PTSD. My ex found a “christian” divorce lawyer and let me know he was doing the godly way, while trying to take everything away from me.

These isn’t a complete list of my bad experiences with various Christians. And as a positive, the therapist I finally found, who helped me back to life, is a lovely Catholic woman. Because of her, I am ok.

I love God with all my heart and will never again belong to a church group.

@ Boyd:

Very interesting analysis, Boyd. Pastor vs. Evangelist… looking at it that way explains a lot.

The comments today have been even more excellent than usual, and have given me a lot to think about. Thanks everyone!

@ Gram3:
Holy crapnuggets Gram. Good analogy.

Cousin of Eutychus wrote:

Interestingly, since that time, my eyes to what some would refer to as ‘Common Grace’ has become much more alive to my wife and me.

Great comment “cuz!” Your life sounds like many others I have been reading about lately. It would appear the Holy Spirit is working in a new way amongst the Church.

One thing about modern music, lasers and fog machines make no sense to me. However, using modern “rock” instruments does- in that it’s just a musical language that the majority of people speak these days. You are going to find more guitar players than organ players, and it’s music people know and understand.

“Performance” music doesn’t bother me as long as it’s not the entire music part of the worship service. I’ve been bless by organ performance pieces just as well as more contemporary performance pieces. But it’s all about one thing- bringing our focus on to God and responding to him. I don’t see how lasers and fog machines do that, but I do see how honest musicians playing the music they know how to play does that. Of course, all music must be selected with care so that if it is congregational, it is inviting them to worship, not distracting them from it.

Jeff S wrote:

One thing about modern music, lasers and fog machines make no sense to me. However, using modern “rock” instruments does- in that it’s just a musical language that the majority of people speak these days. You are going to find more guitar players than organ players, and it’s music people know and understand.

I don’t know how old you are, but you sound like you were fortunate enough to not be around during the ‘music wars’ of late fame. The thing is, what you have said above is true of some people but not all. By limiting the music to this style the church drives off those who do not speak that language to use your terminology. This process, then, changes the makeup of the congregation by swinging it in only one direction. I am thinking that the predominantly rock music crowd are younger and possibly do not have the years of either prior church experience or years to serious bible study and that may be an underlying reason that the churches find this useful; more younger people who may also as a population less already catechized in different doctrines and practices.

IMO these congregations do use various ways of culling the flock and perhaps this is one tool they use

singleman wrote:

Although it’s worth noting that John Yates, rector of The Falls Church Anglican, is a member of The Gospel Coalition’s council.

That’s what the tipping point for me in leaving an Anglican church and returning to the Episcopal Church.

K.D. wrote:

As I have written, I will at some point be UMC or Anglican or something liturgical…but my mother is still with us. And she just would never understand why her little ” Baptist seminary alumni” is no longer Baptist….

You’ll be welcome when you get here. 🙂

So anyway, I doubt I’ll be a “done”, but as of right now, we are taking a break from my church. I know, many of you saw it coming. It is what it is. The father’s day sermon was a bridge too far for me, unfortunately. Which is too bad, because my pastor is a good man and even in a misguided sermon he had a LOT of good points (such as, pointing out that men can be more emotionally fragile than women, but they hide it by covering over their real emotions with “masculine” ones that are more socially acceptable- that men don’t allow themselves to be fearful, but anger is OK in many people’s eyes). Unfortunately, all his good points were couched in a sermon about encouraging men to be better leaders in the home (with an aside that women can encourage or damage their work- ugh).

I have no doubts he honestly believes this is the problem. As I said, he’s a good man and I love so much about the church. I think he is deceived. The problem is, I don’t even feel like I can speak to him about it (even though he has invited me to share my views on gender roles with him) because for him to change his views means leaving the PCA. Talking about it just seems like tilting at windmills.

I’ve been talking a lot recently to our worship pastor, and I’ve been very vulnerable about this particular issue*. He is very respectful and has asked if we can just agree to disagree- that community is more important than doctrinal agreement, but for me gender roles is not just a “doctrinal disagreement” any more. It’s about how we treat people at a fundamental level. It’s about treating people with love and dignity, which is one of the greatest commandments in scripture.

My worship pastor told me that the PCA is having lots of conversations about how to do complementarianism without harming women, and I said I’d love to be a part of that discussion, but I can’t since the premise is flawed. Even now, though, when I told him we are taking time off from the church, and he knows why, he has been incredibly supportive. I’m trying to decide how/if I should approach my pastor about the sermon he gave. I know I won’t change his mind, but I do want him to consider what he said to women and how devalued it must make them feel (even if many don’t realize it). I feel like it would be wrong to leave without having that discussion.

I don’t know, I feel like every one I know at the church has been incredibly accepting and loving, and no one has judged me. And now I’M THE ONE turning around and saying this “secondary doctrine” isn’t secondary to me. That it’s worth dividing over. And I hate that, but I just felt so gross this Sunday that I left before communion was served- I just couldn’t sit in the room anymore. The more impassioned I get about it, the more vocal I feel I need to be, and it’s hard to see how I can be peaceful and loud at the same time.

Anyway, I’m taking a month away from our church. I’m going to see what other churches are out there. It’s hard to find an egalitarian church. 🙁

My wife is a big fan of Andy Stanly’s church, and honestly I do like a lot of his preaching, but mega church is hard for me . . . do they have smoke machines? 🙂

We may return after a break. Maybe there are ways to have constructive conversations about gender roles. Both of my pastors have seemed respectful and willing to talk about it. I have not once been judged by anyone when I’ve said I don’t believe in gender hierarchy. But it’s hard to be at church when it makes my heart hurt.

*as an aside, the conversations with my worship pastor have been very interesting. We discussed ESS, and he honestly had no idea what I was talking about. When I explained ESS and how I thought it sounded heretical, he agreed with me. I told him it was a Grudem thing, and he mentioned that some people in the PCA are becoming uncomfortable with how revered Grudem is.

One thing I really appreciate about my current (maybe soon to be former) pastor is his view on church size. He wants people to come to Christ, but he doesn’t want to be a big church. The church has grown so much recently they are likely having to go to two services, and he is very concerned because he feels like it will divide people. But at the end of the day, there just aren’t enough chairs.

The church has already recently spawned a second church, and I can see planting another to try and keep the numbers lower so people don’t get “lost” in the shuffle. Keeping it at < 200 people on a given Sunday is the target, but when people keep coming . . .

I really do love my church and my pastor, so potentially leaving is very hard on me 🙁

@ Gram3:
That’s what the missus and I are hoping (he married her sister), but unfortunately I think he’s just going to thrive there. I don’t doubt he’ll be in leadership in the not so distant future.

@ Jeff S:
That is so sad, but I understand completely. Your pastor sounds like some guys I know who mean well but are so caught up in this that they cannot see beyond it. What is truly sad is that they do not know what they are giving up in order to pursue things which are *not* what please God and which are not what God planned. In addition, in the PCA there is the doctrine of church office where the officers must be male. Keller skates on some thin ice with his deaconesses but ultimately gets a pass because he is the new PCA whale now that Sproul is getting older. The guys I know in the movement would also have to give up a lot, including some prestige, in some cases, and an income in all cases.

I agree that the “gender” issue is a matter of how we see one another and how we see ourselves as created in God’s image. There is nothing wrong with a husband leading in his family. The problem is what leadership means and on what it is based. If it is based on gifting and interest, then that is a good thing. If it is based on a gender hierarchy, then that is a sinful thing. Fear drives much of this, IMO, and fear is a very difficult emotion to conquer.

May you and your wife find a great place to fellowship, and may your pastors seek the truth without fear of man. It is sad that your worship pastor did not know about ESS, but hopefully he will look into it. How awful to make the Son less than he is while talking so much about spreading the fame of Jesus’ name.

How great it would be if the Piper/Grudem/Ware/CBMW stranglehold could be broken or at least weakened enough that people would be willing to search the scripture and seek the Holy Spirit instead of blindly following fallible humans. Men have institutionalized the insecurity and weakness and fear of a few influential men and in the process are enslaving men and women with those doctrines. Maybe you will be the ones to start shining the light. Perhaps not with your pastors but with others who observe your life and testimony and start to ask some questions.

Jeff S wrote:

Nancy wrote:

Jeff S wrote:
One thing about modern music, lasers and fog machines make no sense to me. However, using modern “rock” instruments does- in that it’s just a musical language that the majority of people speak these days. You are going to find more guitar players than organ players, and it’s music people know and understand.
I don’t know how old you are, but you sound like you were fortunate enough to not be around during the ‘music wars’ of late fame. The thing is, what you have said above is true of some people but not all. By limiting the music to this style the church drives off those who do not speak that language to use your terminology. This process, then, changes the makeup of the congregation by swinging it in only one direction. I am thinking that the predominantly rock music crowd are younger and possibly do not have the years of either prior church experience or years to serious bible study and that may be an underlying reason that the churches find this useful; more younger people who may also as a population less already catechized in different doctrines and practices.
IMO these congregations do use various ways of culling the flock and perhaps this is one tool they use

Oh, I was around. I served as a worship leader through them when people were getting upset at the idea of having drums on a stage. Going through that, I always tried to be as flexible and accommodating as possible to people with all kinds of tastes, but since I play guitar, that necessarily limits what I’m able to do for those would prefer to hear organ music.

At the end of the day, we speak with the voice we have. Mine is with my guitar (usually), and I do the best I can. I try to always pick music that is singable, doctrinal, and accessible to many tastes and styles. But at the end of the day, I’m still limited in how well I can provide for a congregation with different wants/needs.

@ Jeff S:
It sounds like you are at a good church! But if your doctrinal disagreement becomes too much you could check out the EPC….they have egalitarian churches and presbyteries…..they allow each individual congregation to follow their own conscience regarding that issue.

Gram3 wrote:

I agree that the “gender” issue is a matter of how we see one another and how we see ourselves as created in God’s image. There is nothing wrong with a husband leading in his family. The problem is what leadership means and on what it is based. If it is based on gifting and interest, then that is a good thing. If it is based on a gender hierarchy, then that is a sinful thing. Fear drives much of this, IMO, and fear is a very difficult emotion to conquer.

I totally agree. And I think I’ve mentioned, that I really *am* the “spiritual leader” in my home. That is, I generally take responsibility for a lot of the spiritual activities in our house and family. And my wife does tend to look to me to do these things. But the key is the *basis* for this dynamic, and it isn’t because of our genders, but how God has gifted and led us to this point. The sad thing is, we may not look that different from a lot of complementarian couples, but the underlying principle means so much.

When people talk about proof texts for egal/comp “sides”, Galatians is brought up a lot. But I kind of agree with the comps about Galatians. I don’t think it’s a great egal proof text in context. IMO, the better text for egals is when Jesus talks about the highest command being to love one another. And when Paul says the summation of the law is love. When these are your primary doctrines, you simply cannot subjugate a person based on her being. That is not loving 🙁

adam borsay wrote:

It sounds like you are at a good church! But if your doctrinal disagreement becomes too much you could check out the EPC….they have egalitarian churches and presbyteries…..they allow each individual congregation to follow their own conscience regarding that issue.

The closest EPC is 40 minutes away 🙁 I wanted to check it out at one point, but such a long distance (even longer if there is traffic) would mean a loss of community that is critical.

It’s amazing skimming through some of these stories y’all are sharing. Wish I had time to go through and comment on each one. I love it.

Gram3 wrote:

It is sad that your worship pastor did not know about ESS

Well, I’m thankful he didn’t 🙂 They don’t teach it at much church, so it’s better for it!

@ GovPappy:

You have a point here: we used to meet after church at my house for dinner every.single.sunday night. Those people became our family, our “church” for lack of a better word. The church itself later folded, but those people were our lifeblood.

Until one of them had an affair. 🙁 Our little “family” fell apart after that.

I share this just to let you know that all of the same pitfalls that occur in big churches can occur in little ones too. And vice-versa. I’ve learned that people are stubbornly human creatures. I have to be mentally and emotionally prepared to be disappointed *and* elated by any gathering of humans.

That does *not* mean we ignore huge problems for the sake of preserving unity! THAT has been the major problem that the large churches have perpetuated: let’s push through a hurried “forgiveness” process to keep the church rolling on. 🙁

@ Jeff S:
Me too–a guitar player for 20 years now. It’s so hard. Even in multi-racial churches, they say music is the most difficult bridge to build, and the most frequent source of conflict. They joke that when Satan was cast down from heaven, he landed in the choir loft. 😉

XianJaneway wrote:

@ Jeff S:
It’s my understanding that Andy Stanley is a complementarian. I may be wrong though.

I’m not sure- I actually called the church and asked. They told me they have women elders who have the power to fire Andy if they felt it was necessary, so they do not believe, as a church, in gender hierarchy.

But with Andy it’s a little different story that with my current pastor even if he is comp. Since his approach on cultural issues is to have those conversations in private rather than in sermons, even if he is a complementarian, it probably won’t saturate his messages.

I’m actually more concerned about their doctrine of divorce, given I know that was the dustup between Andy and his father, and divorce for abuse is another line in the sand for me.

Anyway, with NorthPoint, I’m likely to have a whole different set of concerns because I’m not a fan of mega churches and churches built around a single personality. That being said, my wife was incredibly blessed by the small group ministry (they put a HUGE emphasis on this); after her divorce, her small group was her life line. So I at least owe it to her to give it a shot. Also, they have services that she can attend every single week, so that’s a selling point as well.

I’ve also identified another local church that looks like they have a woman elder, so I’ll be checking that one out. But honestly, it feels like the options are quite limited.

XianJaneway wrote:

@ Jeff S:
Me too–a guitar player for 20 years now. It’s so hard. Even in multi-racial churches, they say music is the most difficult bridge to build, and the most frequent source of conflict. They joke that when Satan was cast down from heaven, he landed in the choir loft.

Haha- yes. People who haven’t done it rarely have an idea of how much criticism you take. So many people all wanting different things and feeling hurt when you do things different. More Christmas hymns, less Christmas hymns, louder, real drums, softer, no drums, etc. It’s enough to drive you from the ministry altogether. All I can do is express that my primary goal, and this *is* my primary goal, is to facilitate people responding to God with their whole being, emotions, bodies, and minds fully engaged. I may not do that perfectly, but it’s what my focus is always on.

Worship music is really important to me, because I tend to bury my emotions a lot and live in my head. Worship music is one place where I do allow myself to be emotionally involved, and so it’s an important part of my spiritual life.

Law Prof wrote:

My family can be counted among the “Dones”. We left not to run from faith in Jesus, but in a desperate attempt to preserve a true faith in Jesus.

We have been out two years. We miss the fellowship, but we hated the manipulations, behind-your-back whisper campaigns, passive-aggressive abuse and back stabbings. All of these things were nominally done in the name of God, but they had absolutely nothing to do with the Lord.

We are not wild-eyed liberals, we are not perpetually wounded malcontents, though I am certain that many religious leaders would label us as such. We have been abused and slandered by neocalvinists and Arminians alike, we have been lied to, lied about, abused, manipulated.

We are done, and we will not go back into anything that calls itself Christian fellowship until we can at least be assured that it is less hateful, less harmful and less disingenuous than the average meeting of the average skeptics or atheists society. I tell my adult daughter: “Honey, just know that what you have experienced and are currently experiencing (she’s attending a YRR neocal with her boyfriend) has nothing to do with Jesus.” I never thought it would come to this, that I would feel more safe in the company of atheists and agnostics than those who call themselves Christians. Our faith in Jesus is not diminished–maybe it’s strengthened. But we will not go back to anything that calls itself “church” unless we hear clearly from the Lord.

