DIARY OF A DEAD SOLDIER
Posted on December 20th, 2004 by Reformed Pope into the Why We Blog, When We Quit categoryWe would like to thank Church Gal for releasing this letter to us. It was her last contact with the Reformed Pope, before he past away. Please send your prayers and support to her and her family at this difficult time.
Catalyst was right. The proud soldier is dead. I appreciate all the support that you all have given me over the past few weeks but I regret to inform each of you that it is over. It is finished. Anonymous was right. CBC was right. And according to one pastor, out of the 395,000 churches in America 390,000 of them believe the way CBC does. How could I possibly think that I had received some sort of special word from God? It was foolish and prideful.
CBC doesn’t preach “give to get”, they simply preach the Word of God. Give and God will give back to you. That principle is undeniable. I clearly caused a lot of people pain and anguish, people that love me so much that my actions brought them to tears. To each of those people I would like to say………………………… “No”.
Do you really think that you can manipulate me into running? No.
Do you really think that you can guilt me into stopping? No.
(sing this next part) No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no God’s not dead, but he’s alive. God’s not dead, but he’s alive. God’s not dead, but he’s alive and I feel him all over me. I feel Him in the street, I feel Him in the air, I feel Him in this blog, yes I feel Him all over me. No, no, no, no, ….(fade song out slowly)
I am sorry that you think this is tearing the church apart. I am sorry that you don’t understand my sarcasm. I am sorry that you refuse to accept that there might be some truth to what we have been saying. But most of all I am sorry that you take yourself so seriously. Lighten up. You might find life to be a bit easier to handle if you can laugh at yourself.
“I saw three checks come mailing in” that’s funny, but maybe you don’t get it. “I saw three ships come sailing in” is a Christmas song. We changed the words. Hilarious. I’m laughing right now as I write this. My heart is light. I would like to sing another song. Everyone join in. BE BOLD! BE STRONG! For the Lord thy God is with thee. BE BOLD! BE STRONG! For the Lord thy God is with thee. I am not afraid, no, no, no. I am not dismayed no, no, no. I’m walking in faith and victory, COME ON, I’m walking in faith and victory for the Lord thy God is with me. (end song)
This is where I get serious. I do not want this site to cause bitterness in anyone’s heart. That truly is not my intention. My intention is not for people to leave CBC. My intention is to cause people to think about what is being said. Question everything, and run it through the Bible. Your faith will grow, and you will be blessed. It does not matter which church you go to. There is no perfect church. Everyone, everywhere take the time to stop and run things through the Bible.
If you are struggling with bitterness, go and reconcile it. If you hear something that doesn’t sound right, don’t be afraid to ask questions. And for goodness sake, everyone, lighten up.
What happens when a church won’t let it’s members question anything? The congregation becomes totally dependant on their pastors for everything. They look to them for complete guidance and they lack their own personal convictions. Imagine what happens when that pastor is not around? This is a dangerous road to walk on.
Pastors of this nation, I challenge you to encourage your congregations to question your teaching (Ombudsmen of America unite). Let them dig into the Word of God to study what you are preaching. How harmful can that be.
On a more personal note, I really struggled with what the right response was going to be.
I was uncertain whether our use of sarcasm was an appropriate way to raise questions in the church or not. After much deliberation I decided that there are many ways to communicate your thoughts, and my generation really responds well to sarcasm. There for I shall continue in my ways.
A blog is nothing more than an online journal. Please understand that this is simply a few men’s opinions. I encourage you all to question everything that we write. Criticism is appreciated as much as support. The important thing to me is that we are all thinking about what we really believe.
Catalyst, hand me my sword.
RSS feed for posts
December 20th, 2004 at 10:33 am
Good and thoughtful comments, RP. When I first read the blog, I laughed because it was true. Then I cried because it was true. I have appreciated the humor — you are making good points. Let this stay in the place of observation and searching; there is grace for that. (You know, Search me, O God…)However, when observation becomes verdict and sentencing, we are encroaching on the duties of the Lord Jesus, and there really isn’t grace for that.
ps to Catalyst: the alcohol references do not help to make your case. They just shift the focus from the need of the church to the need of one of the Father’s prodigals.
I posted as anonymous because I didn’t want to set up a blogger account. But if I return, you’ll know me as Oldanna.
