February 06, 2008
What God Has Joined Together
I met a woman from Chicago who told me her church had gone through a split. The more traditional members went one way and the younger, more progressive crowd went the other. My new friend found herself in the position of being one of the older members in the progressive group. “After the split neither group had enough women to make the Women’s Ministry effective. The traditional folks had all the mature teachers and we had all the young students.” She laughed, “Now the women from both churches meet together in order to have our Bible studies.” So much for thinking we control the choice to separate and divorce ourselves from one another. Tell me God doesn’t have a sense of humor!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Gail;
-----I think God does have a sense of humor, for now. It is tied to His mercy. But there will come a time when the laughing is over. Jesus said, “And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.” (Math 12:31). We need to be real careful in coming to our beliefs. For when we stand upon something strong enough to say someone else is so wrong that we must separate, we make a statement about ourselves and the Bible. For God expects us to come to His Word for the shaping of our beliefs. If we stop short of opening His Word, if we instead shine our reasoning upon our own experiences and learning, then we have set ourselves in the place of the Word. If we say that any part of the Word does not matter so that our own reckonings may proceed, then we have placed the Word under our own judgment. If we indeed open the Word and twist it to support our own positions, then we have shown irreverence for the Word. As far as I know, thank God, He considers the naivety of the action. For if we irreverently set ourselves in the place of the Word, judge the Word, or twist it, we make the statement not about a bound fistful of printed pages, but rather, we make the statement about the one who authored the Bible, the Holy Spirit. To show irreverence toward, insult, judge, or take the place of the Holy Spirit is blasphemy. The Word matters in our spiritual lives, and our humility towards it is of paramount importance.
-----Divisions and splits regarding any issue unaddressed by the Word itself are disregard for the Holy Spirit. Our unity is of paramount importance to Him. Jesus prayed for us to be one so that the world would know He was sent by God (John 17: 21,23). Paul beseeched the Romans to glorify God in their unity (Rom 15:5), and he told the Ephesians to make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit. (Eph 4:3). Why are our determinations of how our brothers and sisters should join us in worship more important than unity? Didn’t Paul tell us to strive to please our neighbor for his good and edification (Rom 15:2)? We deny that command when we tell our brothers and sisters that their traditional hymns and traditional worship culture are no longer relevant and they are going to have to celebrate our way or hit the highway. It spits upon the very heart and soul of fellowship; it snubs the Holy Spirit, judges His call to unity, and usurps His place.
-----Instead, the Lord expects us to deny our behavior and allow the Word to retain its place. We are to spit upon our ambitions that chase our neighbors off and run counter to even one passage of the Word. We are to snub our vein conceits, judge our willingness to divide, and give Him His place by surrendering our demands. It was our unity by which Jesus expected the world to be convinced, not our contemporary celebration services. So, what these people who call themselves “progressive” do is not progress. Progress is a movement forward, a movement toward a goal. I suppose if one’s goal was to destroy, destruction could be considered progress. But destruction is not God’s goal. His concept of progress involves the expectation of improvement. But if one’s goals destroy the unity that is greatly important to the Lord, then one’s goals have not been defined in His terms, progress is actually regress, and attitude is on the road to blasphemy of the Spirit. It would behoove the domineering brethren to lay down their guitars for a spell, and do some genuine pleasing of those whom they have offended, ridiculed, denied, and chased off, before God stops snickering at their blasphemous behavior.
Dear Mr. Corey,
I can definitely see both sides of the frustration over the Worship issues. I am a young 30 something who has a lot of growing to do in the Lord. I entered the scene at the same time your letter hit my mailbox, so I was not there and aware of all that led up to the situation. As a young Believer, I was very confused. It was all actually somewhat of a stumbling block for me. From your letter, I saw someone tied up in tradition, upset about music, furniture, (disputable matters) and domination by the leadership (something for definite concern, but was it all over disputable matters?).
I can completely understand what you are saying, I adore the Hymns. I was saved in a church that sang traditional hymns and they definitely mean a great deal to me. There were definitely days though (quite a few of them) that those hymns were sung with little enthusiasm and upon returning one Sunday for a visit (we had moved to a new city) I thought, WOW, I didn't realize what Worship could really be. I also must say that the Worship and the Word were what drew our young family to this place.
