Being watched
Warning - rant ahead...
Apparently there are folks at BH who are watching me quite closely. As a friend who would know said, "Under a microscope." Someone noticed that I was not ther last week - and asked one of the elders about it. They were "suspicious" that I was with that "other group" (meaning Grace Pointe). Well, I was at GP. Two things were said to me in response. 1) You make it hard to defend you. 2) You can't have it both ways.
So I'd like to know - defend me against what, exactly? Also - what two ways are we talking about?
For me to be defended, that would imply an accusation of wrongdoing.
For there to be "both ways" would imply a division of right/wrong where one does not exist.
Somehow, somewhere, someday, the leadership at BH is going to have to take a firm, public stand. "We're going to SHEPHERD people. Not enable judgementalism or legalism. We're going to rise above pettiness, and we're going to REQUIRE that our those who should be spiritually mature ACT LIKE IT! We're going to unite on Jesus!! Only Jesus!! They'll KNOW we are Christians by our LOVE!"
Anyone have any advice on the loving way to handle this? Should I confront, or ignore? Or what?
Apparently there are folks at BH who are watching me quite closely. As a friend who would know said, "Under a microscope." Someone noticed that I was not ther last week - and asked one of the elders about it. They were "suspicious" that I was with that "other group" (meaning Grace Pointe). Well, I was at GP. Two things were said to me in response. 1) You make it hard to defend you. 2) You can't have it both ways.
So I'd like to know - defend me against what, exactly? Also - what two ways are we talking about?
For me to be defended, that would imply an accusation of wrongdoing.
For there to be "both ways" would imply a division of right/wrong where one does not exist.
Somehow, somewhere, someday, the leadership at BH is going to have to take a firm, public stand. "We're going to SHEPHERD people. Not enable judgementalism or legalism. We're going to rise above pettiness, and we're going to REQUIRE that our those who should be spiritually mature ACT LIKE IT! We're going to unite on Jesus!! Only Jesus!! They'll KNOW we are Christians by our LOVE!"
Anyone have any advice on the loving way to handle this? Should I confront, or ignore? Or what?
posted by MichaelPolutta at 2:55 PM
2 Comments:
zoe,
Thank you for the reply.
Yes, I am aware that at least one elder visits this blog on occasion. I have no idea whatsoever how many other BH folks read it - you are the very first commenter from BH that I know of. (just wish I were sure who you are...) And, as you mentioned, I have no desire to hide this topic from anyone. What saddens me is that most of the perspective with which I received the query was political. Not really concern for my soul (well, maybe?), and certainly not one based on relationship. If it were based on relationship, they would ask me directly.
What I meant by "both ways" was another way of saying that I do not agree that there is any scriptural issue between instrumental and non-instrumental. There is a "both ways" from a practical perspective, but not from a scriptural perspective. Perhaps I interpreted the statement other than was intended, but it hit me as "you can't truly worship in both places." I would disagree vehemently with that perspective. I also fully know that many (esp. at BH) will not agree with that. Beyond that, if I "can't have it both ways" means that I do not have the freedom to disagree, and even to practice what I believe, while remaining a member at BH, well, I don't know what else to say about that. I certainly have no objective to convert BH to being instrumental. I have never made the first move to even imply such. And anyone who asks me will get the same answer. (Suspicion is an indisious thing...)
Regarding GP - "Instrumental on occasion" is/was intentionally vague, I think. I know that at the beginning there was a lot more acappella at GP than there is now. Regardless, I would respond with this question - was their path written in stone back in April, or can they adapt as they see fit?
I'm less black & white regarding the division issue than it seems you are. I recall that Paul and John Mark (was that the right guy?) split up and the church was blessed for it. I also think that the BH eldership had a good opportunity to actually treat GP as a church plant - but folks who would never accept deviance from CoC practice would never accept GP being a plant either. Your Romans 16:17 quote is referring to people who are intentionally misleading people and intentionally misusing scripture. I personally do not think that either characterization applies to GP.
I'm personally sorry that you didn't feel you fit "their criteria." I'm not sure what you mean, I've never felt that. The cynicism and/or bitterness that I read into that paragraph I would look at as dangerous. I hope and pray you will guard your heart against bitterness.
I'm glad you are "at home" at BH. Regardless of what else happens, I believe that we are all striving, with our broken vessels, to serve our Savior and carry out His mission. I think it perfectly valid that the carrying out of that mission takes many different forms. All to His Glory, as I truly hope to live my own life - though I struggle mightily. Our adversary is indeed creative...
Michael -
I agree with you. Both comments are very telling.
Your needing defending, though, doesn't necessarily mean that you've done something wrong, (although it may be implied in this case) but that your particular viewpoint is being challeged.
The Truth needs defending. Which is a huge dimension at GracePointe! But, the Truth has not done anything wrong. The challenge is - what is Truth?
Over time, particularly over the last 60 years historically in our heritage, the Truth has become blended with traditional truths. There is the presentation of the Truth, years of discourse about the Truth, and obviously - since our ancestors were not liars! - then it is ALL truth! See the very subtle change? Truth comes to encompass 'truths' about it - but unfortunately - corrupting it.
GracePointe is all about simply trying to "unbind and set free" the Truth, and nothing but the Truth.
So how does one possibly go about exercising the Freedoms offered to us by Christ's sacrifice without being accused of being divisive? This is NOT a rhetorical question! How does one actually do this?
If this cannot be done as GracePointe has chosen, with all the best efforts taken to make as certain as possible that BOTH groups of Christians thrive - then how is it possibly even attempted? The quick answer is often to misunderstand the intent of Romans 16:17 - assuming that "the teaching you have learned" is a one-to-one corollary to the 'now' of today! Hmmm... did "the teaching" THEY (in context) learned include... say... Acapella music? Four-part harmony? Singing from songbooks? Or worse - singing off the wall! We need to make certain we fully understand the teaching (Christo-centric) they (this specific audience) had in fact learned - and had in fact been purposely and purposefully taught.
To set the record straight, the leadership at BH did NOT refer to the church plant as a church plant, but rather "the new church." I can send you a copy of the actual words read by Elmer Utley if you desire. And if folks want to use the inflammatory "split" word, I guess they can't be stopped. GracePointe is open to all seekers of Christ. But the heart and soul of GracePointe is in church planting.
Which is why GracePointe is committed to planting ANOTHER church before it begins to acquire its own real-property.
And has hired on a part-time basis Tom & Debbie Jones from Stadia (look 'em up on the web) who have had years of church-planting experience.
We ought not to make judgemental statements about being judgemental. The proof is in the pudding - as they say...
Post a Comment
<< Home