December 20th, 2004 at 10:36 am
Is that you Mom?
December 20th, 2004 at 10:43 am
This post has been removed by the author.
December 20th, 2004 at 11:00 am
Come Home Prodigal, Come Home!
December 20th, 2004 at 11:05 am
I have been lurking in the background as an avid reader since the creation of this blog, and I can hold my silence no longer.
Reformed Pope, I can’t tell you how good it is to have you back. I was getting worried there for a while.
Whether or not I agree with everything in this blog, it has stirred up some issues that I believe need stirring. So let’s get some comments in here from the leaders at CBC.
Eldership of CBC, what are thinking about the comments of this blog? Speak to us! Is it our over active imagination that there is an over-emphasis on tithing and giving? Are we delusional? Why is giving to the church preached more than the cross? Someone offer us a rational explanation. It would help us a great deal.
Oregon Fish, you would be a great candidate for this. We can’t all get together for coffee with you and discuss this. What do you think?
Any leader would be fine really, the higher up the better. Heck, I’ll just go for it. All you bloggers out there repeat after me:
WE WANT PASTOR FRANK!
WE WANT PASTOR FRANK!
WE WANT PASTOR FRANK!
I’m just kidding, but I am serious about wanting rational explanations from Leadership. Thanks to everyone for 2 weeks of unstoppably great reading.
December 20th, 2004 at 11:09 am
White-Boy,
You fit in perfectly. Fantastic comments. You made me laugh and yell at my screen.
WE WANT FRANK, WE WANT FRANK.
Good work. I’m glad to be back.
December 20th, 2004 at 11:21 am
White Boy,
If ‘they’ entertained this site it would be like the USA capitulating to terrorist… it would set a precedent. One that acknowledged the validity of the insurgence. America will not withhold the elections in Iraq because it would encourage the terrorist that their methods- which are subversive and evil- are actually working. (forgive the ridiculous analogy)
I wouldn’t hold your breath.
-Diotrephes
December 20th, 2004 at 12:22 pm
Dietrophes,
You’re not much fun at parties, are you?
Just play along with us.
WE WANT FRANK!
WE WANT FRANK!
December 20th, 2004 at 1:01 pm
WE WANT FRANK
WE WANT FRANK
December 20th, 2004 at 1:26 pm
WE WANT PASTOR FRANK!
WE WANT PASTOR FRANK!
December 20th, 2004 at 1:26 pm
WE WANT FRANK
WE WANT FRANK
December 20th, 2004 at 1:32 pm
WE WANT FRANK!
WE WANT FRANK!
WE WANT FRANK!
WE WANT FRANK!
WE WANT FRANK!
WE WANT FRANK!
December 20th, 2004 at 2:39 pm
Hi boys,
Are any of you actually members of CBC? Or are you just relying on moles/informants? Even as a member you would need to appreciate the fact that any “mega-church” is actually a network of congregations, that it is not by any means monolithic. Even the leadership team represents a variety of views/styles/philosophies.
There are obviously so many responses that some are not aware that there are CBC leaders posting. Including me. Frankly, I would feel a greater pastoral/personal motivation if I knew I was dialoguing with someone other than disaffected former members. Oh well…let me give it a try anyway.
I take you guys seriously (even though you are attempting humor, and not very humorously, I’m afraid). And I respect your right to communicate your viewpoint. This is America, not Russia, after all. I’m not afraid of you talking someone into “leaving” CBC. If they can leave that easily, they were never actually “here.”
In fact, I propose that some of you grew up in your parents church, a Christian community that was never actually your spiritual home. God gives you grace to grow where you’re planted. If you’re never planted there, it’s just an irritant. Please continue to search for your home, and then be a happy, supportive member of that community.
Please let me address the issue of the appropriate use of humor. Those of you who know me know that I am a great proponent of humor (and life-long student of humor). The appropriate use of humor is a constant issue for me, and to be honest, I don’t always get it right. The question is: how can I be funny without being offensive. Some people will be offended no matter how you do it, so you can’t factor them in.
There are certainly a lot of “funny” things about the American church, and I’m an advocate for making fun of those things…appropriately…in a way that makes the point winsomely without stomping people into the ground.