I can Worship traditional or contemporary because I am Worshiping. I feel like all that matters to the Lord is my heart. I'm willing to learn new songs as long as they glorify and praise Him. The hymns were new to me when I learned them. I have also not seen anywhere in scripture that it tells us exactly how we are to Worship. A lot of it really seems to come down to personal preference in the ways that each one connects with the Lord. I definitely feel that we should never leave a generation behind as though they don't matter. I'm also sure that throughout history, worship has obviously evolved in different ways. What were the compromises between the generations for the sake of unity? Did some have to die to themselves? The hymns we sing today have not all been there from the beginning of organized Worship.
I have been reading all of your comments and I see that you have a heart for the Lord and that you are very well versed and have much insight. You and Gail are wonderful writers too. To all: I am obviously not any kind of writer, please excuse my lack of eloquence and proper punctuation. :) You have definitely made me think a lot. I was wondering, was anyone on the other side (contemporary) willing to meet in the middle at all? Were you willing to meet in the middle? I'm asking because I don't know. I saw all of this as a huge division in the body, full of pride and stubbornness as to who was wrong or right. I thought it was all really sad, all the way from the letter I received, to your expulsion by the elders. I felt that it should have never had to escalate to the point that it did.
I know the; Our way or the highway, we don't care who leaves attitude that is going on. I feel that it is all very devastating to the Body and I'm sure really to the Lord. But from my very outside perspective, all I could see, was no one willing to budge on either side. You write a lot about unity and I didn't see that on either side from where I was sitting. I am in NO way making judgment of any kind, just asking questions to better understand the context of your writing. I know I don't know the entire story. Was there a willingness on the part of more traditional Believers to allow contemporary Worship to be part of the service for those that connected with the Lord in that way, as you do with hymns? Did they all stand or sit and refuse to sing the contemporary songs because they were angry? (As I saw that happening...I'm not talking about the first time we sang a song either.) Does that glorify the Lord? That if they aren't singing a hymn they refuse to Worship Him at all? Were you asking for a nice combination of both so that there could be unity in the body? Did you want the hymns sung in slower time with only the piano? No other songs at all? At what point do we lay down our swords over the WAY things are done for the sake of unity and peace among us? I have seen some hymns being sung, but maybe not enough, not the right way? I don't know. I don’t necessarily like to rehash what has been done, but your mention of it got me thinking again.
Sincerely,
Still Confused
Anonymous,
Thanks for joining the conversation. For a young 30-something let me compliment you on your heartfelt, mature and well written comments.
As you mentioned, Steve Corey has a heart for the Lord and is very well versed. I too appreciate his Biblical insight and will be interested to read his response to your thoughts.
Gail
Dear Anonymous;
-----First: please allow me to put forth and support all of my disagreements with your comment of Feb 07, 2008. You are some kind of writer! And you need to know that. I think they call it a good kind of writer. In fact, a very good kind of writer. Your writing is simple and clear. You know what you are trying to say, you say it directly, and you say it in good order. As I read it I kept wanting to read more. And that is what makes writing good. Gee. Now, uh, what else can I disagree with you about? I don’t know. Maybe I can think of something.
-----Actually, I think you have a very good understanding of the spiritual dysfunction at your church. It is not the kind of dysfunction that would kill the spirituality dead, as if there were outright debauchery, thievery, or immorality being taught there. But it is the kind of dysfunction that entered the church nearly as soon as the second century AD opened. And there has been plenty of it to share for all of the churches since. That doesn’t mean that the church was no longer the Bride of Christ, nor any longer cherished by Christ. It just means that the spotlessness of her dress is not by her own washboard, but by the Lord’s mercy.
-----For you are certainly right in feeling that all that matters to the Lord is your heart. I feel that all that matters to Him is my heart as well. And I know that is a true statement, because I know of a short spell coming when my eyes will close for the last time to this world. I will be completely alone in that moment, except beside Him. All that will matter then will be my heart, its being of the right fiber, for the intimacy will be profound. In my closet at home, and in the confine of my mind, my heart matters. But that only allows me to move on to the next matter of more importance, your heart, Gail’s heart, the hearts of my wife and children, and whatever heart may come within my proximity at the moment.