Excellent post. I wholeheartedly concur

Adam Borsay wrote:

5- Analogy for value of the church to Christians—-I was an “athlete” in highschool, thought I would totally take advantage of all the great workout facilities in college……NEVER went my first year. Without a team I just never got the same motivation and accountability to REALLY do what I was so sure I would do.

With many of us the problem is when we show up “with the team” we are told the rules have changed, Socks must be worn at “this” height. We all must attend a team picnic on Sundays at 3:00PM (or be suspended for a week). And on and on and on. Oh yeah, the coach gets to inspect your diary or else.

mirele wrote:

It might be all about Jesus, but which Jesus? There are so many…

“… even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour” (1 John 2:18).

The greatest need in the American church is for the pew to pray for discernment. Folks, you better read the red and pray for wisdom. It’s come to that!

@ Sharon:

Maybe it’s crisis plus age. One thing that really changed for me was a death of someone very close to me. And when I went in church people for some support, I got criticism instead.

Prior to that death, when I went to church in my min 30s another eye opening thing is how the churches I visited were catering to married couples. If you walk in to a church alone, you feel and notice a difference.

I’m in my 40s, and trust me, when Adam gets older and/or hits some very difficult life experiences, he will change his mind.

Daisy wrote:

church in my min 30s another eye

should read “in my MID 30s” not “min”

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

If forces the pastor to focus his thoughts and not overwhelm the parishioners with his vast knowledge of scripture.

I think it depends on which church you attend

The seeker friendly mega churches don’t quote Scripture that much. Someone like TV preacher Joel Osteen might mention a lone verse in a 30 minute sermon, but the rest of his sermon is a self-help pep talk, based on his personal experience and personal opinions.

I am not opposed to a little bit of that sort of thing in a sermon, but I think Osteen goes too far with it.

But there are some Christians who want 100% Bible quoting, or 90%, but seeker friendly preachers only dole out about one percent of Bible quotes during sermons.

@ XianJaneway:
Indeed – the idea in my mind is to get away from institutional crazy. People crazy is gonna happen regardless, but when it happens, I don’t need institutional crazy enabling it and making it worse. The missus and I need to grow into handling problems ourselves with the help of others where possible and necessary, not trusting an organization to do things for us.

Most of us have jobs, careers, families – things that keep us busy enough. I think it’s easiest for a lot of people to be passive and do the minimum. It’s easy, certainly for me, to sit back and let “appropriate leadership” handle conflict and decisions while I just hold down a pew and do the minimum to pull my weight. I still believe I have work to do in the Body, and getting away from “convenient serving” forces me to get out of my comfort zone and find people to help and useful tasks to perform. It forces me to seek out, on my own, causes that could use my money, time, and talent; not simply trust a church organization to put me where I belong.

Frankly, there isn’t much use for a specialized technician with no formal church-related training or musical talent in a traditional church setting.

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

The problem with church as you know it, Jake, is that it has become nothing more than mutual accommodation of self-need. Everybody needs something out of it.

I don’t have a problem with people using church to get their needs met; that is actually one of the reasons God created the body of believers. Paul tells believers to meet each others needs, to pitch in financially to help those in a tight spot, to weep with those who weep.

I’m no longer interested in belonging to any group who tells me or shames me into thinking that me having needs or wanting them met is wrong, selfish, and that I should stuff those needs down.

I’m also not interested in belonging to a group where we are told we are going to have a one-way
relationship, where I do all the giving and they do all the taking.

I used to go through life that way, and all it ever got me was exploited and taken advantage of.

I can’t believe churches still expect people to donate their time, money, work, and affections, but get nothing in return for it.

Daisy wrote:

Todd Wilhelm wrote:
“Because we’re supposed to have fellowship. We need … to stay accountable to others,
Considering all the married preacher sex scandals that are in the news every other week, this is pretty funny.

Rank Hath Its Privileges, and an Alpha Male/Herd Bull or Roman Paterfamilias has claim of ownership (including sexual privileges) over ALL his inferiors.

And the latest sex scandal two-step is Billy Graham’s grandson whose name I’m not going to even try to spell. Somebody really ought to start a take-a-number system.

Daisy wrote:

I’m in my 40s, and trust me, when Adam gets older and/or hits some very difficult life experiences, he will change his mind.

“Oh, I was so much older then;
I’m younger than that now…”

@ Daisy:
Snerk. I lol’ed.

@ Patrice:

I am really sorry for everything you went through, in your Part 2 here and the Part 1 post.

I don’t know about you, but sometimes it feels like the cruddy or insensitive responses you get from Christians hurts more than the original thing or original incident was that you are reaching out to help for in the first place.

Daisy wrote:

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

“Because we’re supposed to have fellowship. We need … to stay accountable to others,

Considering all the married preacher sex scandals that are in the news every other week, this is pretty funny.

I live a cleaner life style as a single adult and not going to church, than these married guys do working at a church every week.

I find the “accountability” teaching off-base and a flimsy reason to give to people to tell them why they should go to church.

The problem is they’ve defined accountability ultimately as submission to church leadership and forced interaction with a small group lead by a male elder.

Oh yes, I believe in accountability. I believe in letting good people into my life close enough to know when there’s something wrong with me. But that’s what happens in friendships organically, if they’re worth anything. Again, by wanting a good thing, they’ve decided to create a rule structure to make it happen, and if you don’t subscribe to that, you “don’t want accountability” in your life.

The missus saw this pressured in her ladies small group meetings at the 9marks church we attended for awhile. Drove her to tears. Being pressured to share your deepest struggles to a group of people you barely know is not accountability.

@ Law Prof:
Bravo. Well said.

Max wrote:

NJ wrote:

“…and he mentioned that some people in the PCA are becoming uncomfortable with how revered Grudem is.”

I can only hope.

I wish SBC’s New Calvinists would become uncomfortable John Piper. They definitely revere the Pied Piper.

Not that it helps ghe SBC, but I had lunch with a PCA pastor recently who told me he doesn’t like Piper’s teaching at all.

Law Prof wrote:

Also, don’t assume we’re not meeting together or haven’t tried home fellowships. I’ve been heavily involved in two. The reason you’re probably not “observing” a “trend” is because many dones aren’t interested in establishing a trend, aren’t interested in promoting themselves and their lifestyles, and don’t make extensive use of the media and marketing techniques to push themselves to the front, such as many churches have been doing. We don’t care to show up on your radar.

This! Most of the “Done” people I have met, don’t want to be on the radar. They sit face to face, and are able to share, and discuss the bible and learn without the condemnation and manipulations that the corporate church placed upon them before they were “done”. Why would a group that meets together in private, want to even deal with all that?

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

May as well be passing out glowsticks and Ecstasy for Communion.

Just when I thought I’d heard everything! Too funny! 🙂

@ Law Prof:

Thank you! This is certainly where I am at this time. I’d much rather be with six people in a home worshipping, praying, and exhorting one another to love and good deeds than in a building sitting aimlessly staring ahead watching what is often a show of music or preaching.

Daisy wrote:

The years I had depression I got similar responses from church-goers: got cliches, platitudes, was told by some churchy people that “real Christians” don’t experience depression, or told to just read my Bible and pray more.

Blessings to you. I suffer from depression and keep it in check with prescribed meds. It has become a little mission of mine to enlighten those who think depression=sin or failure. That is the last thing a struggling person needs to hear.

GovPappy wrote:

The missus saw this pressured in her ladies small group meetings at the 9marks church we attended for awhile. Drove her to tears. Being pressured to share your deepest struggles to a group of people you barely know is not accountability.

It’s “Enlightened Self-Criticsm before Party Commissars”.

Or (in Scientology) a mix of “Auditing Session”, “Bear Baiting”, and “Gang Bang Sec Check”.

mirele wrote:

dee wrote:

But still hanging out here. I am glad. I really enjoy your comments.

Of course. If I left only HUG would be here to remind people about how some church practices are downright Scientological.

When your church practices remind people of Scientology, that’s NOT a good sign.

Daisy wrote:

Usually men will treat other men with much more respect and hear another man out far more than they will a woman.

That has been my experience. I sent something regarding mutualism to a pastor and he gave a one sentence response and never said another word to me about it. Pretty dismissing attitude.

Law Prof wrote:

the ESV translation

Definitely the sword of choice in New Calvinist ranks! The no-commentary ESV is harmless enough, but the ESV Study Bible is particularly encouraged in reformed works … it comes loaded with Calvinist commentary. You know you are in a New Calvinist work if you observe the multitude carrying ESV bibles, note the pastor exclusively using this version in his expository, hear a lot of Piper Points in the hallway, see reference to preaching and teaching elders in the bulletin, and are asked to sign your Christian liberties away by putting your John Henry on a membership covenant.

I thought I was done with bible version insanity when I left the KJVO nonsense.

Then the neocals and their ESV study bibles showed up.

Florence in KY wrote:

Forgive me if this has already been posted. I just ran into it on Facebook.
https://soteriology101.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/calvinism-in-the-southern-baptist-convention/

This is FABULOUS!! I hope it goes viral!

@ Jeff S:
Gramp3 and I look exactly like a textbook Complementarian couple without the hierarchy. It is because we are mutually respectful and mutually loving. He is a natural leader, and I am not. Spiritual issues we discuss together. The thing is that I don’t think that every marriage needs to look exactly the same. I think that our creative God loves diversity of expressions of his goodness and his image.

I’m going to agree and disagree about Galatians. No one text is a killer text for either “side” of the issue, IMO. However, the overall message of Galatians is not just Jew/Gentile but rather the whole idea of social hierarchies being of no value in the Kingdom. There is no privileged position in the Kingdom according to human social arrangements which tend to be hierarchical. So, in that sense, the principle to be extracted from Paul’s teaching of the Galatians is very applicable to the gender issue.

I just wish they would get on with it and start raising money by selling plenary gender indulgences. Because they have made being female an unpardonable sin.

Jeff S wrote:

I totally agree. And I think I’ve mentioned, that I really *am* the “spiritual leader” in my home. That is, I generally take responsibility for a lot of the spiritual activities in our house and family. And my wife does tend to look to me to do these things. But the key is the *basis* for this dynamic, and it isn’t because of our genders, but how God has gifted and led us to this point. The sad thing is, we may not look that different from a lot of complementarian couples, but the underlying principle means so much.

Now imagine the scenario for a family in a comp church if the woman is the gifted and natural spiritual leader in the home? The children, husband and wife can all be denigrated in a church that views this as sinful.

@ Patrice:

I want you to know that I greatly admire your courage. Not all would tell their story on a public forum as you have done. Funny, but after reading it, Madonna’s song Live to Tell started playing in my head. Please don’t think it trite or disrespectful. There’s much to be said for Madonna’s work as an artist and a wordsmith.

GovPappy wrote:

It’s amazing skimming through some of these stories y’all are sharing. Wish I had time to go through and comment on each one.

Agreed.
I also found a lot of similar stories from my own community. Most won’t engage as they probably get back a load of platitudes but scratch the surface and there is a lot of disillusionment. Listening is a lost art in many churches.

Bridget wrote:

lydia wrote:

Law Prof wrote:
find John who tells me that I am not in need of teachers, as I have one teacher, the Holy Spirit.
Some pastors are not real fond of having that passage mentioned. I know first hand from a few years back. :o)

In 35 years I have never heard a teaching on Sunday morning covering these scriptures.

My Sunday school teacher at my former sbc church dealt with it very fairly one morning. I don’t agree with them on everything, but at very least they have the idea down that they’re mainly a complement to the believer’s growth, not the primary source.

But other than that, I don’t think I’ve ever heard it approached.

There is no reason that a group of people can’t say, the local church here has been hurtful and we can’t go back, there are “x” number of us who feel/experienced that. The NT calls us to gather and have a part of our christian life and witness “these” things, so let’s do it.

I look forward to the day when I see Hebrews 10:24-25 used as encouragement and not as a weapon against those who’ve been hurt by the church.

Law Prof wrote:

the ESV translation

Nowt wrong with the ESV translation. It’s the readers that are the problem …

From reading the accounts of Tullian, I was struck by one of the paragraphs in the Washington Post article:

Before he became senior pastor of the Fort Lauderdale congregation, Tchividjian’s church plant, New City, merged with the larger Coral Ridge. Seven months in, a group of church members, headed by Kennedy’s daughter, circulated a petition calling for his removal. Church members voted 69 percent to 31 percent to keep him, but a group of congregants formed a new church in response.

This sounds like one of those YRR take-overs of an established church. Is that what happened?

@ Bill M:
Recently had a good friend tell me I was the first person who hadn’t blown her off or laughed at her for sharing doubts, or even the fact that she had doubts about things.

I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. The heck are churches teaching these days?

Daisy wrote:

Charity wrote:
They sit face to face, and are able to share, and discuss the bible and learn without the condemnation and manipulations that the corporate church placed upon them before they were “done”.
I have heard some Christians criticize this manner of Bible teaching, Bible sharing, or study.
They don’t like it when a group of Christians sit around in a small circle, read a verse or chapter aloud, then turn to the group and say, “What does this passage mean TO YOU.”
The critics of this approach believe there is only one set way or correct way to interpret any particular passage.
To a point, I think they are right, as I am not in complete agreement with those who think that the entire Bible is up for grabs, but.
I see entire denominations in the Protestant tradition who disagree with each other – churches and denominations that are headed by one or two guys in charge – and they differ over certain passages or verses.
So how is that any better than the little group of average Jane and average Joe Christians trying to make sense of the Bible?
Are these critics just more comfortable with the idea of possibly incorrect hermeneutics done at the official, corporate, large group denominational level, than they are when it comes from among small groups of Average Joes and Janes in someone’s house?
Why do they think big mistakes at a big level are better or safer than little mistakes at a smaller level?

For us, we will have bible commentary, and study with Matthew Henry and other books, guides, etc. in addition to just our bibles. But, we will not have just one position crammed down our throats (i.e. many of us came out of prosperity gospel, tongue speaking churches and reject that theology).

We may not be theologians but we are not alone now, in the wilderness and perhaps, sitting together will help one another heal the wounds of the past. I am sure there are many pastors that will claim that we are not “educated enough” with their theological training, but so far, we have heard so little theological training put to use in the evangelical prosperity tongue speaking AOG churches we attended in our area. Others experiences may vary of course, I can only speak of our area and experiences.

@ Florence in KY:

About everything that guy says about Southern Baptist leadership pushing out Traditionalists to favor Calvinists can also apply to Southern Baptists (and other groups) marginalizing adult singles and favoring married couples.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

When your church practices remind people of Scientology, that’s NOT a good sign.

Not just Scientology, but some Christian biblical interpretations I see on some subjects reminds me of either Mormonism or Islam.

@ Law Prof:

Let me be clear. There is NO WHERE in the NT that says, Everyone must meet on Sunday for 1-3 hours if they are to be a good christian.

But how do you go from that to missing that the description of the church in the NT did have very clear indications of what was occurring, and while not a definitive prescription of the first order, it is very clear on what the Church looked like…

1- Appointment of Elders and Deacons who were responsible for(amongst a number of things); 1- Teaching scripture, 2- “protecting” the flock, 3-leading the community, 4- organizing and facilitating the helping of those in needs(widows, orphans, etc)

Paul even goes on to detail how to have an orderly gathering in 1 Corinthians 14.

The NT is written entirely in the context and assumption that those who are followers of Christ are in some recognizable capacity within a regular gathering.