In your particular case, I would rather have seen you invent a “fictitious” congregation, may some stereotypical American mega-church, or a home school church, or whatever you find most humorous (and bothersome), and then mock that entity. I’ll grant you that in some ways CBC is a fairly “typical” American megachurch…but so are so many other congregations in the Portland/Vancouver area. Why pick one particular congregation and publicly trash it? As funny as it might be, it’s simply offensive and inappropriate. It would be like me picking some personal foible of yours, maybe the size of your nose or the shape of your butt, and dedicating a blog to the ruthless mocking of it. Wouldn’t it be better to invent some kind of “too-big-stick-out-way-too-far butt” and dedicate a site to making fun of it?
Obviously you’re going to do what you want to do, no matter what anyone says. If you want a good faith dialogue about specific issues that involve actual biblical exegesis, with some humor thrown in, I’m your man.
No matter what, please know that you and your family are loved at CBC.
December 20th, 2004 at 3:22 pm
Oregon Fish,
I don’t understand why it is so easy to sluff aside someone that grew up in the church and left feeling distant from the church of their youth. I thinks this speaks to the issue that “mega church” only cares about butts in the seats not who and how the butts are being fed. Throughout this blog I have heard about the growth of CBC as if that speaks of good doctrine. Unfortunately, I think the growth only speaks of the revolving doors at all churchs. I would like to see the numbers for CBC East and West side members (as well as any mega church). How much of that body count you guys are so proud of is just transfers(church hoppers) looking for the latest excitment. I always hear talk of being planted in a church then you won’t leave. I think that is a bunch of bull bleep birthed out of the idea that you shouldn’t question your church. If you have the ability to question you obviously aren’t planted. That is exactly why “doubting Thomas” was not planted in the disciples. He couldn’t have questioned Christ if he was really planted.
Oh Yeah, did I mention I love Mega Churches and everything that they stand for.
Love,
Faithful Follower
December 20th, 2004 at 3:30 pm
Oregon Fish,
Well, it sure is nice to get a well thought-through response. I can appreciate some of your comments on the use of humor, I for one do not wish to “publicly trash” CBC. I do however strongly feel that there are certain questions that I was never able to get answered during my time at CBC.
I did not grow up at CBC, I started attended when I was 19yrs old. Leaving the church was very hard for me due to the number of people there that I hold in high regard.
Maybe we could dialogue (in good faith) on these issues:
1. I have never been able to reconcile how little Christ and the message of the cross is preached at CBC. When I look at the teaching of the Apostle Paul and the other New Testament writers I don’t see people taken up with financial giving and blessing. I see writers consumed with the message of the gospel.
2. Tithing and giving seems to be preached so much more than the gospel it was hard for me to keep my eyes on what the real message of Christianity is.
It’s not that Christ is never mentioned it’s more that the gospel message was very much in the background. I hope this clarifies what my questions are.
December 20th, 2004 at 3:56 pm
Fish:
Thanks for your response, and I agree, you do know how to use humor appropriately.
I also agree that our complaints about mega-churches are not exclusive to CBC.
And it is probably unfair to single out CBC. But its the church we know, and you write about what you know.
One question, though. And I’ve been asking for about a week now. Why are they charging for parking at the NW Conference? You have to admit it seems greedy.
And if your answer is because they want to encourage carpooling. I feel there are much better ways to encourage carpooling, rather than charhing $20.
Its just sketchy.
But thanks for your response. I agree with most of what you say.
December 20th, 2004 at 4:00 pm
Reformed Pope, let’s just say I nearly bifurcated in my pants over the “…no, no, no, no God’s not dead!” crack! Long live Prince of Peace! Go Rams, those mighty, mighty Rams! Oregon Fish, I love you and your whole fam! I particularly love Monty Python, a favorite of yours, however I think that form of humor, of which you possess, is only wasted on most of us SNL and Mad TV kids. Sarcasm is this generation’s James Belushi, who for the life of me just don’t think is funny. How can you, Oregon Fish, sit back and listen to the cotton candy messages coming from the pulpit at CBC! What happened to Ken Malmin, Lanny and yourself; they’ve put you in storage on some back room shelf to be used only in an emergency! Forgive us for our melodrama but perhaps this is that emergency! We don’t want “10 Steps to Living a More Fulfilled Life” sermons followed close behind by the book “10 Steps to Living a More Fulfilled Life”, that’s what Tony Robbins is here for! We don’t want anyone to leave CBC, heck, we didn’t want to have to leave, but we could see CBC (and New Hope, Portland Christian Center, New Beginnings etc., just to be fair) tweak a few things and get back to the basics (the Cross, the Gospel, Jesus, grace, prayer, reaching out to those with needs and so on).