-----This is where Jesus Christ divides the sheep from the goats. It was Satan that taught the ultimate care for one’s own heart. It was Jesus who taught the ultimate care for your neighbors’ hearts. He taught that care first to His disciples and to Paul. In turn they wrote it into His Word. Since you have been reading our blogs regularly, I will not bore you further with all the references I continually make to the Scriptures regarding pleasing your neighbor for his good and edification, looking to other’s interests, doing good to all men, especially to those of the faith, etc. The Lord set into the order of the new life a love and concern for hearts of others. John, the disciple who was closest to Jesus, tells us that we know we belong to the truth by our honest and truthful concern for our brethren (I John 3 esp. 3:17-19).
-----So you are right in that it does come down to a personal preference for the ways that each one connects to the Lord. When I am alone I connect to Him in the ways that I personally prefer, and I am sure you do the same. But when I am with you, I must give regard and consideration to the way you connect with Him, also. From the ideas you expressed in your writing, I am sure you realize the same. This is love. This is the nature of the body. He leads us to concern and regard for one another, not to the selfish ambition or vein conceit of our own ways that will only leave any generation behind.
-----In the early 1970’s, I spent a few months in a Pentecostal church. There I learned a flare for the lively music and celebration you experience so much at your church. In that same year, when I began attending your church regularly, I assure you, I missed those lively, emotionally meaningful services. I, too, had to open the dusty old hymnal and mouth the liturgical lyrics to the centuries-old melodies. I felt left behind. But I understood the worship service was not about me. So I decided to find meaning in it to which I could relate, rather than expecting the worship services to serve me with the Pentecostal sounds I felt were expressive. Consequently, I began to realize these dusty old hymns had as much meaning to those who had been singing them for all their lives, as Pentecostal stuff had to me. Meaning is what you learn and build from your experiences. And the people I was with certainly meant more as they were, than what I thought they should be.
-----I was also glad to have some contemporary tunes mixed in with the old hymns in the mid 1990’s. I was like you. I was ready for it. But I also realized the services were not about me. Others were not ready. And there was complaining among the folks who knew nothing but that old time gospel sound. To them, any contemporary tune was a threat. I do not know if they understood, or just feared, that their familiar way of worshipping the Lord was about to be taken away from them. But it was taken away from them. And that generation was left behind as though they did not matter. I understood that the change meant simply an adjustment to new sounds, but they did not. My heart was not the point. Theirs was, albeit, as you pointed out several times, history proceeds and things change. Usually, the new sounds come upon us as they are written and found to be actually good, quality pieces. They become assimilated into the mix of sounds we have already had for centuries, and as life goes on, things change more. The coming of the new generation should not get blocked out, nor should the older, passing generation get thrown out. But the there has been no mix made. Just replacement. The new generation is served, the old has been booted.
-----Many of the folks who had grown up with traditional church culture understood this and compromised. Others did not even ask for compromise, they just accepted the entire change with no consideration of themselves requested. But as it is in any group of people, there are those few on both fringes, the fringe that wants all change, and the fringe that wants no change. Though these brothers and sisters were, and are the problem, these brothers and sisters are still brothers and sisters to whom the way of the Lord also directs our service. For neither can they be simply left behind. Upon that point is where the proper solution would have averted all of the subsequent dysfunction your church has suffered.
-----One of the men in those days, 1996, 7, 8 or about, was an elder, ambitiously involved in changing the church. In his terms, he had looked around the church one Sunday morning and noticed that, before too many more years, most of the church was going to die off, because they were all old people. I should have pointed out to him at that time that I was not very old, only 43 or so, neither was my wife, my daughters, he himself (who is younger than I), or many other middle aged and younger people whose company I enjoyed there. But that was before my more cantankerous years. His office of business was in the same office suite as mine. In fact, he worked at his desk across his office room, across the hall from mine where I sat working at my desk facing him. Being face to face all day, and only some thirty feet apart, we had many lively conversations and debates about the changes he and a few other men in the church were trying to make. The more traditionally inclined folks were not dealing well with the change. My message to him was always, “Brother, it is not that the church does not have to go in this direction. It is that the church has to move very slowly at first, until everyone, EVERYONE, is on the wagon. Then, and only then, put the peddle to the meddle, smoke up the tires, and leave the traditional culture in the dust.”
