I would love a look at our history that is written like this and the follow-up to how to present their church’s history here. However, I do not believe that we can make similar claims. The primary reason is probably due to the fact that we haven’t taken ten years to go through ‘changes’. In many places two years is seen as too long, so the rhetoric is akin to “Okay, we wrestled for two years: now that it is finished, let’s get back to evanglizing.”

In any case, I present it as a means to present bad news, be honest about doctrinal errors and look to God for the future.

Read the question about “Why don’t you stress the positive elements of Dr. Armstrong’s work?” I believe it is a fair and honest response to the dynamic that is really going on. I believe the following quote will one day describe our current struggle to understand our history:

In our recent history, we have both good things and bad things, and we have found it difficult to deal with this mixture. When we mention the good, some members get angry. When we mention the bad, others get angry. It seems that these events are so recent that the emotional level is very high.

Some members suffered because of the church’s doctrinal errors. These people often have an emotional desire to emphasize the bad so that it not be done again. Other members found the church to be a spiritually energizing fellowship despite our doctrinal errors. These people often do not like it when the problems are mentioned. We receive letters from both kinds of people regularly. It is helpful for each group to know that the other exists: not everyone had the same kind of experiences in the same church, even in the same congregation.

I have to admit that I have trouble dealing with friends that keep trying to stress the positive and ‘move on’. I have always bristled at the mention of positive thinking and roundly denounced how American businesses and churches defined it. I’m biased. I want to acknowledge that there are people, different from me, that have had largely positive experiences in the ICC and strive to hold on to that good. I really want to see how that is NOT avoided the issues. I also do not want to force others to be like me in this way.

However, I don’t think it is unfair to ask for the same consideration. The fact that I would like our troublesome past to be more public is because I do not want our past to come back. I am not crying out for help. I am not licking my wounds. I am following my conscience. I do not want to be made to be conformed to always looking to the positive. I fear that people like me are marginalized as bitter complainers, when we are desperately trying to be Christians.

I confess, I truly do not understand the need to stress the positive. I perceive it as phony and unreal. However, I know that others do not understand me. I can be perceived as bitter and unable to enjoy life.

In short, it seems that a lack of value judgement is needed on this issue. More understanding needs to be experienced. People like me don’t want to see the past repeated. People not like me want others to experience the good in Christianity. Both of us are needed.