To jump to the conclusion that the regular gathering of believers is totally unnecessary and not described in the NT is sort of like if I wrote a book on a healthy marriage and people were like, “Oh, I guess you don’t have to actually live WITH your spouse”. I wouldn’t feel it necessary to make a long drawn out case about living with your spouse because the natural assumption would be that you were.

Adam Borsay wrote:

K.D. wrote:

Adam, wait until you’re 55+ and read what you’ve written. You’ll have a totally different look at stuff.
—–
What would I see differently? Not at all meaning to sound facetious. But I am convinced that the NT clearly indicates that the regular, organized and deliberate gathering of believers is the normative. How would 20 more years of life convince me otherwise?

In 20+ years churches will not care if you attend or not. Now they want you because you’re a millennial. Yes, a deliberate gathering of believers is normative, but too many churches work at gathering in only SOME of the believers.

I grew up very active in a moderately evangelical UMC, and had been an active member (served on Trustees & Administrative Council, choir member) of an urban UMC for many years, but went through church-shopping a few years ago when I moved. I was shocked at how little churches (not just UMC) cared about bringing in someone who was actively seeking church membership.

It never occurred to me before I moved that finding a church would be so hard. Yes, there are lots of types of churches in the area and I have found one whose preaching & liturgy & classes are great but the music is soul-suckingly depressing (and I truly like a wide spectrum of music genres). I’ve found another with some pretty good music but not much else. Though almost everyone in these churches looks just like me, I want, but haven’t found, any that reflect the wide diversity of my community as my old church did. Also, not everyone thinks social justice issues should be limited to (or even include) the typical pro-life Sunday and support for a crisis pregnancy center. I recognize that no single church is perfect, but I would settle on one of these churches if any one of them made the slightest effort to reach out beyond a Sunday morning handshake or gift baggie with an expensively produced DVD patting themselves on the back about how friendly and diverse they are.

Please understand that when you appear to not be able to appreciate any experience or perspective other than your own, that’s, IMO, part of the problem.

Daisy wrote:

I don’t know about you, but sometimes it feels like the cruddy or insensitive responses you get from Christians hurts more than the original thing or original incident was that you are reaching out to help for in the first place.

Totally agree. A person experiences abuse but believes that the rest of the world will be different than that small situation. When further experience turns out to be only more versions of abuse/neglect/shunning, a precious hope dies.

These abused people are left to their own devices, knowing very well that they aren’t really adequate to the task. Surprisingly, they often do get through, but with some deep scars, one of which is a deep (and practical) distrust of others.

That’s why it doesn’t make sense to expect such people to go out and build churches of their own. They’d have to believe there is benefit to it, but outside their forlorn wishes, they have found very little.

If church was the only way one could worship God, be a testimony to the Light, and live in joy with Him, then these abused people would be up sh*t creek. But God is very good indeed; it isn’t the only way. 🙂

refugee wrote:

This sounds like one of those YRR take-overs of an established church. Is that what happened?

The New Calvinist movement is rapidly establishing itself via two avenues: (1) new church plants, and (2) takeover of established non-Calvinist churches. The first pathway is an easier row to hoe – young reformed pastors can easily plant their theology and set up reformed belief and practice with few obstacles (New Calvinism is more about planting theology than churches). The takeover approach requires deception to gain control of a non-Calvinist church – the SBC is full of horror stories about young militants lying to pulpit search committees about their theological persuasion … and then proceeding to split the church. While the takeover strategy has more weeeping and gnashing of teeth associated with it, a successful young reformer can capture church resources that a previous generation paid for! I suspect the Kennedy family had concerns about Tullian’s motives in this regard … and must now feel justified for their actions to split and form another church. Unfortunately, the church assets Dr. Kennedy labored for so faithfully remains in New Calvinist hands.

Bridget wrote:

lydia wrote:
Law Prof wrote:
find John who tells me that I am not in need of teachers, as I have one teacher, the Holy Spirit.
Some pastors are not real fond of having that passage mentioned. I know first hand from a few years back. :o)
In 35 years I have never heard a teaching on Sunday morning covering these scriptures.

In fact, I heard the following from the pulpit in a neocal at which I was an elder: “The Scriptures tell us that you need teachers!”

The sermon was one of those set-the-laity-straight-because-there’s-been-some-divisive-questioning-of-the-anointed-leaders sermons, it was specifically cited to answer some concerns from many of us pew-dwellers about all of the teaching being controlled in a top-down manner and whether we all ought to instead submit one to another. The preacher in this case had specifically said that “submit one to another” in the Scriptures specifically did not apply to the leaders, that taken in proper context, we were supposed to submit solely to them, a pure one-sided affair.

Of course the Bible sets out some as teachers, and prophets, and so on through the various gifts. But at the end of the day we have One Teacher, and He’s from above and He works through the Holy Spirit in us, which is why the systems that Adam defends are dead on wrong and I personally believe are driven by forces very much opposed to the true Church and are seeking to marginalize it or destroy it if possible.

Gram3 wrote:

Also, a long time ago Andy Stanley taught the permanence view of marriage

Yep. I’m listening to a sermon about it right now that they sent me. That’s pretty much a dealbreaker.

But they did tell me that had female elders on staff. Perhaps I misunderstood- it was a few months ago I asked.

Max wrote:

Definitely the sword of choice in New Calvinist ranks!

The ESVonlyists. I don’t think they believe that the ESV is a translation, as a practical matter. Grudem practically invented Koine in their view.

Gram3 wrote:

Also, a long time ago Andy Stanley taught the permanence view of marriage which we discovered from a sermon by another pastor who cited him

Of course you know his father is Charles Stanley, who was, IIRC, strongly against divorce and said he’s step down from the pulpit if he ever got divorced. Until his wife divorced him. Then he changed his tune on divorce.

Adam Borsay wrote:

why aren’t any of these millions of people establishing NT churches? Again, not to speak to any one individuals personal story, but statistically speaking, shouldn’t there at least be an observable trend of these dones establishing at the very least home based small churches that pursue the NT description of the life of a christian? IE, teaching the word, evangelism, discipling, serving their community, etc.

Because I’m an attorney and not a preacher or teacher. Starting a church is a huge undertaking that very few people are called to do. It’s not that I wouldn’t give my time and effort to a church but it can’t be a full-time occupation in addition to my day job. I have long been good at caffeine-fueled all-nighters but not everyone is or not everyone is good at them at every stage of their lives.

Your arguments make it sound as if you who can’t appreciate where other people are in life. I’ve certainly been guilty of doing that as well.

Daisy wrote:

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
When your church practices remind people of Scientology, that’s NOT a good sign.
Not just Scientology, but some Christian biblical interpretations I see on some subjects reminds me of either Mormonism or Islam.

LOL! I can totally resonate with both your responses..

Case in point, I can remember my old church something like this

“We are having a week long bible study series in the evenings. For just a mere $300, reserve your seat for this great bible event!” (yes, this really happened at my old church)

Later the next week: “Hey, did you go to that study, bla bla bla”… Me: “No, I could not afford the $300 to go”… Them: “Oh, well how are you supposed to know the word of God, if you don’t attend?”. Me: Head Desk!

And the series was usually something on financial prosperity and tithing. So, you had to pay $300, to go to a class, to teach you how to give more to your church so God could bless you with more financial blessings…

@ Gram3:

As to the Galatians passage, the issue of “full inheritance” just does not resonate today as it would have then. It is a big deal. And when it comes to male/female it is not “nor” it is “and”. Which is Gen 1!

Catholic Home-Schooler wrote:

And it’s certainly not because the pastor regards his sermon as the be-all and end-all of the service.

This reminds me of this Tweet:

C.J. Mahaney
‏@CJMahaney
The most important moment each week in the life of the Christian is the preaching event in the local church.
https://twitter.com/CJMahaney/status/612577887431094273

dee wrote:

Adam Borsay wrote:

If the church wants to look like it used to “50” years ago then start behaving like it did 50 years ago.
——
You mean like endorsing Jim Crow and all that stuff?

Exactly! Most churches have given up support for Jim Crow but too many still think Leave it to Beaver is the fifth Gospel. They even invented the term “complementarian” to make it sound Biblical©

K.D. wrote:

The ” New Bloods” could care less about the older members. Their mantra is sit down, shut up and give your tithe. We don’t care about your problems, we don’t care about witnessing to people your age.

I think I mentioned on this blog over a year ago a book I found on a book selling site.

The title was something like “Who Stole My Church.”

The back cover blurb, IIRC, said things like, “Have your old hymns been replaced by rock and roll and laser shows, you’ve told church leadership this bothers you, they don’t care, and you find this upsetting? This is the book for you.”

At first glance, you would assume that this book was for older believers who were being marginalized or kicked out of their churches and how to remedy this.

But upon closer inspection, the elderly people who left reviews said that the book was a big example of Cat Fishing or bait and switch.

When they read the book, they say it actually says that church should only be for younger people and unbelievers – so sit down, shut up, keep giving your tithes, and if it takes rock music and laser shows to bring in the kids, then get over it already.

XianAtty wrote:

In 20+ years churches will not care if you attend or not. Now they want you because you’re a millennial.

I agree with this.

When the last millennial turns 30, 35, or maybe 40 years old, churches will have already moved on to the next group of then-twenty-somethings (unless they continue to perceive millennials as a cash cow).

I think this is true of many churches too:
Marketers Create Mania over Millennials
http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/marketers-create-mania-over-millennials/

lydia wrote:

@ Gram3:
As to the Galatians passage, the issue of “full inheritance” just does not resonate today as it would have then. It is a big deal. And when it comes to male/female it is not “nor” it is “and”. Which is Gen 1!

Galatians 3:28 could be plausibly read as an escalating set. People might see how Jew/Gentile did not matter, but the difference between slaves and masters? Probably would have been conceptually difficult. But no male or female? That goes to our very identities, and that would be unthinkable. Paul, who was skilled in rhetoric, would know this. I need to check the interlinear, but I believe that the no male/female grammar is different from the two other pairs.

Daisy wrote:

@CJMahaney
The most important moment each week in the life of the Christian is the preaching event in the local church.
https://twitter.com/CJMahaney/status/612577887431094273

I think that thinking Christian heads are going to crash clear through desks with that tweet. Perhaps Mahaney and Piper are in a tweet-off competition? Julie Anne’s reply is a classic.

Gram3 wrote:

But I think it is a mistake to think that God is restricted to acting mostly within a recognizable organization. That does not make sense to me personally.

Agreed! I’ve had more opportunities to share my faith since I left the organization known as church. J.B. Phillips wrote a book entitled, “Your God is Too Small” years ago and if anyone threatens that He only or even primarily works within the confines of brick and mortar, their God is too small.

Gram3 wrote:

I’m going to agree and disagree about Galatians. No one text is a killer text for either “side” of the issue, IMO. However, the overall message of Galatians is not just Jew/Gentile but rather the whole idea of social hierarchies being of no value in the Kingdom. There is no privileged position in the Kingdom according to human social arrangements which tend to be hierarchical. So, in that sense, the principle to be extracted from Paul’s teaching of the Galatians is very applicable to the gender issue.

Fair enough, and I don’t disagree with any of this.

I guess I’ll just say that I think the line from “love one another is the most important” to “no hierarchy based on a person’s being” is a bit straighter in my mind.

@ Jeff S:
by “straighter”, I actually mean “shorter”.

@ Denise:

I relate. I hesitate now before opening up to people in person.

On the internet, it’s not so bad, since you can lurk for days or weeks to get a feel of how others on a forum or blog will react to what you say, but in face- to- face meetings, or on the phone? It’s much more dicey.

Gus wrote:

No, you are actually a treasure, a wonderful person who deserves any help and understanding you can get. The fact that those prosperity heretics don’t understand that is a judgment on them, not on you. Thank you for all that you do!

You just made me cry, in a good way! God Bless YOU! 🙂

Adam Borsay wrote:

If I found myself in an environment where there was legitimately zero faithful and healthy churches within a reasonable distance, I would start something myself.

Now again, I’m not a “none” (yet). However, if I were to run out of churches (my two biggest leads right now just went kaput), the idea of starting something myself is . . . terrifying. I don’t feel remotely mature enough to try something like that.

@ Victorious:

Thank you for the warm welcome!

XianJaneway wrote:

@ Jeff S:
Me too–a guitar player for 20 years now. It’s so hard. Even in multi-racial churches, they say music is the most difficult bridge to build, and the most frequent source of conflict. They joke that when Satan was cast down from heaven, he landed in the choir loft.

I am part of the late-Boomer generation that first brought drums & guitars into the sanctuary in the 1970s and loved both the contemporary group AND the Chancel Choir. When I don’t like something now I try to remember how horrified some of the older folks were when we were first rocking out in church and try to broaden my musical horizons. Now, I look for musical diversity in part because as others have said, if you just have one type of music exclusively it effectively winnows out people who are really set on another type. Same for music from other cultures and ethnicities. I agree with you that music can be the most difficult bridge.

Re Satan landing in the choir loft. LOL! Hadn’t heard that one before, but from years of sitting there, I can agree that Stan reared his ugly head from time to time.

@ Law Prof:

I appreciate your desire to interact with me. If you feel as if I am being dismissive of you or anyone else’s viewpoint, that is not my intent.

I don’t think there is something “magical” about Elders and church “structures”. The reference to leadership and deliberateness in the early church is through out the entirety of the NT. That does not therefore mean that the brick and mortar normative of Western Christianity is the end all and be all. If someone said they were done going to “x” institutional church that would simply warrant further discussion. Not a blanket condemnation. If they were indeed, as you described, fellowshipping with other Christians for the purpose of study, edification and application of scripture together—regardless of the context(house, coffee shop, skype etc) I would not believe that to be outside of the stream of NT teaching.

When we see how much of the church world wide has to function, especially in totalitarian regimes like the former USSR and China, it clearly was not even possible to go to a good old brick and mortar location. Yet, they still functionally gathered together to the best of their ability. There wasn’t, and isn’t, a movement in these locations of people saying, “here is your bible, your a christian now, talk to you later” They put into practice the gathering together described in the NT even at great risk to themselves. If the “Done” movement is completely in the right in completely pulling up stakes from the regular gathering of believers what are we telling our suffering brothers and sister who were/are literally willing to be arrested and killed for the sake of gathering together?

I don’t presume to be some sort of youthful guru who old folks are lucky to learn from. The reason I am not in a parachurch ministry is my personal Biblical conviction that the multigenerational church is where we should be as believers. I am gifted(not that I am indicating that I am amazing by any means) in teaching and communicating scripture, not in espousing my own views and interpretations. Our elder board has an average age of around 60 and I consider them to be above me if we were to give artificial hierarchial structure to it. Until recently I was actually the only pastor of a small rural church with mostly older folks, and we decided to merge with a sister church in our area(for a number of reasons) and I happily took on a secondary role to their Sr Pastor who is in his 60’s and has been there since the 70’s. I don’t have any need to be in charge or have people listen to me. They are going to bring me in “permanently” in the next few weeks and asked what my long term plans were, and I could honestly say that I don’t care about being a senior pastor, that isn’t some sort of “career” goal. I just want to serve where God has me with the gifts I have been given and I will joyfully do what ever they need me to do. And one of my main roles is leading the “stretcher bearers” ministry where I spent a large chunk of my time in local nursing homes. Even though I am only 33 I have a reputation in the community as “that nursing home guy”.

I say all that to circle back to; Either scripture lays out a description of “this” is what christian community looks like, or, not. Regardless of ones personal experiences and perspectives, it doesn’t change what scripture says. If I am wrong about that, then show me in scripture. Not to be argumentative, but appealing to experiences and “age” does not convince me that scripture doesn’t say what I believe it says.

