At least two presidential candidates in my lifetime have come before the American people and asked a simple question, "Are you better off today, than you were..."
There are a lot of people reading this blog. Good. I'd like to put a question to those of you who are pushing Team One, or the Healthy Church Initiative, or those who belong to congregations who have substituted the Church Manual for "Staff Lead Churches" and consultants. Are you or your churches better off today than you were when all this started?
Are you happier? Is your church growing? Are you told the truth by your pastors or conference officials that back this? Is your church or your conference able to attract, and most importantly retain, talented pastors and other professionals?
When you ask your "Growing Healthy Churches" pastor, or Conference President a straight question, does your gut tell you that you are getting an honest answer?
Can they even look you in the eye?
I'm curious. I would really like to know.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I have not taken offense to any one thing, only pointed out that in creating a blog, where you feel it is important to expose every letter written and meeting held between Takoma Park and the Conference to anyone who stops by to read about it, is in many ways less Christ-like than the things you are accusing the Potomac Conference, and leadership of Takoma Park Church of doing. I suggest if you were serious about your desire to approach in a Matthew 18 way, you would immediately shut down the blog, drop on your knees and ask God for a humble heart and the best, most effective way to handle what you perceive is a problem. That would be Christ's way of doing it. You may have have good intentions, but even Satan thought he was doing what was right when he deceived one third of the angels in heaven.
I am fully aware of the entire situation at Takoma Park, and other churches in the Potomac Conference. Stephen Covey suggests that we seek first to understand before we try to be understood. Have you tried this approach? Have you looked for the best in the situation instead of the worst? Have you tried to see what the desired outcome of the changes is for TP? Perhaps you could agree with the outcome and then work TOGETHER on the process that achieves the desired outcome.
I think what has happened here, and is clearly evident in your writing, is that you have ceased to find the common ground and are now wanting the higher ground at whatever expense of others is needed. I think this is evident in that you feel it is important to share letters and other insights to others so you can beat up the person who wrote the letters. Is this Christ's way to get a win-win for everyone? I suspect if you stood back and thought and prayed on it you would find out it isn't.
Let me be clear. I harbor no ill-will or grudges against you for your blog. I only wish for all our churches in the world to be focused on God, focused on humanity, and seeking to reconcile the two together quickly so we can spend eternity with all. Trying to work together is better than battling apart. I feel this blog is a very abrupt way of sharing YOUR view, not the whole view. For it has been said, and proven often, there is your version of the truth, their version of the truth, and the cold hard truth in the middle. I suspect it holds true in this case as well, and I hope you will rethink where the truth is in this case.
One danger in all of this, and in fact I suspect it gets worse with each post of the "epic", is that you begin to believe what you are claiming is the best, most accurate version of the truth. Satan did the same thing, in that at first he knew better with his charge against God, but the more he expounded his belief to the other angels, the more he became to believe his version was THE truth. He was willing to go to war for his version of the truth about God and he lost his place in heaven because of it.
The answer to knowing whether or not you have begun to harden your heart to reconciling truth and relationships with those you are writing against is your willingness to love them in spite of where you believe they are wrong. Would you wash their feet? Would you pray with and for them? Would you be willing to admit where you are wrong if they came to you to admit they were wrong? Would you humbly sit down and seek to reach the common ground that "wins a brother" (Matthew 18) or do you desire a win that satisfies your view, even at the expense of someone else experiencing a loss...
I have been an Adventist for 38 years and I love my church and the people in it. Do we have challenges? Yes. Do we need to adjust? Yes. Can we do it together? We have to. May it be the case in your church that it is done in love, and a non-confrontational manner, so that others, who are observing this "fight" and sharpening their swords, will humble themselves as well as you have done, sheathed their swords and dropped to their knees as we all seek common ground to serve and honor our God.
Anonymous, I do appreciate very much of what you have writen. I would like to ask for some wisdom if I may???
I wish I could speak privately because what you have said seems right.
What you have suggested is correct...however, where do people go when there is no equality "in being responsive" to one another? This has precipitated the problem. Matt 18 seems to be expected "only" from one side.
Also, where is the leadership of the "Church?" Why has there not been any guidence from World Headquarters?
Thank You,
God's Blessings'
Deborah
Deborah,
I just today realized you had commented on my post. I wasn't ignoring your statement, so forgive me.
Let me share from personal experience, some observations that may answer your question. That question being; "where do people go when there is no equality "in being responsive" to one another? This has precipitated the problem. Matt 18 seems to be expected "only" from one side."
I have found to be the case that when two people who are at odds cannot come together there are several things that could be the reason. I won't go into them, but I suspect the primary reason is that neither of the two individuals or parties have fully understood the other, or really wanted to get to know the other. What I mean is, if a person who feels they have been wronged goes into the Matthew 18 situation already believing the other person is wrong, at fault or they have misunderstood the other person, then chances are Matthew 18 won't work. The reason? Simply because neither has taken time to get to know the other.
Take this Takoma Park example for a moment. Believing that all are children of God and have been sacrificed for by Christ on the Cross, then those with whom "Liberty", "Justice" and "Religious" have an issue with should be approached in a completely different manner than they have been on this blog. They should desire to know these people individually, and what makes them tick so they can better understand their perspective and where they are coming from.
While the writer of this blog completely dismisses Stephen Covey because he is a Mormon, i do find the admonishment of Covey "seek first to understand before being understood" to be relevant in most every case when dealing with people. We see a conflict or conversation as an "in the moment" crisis, but each person or party in the conflict has a background, be it cultural, personal experience or other conflicts, that has shaped their view and the way they approach the situation. When we really look through the lens of the Cross, we want to know people personally so we appreciate their humanity first, which in turn helps us deal with the conflict we find ourselves in with them.
I find many generalities and assumptions in this blog, and also with other conflicts I have witnesses and been a part of. When we pray for God to make things clear to us, and seek to define the real core issue, then we are on the path to peace. By understanding the other person / people, and then finding out together why the conflict has risen and why there are two different viewpoints, we can then begin to pursue an outcome that is a win-win for each party / person and appreciate the other individual for what they are; a person God deemed worthy enough to die for.
Hello Anonymous, I do appreciate your position.....let me say this.......the problem we are facing in our conference is not a "person to person" issue. It is much larger than that.
I can remember hearing on our conference web-site during the yearly conference with teachers and pastors (last year)the Speaker (a guest, a Baptist Minister) in answering a direct question form a pastor, concerning the "structure of the SDA Church" that, the structure needs to be changed. The local churches need to break away from the conference...the conference from the union, and on up the chain.
Now, many of us recorded the conference last year to make sure, we were hearing what we thought we were hearing. This is not a minor problem....none of us have ever faced this kind of issue.
Also....we are not getting any help from the Union, NAD etc.... Our church wrote to the Union several times. They have turned a deaf ear.
I hope you can appreciate our situation. Either we role over and become "congregational in nature" or we resist and stay with the Church Manual and GC.
I wish....those who may have some answers for us (perhaps helping us as to "process" in an approbriate approach to this issue) would some how educate us "in our part", and the proper engagement. We have been left hanging.
This has become very damaging...it has split churches...the tender shoots are the ones being hurt....
Thanks for listening,
God's Blessings'
Deborah
Post a Comment