Should I Stay or Should I Go Now?
| 9 |
 |  |  |
| 0:00 | -56:55 |
Conflict feels like it’s everywhere these days. Church communities, old friendships and even families are being pulled apart by tensions over politics, the pandemic, race and more. When should we stay in a church or relationship? When should we perhaps leave? Is there a biblical model to navigate these decisions and what comes in the aftermath? Join David and Curtis to discuss how we as Christians should approach these perplexing questions.
Show Notes:
-The Russell Moore Show: Beth Moore Didn’t Expect Us to Be Us
Thanks for this podcast on what I think is an existential question facing the church. This is not necessarily a new question, but is perhaps getting some new steam due to political tensions you discuss. We have always had the opportunity, and sometimes compulsion, to divide in communities of faith. Historically we saw this in response to theology (Reformation and reformations of the Reformation), response to experience (pietism, the Great Awakening, etc.) or response to important questions of faith (slavery, civil rights, gender roles and the like). In recent times, the question of identity as reflected in politics is a stressor. There will always be some causes acting to pull us apart. I think David and Curtis hit on the essential question - what drives me to take action?
My family left a church about ten years ago, before the current political environment really manifested itself. We were part of that community for ten or twelve years. My wife and I served on committees and as elders, Sunday School teachers, Youth Group advisors and several other informal roles. We knocked heads with some people and got on well with others and weathered most things fairly well but with some sense of fighting city hall on many things. There were a few well entrenched families that would have their way and others like us who were 'new' needed to deal with that. I think a lot of that is the effect of being in a smaller community (even one that had grown quite a bit in the past 10-15 years. I always felt a bit philosophical about these differences.
What caused us to leave was an event where one of the young male teens was guilty of some action of physically grabbing a girl. I never got a very detailed description of what this exactly entailed. The young man is the son of a woman with who we had served on various groups and knew pretty well. He was always a bit withdrawn and shy. When this happened his mother told us he was identified as having Asperger's Syndrome, which really fit behaviors we saw in him. The church governing body launched deliberations on this case and concluded that the young man would be asked to no longer attend the church. I was told that the elders felt that they needed to do this to protect the body from his behavior and the congregation from legal consequences. I believe the minister spoke with the mother and offered to 'counsel' the boy. My wife and I were both very unhappy about this outcome and conflicted about what we could or should do. We ended up engaging with one of the current elders about this for a week or two but ended up disengaging from the congregation. We felt that we could not effectively continue in active membership and mission with people that would discharge a young person over a single action without a more loving and engaged effort to understand and guide his growth in the church family.
We ended up transferring our membership to another congregation in a nearby city. We maintained contact with some of the members of the first church but only as a means to explain our reason for leaving. We did not want to make our leaving a statement or 'about us'. I had no desire to be disruptive. We just could not remain without showing our pain over this and had no sense that there would be any reflection by the congregation over this expulsion.
We continued to have contact with members of that congregation as members of the same community, and went to viewings when elderly members passed away, etc. I remember being told at some of these events that we were missed, and they needed us to return. I always had the feeling that this was a reflection of our relatively high level of participation and financial support, but not any real interest in our views or what caused us to leave. This can all be pretty tricky stuff to negotiate and I knew from reaching out to other ex-members that there is always something to unpack with people if they are even willing to talk. I think most congregations do not put any effort into pursuit. The minister of the church we left (the one at the time it happened) had a view that if you don't want to be here then there isn't much that we can do. I think this is very common.
As a minister I wish more folks were stayers like David and Curtis. My experience most are goers and the standards for going are pretty low on the laity side. I also think the standards for going are pretty low on the clergy side. My first pastorate I quit because of the culture. The second I hung in there but did not get my contract renewed. My current church I am more content even though my hopes coming in did not match reality. This is often the case. Interviewing like dating is a mutual exercise in fudging the truth. I have found that if you are a goer than you will find something to be disappointed with wherever you go. Instead we should find the secret to contentment in plenty and in want.
As far as staying I think the New Testament is particularly weighted toward faithfulness, long suffering (patience), and staying. But I would disagree with Curtis point that the main focus of the New Testament is unity within a diversity of opinions. The Trinity did not have a diversity of opinions. They did not spend all of time arguing with each other. Jesus did not say to the Father this cross thing is a bad idea and the father forced him to go anyway. Though separate people they had ultimate humility and thus were always in agreement. The Son only did what he saw his Father doing. The Holy Spirit glorified the Father and the Son. Perhaps there is diversity in the sense of the Trinity having different personalities and focuses. But they are always working together even when we talk about one over the other. I have found that agreeing to disagree is a poor strategy for unity. Even Paul does not call people to agree to disagree but to agree in the Lord (Philippians 4:2). I do think having high regard for each other is a good way to reach agreement. The Wright brothers fought cats and dogs but because they did they built a plane before pigs flew. They had the humility to admit when an idea was working and when the other one had made a better point. Often in our discussion of theology and study of scripture we often will not admit when the other side has a point. For example I worshiped in a congregation like Curtis' that focused on racial reconciliation. While reconciling ethnic differences is a point of the New Testament I am not sure it translates well to all our racial debates. It is also a good point that as a percentage of officer interactions very few unarmed people are shot by police. I don't think Michael Brown and Brianna Taylor should be in the list of Black Lives Matters cases of police injustice. Michael Brown because the justice department disproved that case Brianna Taylor because that was a horrible accident but not the fault of the officers. I said as much at a racial reconciliation conference. It was not well received. The scriptures call us to reason together so we may be the universal church. More often than not we agree to disagree thinking that will bring unity. But when you sweep sensitive issues under the rug or leave them unresolved they tend not to stay that way.
I do think there are appropriate times to go. But as David said we must be aware of our nature and self examine that nature. Counseling couples in marriage I have found women in abusive relationships that should go but want to stay. I have also met a lot of women who left their husbands for reasons I find questionable. Lori Gottilieb makes this case in the book Marry Him the Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough. She points out how many women are overly critical of their husbands for things that most men would shrug off. In fact 2/3 of divorces are initiated by women for reasons of emotionally compatibility. I have read research that men need to take more feedback from their wives. I think the bigger problem is women having unrealistic expectations for marriage.
Jesus does call us to shake off the dust off our feet. But that is in terms of evangelizing people who have not heard the gospel. When we make a covenant in a church or in a marriage we should be willing to stay longer in most cases than non Christians think reasonable. And we should learn to speak the truth in love to each other without using catch phrases like stop being defensive or stop taking it so personally. There is no legitimate way to respond to those statements. They are simply ways of shutting down debates that produce uncomfortable emotions.
In regards to staying together when your politics differ as Christians this is the best book I have ever read
https://www.amazon.com/Love-over-Fear-Befriending-Polarized-ebook/dp/B07JJ2FY2P/ref=sr_1_2?crid=OAA2VVAG18DI&keywords=love+over+fear&qid=1642370862&sprefix=love+over+fear%2Caps%2C113&sr=8-2