Now, that doesn’t absolve church “leaders” from being sensitive towards peoples experiences when we think about “how” we do church. We shouldn’t be adding millstones to peoples necks to enter into community as described by scripture. i am a big believer in keeping it simple and to not think of any thing we choose to do in our personal practices as sacrosanct.

@ Charity:

That whole thing sounds like a scam. That’s for sure.

Adam Borsay wrote:

But how do you go from that to missing that the description of the church in the NT did have very clear indications of what was occurring, and while not a definitive prescription of the first order, it is very clear on what the Church looked like…

Actually it is not real clear as in a command form. That is why when people obtained freedom from the thousand year reign of a state church political system, hundreds of “denominations” bloomed – not to mention the anti denominational types.

Some scholars have pointed to the church in Corinth that operated for quite a while (some say 9 years) with no discernable elders unless you want to include Chloe because “she had people”. :o) who were the elders at Philippi? Lydia?

We are a long way from Jew/Gentile gatherings in the 1st century and all the chaos that would naturally bring. Not only that but we live in a literate age. We don’t really need ” special” people to read and interpret for us. Now, someone wise and mature actually operating in the real world can be a great model for others. But even that changes as others mature. I tend to think scripture focused on functions not offices.

And none of this is what I am seeing in the institutions on a broad scale. Maybe more of us have questioned the typical definition if pastor/elder and did more digging.

Max wrote:

Only for those who have been redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb. Until then, we only have human intellect and reason to guide us, not the Holy Spirit who leads us into all Truth.

Hi Max, I appreciate your forthright statement. Since I’m guessing you have this discernment, I have a question if you’d like to take a stab at it. There are 30,000+ different denominations, all with their own particular take on Christianity. So which one has the right discernment? Which ones are the ones that have been “redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb”?

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

Hi Max, I appreciate your forthright statement. Since I’m guessing you have this discernment, I have a question if you’d like to take a stab at it. There are 30,000+ different denominations, all with their own particular take on Christianity. So which one has the right discernment? Which ones are the ones that have been “redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb”?

The ones who Agree 1000% with Max in everything, of course.

Daisy wrote:

This reminds me of this Tweet:
C.J. Mahaney
‏@CJMahaney
The most important moment each week in the life of the Christian is the preaching event in the local church.
https://twitter.com/CJMahaney/status/612577887431094273

HUMBLY, of course (chuckle chuckle).

Charity wrote:

Later the next week: “Hey, did you go to that study, bla bla bla”… Me: “No, I could not afford the $300 to go”… Them: “Oh, well how are you supposed to know the word of God, if you don’t attend?”. Me: Head Desk!
And the series was usually something on financial prosperity and tithing. So, you had to pay $300, to go to a class, to teach you how to give more to your church so God could bless you with more financial blessings…

Did they spend this series holding the cans of a Hubbard E-Meter?

Because additional charges as you go Up the Bridge is very Elron.

Gram3 wrote:

Because they have made being female an unpardonable sin.

Yes, Jesus died for all sins, except the sin of Eve. If they really believed in the saving power of Jesus, they wouldn’t be so exclusive.

“Jesus died for somebody’s sins but not mine” – Patti Smith “Gloria” (1975)

Daisy wrote:

@ Bridget:

I wonder, if you made up an e-mail address with G-mail, Hot Mail, or whatever, under a male name or a neutral name, and identified yourself as a “male guest who wishes to be anonymous” and sent that guy the same or similar material, he’d probably give it a fair hearing.

Back when publishing was a Boy’s Club, female authors used to routinely take male or neuter pseudonyms to get published.

@ Jeff S:
No argument from me. Someone tells me they’re a Christian I take them at their word. However Max was saying that only those who are saved with the blood of the Lamb have discernment in response to Mirele bringing up that discernment isn’t the most reliable measure for a lot of people. I’m interested in his take on what he’s discerned from his as position on the Holy Spirit as the right way to do Christianity.

Jeff S wrote:

Anyway, I don’t necessarily agree with the idea that God only answers believers . . .

Oh like the universalists? Or the Caloremen in the last book of the Chronicles of Narnia?

Brad wrote: “If you’ve been following this issue and discussions about the *Church Refugees* book in social media, you’ve probably seen some attempts to distinguish some sub-categories.

Not all “dones” are survivors of spiritual abuse, and vice versa.”

This gets lots of attention, but there may be a whole iceberg of Dones that are leaving for reasons other than spiritual abuse.

Muff Potter wrote:

Not all would tell their story on a public forum as you have done. Funny, but after reading it, Madonna’s song Live to Tell started playing in my head.

It doesn’t take much courage to tell my story because I’m long gone from those circles and my current life is sturdier than it’s ever been. Plus since I’m disabled, I no longer have anything, career-wise, to lose by the story being told.

I’ve recently had several conversations about privacy and boundaries. People draw lines differently. I am still learning to draw them better in my personal life but publicly I don’t care.

I think Madonna is a fascinating highly talented mess. How can she not be, when she also sings:

“A man can tell a thousand lies
I’ve learned my lesson well
Hope to live to tell
The secret I have learned, ’till then
It will burn inside of me….

Will it grow cold
The secret that I hide, will I grow old?
How will they hear?
When will they learn?
How will they know?”

So thanks for the compliment.

Adam Borsay wrote:

Either scripture lays out a description of “this” is what christian community looks like, or, not. Regardless of ones personal experiences and perspectives, it doesn’t change what scripture says. If I am wrong about that, then show me in scripture. Not to be argumentative, but appealing to experiences and “age” does not convince me that scripture doesn’t say what I believe it says.

You’re not wrong about what scripture says, although I think your interpretation of it is unnecessarily narrow.

But, you’re wrong about how easy it is to find or start anything like what scripture calls for. Most of us want to find a community of believers (in some fashion) to join. It’s our life experience in searching and finding (or not) that you can’t seem to appreciate.

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

Anyway, I don’t necessarily agree with the idea that God only answers believers . . .
Oh like the universalists? Or the Caloremen in the last book of the Chronicles of Narnia?

Well, I’m just saying that it seems God does communicate with unbelievers in scripture, so I don’t see there being a wall of communication that only comes down when you become a believer. But I do think that only believers (in the invisible church) are indwelt with the Holy Spirit.

lydia wrote:

@ Patrice:
What is happening is not really measurable. That leaves the institutions to interpret the exodus. Sadly.

IMO, for the majority of them, if the data was collected in full, diagrammed, venned, summarized, printed, collated, bound, and handed to them in person, they wouldn’t read/interpret it correctly. It would require them to dismantle a complete system of life, and that is too much to risk.

In many ways, they are the rich young ruler.

Patrice wrote:

It would require them to dismantle a complete system of life, and that is too much to risk.

Exactly right.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Because additional charges as you go Up the Bridge is very Elron.

Don’t you get to meet Xenu or something when you get to the end of the bridge? Or Tom Cruise? (I’m not up on all things Scientology.)

@ Charity:

I’m glad you at least got something positive out of the bad church experiences. 🙂

@ Charity:

Hi Charity – I am so glad my words were helpful to you! Stick around here, and I believe you will find deep healing and understanding. And further, your story and words can help heal others. How sweet it is to know that one is not alone, that the problem is not you!

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

The ones who Agree 1000% with Max in everything, of course.

I agree with HUG. 1000% 😉

@ Bridget:

You raise another good point. Christianity is banned in other nations, or very limited.

So some Christians cannot meet at a weekly meeting with elders, deacons and in a building with a steeple.

Would Adam B. argue that their meetings are less than, or not as good, or something?

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

So which one has the right discernment?

Denominations don’t have discernment, individuals do.

I don’t know if this is another topic Deb and Dee would ever want to take on, but so many Christians either deal with those in grief inappropriately, or just want to brush other people’s grief under the carpet.

I thought this lady’s open letter to preacher Joel Osteen was on target.

I have experienced some of the very things in this that she mentions, but by other Christians, as I’ve tried to grapple with the death of my family member. It’s been one of several things that has pushed me away from the faith and reluctant to go to a church.

Dear Pastor Joel Osteen: You Owe Me and Millions an Apology
http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/why-megachurch-pastor-joel-osteen-owes-an-apology/

I would like to quote her entire page (it is really that good, IMO), but will limit it to just a part:

Shame on you, Pastor Osteen, for lecturing us to shake off the self-pity, change the channel, and dwell on the good things God has done in our life.
To ignore the suffering victim who suddenly had his right arm severed would be cruel.
To instruct him to look past the agony and instead focus on his remaining left arm is devastatingly ignorant.

There are Christians who may be in grief who are driven away from churches or the Christian faith itself, when their grief is handled in an insensitive manner.

Adam Borsay wrote:

If the “Done” movement is completely in the right in completely pulling up stakes from the regular gathering of believers what are we telling our suffering brothers and sister who were/are literally willing to be arrested and killed for the sake of gathering together?

It is interesting to think, as I’ve been contemplating my current situation, how I would handle it if my church were literally the only church around. If I didn’t have the freedom to just be done and “shop” for a new church. In that case, rather than leave, I would probably be more willing to “cause trouble” and argue for a change within, rather than seeking another church that more aligns with my beliefs. And as I’ve considered this, I wonder what that means. Is the illusion of being able to find “just the right church” something that enables churches to languish in bad teaching? Because people can just leave rather than invest in relationships (which is he point of my worship pastor)?

TWW has all of these posts about membership contracts and such, and all of that is because we can move on to new churches when we find them disagreeable. But people you are describing don’t have that option. Churches don’t have to try and keep them from moving on or worry about “releasing” them.

So all this comes back to my current struggle: What is the breaking point? What points do you divide over? When do you stay and work toward the will of God being done at the church level, and when to leave and go find churches already doing that will? And what is worth sacrificing for the sake of peace?

@ Daisy:
They already have, but only the upper echelons know about them, or maybe i shoild say knew. The internet is a deal-breaker that way.

L. Ron Hubbard was writing bad sci-fi prior to becoming a cult leaddr.

Max wrote:

takeover of established non-Calvinist churches. The first pathway is an easier row to hoe – young reformed pastors can easily plant their theology and set up reformed belief and practice with few obstacles (New Calvinism is more about planting theology than churches). The takeover approach requires deception to gain control of a non-Calvinist church – the SBC is full of horror stories about young militants lying to pulpit search committees about their theological persuasion … and then proceeding to split the church.

Here’s what bothers me…I’m reading on this blog and so many others about SBC take over by Neo-Calvinists. The SBC is not the only denomination dealing with this problem. I’ve been involved in the Evangelical Free Church in my past and this is tearing about the Evangelical Free. There are a number of churches in the DC area that are Evangelical Free that have moved in this direction. You can find Evangelical Free on the 9 Marks locater. But the Evangelical Free is largely forgotten or not talked about. A lot of Neo-Cals are going out of Trinity Evangelical which is to the Evangelical Free what Southern Seminary or SEBTS is to the SBC.

@ Bridget:

My point is if the the regular and deliberate gathering of Christians for the purpose of to the best of their/our ability to reflect the picture of the church in the NT is completely unnecessary why in the world are they risking their lives for it.

For comparison, if some people were saying, we are willing to be killed to make sure we only use chardonnay for communion I would say, “are you crazy, who flipping cares??” If gathering together as the ‘church’ is not too important in the grand scheme of things shouldn’t we literally be begging our brothers and sisters to stop risking their and their families lives by continuing the practice??

Adam Borsay wrote:

If the “Done” movement is completely in the right in completely pulling up stakes from the regular gathering of believers what are we telling our suffering brothers and sister who were/are literally willing to be arrested and killed for the sake of gathering together?

First of all, the “Dones” are not an organized movement. They are finding one another on the internet but not in any organized way.

But the illustration you use is not really applicable to us, is it? If they had been free to assemble, over the decades they would most likely be facing some of the same issues the dones are facing as they evolved into institutionalization. I am having trouble understanding what you mean by “regular gathering of believers”. That says institution to me. Tradition (not always something wrong with that either but has a tendency to evolve in a caste system way)

I would say to them: Don’t institutionalize when you get free! :o)

My sister visited churches in China when traveling there years back. You know, the ones government approved. She said they reminded her of what was happening to churches in America where everyone has to be on the same page so to speak or they are breaking the rules.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Did they spend this series holding the cans of a Hubbard E-Meter?
Because additional charges as you go Up the Bridge is very Elron.

No, but usually after a heavy push for funds, and the collection plate passed around 5-6 times during a service, the pastor & his wife would take a luxurious vacation and the pastors wife would have a new Coach bag.

But yes, it was very “Scientology” in the way that one is charged to hear sermons and workshops through the church. It seemed like there was always some sort of marketing, or book selling, or “honor the pastor” days, where money was always involved. Don’t even get me going on the guest speaker racket with “faith healers” and such, and again, hold on to that checkbook!

Jeff S wrote:

I told her something my pastor said in the sermon about how women can empower or destroy a man’s work, and I asked her if it made her feel equal or valued.

I think the devaluation comes from the implicit assumption that a man cannot empower or destroy a woman’s work as well. And along with that is another one: The woman has a bent toward desiring to emasculate her husband or her pastor. That to me is the most corrosive part of the doctrine along with blaming God for the hierarchy rather than owning their own lust for power and control. The teaching that God designed women *for* men in the sense of for his purpose and use as an assistant to further the *real* work is another corrosive teaching.

I don’t know about your pastors, but the ones I approached could not or would not see how corrosive their teachings are to the souls of women. Most women are afraid to say anything lest they be accused or condemned for committing Eve’s Original Sin.

You might also email them a link to Wade Burleson’s excellent article on the Ephesian historical context. And you might ask them how they derive Complementarianism from Genesis 1-2, particularly 1:26-28. Their responses will tell you a lot about where their hearts are. It happens that I found mostly very hard hearts.

Max wrote:

Only for those who have been redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb. Until then, we only have human intellect and reason to guide us, not the Holy Spirit who leads us into all Truth.

I’ve seen a lot of people claim to be redeemed by the blood of the Lamb and to have the Holy Spirit as their guide. And they have led themselves and others down paths of folly, danger and illegality. You’ll pardon me if I choose to stay with human intellect and reason, along with personal experience and observation. It’s safer.

Adam Borsay wrote:

EVEN if we feel that being wrong in “that” particular” issue is completely wrong.

Yes, I get this. And in most cases, I’m willing to agree to disagree.

The problem now is, when I sat there this Sunday listening to the sermon, all I could think was how harmful the teaching was. That women were being devalued and harmed by his words. And my heart hurt.

Because it isn’t about theology- it’s about real people who have the image of God and are worthy of love. That I am called by God’s highest command to love.

I’ve thought a lot about what caused my emotional reaction. I wanted to test myself and understand was I feeling my views offended, or was it something more?

And I think it’s something more. It’s a desire for Godly justice to be done. To see women not subjugated, but to be elevated.

If a pastor said “a black man can either destroy or empower a white man’s work”, we ALL would feel sickened. We would know what was being taught and it was NOT good for the black man. That same radar is what was going off. Not because I am upset about a doctrine, but because I have dear sisters in the congregation who are being told their identity is found in being an appendage to a man.

Adam Borsay wrote:

For example, on a spectrum I am more comp than egal. But I don’t think your soul is in trouble, or that you are compromising the Gospel by disagreeing with me.

And to be clear, I think the pastors and people at my church are all believers and wonderful people. Good people do bad things. But the issue is what I am a part of, and if what I am a part of I believe is actually harming people . . . that’s what makes it difficult.