December 20th, 2004 at 6:10 pm
I realize that I am totally band wagon:
WE WANT FRANK!!!!
WE WANT FRANK!!!!
WE WANT FRANK!!!!
WE WANT FRANK!!!!
December 21st, 2004 at 4:30 pm
I wanted to respond to Oregon Fish’s comments. Larry I think I know you fairly well; I attended many of your classes and I am sure you can recall many of our long winded conversations. I think that one of the mistakes you are making is assuming that the authors of some of these comments have not previously tried other avenues to express some of their views. In fact, I think the real tragedy of this blog is that for so many people in my generation it has taken this much “negative press” to retrieve the legitimate consideration and attention needed for these issues. I know quite a few of the authors and after speaking with many of them it appears to me that one of the things that makes them feel so fulfilled and liberated by this site is the fact that people are being forced to actually listen to and consider their very legitimate concerns. Even as I am writing this now I am gaining a sense of release in feeling that my voice will be heard and that there is just the slightest chance that something might be done about the things that weigh so heavily on me.
You suggest that there are more proper approaches to addressing grievances with The Church but I suggest to you that many of these authors have already tried those approaches and have been shot down or just dismissed as “bitter”. That is such a cop-out! I, myself, have schedule appointments, weeks in advance, to meet with some of the leaders up on the hill only to finally speak with them and have them blow off everything I am saying or patronize me by saying “Man, you really need a healing, brother”. (reference Catalyst’s table experience with the elders). I have yet to experience any productive outcomes to the “proper” way of addressing crimes committed by The Church.
The problem is this: The Church is never wrong. As I sit and recall all the situations I can from my upbringing and my experiences at PBC it seems to me that the Church is rather hypocritical. They can require a girl to get up and confess to all her peers at her youth group her sin of a little premarital bump-and-grind and publicly apologize but I have yet to hear a public apology from any church with regards to its harsh treatment of its flock. Let me work out the logic. PBC of all places was and is a huge proponent of Original Sin and the total depravity of man. If we truly believe in that concept shouldn’t we just expect that at some point the Church, which is run by gracefully-saved-yet-however-still-depraved (catchy isn’t it?) people is going to make some grievous mistakes? History shows us that it already has. But history also shows me that the Church has a really bad habit of not admitting its mistakes until they have been in the history books for a while. The Catholic Church will gladly admit that hundreds of years ago it was screwed up and made lots of mistakes but their response today would be “yeah, that was the past but we have got all the kinks worked out now; whatever the Pope says now is infallible.”
“Yeah, but what about the Popes who molested children back then? They said that everything was worked out at that time and that they were infallible too?”
Bottom line it’s always easier to admit your mistakes when they are buried in the past and you can say “Oh yeah, that was then, I don’t know what I was thinking back then but now I’ve got it all figured out!”
I used the Catholic Church as an example to stray away from singling out CBC because I believe that just about all organized religion has this problem. For a more modern day example let us return to CBC. Larry, you can attest to the fact that Portland Bible College has drastically changed many of its views in recent years and has self-proclaimed that it was a “little” legalistic back then. Okay, that’s great that you can recognize that now by why couldn’t you recognize that then. You mean to tell me that nobody ever approached the leadership “properly” back then? What do we do about all the dozens of casualties along the way who were left in the wake of PBC’s religious zeal? I haven’t heard any public confessions or apologies for the mistakes but you can be sure of it that PBC would have required public confessions and apologies for the petty breaking of their all-import legalistic rules back then. Am I making sense?
Yesterday’s mistakes that we so readily admit today can be the same mistakes that we make today but won’t admit until tomorrow.