-----But the need for the change was too great. There had been books read and seminars attended that convinced these leaders to change the church, now, quickly, and thoroughly. They felt they were ushering in a new way of presenting the gospel that was so important their brethren’s feelings were not relevant. That of course meant their brethren were no longer relevant, either, because a man is what he feels. And that is neither the message of John, Paul, or Jesus. It became sadly apparent that, although the church had a large and malleable middle from which good, functional love could be nurtured, the old traditional fringe was to be left behind, because the new contemporary fringe was in control. And that fringe understood itself to have received a vision from God, a vision of such importance, that the feelings of their own brethren no longer needed consideration. Unity was when everyone agreed with the leaders. And behold, division was created.
-----Things did not go well, as you have gathered from Gail’s blog-site. After a few years of effort to change the church into what was then called a “purpose-driven” paradigm, much of the new culture of celebration had replaced much of the old culture of tradition. And many, many folks had left. Those who left were not only of the traditional fringe. Some of the malleable middle also left, because it was apparent that not only had the reverential feeling generated by the traditional culture gone away, but the actual reverence for the Lord generated by the merciful treatment of the brethren was also spilt into the dirt. As the final structures of the purpose-driven paradigm were proving to be impossible to build into the church, the music minister wrote a letter of reflection to the rest of the ministers. That letter was unfortunately intercepted, copied, and circulated among the traditional fringe of the church. In it were some very, unflattering and disparaging remarks made about those still lamenting their being the generation left behind.
-----This is where I could no longer bear the sight of one fringe forcing its ways upon an entire church, and especially impugning the other fringe. I knew that to be partisanship. Favoritism. The attitude of “Me and mine count, who are you?” I slammed my foot down in the mud puddle, I know. And everyone got a little muddy, I know. But my conscience drove me to call both of those fringes into the Scriptural thoughts about one another. I wrote a letter to the elders and ministers to be read by the traditional fringe as well. Since the elders and ministers are supposedly the more mature through whom Scriptural examples are made to the flock, my call was mostly upon them to become the examples of love, consideration, thoughtfulness, and unselfish servitude which the New Testament portrays. “Open yourselves to the traditional fringe and serve what they need, too,“ was my message. “Life does not remain the same. Change is inevitable. Open yourselves to at least some change,“ was my message to the traditional fringe.
-----Although my efforts exploded within the situation, and many at the church are yet hostile towards me because of it, a few other events lead to an indication made by the leaders that there was going to be some changes, maybe such as compromise. The church went into a period of waiting and anticipation for about a year and a half. But only waiting and anticipation. Compromise never came. Although the leaders, for a while, would acknowledge the need for compromise in the hallways when that topic was brought to them, their acknowledgment never actually made it into the worship service.
-----Yet, there was a lot of compromise made, if you could call it that. It was not made by those who left the church, or refused to attend the worship services. Nor was it made by the leaders who created this division for those who agreed with them. It was made by many of those you sit beside and celebrate with. You do not know who they are, because they so compromised for unity that they gave themselves up for it and allowed the leaders to have their own way with the church. It is at both times a noble compromise, for there is no longer any resistance given by them, and a pitiful compromise, because there are still unsatisfied yearnings for traditional culture in the hearts of those left behind. Although they have given themselves up for the leaders‘ ways, the leaders have given precious little in return.
-----Though it was made for the sake of unity, their compromise did not achieve unity. It achieved only silence. It did not achieve peace, it achieved only possession. For unity comes from all hearts towards all other hearts. Unity is in agreement, and agreement is with one another. The contemporary leaders gave nothing for the needs of traditional culture. In their understanding, traditional culture was on the way out, and it needed to be hurried out. Any respect given it, or use of it, would only prolong its life in the hearts of those who needed it. And that would not serve the purpose of being rid of it. Therefore, it behooved the contemporary leaders to take possession of the worship service, and not share that service at all with their traditional brethren. That is not unity. That is not peace. That is not love. That is a generation being left behind.