Adam Borsay wrote:

My point is if the the regular and deliberate gathering of Christians for the purpose of to the best of their/our ability to reflect the picture of the church in the NT is completely unnecessary why in the world are they risking their lives for it.

I have a pretty good understanding why just based on convos with converted Afghans and some others. And it is not what we tend to think of in terms of worship service or even education. There is a real focus on “helping each other” with some very basics in life with things going on that we cannot even fathom. It always made me think of Paul so zealous in gathering offerings for the Jerusalem believers who were being persecuted. He talked about it everywhere he went. They needed the money to exist!

My cousin went to Romania right after the tyrants were ousted and killed for humanitarian aid. She told me stories about the believers there operating in such an oppressive environment for so long. Examples such as :so and so had a cousin who worked at such and such ministry who could get this or that for a needy believer. They tended to function as an underground network to help people. Even down to mountain farmers sneaking meat to believers in the cities which they told as if really putting one over on the oppressors.

I sometimes think we have romanticized this to believe they went to great lengths to sneak around and meet only to pray and worship. It seems to be much more.

And that is sadly missing in most institutions. A great sound system is of great importance. Not the single mom who needs new brakes on her car. Of course, she is supposed to tithe, you know.

I think our institutions are pretty much the “gathering of believers” but backwards. Worshiping Jesus Christ entails living out the kingdom now and IS about what we “DO”. Yes, I know, a dirty work. Putting brakes on a single moms care would be “filthy rags”. Sigh.

Someone asked earlier if Tullian was a classic YRR takeover that caused the church split. While he is def more in the reformed camp, the problem they had is that Coral Ridge used to be one of the main “moral majority” churches and the previous pastor was BFF with Falwell back in the day. They were known to be highly political and overtly involved in partisan issues. Tullian said he wasn’t going to teach about why democrats are bad(my paraphrase) and dropped their “tv” broadcasting(which was very much like good ole pat robertson) and they old religious righters were po’d. THAT is why the church split happened.

@ Adam Borsay:

I kind of viewed is as two “celebrity cult of personality” cultures clashing.

@ Lydia:
Nailed it.

The insight I get from these comment sections is incredible sometimes.

Very good article. To me the issue isn’t so much with the church as it is with society. America has been feeding it’s kids the “You are Great!” mentality since the early 80s. The country has been focused on “me” for DECADES!

The last thirty years has raised a generation of unchurched people who have been told that they can be anything that they want and that “You DESERVE the good things in life.”. Now, we are trying to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to them.

Yup, fog machines, loud music and slick presentations will get them in the building. But what is the FRUIT of all of this?

The other issue I see with those calling themselves “christians” (and who do attend church regularly) is that, although they know scripture, they don’t practice that scripture in their individual lives.

So many are worldly in their life. I can’t begin to tell you about how many brag about their jobs, vacations and the incredible kids that they have and the schools that they are going to … but NEVER talk about Jesus.

We live in the Facebook world of one-upping each other, gossiping, slandering, and climbing over each other’s backs to get to the top of the ladder. Oh, we don’t think that we do, but we do.

Think about the 7 deadly sins (wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy and gluttony). Which of these are we calling out in the Christian church these days???

Gluttony? Have you seen the 4x4s in the parking lot hauling in people the size of cows? Goodness no. Don’t say anything. We might hurt their feelings!

Greed? Yes, we need that $10 million new building to serve Christ in this town! Nobody ever says “We need $3 million to build a soup kitchen in our town that will feed those in need”. Nobody!!!

Pride? My son got a 2200 on his SATs! My am I great! Look at my facebook post ..don’t my “ducky” lips look sexy in these tight pants? My daughter is goint to MIT in the fall! I just got promoted! ‘ll have $1.2 million dollars in the bank when I retire!

I haven’t heard a SINGLE sermon on any of those in yeras. Not a single one. Why? We don’t want to offend anyone with the truth of scripture.

As the American church continues to “entertain” the masses and follow “celebrity pastors”, we will continue to fall in to the pit that we ourselves have dug on our own.

There is no magic bullet for the church in the United States.

My hope is that the coming economic storms, plus the wars, will shake the church to its core and that many will come to, and return to Christ as the one and only hope that they have. Nothing short of Jesus’ return will get us off of our butts and back on our knees faster then death, destruction and despair.

Our government can’t save us. Our 401K can’t save us. That new Lexus can’t save us. My son’s entrance to an Ivy League school won’t save us. My perfect pastor can’t save us. Nothing can save us or the church! Except for Jesus.

Adam Borsay wrote:

And one of my main roles is leading the “stretcher bearers” ministry where I spent a large chunk of my time in local nursing homes. Even though I am only 33 I have a reputation in the community as “that nursing home guy”.

Having worked in several nursing homes many years ago as a nurses aide, I know how much visits are appreciated in that setting. One woman missed her granddaughter so much that she often asked me to sit on her lap so she would remember the closeness they had. I always accommodated her even though I felt a bit foolish. lol

Bless you for having such a reputation that reflects a caring heart! What you do to the least of these….you do unto Him.

I had struggled recently with going to church. I extracted myself some months ago from a church I’ve been a member of for 14 years. I relied on knowledge gained from TWW and asked , in writing, that the leaders desist from ringing me, texting me and calling to my home. I have been a Christian for 35 years and this is my second experience of serious spiritual abuse. I have started , gingerly, to attend another church. The teaching is very sound but I am not trendy , it is the least friendly church I have ever experienced yet when two good looking young adult members of my family came with me they were immediately welcomed, chatted to and asked to go for lunch. In discussing church I am very concerned for the children in my family, evangelicals are very thin on the ground where we live, church provides the children with a place where they can mix with others and know they are not alone. Deciding to stop attending a church is more daunting , I think, when there are children involved.Currently I steel myself before I go, I rely on a few faithful friends for deep, close Christian fellowship, I love TWW as it helps me realise my experiences are not unique. I want to see Jesus glorified, I want to love Him and follow Him with all my heart, soul, mind, body and strength. I want to survive as a believer, I’m putting one foot in front of the other.

@ Beakerj:

Thanks. I have not seen that!

Going back to the original post here:
“2. Practices from the 1980s and 1990s which still linger drive people away. These include:
Extreme political and social stances. Passive worship. Lack of true conversation about theological issues.”
Passive worship is one that gets me, and this is coming from a feller that still loves a good teaching sermon. It has always bothered me that you’re just expected to sit there and listen to the preacher for an hour in silence or in single-word affirmation, and this has been just about universal in my church experience. In every church but one, both Sunday school and all services, the preaching portion was completely passive. Just drink it in, and if you have a question, see me after the service (ha! Joke is on you, don’t you dare interrupt the preacher’s lunch schedule). No discussion. No pushback.

In contrast, one thing my old SBC church did well was actively encouraging audience participation during Sunday school and all services. Got a question, raise your hand and let it fly. Consequently, you could tell a difference in the level of pastoral preparation.

Just that little thing–opening up the floor throughout the meetings–changed the whole dynamic. Even the women could speak up, and this is a strong comp church! Men and women in the church could, and very often did, raise objections. The pastors stayed pretty honest. Really, it was a beautiful thing, and something I haven’t seen repeated yet. Even with the rest of the traditional southern Baptist trappings that I don’t care much for, that place still feels like home and family to me.

Just that alone could keep me from being Done. I’m a huge introvert, and sharing publicly is not my thing in the slightest, but even I was comfortable with speaking out from time to time. Now granted, I never questioned complementarianism there (I’m a recent convert), but still.

@ Law Prof:
I think that Adam’s heart is shown by his work at a nursing home. For a young guy to be known as “the nursing home” pastor is really something. I know of exactly one pastor who visits nursing homes and shut-ins and hospitals. I can tell you for sure I have not received such care from any pastors. And that pastor is paid to do only that by the rather large church. I think that we are, for some reason, talking past one another on this issue.

@ Gram3:
That was unclear. I meant that for some reason Adam and the rest of us are talking past one another on this issue. Adam is unlike the knotheads I’ve come across, including the one in my mirror.

@ Gram3:
I think if I had been here a year ago, I’d be saying the same things he was. Grace, time, and conversation work wonders. Not saying either he or the rest of us are wrong, but the fact that we can gracefully converse on the subject is awesome.

Gram3 wrote:

Adam is unlike the knotheads I’ve come across, including the one in my mirror.

You’ve got one in your mirror, too? Seems like they’re everywhere! 😉

I really do think Adam has some heart – I just wish he would think about his use of language. My last reply to him addresses a tendency in people that really gets to me – the use of totalizing language that inaccurately portrays his ‘opponents’ (that is how he seems to be thinking), setting up a straw man to knock down. Shades of gray are just swept away, and a real chance for useful discussion is gone.

It’s a very easy trap to fall into – that guy in the mirror does it now and then and I have to admonish him from time to time…

We were a member of a sovereign grace church in Maryland for over 5 years…. My daughter tried to join a care group but the kids ostracized her bec she didn’t appear to dress like them…or talk like them… I tried to serve on the worship team and was told no we already have a pianist… Tried to reapply but was told I needed to be in a care group… Just flat out rejection… Tithed for years…. Not one pastor ever called to visit us or contact us…this was a church that had Dave Harvey preach twice a year… Also very close ties to cj mahaney

FWIW, I think some of what complicates this entire discussion is that “church” (in the U.S. at least) is generally a combination of three distinct layers that are intertwined:

* Relational – personal connection, with enough freedom to accommodate both individual and group needs.

* Organizational – the non-profit tax-exempt entity, which brings with it specific requirements for formal organization to accommodate IRS regulations (e.g., mission statement, governance, financial accountability, etc.).

* Institutional – a legacy to pass on to next generations. (Not talking liturgical practices or abstract theological systems here — but, ideally, the legacy of a missional mindset that cares about living out the Kingdom, and transformed lives through purposeful discipleship and mentoring.)

There may be issues at each level that contribute to people staying as “nones,” becoming “dones,” or moving toward “gone” from Christianity entirely. i think it would help to consider each level when thinking through what potentially contributes to people going in any of these directions — and therefore what constructive things can be done to prevent that, if it isn’t already too late because the leaders and/or system won’t allow it.

What I believe contributes to an environment that pushes faithful people toward becoming “dones” is a collapse in the foundational layer of concrete personal relationship and an over-building of abstract systems and frozen-in-time structures.

* The flexibility aspects of the relational element get de-emphasized. Or there’s been a significant disconnection so that “church” and “ministry” are very impersonal.

* The governance, strategy, and structural aspects of the organizational element get overemphasized. It becomes about leaders, rules, and regulations — in other words, control.

* The institutional legacy element shifts toward being institutionalized, which means what lasts and gets passed on is a system and structures and financial assets, but not so much the assets of the heart and spirit and community. It requires recipients of the legacy to fit a specific mold. This means the whole system has become so inflexible that it cannot survive in a world of change. It’s unsustainable — it turns out disciples who are culture-bound to the present and develop little ability to discern the times and make wise decisions about what to do in the future.

When the organizational and institutional aspects overshadow the personal ones, it no longer matters what unique spiritual gifts and ministry passions the Holy Spirit has endowed to individual disciples or to the community as a whole. It becomes about mechanistic maintaining of other things, not sustaining the vibrancy of the spiritual community. No one person can impact The System any longer. How does one stay a faithful disciple when you are denied the use of your spiritual gifts and what looks like “participation” doesn’t actually promote the Kingdom? When you’ve come to a question like that, you’re probably almost done.

And while that kind of combination of relational-organizational-institutional is dehumanizing, it isn’t necessarily at the same level as spiritual abuse. But, when you add malignant ministers who are devoid of conscience, compassion, and character into the picture — and theologies that make false/artificial distinctions between types of people in the Body of Christ — you get the system being co-opted to orbit around the personal benefit of the leaders. That changes the system dynamics. Instead of the system seeking to self-perpetuate itself and thus frustrating innovation and participation, there is the addition of spiritual abuse through grooming people to stay as cogs in the machine, using negative conditioning to scare them from leaving or to inflict revenge if they do, etc.

Anyway, there are some thoughts I’ve been working on to go with a chapter I’m writing on how to navigate this threefold relational-organizational-institutional reality in ways that still allow us to do good plus do no harm.

@ brad/futuristguy:
Word.

@ Debby:
I’m so sorry you and your family had to go through that. It should not be that way in the Body of Christ, and I’m ashamed of the “leaders” who still to this day protect Mahaney so fiercely. Their loyalty is obviously to a man and not to the little sheep in the Lord’s flock. I truly do not know what is wrong with these men who claim to represent Jesus.

I am not done with church as a whole, as much as I am done with Acts 29. I started out a large, well known A29 church, and I have sent at least three or four communications to the church about my experience with a situation that seemed to favor the person who was popular with the staff at the church. No one gives me the time of day or replies with any sincerity. It has been a “Oh, too bad” reply. I made a serious effort to find community and all I found was cliques, gossip and favoritism. I also won’t be attending mega churches in general anymore. They are too big for a single pastor to sheperd everyone well.

E.G. wrote:

To say that a church is just there to “meet my needs” is absurd.

No, it’s not.

In the New Testament, to use one example, Paul says you are to “weep with those who weep.”

So, when I approached people at two local churches to have someone “weep with me” after the death of my loved one, I was either given platitudes, or scolded, or shamed, and told to go help homeless people in soup kitchens. None of that addressed my needs.

Nobody at those churches, and none of my church going extended family, would weep with me, as they are instructed to in the Bible.

Please read the book, 12 “Christian” Beliefs That Can Drive You Crazy which addresses some of these points.

There is nothing wrong with an individual person wanting to have her needs met, or seeking to have them met, and not by a church. It’s actually very biblical.

The church has more then one role, by the way. It is not a mutually exclusive proposition.

The church’s role is not only to “meet the needs of the world outside,” but to meet the needs of those within.

I saw on the other blog, about domestic violence, when the woman divorced her abusive husband, she and her children lived in poverty.

The church she had been attending for years kept refusing to help her, they refused to buy her groceries or allow her to use the very food pantry she used to contribute to when she had money.

For years, I ran around meeting other people’s needs, because my Christian mother taught me it was sinful or selfish for me to get my own needs met. All that did was create resentment in me, as well as frustration, and many people took advantage of my giving nature.

I’m not the only one. There are books by Christian authors who explain one reason why adult singles are quitting churches is that in the ones where they are being exploited as free labor, they have realized they have served for years, but their churches won’t help them when they need help.

That is unfair for churches to do that, to expect people to invest their time and money but not be helped in return when or if they need it.

Adam Borsay wrote:

Not to minimize suffering someone may have endured in an abusive church, but it strikes me as a sort of, “I dated this jerk in highschool and so I will never date again”.

Goodness! The “but” completely cancels out the comment that comes before it. You are minimizing suffering with that comment. The abuse heaped upon so many believers by abusing churches can in no way be equated to sour grapes over dating a jerk in high school. It’s not just one thing, it is many things that happen over and over again that tends to lead us out the door. For some it involves criminal acts against them that the church chooses to ignore. Speaking for myself as a single female Christian, I have no voice in these types of churches. I have been shushed because I am female (Dee wrote about it in her post), I have been rudely disciplined by a pastor in a group setting to shame me over something he misunderstood, I have been told I was probably never a Christian because I left my pastoral authority, I have been shunned and ostracized. This hardly equates to one bad experience means I will never do it again.
One of the hardest things in the world to do is to sit in pain, suffering, questions, and anger with someone and wait patiently for them. It is so much easier to dismiss it, tell them to get it together and do what the Bible says. Because that is what Jesus would do, right?