If we truly believe in the total depravity of man than we must admit that some of the things we are doing today have to be wrong just purely based on history and the math. This seems elementary but I don’t see the Church in general using this logic. They can’t use this logic because once you start second guessing your decisions by taking an honest look at yourself and admitting that maybe you don’t have the “mind of God” on every issue people are going to stop relying on you so heavily to make their decisions for them. What will they do? Where will they go? How will they know the will of God for them? They are going to be forced to think for themselves and work out doctrine on their own. They might even have to resort to opening the Bible themselves and figuring out what it says.
To be honest it seems scary to me how similar this looks to the whole Martin Luther scenario. One of Luther’s biggest grievances with the Church then was that it kept the Bible in Latin (which the common man couldn’t understand) It kept the people dependant on the Church to interpret what God had said. His blog was the printing press back then and as soon as he posted his objections on the door the church came down on him like a ton of bricks. The way they hunted his head reminds me of the way CBC has pursued the authors of this site. What are they so afraid of? Why can’t they take a little criticism? The fact that the observations on the site have been so vehemently opposed and reacted to with such drama sends up a red flag for me.
In closing I would like to state this: Larry, you speak of the proper and improper uses of sarcasm and humor in general but I’m a realist. I’ve seen this site produce more positive results concerning these issues than I have seen in the last decade. I would like to suggest that nothing else but this sarcasm would have adequately done the job. As far as the “big-butt” or “big-nose” situation goes that would not have been adequate enough either. To refer to the dark ages again, most of our nursery rhymes were originally composed as attacks on governing bodies disguised as childs play out of fear of retribution. The nursery rhymes took your very approach of setting up a fictitious target that resembled the real target to get a point across. However, they didn’t do a lot. It was only when the truth was brought out into the light and dealt with straight on that results were achieved. I wasn’t raised or schooled by a “big-butted” church. I don’t struggle with the psychological issues that I do because of a “big-nosed” church. I want an accounting for the crimes that I witnessed myself from the actual perpetrators.
December 22nd, 2004 at 10:32 pm
To PBCalum…..wow! Thanks for the commentary. It truly shows a great need for a forum or even small group meetings for people who have been hurt by religious doctrine and practices (primarily fundamentalism in all its forms, Charismatic, legalism, cults, etc. etc.)…maybe this could be the next step for healing the hurts so many people are feeling from their experiences in churches like this, or smaller ones as well.
–Nice Guy
January 17th, 2005 at 11:56 pm
I thought this was very refreshing. I am assuming catalyst is the one who went to law school because he has a certain logic to him.
I used to attended the “watched church” but they weren’t ready for my sense of humor either so I moved on. I have made good friends with people bonding over the fact we were mutual survivors although it did take them much longer to recover than me (a sense of humor goes a long way in preserving your sense of self) I will email this site to them as they will thoroughly enjoy the comments.
I do know that anyone in leadership with something to protect either positively or negatively will be sensitive to what is said about them. Your reputation is a part of who you are. That is understandable but “methinks thou dost protest too much” also comes into play. People are suspicious when you can’t take cricitism.
My personal belief on the above named church is that they were good at being parents of small children and providing them structure and discipline but did not understand how to let them grow up. These kinds of comments come from people who have learned how to think for themselves and can’t be spoonfed pap. One of my most humorous memories was taking the membership class and being told what to write in the blanks. When we finished we were told that “now we all believed the same way”. If they believe that I have a bridge to sell them.
My basic beliefs also fall in line with loving God and treating other people the way that you want to be treated. I have left more than one church because I couldn’t in good conscience bring people there. I realized that to me people are more important then programs, or structure or buildings or anything else. People matter more and letting them grow and think and learn and be who God made them to be wasn’t their top priority but it was mine. It was a good thing I felt that way as I ended up with sons with mohawks, leather with spikes, and we have been through several colors of hair. I can walk up and be friends with people I would have been afraid of or criticized in the past but some of them are better Christians than I am.
I don’t see anything here that contradicts loving God and others and using your brain so I don’t have trouble with it.
I think this has helped several people think and for that it has done well. Keep it up. I do think the elder’s comments about big butts was offensive (and I don’t have one) His sense of humor was not funny to me. The peeing on things is a little much.
Bye.
November 30th, 2005 at 6:38 am
Hi Reformed Pope, I just dropped in on my way back to my Church site. I liked what I
found and thought that I would leave you a note for your efforts in creating DIARY OF A DEAD SOLDIER.