-----I wrote many letters to the elders and ministers during those few years leading up to the letter Char and I sent to the church. All of those letters called upon the leaders for compromise. All of those letters were written from me to them, and were shared with no one else by me or them, until the time they rejected my cries for compromise. Many times I requested meaningful dialogue. But the leaders never opened up that opportunity until we took the issue to the church. They always remained as quiet and to themselves as possible about the fact that there were people in the church who were hurting and who were requesting compromise. Those few times they did acknowledge these communications, they were spoken of as evil complaining and selfish desires. But those letters were not written without prayer and thought and examination of the Scripture. I did not just lay pen to paper to spew my own feelings. I saw people being mistreated by the leaders of the church; they were my brothers and sisters, and I loved them. And the Scriptures agreed. I had had enough of the broken promises for compromise. I had had enough of the sincere letters of mine and of others addressing a serious issue being ignored by the church leaders as if they were written from cranks concerning pettiness. I had had enough of church leaders thinking God had called them to lead the church into their own ideas, rather than into the Scriptures. I had had enough of these precious older brethren approaching the ministers to request more traditional culture and being dressed down as if they were obnoxious children. My letters to the leaders, having been written and delivered in private were my approaches to my brethren who were sinning against me, and against others. Those who also wrote to them and spoke to them face to face concerning these same issues, were my witnesses. And there were many!
-----I wrote the letter I sent to the church upon the Scriptural grounds of Mathew 18:15-19. In it I did not call for the church leaders to be ignored or rebelled against, but rather to be encouraged to compromise, as had been requested from them for years. Nor was that letter written willy-nilly. I spent five months carefully grooming it so it would contain no falsehoods, so it would reflect simple Scriptural principles, and so the reflection of those principles would illuminate what the leaders had been doing in causing the division in your church. Read the letter again carefully. There is not in it one word calling for the ousting or ignoring of one leader. It calls for the church to exhort the leaders to the Scriptural treatment of ALL of the brothers and sisters. It called for the end of the division.
-----In fact, Brother Anonymous, I was reluctant to send the letter to the church, even though it had become apparent the leaders were denying the Scriptures prohibiting their behavior towards these traditional brethren. So I wrote one last letter, one direct, plain, outright call for a meeting to address the possibility of compromise, and gave it to the elders and ministers only. I called it the trigger letter. If they would agree to meaningful acknowledgment of these matters and their traditional brethren, then the letter to the church would sit on the shelf. If not…
-----Now, this is true. After I wrote the trigger letter, I let it sit. Char asked a few times when I was going to give the trigger letter to the leaders. I told her that the Holy Spirit knew the proper timing. I didn’t know how He would cause it, but the trigger letter would be delivered by His timing. Then, one Friday evening, I just turned to Char and said, “This Sunday morning, Honey, we give them the letter.” That Sunday morning before worship service, I placed a copy of the trigger letter, calling for compromise, into the correspondence boxes of each elder and minister of your church. We then went directly into the worship service. Then your preacher delivered a great sermon on the necessity of everyone in the church to compromise, including the leaders. Later that afternoon my letter calling for compromise evidently became trash, for nothing of it, or of what your preacher preached, ever happened. I took this as the confirmation that the sin of partisanship and disregard towards the Word and beloved brethren needed to be discussed by the church.
-----All of this was a huge division in the church. But where do you suppose the stubbornness and pride originated? Where do you suppose it has been perpetuated? I too felt it never should have escalated to the point it did. No one was demanding the leaders to give up all of what they honestly considered to be necessary for the church. At least, that is, nobody except a few of the traditional fringe. Most of us agreed that contemporary was needed. I figured the fringe would eventually compromise to a tolerable degree after the leaders had done so second. Remember, the leaders could not be the first to compromise, we discussed above who were the first to compromise.
-----Although the invitation to go down the street to the church you might like better no longer verbally stands, you are perceptive in sensing the “our way or the highway” attitude that has silently replaced it. This has been devastating to the body and to the Lord especially because there are more on both sides willing to compromise than not. In every group there are key figures who lead the overt thought and attitudes of the group. Not the covert, but the overt. The rest of the group knows they are to shelf the covert thought in order for the group to move forward without friction. This is man’s system of “unity” which is actually not at all unity, but despotism. God’s unity is when both the overt and covert thinking of the group can come to the fore for its Scriptural measurement. These few key people in your church have been preventing that. And for your church to have the true, Scriptural unity of love, these key people need to be lovingly led to a deeper understanding of fellowship. Don’t get me wrong, these key people are not sinful men and women. They are very ambitious for the Lord, and they are certain God has shown them the way the church must go. If everyone in the church felt the same, I am sure then the church could speed off that way without damage to the body or the Lord.