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

@ mirele:
I remember discovering Operation Clambake back in ’99 or 2000. Haven’t stopped sniggering at Hubbard yet. Those poor people though, stuck in a horrible cult.

If Scientology wasn’t so destructive to its people, it’d be a great joke.

If you could ever do an accurate movie about it…

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

If you could ever do an accurate movie about it…

Makes me think of Elvis’ Clambake.

roebuck wrote:

Adam Borsay wrote:
If the “Done” movement is completely in the right in completely pulling up stakes from the regular gathering of believers what are we telling our suffering brothers and sister who were/are literally willing to be arrested and killed for the sake of gathering together?
What is it with this totalizing ‘completely’ this and ‘completely’ that? This thought-stopping binary language is not really helpful. People are pouring their hearts out here, telling you why they are done. Most become dones with reluctance, and for very good reason. Some have said that it might not be a permanent condition.
And I’ll bet every one of them prays for our less fortunate sisters and brothers in hostile lands.
Please consider nuancing your language a bit – it seems like you are setting up straw men to knock down. Have some heart.

I guarantee that persecution would weed out many of the stupid proceedures and harmful policies that made many of us “dones” in the first place.

(I’m only “done” w/ trying to fit in with complementarian, culture-war type churches.)

If the “Church Refugees” project is reading this, I’d like to share some links to my story:
http://www.amazon.com/review/R14MHSGLXFX58Z/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm (Being at a Great Commission Church, where I was introduced to the Pearls’ teachings.)

https://calvinistjaneway.wordpress.com/2014/07/24/15/
(The journey away from complementarianism.)

https://taylorjoyrecovers.wordpress.com/2014/04/15/dear-sheldon-a-story-of-maternal-abuse/ (my first experience w/ spiritual abuse.)

Wow, I really need to condense all of this into my new blog.

This is what happened at my *current church*, which I’d thought was pretty good towards women:
Part 1: http://iprefercaptain.com/2014/08/the-advice-an-abused-woman-received-at-my-church/
Part 2: http://iprefercaptain.com/2014/08/the-advice-my-church-gave-to-an-abused-woman-part-2/
And then it happened AGAIN!
http://iprefercaptain.com/2015/04/physical-healing-vs-marital-healing/

@ Bob M:
I am a Done for many years..because i found no one who was in one accord..as God tells us we must be..everyone i found was told something different by the Holy Spirit about how we believe the scriptures..and i am yes very judgemental and picky about God’s Word ..

  __

What is generally involved in attending a local 501(c)3 Christian church?

—

  __

Is the attending of a 501(c)3 Christian church viewed as maniditory or is voluntary participation permissible?

—

  __

What is generally the time commitment involved when attending a local 501(c)3 Christian church?
—

@ Dave A A:
Yep, that’s what I thought you were doing, because only Owen BHLH writes like Owen BHLH. Relish? What guy has recently used “relish” as a verb??? Owen BHLH would be chopped up like relish if he ever got near a SEAL and, worse, a female fighter pilot. He would melt into a metaphorical puddle on the tarmac or possibly spontaneously combust. Metaphorically.

Is there a Fake Owen on Twitter? Seriously, comp guys, is this the face you want for Complementarianism? Owen, grown up. Please.

Dave, you need to repent of relishing quoting Owen and making him make himself look so silly. Somewhere I hope someone is keeping a list of the words these guys have totally ruined.

  __

Is a belief/faith system required to attend a local 501(c)3 Christian church?

—

  __

What is generally the financial cost(s) involved in attending a local 501(c)3 Christian church?

—

@ GovPappy:
In hindsight I’m a little sorry for the rant – it’s not entirely at you Adam, you’ve certainly shown to me you’re a decent chap.

@ Sopwith:
Every time the church doors are open, ma’am, every time the church doors are open. If not, you can be reasonably certain you’re being judged by those who are present.

As far as out of town goes, individual results may vary. I’ve been at a place where we had to plan every vacation around being back for Sunday morning, and been to another where they just required you to find a local approved establishment on the road.

Really, if you want to follow Jesus closely, none of that should be an issue to you!

@ Gram3:

A big hearty AMEN here Gram3, because when all is said and done, this is where the rubber meets the road. Good is good no matter who it’s done by, otherwise ‘good’ can have no real metric, even though some will make the claim that God’s ‘good’ is wholly other. C.S. Lewis dismantled this fiction quite handily in my opinion.

And Adam? This Bud’s for you (so to speak): ===> [Ecclesiastes 9:7]

Sopwith wrote:

  __

Will I need to be represented by legal council, if and when meeting with 501(c)3 christian church officals becomes required?

—

Are you a woman? Then yes.

GovPappy wrote:

I’m sick of “the church isn’t perfect, what do you expect? Just find another one and move on from your hurt ” sentiment.

The typical line of reasoning from one who hasn’t yet been slandered, lied to and abused multiple times by multiple churches. Or, in the alternative, from one who’s perpetrating the abuse.

This is the sort of spirit that in time leads to a situation like at TVC, where the abused was more-or-less told to “Move on, get over it already, why you’ve had weeks to recover from the shock of your husband getting his thrills from the rape and torture of infants, forgive and forget, what’s your problem?”

Of course, the abusers and sociopaths are almost invariably the ones embraced and given a pass by these spiritually corrupt churches because they’re ruthless and opportunistic enough to fake contrition–and the church can thus proclaim another “miracle of their system”–while the abused often just honestly speaks their pain from the heart, and refuses to become the topic of a tear-jerking, uplifting, look-at-me-in-the-spotlight-the-great-savior-of-the-worst-reprobate sermon. It all boils down to how you advance their agenda.

Adam Borsay wrote:

If the “Done” movement is completely in the right in completely pulling up stakes from the regular gathering of believers what are we telling our suffering brothers and sister who were/are literally willing to be arrested and killed for the sake of gathering together?

I find this a tad disingenuous, Adam.

No one here writes that all Dones are correct. Nor is anyone writing that there are no regular gatherings done by at least some among them (which you yourself, in the preceding para, admitted there might be).

To then compare your facile assumption of our poor behavior with the superior behavior of persecuted brothers/sisters—–well, that is quintessential guilt-tripping.

Please don’t do that. It doesn’t work because it isn’t accurate. And it makes people less likely to be cooperative because they get cranky.

As a former baptist pastor (and lawyer) I’m done with institutionalism. But I have a greater love for Jesus, his people and the lost than ever. I have found a richness of conversation and relationships within simple, open-participatory gatherings in homes, organic church, similar to what I read about in the New Testament.
I strongly recommend: Frank Viola and George Barna’s Pagan Christianity and Frank Viola’s Reimagining Church. Mark Driscoll stated that Pagan Christianity was antithetical to everything he believes about the church. What better recommendation!
Cheers

Patrice wrote:

Adam Borsay wrote:
If the “Done” movement is completely in the right in completely pulling up stakes from the regular gathering of believers what are we telling our suffering brothers and sister who were/are literally willing to be arrested and killed for the sake of gathering together?
I find this a tad disingenuous, Adam.
No one here writes that all Dones are correct. Nor is anyone writing that there are no regular gatherings done by at least some among them (which you yourself, in the preceding para, admitted there might be).
To then compare your facile assumption of our poor behavior with the superior behavior of persecuted brothers/sisters—–well, that is quintessential guilt-tripping.
Please don’t do that. It doesn’t work because it isn’t accurate. And it makes people less likely to be cooperative because they get cranky.

Another point is that Adam assumes their gathering together approximates what he considers a valid, appropriate gathering as opposed to the more informal gatherings of many dones. He has not established that presumption as factual in any manner. Further, he has not established what one has to do with the other. As a point of fact, it could easily be used against him, many dones tell stories of behavior from institutional churches every bit as Machiavellian as oppressive governments. Could not the point be turned upon him along the lines of “How dare you, Adam, judge those who are being abused and oppressed by the domestic system you champion while your heart apparently bleeds for those who are being abused and oppressed internationally?”

But as you put it, the larger point is that his was not a point at all, but merely a raw, unadulterated attempt to guilt trip.

Jeff S wrote:

TWW has all of these posts about membership contracts and such, and all of that is because we can move on to new churches when we find them disagreeable. But people you are describing don’t have that option. Churches don’t have to try and keep them from moving on or worry about “releasing” them.

That is true but I wonder how many of these stratifying and power-determining doctrinal conflicts would even occur under intense external pressure. I suspect things are stripped to essentials and gratitude is the predominant response for whatever good comes by, from whomever brings it.

Re: Tullian Tchividjian

I was reading Chris Rosebrough’s post about Tullian Tchividjian’s story and find it strange how often Rosebrough credits Satan with Tchividjian’s fall.
You can read the post here:
http://www.fightingforthefaith.com/2015/06/my-perspective-on-tullians-sin.html

Rosebrough does state at one point,

With Tullian’s sin, and believe me when I say that just like Adam, Tullian is responsible for this whole mess…

Despite that qualifier, there are several times the devil is invoked on the rest of the page.

From a conservative Christian view, I realize that the existence of a personal, literal being, the Devil, is acknowledged, and it’s believed that the Devil can tempt people, but this post reads in spots too much like a “devil made him do it” sort of thing, which sounds like it downplays Tchividjian’s choices and personal responsibility.

A quote or two more from Rosebrough’s page (this is referring, again, to Tullian Tchividjian’s resignation and affair):

… The devil concocted the perfect plan to tempt a pastor to sin and the devil left nothing to chance.

…The plan was perfect. It was executed flawlessly and the devil played Tullian and a whole lot of other people the way a concert violinist would play a Stradivarius. It was breathtaking to watch.

I’m just not sure how much of all this is really so much the devil’s plans and just a guy who messed up in his marriage.

Adam Borsay wrote:

My point is if the the regular and deliberate gathering of Christians for the purpose of to the best of their/our ability to reflect the picture of the church in the NT is completely unnecessary why in the world are they risking their lives for it.

Christians feel deeply lonely in places where they are persecuted, as does any group that is culturally sidelined and/or ostracized. In that context, meeting together is a sought-after safe haven.

That is not so here. Most people in the US still describe themselves as Christians of one sort or another. The culture itself still bends to some of the ideologies of Christianity.

Thus there is no urgent need to gather together here, and its loss is generally only felt after a period of time. And because it is a society that is open to Christianity, there are more alternatives available to that felt need than there are in such extreme situations.

You are still looking to lay a guilt-burden on people who have already been on a long heavy path away from what they knew/believed. What I’d like to know is why you want to do that?

  __

“And pastors had fun, fun, fun, fun, until lack of pastorial accountability and declining attendance took the tithe away?!?”

hmmm…

;-(

—

—

@ GovPappy:
Sopy is actually a “sir.” 🙂

@ numo:
Fair enough! My apologies.

Bridget wrote:

And is Owen still holding his job at CBMW as well?

He plans to maintain his role within CBMW as he “transitions”.

@ Sallie Borrink:
It sounds like there are some real similarities in our stories. Well, except for the age part. 🙂 I’m so very sorry about your daughter and all the other daughters and sons who have no place where they fit. Being gifted and probably very curious makes it that much more difficult for her to fit within a conservative church where questions of any kind are not encouraged. Especially about the now-sacred hierarchical complementarianism. And even more especially from a female. I hope that more young pastors will start thinking through the implications of what they are teaching and promoting. I do believe that by the time your daughter is a young woman, there will be more conservative options available. Somehow we need to decouple the doctrine of the authority of God’s word and Jesus as Lord of the church from the authority of the particular interpretations of the authoritarians and the authoritarians themselves who have set themselves as lords of the flock. I will certainly grant that they have masterfully linked those ideas such that many dare not question the interpretations.

@ Daisy:

I think in some way we are both agreeing. I call it love, you call it meeting needs. Same difference, I think, except the “meeting needs” thing has a consumerist ring to it.

But I know that’s not what you mean. I don’t think you mean “the music doesn’t meet my needs” or “the sermons are lackluster and don’t meet my needs” or “the kids program isn’t meeting my children’s needs for excitement”.

Right?

Then I agree with you.

It’s just that the “meet my needs” lingo is exactly why we are where we are today with mega churches, coffee bars in foyers, fog machines, and the whole get up.

On that latter, and wrong, “meet my needs” this is useful:

http://skyejethani.com/how-churches-became-cruise-ships/

Gram3 wrote:

It sounds like there are some real similarities in our stories. Well, except for the age part. 🙂 I’m so very sorry about your daughter and all the other daughters and sons who have no place where they fit. Being gifted and probably very curious makes it that much more difficult for her to fit within a conservative church where questions of any kind are not encouraged. Especially about the now-sacred hierarchical complementarianism. And even more especially from a female. I hope that more young pastors will start thinking through the implications of what they are teaching and promoting. I do believe that by the time your daughter is a young woman, there will be more conservative options available. Somehow we need to decouple the doctrine of the authority of God’s word and Jesus as Lord of the church from the authority of the particular interpretations of the authoritarians and the authoritarians themselves who have set themselves as lords of the flock. I will certainly grant that they have masterfully linked those ideas such that many dare not question the interpretations.

Yes, she’s busy, bright and not afraid to voice an opinion. LOL! I wrote a whole series of posts on my learning website about parenting gifted/2e children in the Christian church. They do not fit into the typical church structures at all. That’s another issue we face that I didn’t even mention about why we have been Dones.

I do hope by the time she is an adult she will have more options. I press on for her sake as well as my own. I will continue to press the point so more and more women will be set free in Christ.

@ muzjik:

As I just noted, I think we are saying the same thing. True love in a church “meets needs” in the church and beyond.

But approaching church simply to have needs met (in the lingo of a decade ago, “felt needs”), isn’t going to get you anywhere. That’s a consumerist mindset, and it’s the reason why we have mega churches and all the nonsense that goes with them.

Needs aren’t truly met by programs, needs are met by love.

Needs of widows were met in Acts by love, not a fancy program, a satisfaction survey, and a fog machine.

Just love. Jesus’ love. A fellowship that show that meets needs as a byproduct of the love. Love is foundational.

@ Carmoll:
Hi, Carmoll. That’s a hard path even without kids! I am glad that you have a couple of good friends–sometimes that is what church becomes, at least for a while, and that’s not all bad.

Anyway, welcome.

I am a done. DONE.

@ Sallie Borrink:

Homeschooling itself is exhausting, but when you have health issues it feels like a Sisyphean task. I hope you at least have a supportive homeschool group that welcomes you and your daughter with loving, open arms.

Our family has its own sad megachurch exit tale. We’ve found refuge in a very small liturgical church a few blocks from our house. I’m an introverted HSP, and the traditional service they offer is such a relief.

  ___

There was a substantial documented decrease in tithes and offerings attributed to among other things, the increase in ‘negative media attention’ surrounding the Marshill church controversy prior to it’s closing. Did social media played a part in this attention? How So?

—

Just posted, a 90-minute interview with Josh Packard, hosted by Rob Wilkerson. Josh is co-author with Ashleigh Hope of Church Refugees: Sociologists reveal why people are DONE with church but not their faith.

http://www.robwilkerson.net/2015/06/my-interview-with-josh-packard.html

roebuck wrote:

Please consider nuancing your language a bit – it seems like you are setting up straw men to knock down. Have some heart.

Reading up thread and skipping around I missed your comment till after I made the same observation. It is hard to engage when people talk past each other.

I recall going to lunch with a fellow with whom I had contrary beliefs. I mentioned that I enjoyed engaging with his opposing viewpoint but I didn’t care much when it appeared he was trying to score points. After that we both found much more agreement and appreciation for each other.

