Posts tagged ‘church’

where we came from

This is the first post in a small progression to get to “where we are now.” “Where we came from” is probably covered in a composite of many posts here, but I don’t think is summed up in one place. This is a bit rambling, so please bear with the length.

The church we used to attend is a conservative, evangelical, charismatic church. A part of a denomination of sorts in reality, though it doesn’t call itself that. The organization is also characterized by a relatively high degree of authoritarian leadership. The pastors are accountable to others at their level and higher in the organization, but not to the congregation in any degree.

Some other characteristics…

Patriarchy, but the group calls it  “complentarian.” Meaning the roles of men and women are different, but “complementary” to each other. Which is a reaction to feminism and egalitarianism. Normal for conservative evangelicalism, but elevated to an exceedingly high level of importance.

Biblical literalism/inerrancy: Par for the course in conservative evangelical theology, and little different from fundamentalism in this regard.

Reformed theology: aka “Calvinism,” with a heavy emphasis on “penal substitutionary atonement”.

Charismatic: A belief in gifts from God exhibited among Christians; prophesy, tongues, healing, words of knowledge, etc. The group claims the distinctive of combining reformed theology with charismatic beliefs. Though the group over time has placed far more emphasis on “reformed,” to the point where “charismatic” is largely in the background.

We stopped going to the church in 2008. At that time I stopped agreeing with the doctrines, having questions in a place where there was no room for questions. It was harder for my wife, who had to deal with both the strains of my changes in belief and the potential for strains with her relationships with people she cared for (and cares for) deeply. To the degree that I questioned the churches system, I was seen as a danger to my wife holding the “right” beliefs. Any significant divergence from the church’s doctrines was seen as dangerous, and my wife was encouraged to “hold fast” to those doctrines. Needless to say, it strained our marriage, and I don’t know what things would have looked like if we had stayed there longer.

I have come to see many aspects of the church as cult-like. There may be a fine line between “cult-like” and a cult, but I don’t think it matters that much. How many cult-like behaviors does a group need to exhibit in order to be considered a cult? I asked my wife at some point if she ever wondered if we were in a cult. She didn’t think so at the time, understandably, and the question itself caused her concern.

The organization had enough problems that a couple of “survivor” blogs were created, where people who felt hurt by their experiences could interact. I was shocked when I read them, finding some validation in the idea that, “I’m not crazy, other people think this way too!” My wife was initially concerned with them being frequented by people who had some bitterness, partaking in gossip. Which to a degree is true, though I felt it was outweighed by the benefit of bringing things to light.

But something strange happened a year or two later. There was a crisis of leadership in the organization, and a whole lot of bad stuff was revealed. Which from an entirely selfish point of view was good for our marriage, because it supported some of my concerns about our involvement with the group, which were still issues between us even though we had already left. It enabled us to be on the same page more, rather than me coming across as only critical (which granted I can be), and her often being on the defensive.

I won’t link directly to the blogs or the organization, but here is a link to a post by a blogging friend who was at the same church I was, though we didn’t know each other at the time. He describes some of the cultish behavior in better detail. “Christianagnostic” on, How Smart People Get Sucked into Cults

So we left, and are glad to have left, and the emotional ties to our experiences there, both good and bad, are fading, and we are in a much better place, both figuratively and literally.

July 7, 2012 at 2:55 pm 9 comments

stress and controversy

I have been writing posts lately, just not posting them. And once a post sits for a little bit, it often describes thoughts or feelings I no longer have. And as such they seem disingenuous or perhaps fictional. So therefore no posts here lately.

We have been attending a New Church which is more progressive than the Old Church we previously attended. Actually, we attend a subgroup of the church which meets at a different time than the main body. This group is generally more progressive than the rest of the church, a bit postmodern and trending toward Emergent. The leaders are very comfortable with people of other faiths and beliefs, not needing things to fit into the black and white categories which is often the case in evangelicalism.

I’ve been commenting recently on a blog run by this group. They have broached some interesting and difficult (for the evangelical church) topics; gay marriage, evolution, and an article by a secular humanist critiquing Christianity. I have been very impressed by the intelligent and nuanced conversations, both from the more liberal and more conservative commentators.

Most of the commentators that is. Not surprisingly there are several who are more fundamentalist in their views. And unfortunately as is often the case, they tend to be the loudest voices, making statements that tend to close down dialog and conversation. Unnecessarily divisive in my opinion.

I think that most people, myself included, have a relatively limited capacity to deal with people with differing opinions. We are willing to be regularly nudged a little this way, or a little that way. But the larger shifts are often too difficult to handle unless absolutely necessary. I think that is why the adversarial commentators react the way they do. That, and maybe they have also been conditioned by the evangelical culture to think it is a good thing to “stand firm” in their opinions rather than listening to challenging ideas with an open mind. Yeah, I know, if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out…

I think the divisions in these discussions are generally better understood as studies in sociology than as a spiritual fight between light and darkness. The spiritual fight excuse gets brought out way too early, and is often brought up because the person is unwilling to contemplate their own faults in a conversation. It seems a cop out. Conversely, from the secular side, the mind of the Christian (or traditionalist) is too often called into question, with statements to the effect of, “Nobody with any sense would believe that superstitious religious nonsense.”

Having the same limited capacity, I unsubscribed from the blog and the comments yesterday. I try to remain open-minded, and be nudged a bit this way or that. But it is not worth it to me to go around feeling angry or stressed about what I read. And I know I am too quick to anger in those situations. In the end, we all tend to find fellowship with people who are more or less like-minded, and we all run the risk of feeling persecuted by those with differing opinions. But we don’t need to be completely locked into those mind sets either. And yes, I have peeked back at the blog since I first drafted this. A new post is up about Jennifer Knapp’s interview with Larry King, how exciting!

You can read a transcript of Jennifer Knapp’s interview, or watch the video if interested.

…and video part two,
part three,
part four

April 28, 2010 at 9:20 pm 7 comments


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 20 other followers

Recent Posts

current and recent reads

read:
not much

reading:
Russell Shorto: Descartes' Bones: A Skeletal History of the Conflict between Faith and Reason

to read:
???

I support Kiva.org

Kiva - loans that change lives

Categories

wordpress visitor