-----But there are other people in the church who are also just as knowledgeable in the Word, just as ambitious for the Lord, just as relevant to the Lord, who are of the generation left behind. Is their reluctance to follow these key individuals disobedience because leaders are to be blindly followed, or is it obedience because Scriptural principles are to be followed? The answer lies in each heart that thinks upon the question. Meanwhile, the leaders’ ambitions are overwhelmingly toward the contemporary serving for those connected to the Lord in that way. The bitterness the traditional folk feel is the direct result of scant little familiar culture being served for those who are connected with the Lord in that way. Being an imperfect human myself, I can hardly blame them for feeling bitter. I could not stand and sing those contemporary tunes at your church before I was booted out because I could not joyfully join the snubbing of even one of my traditional brethren. If the table had been turned, and the church had been taken away from a totally contemporary congregation to be made into a reverent traditional one, neither would I have stood and sung with their snubbing of the contemporary brethren. Jesus Christ does not side with contemporary or traditional. Neither will I. And neither should your church leaders. But they do. And that is from what they must repent.
-----For what glorifies the Lord is not the sounds of the music we make. Nor is it glory to the Lord to set one’s self up in a place of authority and demand everyone else to do things your way, proclaiming to have had visions from God or not. Nor does it glorify the Lord to harbor animocity and vitriol towards those who secretly spied out the traditions of your church having in mind the making of it into their church. Forgiveness is an imperative, and repentance is an essential. But for there to be forgiveness given, beyond forgiveness prepared, there must be sincere repentance and apology made. That is what Char and I beckoned from the leaders. If they would repent, there would be a flood of forgiveness.
-----And it is not the kind of thing that defines repentance as the laying down of the guitars, the elimination of the drums, and the return to traditional culture only. Dear Anonymous, it has little to do with the sounds of worship. It has everything to do with the honor, respect, and sympathies love has for every brother and sister. It is about the sincerity of leaders. When Scripture says, “But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers,” (James 2:9) how can leaders demand contemporary services for those who revel in them, and refuse traditional services for those who need them? They would not answer that question for me. Can these leaders lay claim to Paul’s instruction to Timothy, “I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to keep these instructions without partiality, and to do nothing out of favoritism.” (I Tim 5:21). How is it not showing favoritism to say, “Our worship services will always be contemporary celebrations. We may play one hymn’s worth of lyrics to appease any traditional heart. But not to worry! We will be contemporary!” And, they will be partisan!
-----I tried to convince the leaders to be genuinely respectful and loving to everyone in the church. If there were known to be folks with a traditional bent congregated there, serve them some genuinely traditional culture. Why are their needs any less favorable than are the needs of the contemporaries? Mix it up. Do some services with a few hymns and a lot of celebration, a few with some celebration and a lot of hymns. Do some of totally traditional services. And do some totally contemporary ones. Wear a suit and tie now and then to relate to the traditional folk. And wear a leisure shirt occasionally for the kids. Show no partiality! Make that an example! You are the leaders, I told them. Then preach often about those who are of the traditional bent needing to sing to those who are of the celebratory bent (Eph 5:19), and visa-versa. If that had been done years ago the activity at your church would indeed have been glorifying the Lord. Yet, He still extracts His glory from it, alas, only by way of Malachi 2:3-9.
-----We lay our swords down over the way things are done at the point that righteousness, impartiality, genuine love coming from a sincere reverence and fear of the Lord returns to the hearts of those who dictate the way things are done. For the obedience commanded by Hebrews 13:17 is not an obedience to just anyone. It is not an obedience to the leaders just leading in anything, but to those leading from the precepts of the Word of God. The Word of God does not call for contemporary or traditional. It calls for impartiality. So then should we be satisfied with partiality?