@ Bill M:

Unfortunately not. It’s pretty much the raison d’etre of the mega-seeker-sensitive-emergent-neoCal-ChristianBookstore evangelical industrial complex.

Gram3 wrote:

Dave A A wrote:

“an army of gospel Navy SEALs”?

Picture the hilarity which would ensue if Owen BHLH held up a big banner at the Army-Navy game about his call for an Army of Gospel Navy SEALS.

For what it’s worth, the retired Navy SEAL who’s in charge of the database and exposes Fake SEALs says that a good chunk of the Fake SEAL posers are clergy.

E.G. wrote:

Unfortunately not. It’s pretty much the raison d’etre of the mega-seeker-sensitive-emergent-neoCal-ChristianBookstore evangelical industrial complex.

I’ve heard this a lot about people being shallow and just wanting to be fed or their needs met and it was often directed at people unjustly. I’ve been guilty of the same tendency to categorize others, label them as being less understanding, and then take the quick off-ramp rather than continue on and consider what actually motivates others.

@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
Great book! It’s amazing how so much of our Christian history and culture is from the mid-20th century and not the 17th and 18th century as our Evangelical churches have been telling us!

Sallie Borrink wrote:

Gram3 wrote:
Where should an older woman who is a conservative, inerrantist, Baptist Berean go?
Gram3 – I have no idea who you are or if our paths have crossed online, but I so relate to this.
I’m 48 and never would I have thought I would be a Done. I won’t get into our entire story, but it includes a couple of episodes of spiritual abuse as well as learning that people with chronic illness really don’t fit into the church and apparently don’t have legitimate needs.
My husband and I don’t have the energy to do it any longer. We love Jesus and nothing about that has changed. We simply do not have the energy to try one. more. time. to find a church. And believe me, we’ve tried. We’ve been flexible on a variety of significant doctrinal issues such as mode of baptism in order to try to find a church home. The biggest issue for me is we have an eight year old daughter and it troubles me to bring her up without a church home. But where do we go?
We’re Biblical egalitarians who believe in the authority of the Scriptures. That eliminates a large percentage of churches right off the top. We’ve tried to compromise on the comp/egal issue in a few different churches and we can’t do it. It is too important to us both for my sake as well as how our daughter hears about the Lord. I simply cannot suck it up any longer and listen to complementarian teaching. I’ve tried. I cannot do it. And I don’t want my daughter listening to it.
My daughter and I are both highly sensitive. Any church that is loud is out. We should not have to take a day to recover from the overwhelming stimuli in church. That eliminates a whole bunch of churches.
We’re fairly conservative is most ways. We wouldn’t fit into a liberal, mainline or progressive environment.
So what does that leave? Not very much at all.
I am open to a small house gathering, but so far we haven’t found that. And, honestly, managing a chronic illness, homeschooling a gifted/2e daughter, and trying to keep a business afloat with my husband while trying to crawl out from under a pile of medical-related bills is all I can handle right now. I don’t have the energy to try to start a new church.
So that’s my story of why we’ve been Done for a few years.

We’re not done, but I understand some of your issues. I have chronic migraine and had to leave the practice of medicine. The woman who coordinates meals at our church is a friend and frequently asks if we need any meals when I’m having a bad string of migraines! I am grateful for that. Otherwise, though, no one quite knows what to make of a chronic illness. My husband and son go to church, but I’m only there about once a month, so people don’t quite know what to say or how to act. Illness is very isolating.

My daughter just turned twenty and won’t have anything to do with the Evangelical Church. I’m thrilled that she’s going to join the local Episcopal Church. In fact, she was excited that I’m getting her a leather-bound Book of Common Prayer for her birthday. I can’t really blame her. My daughter’s best friend (who was a “unofficial” foster child of mine for six months) is gay and my daughter couldn’t handle all the negativity about LGBT people coming from our church leaders. Our church is soft complementarian and we raised our kids to be pretty egalitarian. My daughter much prefers the egalitarianism she finds at the Episcopal church. She’s also a musician and hates modern worship music.

But, my husband and I are staying right now. My husband is an elder, although he’s not on the elder board right now since he just started teaching high school math last year (he was a homeschooling dad and then ran our yarn store for several years). My husband is happy that his primary ministry is in the high school. I’m considering starting some kind of support group for people with chronic illness in our church. I know there are a lot of us. I also know that some aren’t taking good care of themselves. I wonder if we could get Social Services and Dieticians and Nurse Practitioners to come in and help those who need help. And, if nothing else, it would be so nice to just sit and have coffee with people who can also say, “Yeah, I got up with everything hurting today too.” And to congratulate each other on walking around the block even though you feel crappy. I think many churches aren’t doing that kind of thing well. We need to figure out how to love each other, even when they don’t have any thing to offer. And those of us with chronic illness have nothing at all.

My biggest concern is that our church is more political than I’d like it to be with our current pastor (who has been here about three years). My issue is that my 17 year old son is going to be a worship intern next year. I’m overall Evangelical in theology, but I don’t agree with this pastor on Origins, End Times, or his emphasis on politics. So, I hope we can find a good balance. He’ll be spending most of his time with the Worship Director, who is a good friend (and a woman – we’re a pretty softly complementarian church!). Listening to the conservative 17 year old son talk to the liberal 20 year old daughter talk can be interesting. She’s got the theological chops, though. He needs more Bible education. (She was homeschooled through 12th grade. He started public school this year in 11th grade, so he missed New Testament Survey and won’t get World Religions.

So, we’re not leaving the church anytime soon. Right now, this one’s the best party in town. May as well stay till midnight.

Sallie Borrink wrote:

Gram3 wrote:
It sounds like there are some real similarities in our stories. Well, except for the age part. I’m so very sorry about your daughter and all the other daughters and sons who have no place where they fit. Being gifted and probably very curious makes it that much more difficult for her to fit within a conservative church where questions of any kind are not encouraged. Especially about the now-sacred hierarchical complementarianism. And even more especially from a female. I hope that more young pastors will start thinking through the implications of what they are teaching and promoting. I do believe that by the time your daughter is a young woman, there will be more conservative options available. Somehow we need to decouple the doctrine of the authority of God’s word and Jesus as Lord of the church from the authority of the particular interpretations of the authoritarians and the authoritarians themselves who have set themselves as lords of the flock. I will certainly grant that they have masterfully linked those ideas such that many dare not question the interpretations.
Yes, she’s busy, bright and not afraid to voice an opinion. LOL! I wrote a whole series of posts on my learning website about parenting gifted/2e children in the Christian church. They do not fit into the typical church structures at all. That’s another issue we face that I didn’t even mention about why we have been Dones.
I do hope by the time she is an adult she will have more options. I press on for her sake as well as my own. I will continue to press the point so more and more women will be set free in Christ.

Dear God, we could be twins. My firecracker is 2e, and so.stinkin.bored with church right now, because she reads on a 12th grade level, and is in the 4th grade. 😛 We stepped off the stage after leading worship last week, and almost stepped on her–she was hiding in the dark backstage area, reading “Inheritance” by Christopher Paolini with a music stand clip-light. We let her stay there. 😉

Many here are making the salient point that the true Church of Christ is an organism, not an organization (501C or whatever). Dones, whom I would identify with, are members of the church Christ has joined us to by His atoning sacrifice. That church, to which all believers are baptized into by the Holy Spirit, is alive and well throughout the world.

The political, organizational, leader-centric church model is, I think, dying–I think we will be better for it, though it will be a painful process for the western, especially American, church to engage society from a posture of humility and willful setting aside our passions for material wealth and political power.

I think much of the attraction for many of our young people for a more liturgical based church is found in the reality that the role of church leadership is not the primary role or attraction–the truth regarding the character and nature of God expressed in the liturgy and sacraments is central, rather than a personality.

I long for the day that churches are no longer tax exempt; remove the entanglements of church and state and reclaim our heritage with believers throughout the centuries who have loved Jesus in every conceivable circumstance, unencumbered with divided loyalties. (I say this as one who loves his country and is a military veteran.) The whole duty of man is to love God and to enjoy Him forever!

Haven’t yet had the chance to read the whole article and comments, but considering many of the things here discussed, the Churchix software mentioned in the previous article (Really, I thought it was a joke video initially), and many other issues I’ve been experiencing and reading about in the last few years, I have to admit that I’ve also been considering the ‘Done’ status for myself.

The church I attend is a rather wealthy one. Not ‘megachurch wealthy’ but it’s in an affluent area and the annual budget is high, especially compared with other churches in the city. The congregation is currently considering the expansion of the building, as it’s supposedly not adequate for the current needs… However, I have a nagging doubt about it being that necessary. I know the building would require quite a bit of work here and there, but I’m generally a bit skeptic about massive changes and expansions… In any case, I’m giving it the benefit of the doubt as I don’t know yet what are the specific plans for it. And I doubt they’ll go the lights and fog machines route as it is a pretty conservative (with capital C) church that is supposedly mainly working on proclaiming the gospel… In any case, I’d be very surprised if they do something like that.

In the meantime, last Sunday I visited a small Presbyterian congregation in Hell’s Kitchen, New York, which is struggling just to get enough money to finish fixing their building after a fire they had about a year ago. It’s difficult when you’re only about 30 in regular attendance and in an area of the city where a lot of people are not particularly wealthy… Even more, last Sunday there were only 10 in the congregation, including the visiting preacher who officiated the communion and me. I know that the Presbyterian Church (USA) has received a lot of criticism about their open position about certain issues, such as homosexuality, but I have to admit that visiting this humble congregation left a strong impression on me, with their friendliness and their motivation to keep going on despite their struggles, while at the same time helping the homeless and poor people of their neighbourhood.

It’s made me think a lot about what actually are the priorities in our different congregations.

numo wrote:

I am so sorry to hear about your batyle with chronic illnesd, along with whatever you’ve been through with church types and their judgmental attitudes re. said illnesd. Hsve been through my own strughles with that, and it got very ugly (from their side, not mine).

Thank you for your kind words. My experience has been more indifference and lack of understanding although I have felt judged and misunderstood at times. It’s hard for people to understand how much you can struggle to get through a day when you look perfectly “normal” on the outside.

@ Gus:
I went to a church several years ago that handed out letters asking the members to let them know how much they were going to tithe that year so they could plan their budget. At first I was going to sign it, but then then my daughter talked me out of it. It is none of the church’s business how much I am going to tithe or give to them in a year. Where is their faith in God to seeing that they get the right amount of funds they need for the current year.

Jenny wrote:

Homeschooling itself is exhausting, but when you have health issues it feels like a Sisyphean task. I hope you at least have a supportive homeschool group that welcomes you and your daughter with loving, open arms.

Our family has its own sad megachurch exit tale. We’ve found refuge in a very small liturgical church a few blocks from our house. I’m an introverted HSP, and the traditional service they offer is such a relief.

Hi Jenny! We do have a good homeschool co-op. I haven’t really be involved since it is a drop-off co-op. That really works best for me as it gives my husband and me a break. (We work from home.) It’s a Christian co-op, but includes everything from dresses only families to very laid back. LOL! That’s the best kind IMHO.

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

There are 30,000+ different denominations, all with their own particular take on Christianity. So which one has the right discernment? Which ones are the ones that have been “redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb”?

AB, my comment was in reference to individuals not denominations. Jesus came to redeem individuals, not institutions! The true “Church” is comprised of baptized believers who function as individual priests – each capable of discerning and proclaiming truth as the Holy Spirit imparts that to them and each responsible to act on that truth as the Holy Spirit enables them.

According to Christianity Today, there are 41,000+ Christian denominations and organizations on the planet earth! Which have a corner on the Truth? God gives individuals redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb discernment to try the spirits, to see if they be of God or not. The Holy Spirit will help you sort out truth from error; He will lead you to all truth and give you wisdom. I realize that weaving through the maze we call “church” is difficult. At the end of the day, it truly is an individual journey and you can’t always rely on the particular church or denomination you belong to help you along. If you have been redeemed, stay repentant, don’t grieve and quench the Holy Spirit, and pray for discernment. You are going to need it in the days ahead.

Adam Borsay wrote:

My general pushback in this thread has been from my personal experience of the vast majority of the “dones” I interact with aren’t just “done” with the institutional church, but are done with pursuing Christ communally. Many here have assumed I am attacking their choice to shrink their Christian fellowship from an institutional church to something less organizationally formal. And they have mentioned that they have regular NT esque community by studying the word with others, serving each other and encouraging their group to pursue Christ. And to that I say, “awesome!” I would rather have a bunch of people passionate about others and Christ in that setting than a bunch of country clubbers hanging out in the pews on Sunday mornings for a few hours.

Thank you for that! Because, that is exactly where many of us are at right now and the direction many of us are headed.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Gram3 wrote:
Dave A A wrote:
“an army of gospel Navy SEALs”?
Picture the hilarity which would ensue if Owen BHLH held up a big banner at the Army-Navy game about his call for an Army of Gospel Navy SEALS.
For what it’s worth, the retired Navy SEAL who’s in charge of the database and exposes Fake SEALs says that a good chunk of the Fake SEAL posers are clergy.

That doesn’t surprise me. Viewing this from the academy, I’ve also noticed that clergy sometimes have a penchant for fake degrees from diploma mills or parading themselves as “doctor” when their only doctorate is honorary. Either is fraudulent.

Eagle wrote:

I’m reading on this blog and so many others about SBC take over by Neo-Calvinists. The SBC is not the only denomination dealing with this problem. I’ve been involved in the Evangelical Free Church in my past and this is tearing about the Evangelical Free.

Eagle, the New Calvinism movement is a religious phenomenon which is penetrating various denominations. Even certain Assembly of God churches have fallen for it! Who would have thought that would be possible?! The apathetic, prayerless condition of the saints of the American church has allowed this to happen. New Calvinist leaders have successfully tapped into the restlessness of the Millennial generation and are serving up something different that has captured their attention. Young folks are rallying around proclamations such as the following:

“Where else are they going to go? If you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going to end up basically being Reformed, basically something like this new Calvinism, or you’re going to have to invent some label for what is basically going to be the same thing, there just are not options out there …” (Dr. Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary)

For you non-Calvinist millions, Dr. Mohler is telling you that is not a viable faith option. He is essentially saying that Calvinism = Gospel. If you ain’t in, you’re out! What arrogance!

Adam Borsay wrote:

If the “Done” movement is completely in the right in completely pulling up stakes from the regular gathering of believers what are we telling our suffering brothers and sister who were/are literally willing to be arrested and killed for the sake of gathering together?

You think believers in oppressive regimes actually care about the worship choices of Christians in the West?

Assuming that they do, I hope that the message that the persecuted are getting from the “dones” is: “Don’t let your congregations become the nightmarish entities we’ve had to escape, and recover from.”

Max wrote:

Eagle wrote: I’m reading on this blog and so many others about SBC take over by Neo-Calvinists. The SBC is not the only denomination dealing with this problem. I’ve been involved in the Evangelical Free Church in my past and this is tearing about the Evangelical Free.

We visited a small EVFree church not far from our home and had high hopes it might work. The pastor was a Driscoll wannabe. I spent the first twenty minutes in the narthex with my daughter because the "worship" was so loud. And then, no joke, he spoke on male/female roles that day as part of a series. (My husband missed the sermon because he took our (ed.) daughter to the junior church class and stayed with her since we were visiting.) It took everything I had to sit there and not stand up and correct what he was saying. It wasn't just that he was preaching a soft comp sermon. It was a smirking "I'm just telling you what is in the Bible, ladies" type attitude.

