Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.
Gordon raises some good points about how we speak to one another. There’s a conference in Chicago that will be a fragile time for some as there is a bit of concern from everyone about what it will be like. It would not do any good for some bombast to stir up trouble for the sake of generating excitement, or some thoughtless, overzealous person ruin a good chance for brotherhood. I may not take the conference as seriously as some, but I do not want to hurt others while I am there.
The Bible is also quite clear about the power of words and the prudence of wisdom. To that end, I have to say that I have been reckless at times in situation outside of this blog. I don’t want to be reckless. As always, I want to be real. As the book of Proverbs is about making wise choices, I truly want to choose wisdom in my words and actions. I pray to do so.
However, I do not believe that critical thinking is always inherently negative. By definition, a person has to give up their own preconceived notions when they encounter another person’s ideas. Being stubborn is anti-thinking and it benefits no one. Proverbs talks quite a bit about those that choose to be stubborn and unhearing. The outcome of critical thinking can be positive. However, when it’s not, no one is served by ignoring the criticism under the umbrella of ‘being positive’. The same God that calls to us and says, “Come let us reason together,” can not also turn around and shut down thought when a person tries to reason through. Claiming the high ground by only focusing on positive things is a true thought stopper, and one that is antithetical to any principal of relationships. In Ephesians, parents are warned not to exasperate their children. How much more exasperating is it when honest thought is met with quick dismissal? This doesn’t even cover God’s conversations with Elijah and Habbukkuk, David’s Psalms, or Ecclesiates. In all those cases, there was an honest questioning, but none of them with dismissed out of hand.
Critical thinking, however, is not reactionary thinking. I know that I have been quite guilty of that and I take responsibilty for what I’ve said. Reactive thinking also stops any reasonable thought process. Again, critical thinking is abandoning preconceived notions in order to find the truth. The truth may be good or it may be bad, but I contend that it will always set you free.
Gordon’s article says:
After churches appeared to be past the upheaval of 2003, and the members in general were feeling that real changes had occurred in the church and were going to continue occurring, members still were leaving their congregations. In talking to some of them about their decision, the answers they gave simply did not add up. The idea of leaving a group of people who had been close friends for years over issues that were in process of being dealt with simply did not make sense. What was happening? I think they had been subjected to a practical form of deprogramming without realizing it — at their own hands and at the hands of their friends. They had engaged in just too much negative talk about the church for too long, and now their foundations of faith (especially toward the church) were irreparably damaged. They couldn’t get past the past, as it had been etched in such negative ways in their minds and hearts.
This is why I included my three intentional deprogramming instances. I have talked to people all over the US and when I ask them why they leave when things are about to change, their reasons add up perfectly fine to me. This is what needs to be discussed. It seems obvious to Gordon, but the exact opposite conclusion is equally obvious to me. Here are the reasons people have told me why they left:
- Nothing had changed or changes are cosmetic.
- I have been marginalized.
- I have no real friends to talk to.
- Too many painful memories.
- I want Sunday worship to be about God and not issues.
- I’ve tried, but I just can’t trust the leaders here.
Hope deferred makes the heart sick. A person can only ‘be patient’ for so long before it becomes necessary to cut their losses. The truth is that the amount of real change from congregation to congrgation is very different. I would consider South Florida’s commitment to get outside help a real effort to change. However, I would consider other efforts like those described by one that left Denver as less than satisfactory. It is true that I was not there, but I trust the word of someone I’ve met in person and that spent many years defending the church.
Is it fair to ‘rate’ how other churches are doing? I think so. 1 Corinthians 2:15-16 talks about a spiritual man making spiritual judgements. This is not to armchair quarterback a congregarion at all. Lord knows that we have enough management from afar; forcing change from afar is the same thing. My church wants to change and we look to see what others are doing as a way to improve ourselves. Left to our own devices, I believe many good ideas would be missed. It looking at some church’s efforts and in talking with members there, I’ve seen good and not-so-good ideas. We have certainly had our share of no-so-good ideas as well. This kind of discernment is not a condemnation for people honestly searching the will of God – even if I do not agree with them. I can still love my brother, but not do what he does.
When the rules disappeared, what many experienced is that their ‘best friends’ were only friends on paper. Once no one was forcing them to be someone’s friend, folks found themselves alone. It is an invalid assumption that everyone leaving (even most people leaving) have any real friends at all. Sure there are tons of acquantinces, but I mean real friends that you can talk to about anything and you know they’ll hear you. I was fortunate, I moved into a town that welcomed me with open arms. I have people I can talk to and they believe in me, despite the fact that they do not always understand. They don’t have to understand me- I am just glad that I have a real sense of family. Love truly does cover over a multitude of sins.
Many of the other reasons people have shared with me may be considered more emotional in nature. I do not believe that these are any less valid. Some people feel abused. We can argue over the numbers or percentages, but it is a universal effect in our fellowship of churches. These emotional needs should be addressed openly and honestly. Sometimes professional help may be necessary, I know that it is a possible option for me. These people should receive, at the very least, a public apology for the abuse they have endured.
At my own church, we had a woman that was essentially thrown away by church leadership because of her past. She held on for years to be heard: all she wanted to do was repent of her sin and become a member of the church again. At first it was discipline, but it became neglect as new evangelists came and went and never ever talked to her. When we had the small group open forums, she told her story and all of us embraced her. The evangelist tearfully apologized for her neglect. Her baptism two months later was a bright point during an otherwise troubling time. She now heads up a ministry whose only purpose is the encouragement of others. She has been there for people moving in and folks going through hard times. She has been there for me and my fiancee and she continues to do so. I am certain that people like her, in more and less extreme circumstances, exist just like her. There are good-hearted people that have been hurt, but cannot feel loved by God because of the sins of our churches.
I agree that a constant diet of criticism will make a person jaded. I got that way after a few months of it. I’ve seen valued friends go from honest critic to jaded cynic because of a constant influx of so-called negative material. I’m not talking about that, that kind of criticism has no basis in critical thinking because it assumes that the speaker (or author) is right and the listener (or reader) is wrong. I agree that if all you listen to is the faults of a group of people, you will stop liking those people. It’s basic psychology. However, the so-called remedy is too broad. Trying to focus only on positive thoughts kills critical thinking, and that is much needed in all our fellowship of churches, especially in those that appear to have changed little since 2003.
It is true that a man will be judged for all his careless words. How will Jesus be judged by his? He called the Pharisees a brood of vipers, sons of Hell, whitewashed tombs and blind guides. He got angry at them (Mark 3:1-3) and even overturned the moneychangers tables. He had no tolerance for their dogmatic and opressive religous system that nullified the commands of God. As such, I do not get upset at someone, even a person defending the old system, that says strong things. I say strong things. It’s not because I don’t love leaders or somehow have a vendetta against our fellowship of churches. I don’t. I say strong things because I am honest. In working out our common faith, the messnger and the tone of the message is never the point. As it says in 1 Thess 5, test everything, hold on to what is good. If the Bereans are noble for reaserching Paul, I would hope modern Bereans are not set aside just to maintain the staus quo.
Again, I look forward to the Chicago conference. It is formatted for discussions and I eagerly await the chance for us to work out these issues together.