-----What has your church received by its satisfaction with partiality? It has received a division. By this division many bright, godly, and Scripturally learned men have been silenced and barred from its leadership roles. That means much spirituality the Lord tried to provide your church has been left in a back room. Many other bright, godly, and Scripturally learned men and women have been driven away from the church. Meaning what the Lord wished your church to enjoy from them is being enjoyed elsewhere. Then there is the integrity that crumbles in order to maintain partiality against the Word’s demand for impartiality. One of the elders who signed the letter proclaiming, “…one family’s struggle and disenchantment with the leadership…” also acknowledged to me all the letters and complaints from other disenchanted members the elders had to deal with in their regular meetings. Yet he and the other elders signed the lie that it was only my family’s disenchantment. They also knew my character in this whole affair. Every one of my letters called for peace, unity, and concern for one another in the church. Not one demanded anybody be dismissed or ignored. Yet they portrayed me as desiring to destroy the church. At what price does demanding one’s own way come? It comes at the price of integrity. Every letter I have written to them, as well as the dialogue of that special elders’ meeting at which they judged me, is open to everyone for review and perusal. You know my name, and my business number is in the phone book. I will speak to anyone who needs copnversation with me. If you were asked by upright men to shun another man, you should at least make full review of the issue and the communications there involved. You should at least know the man and his character. But there has been no integrity on the part of your leaders to share this information with you for your decisions. Nor was there enough integrity in them to discuss and support their claims of falsehoods in the letter I delivered to the church. They have always cowed from that possibility. Integrity has nothing to hide, and I will hide nothing from you or anyone who seeks the truth about this. It is all open to your viewing.
-----I so appreciate your comment in Gail’s blog. I feel like no one at your church cares about either my family or the implications of what is being allowed to continue there. But that is only emotion. I know many do care. Some have expressed their care. Of others, well, I just know them. They care. That’s good. God loves every one of us. And every one of us are doing some piece of service to Him that He needs. And that goes for the leaders of your church as well. They are not bad, they are just partial.
Dear Mr. Corey,
Thank you SO very much for your willingness and time that you have taken to share these things. As they are exposed to the light, they look so differently than they did when someone tried to keep them in darkness. Only giving the Body “the perception of light” that they wanted us to see. Thank you for helping me to get understanding. I completely get it now that I have “The rest of the story”, as Paul Harvey says. I’ve still got a lot of work to do in my relationship with Christ to gain wisdom, but it is not for lack of seeking it. I thank you for all of the wisdom you have shared in your many writings also. I had a Sister that instructed me in Scripture about favoritism a few years ago, and this is a perfect example of what can come out of that. I truly hadn’t given it the proper amount of thought until now.
My heart breaks for the devastation your family has experienced having been cast from among those that you have loved and learned and worshipped with for so many years. Please forgive me if my questions added to that in any way. I am also sad for the Lord and those that have been quieted and forgotten in their willingness to have peace. I have a great deal of respect for the fact that you were taking the steps that you did in love, for the love of your family in Christ. I can see that it was not without a great deal of patience, selflessness and reverence for the Lord and His instruction given to us in His Word. You have bared your heart for all to see. What courage you have in the Lord. I hope that someday I will have the courage not to be Anonymous, but to be a stronger voice for the Lord like you and Gail. I’m working towards that, that the Lord would grow that up in me, only for the sake of His Kingdom and His glory.
Sister Anonymous
Dear Sister Anonymous;
Thank you for your kind words, your understanding, and your honest heart. In a way, your courage to be Anonymous is more real than my courage to be Steve Corey. For the truth of the matter is that beyond the surface appearance of ourselves, we are not known much at all by others. Yet a little deeper, and we are hardly known by our own selves. But God knows us there, and He works His will there, in as much as we are willing. And it is from those depths throughout the events of our lives that God grooms in us what He may need to extract from us at any particular moment. That is why it is so important for me to never consider that another brother needs to be like me to have my acceptance, acknowledgment , or service.
You are welcome for what I have been able to share. It is shared in love and hope that not only will love become more genuine where you worship, but also that there might be found a little in what I write to edify you and anyone else who reads it. I would say that the Lord gives it to me, but that would serve to credit Him with whatever error that might be in it. Like you, wisdom and understanding are a daily search for me, and God lights the path leading to them should I humble myself enough to have eyes to see what is lit. In all that His simple statement given Moses meant, “I Am,” my greatest expression of what I think and feel towards Him is, “He Is.”
Your questions in no way added to the devastation my family experienced. Quite to the contrary, your questions were like the most soothing salve on that wound. The genuineness of your inquiries, your honest desire to know, was apparent upon the very surface of them. And that you wanted to know the situation as I have tried to know and deal with it showed me you cared. Thank you.
God bless you, those you worship with, and those who lead you there. Christ knows us all, each of our faults, and each of our strengths. That is comfort.
Post a Comment