I guess on the plus side the Lord allowed us to know from the first visit that we would never fit in. 🙂

Adam Borsay wrote:

And they have mentioned that they have regular NT esque community

Another thing to consider. I see a lot of references in your posts to the “NT community”. Acts 29, for example, is the very epitome of that mindset, and we all see where that’s going and has gone.

This trenchant point that we ought to duplicate the NT church does not just leap off the pages of the Gospels and NT Epistles. Some of the things discussed there are descriptive, some are prescriptive. It was a different culture and a different set of circumstances, women were essentially uneducated chattel at that time and place, the Christian church was reaching into formerly pagan areas that hadn’t heard a whisper of Christ. I am not convinced that in a heavily-churched, blasé 21st Century America, for example, that it makes sense to go about doing the same things as those disciples two millenia ago. We should do what is clearly prescriptive, and Jesus’ words seem always to fit that mold, but to make hard and fast primary doctrine out of descriptions of what the disciples did under very different circumstances is dangerous and lists eventually into full-blown pharisaism. I have seen it.

Adam Borsay wrote:

My general pushback in this thread has been from my personal experience of the vast majority of the “dones” I interact with aren’t just “done” with the institutional church, but are done with pursuing Christ communally.

I think a key source of confusion over much of what you’ve tried to communicate, Adam, is that you seem to have overapplied to the whole your experience of a subcategory of “dones” as you described in your most recent comment. I don’t think it was clear earlier that this sub-group had apparently become your description of the whole group.

Anyway, there’s a lot more work to go to identify the distinctives and the overlap zones among nones, dones, gones, those are survivors of spiritual abuse from malignant leaders, and those who have survived corrupt institutional systems. There are likely a lot more nuances to see than any of us yet realize …

Ken wrote:

I take it that it is very easy to be critical of established churches and their structures and traditions – and failures – when you don’t have the responsibilty of caring for a church yourself. Easy to say what they ought to do e.g. if a paedophile infiltrates, and you know what you would do if you pastored a church, but in fact have never had that responsibility yourself.

In the case of a pedophile, it isn’t at all about what I would or could do “in their shoes”. It’s about the responsibilities churches and their “leaders” have under the law. If they don’t know the law, or aren’t interested in obeying it, they have no business teaching anyone else about godliness.

Law Prof wrote:

It was a different culture and a different set of circumstances, women were essentially uneducated chattel at that time and place, the Christian church was reaching into formerly pagan areas that hadn’t heard a whisper of Christ. I am not convinced that in a heavily-churched, blasé 21st Century America, for example, that it makes sense to go about doing the same things as those disciples two millenia ago.

I think this is important. The culture of 1st century Christians included the tension between the Roman government who viewed Christianity as superstitious and their refusal to worship the gods of the Romans, as well as the simple day-to-day lifestyles which were very different than ours today. Most homes of the middle class consisted of 1-2 rooms which a lot of activity taking place on rooftops for convenience, necessity, and the result of space considerations.

In a sense there was already a community as those homes were generally centered around the open marketplace and shops. Gatherings often centered around daily shopping for food and drawing water from public wells. Personal goods were limited compared to today where most slept on mats on the floor.

Persecution in the early church may also have played a part in the admonitions to not forsake their assemblies as well as the prevalent thought that they were living in the last days and judgment from God was imminent.

Very different culture indeed.

Sallie Borrink wrote:

You are sooooo right about this. Happy, healthy, financially stable and no trouble, pain or problems.

“Financially Stable” = Able to TITHE TITHE TITHE TITHE TITHE

All about the Benjamins, baby.

Max wrote:

New Calvinism’s macho delivery preaches to men.

Just like Extreme Islam.

Many years ago, at a website called “Church for Men”, there was an essay about “Why Islam Attracts Men”; their thesis was that Islam (and by analogy Calvinism) has a reputation for Getting Results – Perfect Society, Perfect Family, Perfection of Faith, all in the Great Chain of Command/Being. (With YOU higher up the Chain of Command than THEM.)

Plus Comp Doctrine/subordination of women appeals to Hypermasculinity — “ME MAN! ME FIGHT! ME TAKE WOMAN! RAWR!” (though Calvinists are handicapped in this respect by monogamy, lack of “marriage by raid & pillage” tribal culture, and lack of 72 hot-to-trot eternal virgins per guy in Paradise).

Add a bit of “Marching for The Cause, Changing the Face of The World” from classic Communism, and you can see the appeal.

Martos wrote:

In the meantime, last Sunday I visited a small Presbyterian congregation in Hell’s Kitchen, New York, which is struggling just to get enough money to finish fixing their building after a fire they had about a year ago. It’s difficult when you’re only about 30 in regular attendance and in an area of the city where a lot of people are not particularly wealthy…

Not true – Hell’s Kitchen is no longer the gritty area on the West Side of Manhattan as it was in rough-and-tumble days of Damon Runyon’s stories. The area has been gentrified and average rents in the neighborhood have increased dramatically so that as of April 2014, rents in the area are above the average rents in Manhattan. See “Manhattan Rental Market Report”, April 2014.

numo wrote:

@ Sallie Borrink:
I hear you. Like you, i look healthy, and, apart from the chronic conditions, i am in pretty decent shape. So nobody gets it.

You can add me to that list as well 🙂 The invisible disabilities association is working hard to raise awareness. Just know, you are not alone and that there are compassionate souls out there that do understand. 🙂

Beth wrote:

Brad, what is the difference between “nones” and “gones”? I was curious and a quick search didn’t help me.

I don’t know that “gones” is any kind of official title or has gotten researched, but just from the comments I’ve seen online in the past five years or so, there is a noticeable enough contingent of people who drop out of Christianity completely and now consider themselves agnostic, atheist, skeptic, etc. — something along that line.

Bloggers and commenters here and there have used “gones” to describe this group, as have some of the members of the group. Some “gones” are antagonistic toward Christ and Christianity, others aren’t, but they don’t identify themselves as being Christian anymore.

Law Prof wrote:

Viewing this from the academy, I’ve also noticed that clergy sometimes have a penchant for fake degrees from diploma mills or parading themselves as “doctor” when their only doctorate is honorary.

Reverend Larry awards Reverend Moe an Honorary Doctorate.
Reverend Moe awards Reverend Curly an Honorary Doctorate.
Reverend Curly awards Reverend Larry an Honorary Doctorate.
NYUK! NYUK! NYUK!

Victorious wrote:

The culture of 1st century Christians included the tension between the Roman government who viewed Christianity as superstitious and their refusal to worship the gods of the Romans, as well as the simple day-to-day lifestyles which were very different than ours today. Most homes of the middle class consisted of 1-2 rooms which a lot of activity taking place on rooftops for convenience, necessity, and the result of space considerations.
In a sense there was already a community as those homes were generally centered around the open marketplace and shops. Gatherings often centered around daily shopping for food and drawing water from public wells. Personal goods were limited compared to today where most slept on mats on the floor.
Persecution in the early church may also have played a part in the admonitions to not forsake their assemblies as well as the prevalent thought that they were living in the last days and judgment from God was imminent.
Very different culture indeed.

The thing I see is typically young men with this delusion that they’re the ones who will rediscover the lost secrets and set us all straight and save the world (or, for some of them, the elect within it). The problem is they think they can recover that “First Century magic” by duplicating the church of those years without regard to any of the forces or circumstances operating on those churches. Lacking nimble, experienced minds, seeing the world in black and white, a common inadequacy of youth, they go about mechanically applying these “maxims”.

For example, since Paul once told Timothy in a particular instance to appoint some elders at a particular point in time in an utterly pagan locale–Crete–that means to some of the young zealots that elders must always be appointed rather than recognized by general acknowledgement of the community, and that they, the youthful junior partner to a senior partner operating in some parent church or organization elsewhere, must be the ones to do the appointing. They come in their youthful delusion to believe that anyone who thinks to the contrary is a watered-down Christian or an apostate.

They become exceedingly arrogant and chauvinistic, because they stop listening to outside counsel, except for that A29, SGM, SBC leader or whomever who functions as their guru. They have the keys to the universe, the gnosis, be it neocalvinism or techniques of control, or whatever pop psych trend they’re into. They start thinking that what they believe is the True Gospel, the true First century church reborn, and they just fill in the blanks with what they’ve been taught that the Bible doesn’t supply.

So we get to hear from them about the “clear distinctives” of the First Century church, even though precious few distinctives–other than, essentially, to act absolutely nothing like the young zealots–are provided by the Epistles of Paul, Peter, John and James.

Sallie Borrink wrote:

Daisy wrote:
One thing I’ve figured out the last 2, 3, 4 years, and what some of us concluded on an older thread here, is that most American churches only want happy, healthy, financially stable people who don’t have any tragedies going on in their lives, to attend and become members.
Churches don’t want people who actually have problems or pain showing up.
You are sooooo right about this. Happy, healthy, financially stable and no trouble, pain or problems. It’s okay to have them for a week or maybe two, but after that… Churches have no idea what to do with chronic illness.

Yes! This, basically, is the church we came out of. “Having problems” was a problem. How can you practice “lifestyle evangelism” if you don’t look perfect, happy, and contented, at least on the outside?

Whitewashed tombs.

E.G. wrote:

@ Sallie Borrink:
I honestly never been to a church like that, in Canada (where I currently live) or the U.S. (Where I used to live).
Once while choosing a church, I used what I call the “parking lot test.”
I.e., if a church parking lot was filled with >$50k vehicles, I didn’t stick around.
Civics, Focuses, and Pontiac mini vans? Then I’d give it a shot.
My current church is the “richest” that I’ve ever attended (in terms of demographic tax bracket), and it’s the one with the most problems under the surface. I.e., the least hands-on participation in ministry by parishioners who, generally, would rather just open the wallet.
Open wallets are nice, but they aren’t relational.

A large percentage of 15-passenger vans? Drive right by. If somehow you find yourself in the building (sudden call of nature, perhaps), run, don’t walk, for the exit.

(not dissing large families in general. just large families concentrated together into one church — high possibility of Quiverfull Patriarchy reigning. Not Christ.)

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Fake SEALs says that a good chunk of the Fake SEAL posers are clergy.

Plague of US preachers falsely claim to be Navy SEALs
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/11/us_preachers_claim_to_be_navy_seals/

“‘They don’t understand the internet’ says fake-frogman outer”

mirele wrote:

They haven’t a clue as to what modern life is about.

But are paid to “engage culture”

@ brad/futuristguy:

Thanks. I know it’s all informal, but would it be reasonable to say then, that generally “gones” used to Christian but are no longer believers, “dones” are no longer affiliated with formally organized church, but still are generally Christian, while “nones” never were believers? (Applying this to Christianity for simplicity’s sake.)

Just trying to see where I might fall in the current nomenclature! Looks like I’m a “gone”.

LT wrote:

Dones aren’t done with God or faith. They are done with the 501(c)3’s and deservedly so. If you want to bring the Dones back you might want to spend your time calling out false teachers and supporting higher standards for shepherds. Clean up the garbage first.

Yes, that is very good advice.

A lot of church defenders would rather berate and scold church quitters for quitting rather than fix the problems that are causing the quitter to quit.

They’re not going to stop the church exodus until they fix what is wrong with their churches.

The quitters try to tell them what is wrong, but when they do, they get scolded and blamed some more.

Deb wrote:

It’s amazing how many denominations are being impacted by the Neo-Cals.

They have an excellent marketing strategy. New Calvinist leaders are writing all the theology-provoking books and holding all the cool conferences. Young folks disillusioned with their parents’ way of doing church are flocking to the NC movement which offers an outlet for their rebellion and restlessness. Of course, their parents’ church is largely responsible … mainline American denominations have been apathetic, complacent, and prayerless for years. We desperately need a revival in the church and Great Awakening in our nation … but we need a Great Repentance in the church first. Religious movements of mere men distract us from doing the right thing. Debating theology is not preaching the Gospel … we need a breaking which will get us back to the Main Thing.

I just had an interesting conversation with a churched man at work. He knows I am taking a break from church attendance for the past few months. He said to me this morning that he goes to church even on the Sunday’s that he feels like sleeping in because he knows his kids are watching him and he doesn’t want his actions to ultimately send his kids to hell. Of course, his “kids” are over 30, so I know he is just sending a message to me (with my 8 year old daughter).

First off, I know that his reasoning is not soun, theologically. None of our actions can save others or damn them to hell. It was actually the worst motivational thing he could have said to me. Getting out of bed has little to do with my standing before God. When I was in the throes of depression, I wasn’t able to get out of bed many weekdays to go to work. Since I stopped going to church, my depression has lightened almost completely, my energy level is up, my migraines are nearly gone, and my family sees the difference. I do want to go to church, but not at the expense of my health and my family’s happiness. Our spirituality doesn’t fit into any nice little box like church attendance or affiliation.

Daisy wrote:

They’re not going to stop the church exodus until they fix what is wrong with their churches.
The quitters try to tell them what is wrong, but when they do, they get scolded and blamed some more.

Because just like the old Soviet Union, The System Is Perfect In Every Way and The System Can Do No Wrong.

refugee wrote:

(Actually, I would hang out in a coffee bar, if the coffee were really, really good and reasonably priced. One of my favorite places to loiter has been a coffee bar, like Starbucks, or a coffee/tea place. We even did a fair amount of our homeschool high school while hanging out at Starbucks (free wi-fi, you know, very handy).))

However, the rest of your list… yeah.

But I’ve had some good theological discussions at Starbucks.

Some of us prefer the “golden arches” where, in my neighborhood, you can get a senior coffee for 75 cents including tax with free refills.

@ brad/futuristguy:

I’ve seen so many terms for so many groups that it gets confusing, and some people use the terms to define different groups.

One Christian may use term “X” to define belief set “A,” while another Christian will use term “X” to define belief set “B.”

I’ve heard of nones, dones, unchurched, dechurched, and I forget what all.

Dave A A wrote:

mirele wrote:
They haven’t a clue as to what modern life is about.
—
(Dave AA said)
But are paid to “engage culture”

Great catch by Dave AA!

Yes, they say they want to engage in culture, but they really don’t. Not where it matters, anyway.

Some of them might want to “engage in culture” meaning constantly yell about politics or social causes from the pulpit, but if it means loving people where they are and helping them, they don’t want none of that.

Catherine wrote:

And, if nothing else, it would be so nice to just sit and have coffee with people who can also say, “Yeah, I got up with everything hurting today too.” And to congratulate each other on walking around the block even though you feel crappy. I think many churches aren’t doing that kind of thing well. We need to figure out how to love each other, even when they don’t have any thing to offer. And those of us with chronic illness have nothing at all.

Sallie, Catherine, so much of what you’ve said resonates with me.

Thanks for putting it out there. I feel less alone. Wish we could just sit and have coffee or tea together and talk and laugh and cry together.

I’m not even confident enough to post under my real name. Not yet, anyhow.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Because just like the old Soviet Union, The System Is Perfect In Every Way and The System Can Do No Wrong.

The only thing left in their future are more blog posts droning on about how belonging to a local brick and mortar is so very important, it’s commanded by God, and screaming at people who refuse to go to one.

Which means we can look forward to more blog posts by organizations such as ‘Together for the Gospel’ or ‘Desiring God’ that use cliches such as “marry the church, don’t date her.”

Their shaming or cranky blog posts aren’t going to convince the none, dones, and quitters to return.

XianJaneway wrote:

My firecracker is 2e

Having seen this mentioned twice now, I’m prompted to ask, “What is 2e?”