My Ticket Out
Posted on November 22nd, 2006 by Samaritan into the About Us categoryIn The 5 stages that make this worthwhile, something David Macklin said reminded me of an event when I knew it was time to leave the church I attended.
Every time I ask a sincere question, I get rebuffed.
A beautiful fall Sunday morning in an adult Sunday school class, we were discussing a Max Lucado book about grace when for some reason the discussion turned to the law of Moses. One couple attending the class was a retired army chaplain and his wife, considered pillars of the church by many people. He sat ramrod straight in his chair, and boldly announced that the law still applied to us, quoting the words of Jesus: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:18 KJV)
Buzz-kill that I am, I reclined in my chair, shot him a raised eyebrow, and asked "Sooooo … which one of you boys want to be the one to tell the women-folk they have to stay home 1 Sunday a month when they're having their period? Because according to the law of Moses, during that time, they are unclean and should be in isolation." (Leviticus 15:19)
The ol' chaplain was aghast. Quiet tension filled the room - someone dared challenge a pastor / pillar and showed him a fool. About that time, I noticed storm clouds forming over the head of his wife, Jezebel, and spreading to every other woman in the class. I shall ever be grateful to the teacher who smiled at me and moved the discussion along.
Unfortunately for me, he asked another of his provocative questions to follow up the stimulating law of Moses discussion. "Is this church legalistic?"
My wife, who from years of marriage knew what was coming, siezed up in anticipation.
There was a nervous shuffling in the chairs all around the room; an uptight little cough, someone cleared a throat. Finally one of the women said "NO!" My poor wife tugged frantically on my arm in that way which says "for God's sake, don't say anything, please!!!" But the Spirit was on me, and the instructor turned to me and asked "what do you think?"
There was a fire in my bones … can't … quench … the … fire … I blurted out my reply: "Yes, it is doubly legalistic, in that not only does this church view the old testament as law, but also views the traditions of the church as law."
At that point one of the women, who must have been Jezebel's sister, literally yelled at me from across the room: "Do NOT criticize MY church - I won't stand for it …" Eventually her hysteria subsided and the teacher dismissed the class for the day.
We attended the Sunday school class the next week, and before the teacher could even pray to begin the class, Jezebel's sister began yelling at me again, with essentially the same remarks as the week before.
That was the last time we attended class there as I recall. Not long after, we stopped attending their Sunday services.
Oddly, I'm thankful for that experience - it was my ticket out.
Sam
RSS feed for posts
November 22nd, 2006 at 7:17 am
This is an aside, but my brother who is a very liberal pastor in NYC loves to throw Lev. 15:19 at me to “prove” that the Bible was written by misogynistic aristocrats and that much of the text is suspect. I find this odd since Jesus came to free us from the Law and his disgust is based upon a Law that won’t allow women to worship at a Temple that was destroyed almost 2000 years ago. From my understanding God is not unjust or illogical and so I see this verse as a safeguard by God to keep the blood sacrifices pure. I can see how upset the Jews were in Luke 13 when they consider Pilate mixing the blood of some Galileans with their sacrifices and I can only assume that any additional blood would contaminate the sacrifice. Maybe I’m way off the mark here, but has anyone else considered this scripture and why God made it a Law?
November 22nd, 2006 at 7:36 am
Ahhh.. I love it. I only wish I had been there. …good times… People in power usually hate being questioned.
I always assumed it had something to do with the time-period in which the Bible was written. Maybe it was one of those “community standards” the church likes to throw around when they can’t find a good Bible verse to support their stance.
Anyway, good question, I think I’m going to email your brother and ask him to contribute. He could probablyget people really fired up.
November 22nd, 2006 at 9:19 am
If we need a church to feel “right with God” then maybe we are addicted to church… I overcame my addiction but it was thru a process of great searching and honesty…
I literally had to poke my eyes out with needles and get corrective lenses… lol
November 22nd, 2006 at 9:36 am
Bet that left a mark.
November 22nd, 2006 at 9:39 am
mark of the beast… lol
November 22nd, 2006 at 10:43 am
To Medusa E,
Many of the laws God gave Israel make sense now that we know about hygiene. In fact, one reason Jews were persecuted in the dark ages is because they did not get so sick when all the world around them was dying. They had cleanliness laws that helped to prevent infection and quarantine the carriers.
Also, if you read the whole passage, the restriction on women is in the context of any bodily discharge — men included. So I can’t see how your brother thinks it’s misogynistic.
We have Russian neighbors who are Torah-observant. So the girls all get to stay home from church once a month. They consider it a blessing. I haven’t seen too many men staying home. I can’t believe it’s because they are practicing abstinence since their wives seem to be pregnant all the time. But whatever.
You may be right about the spiritual reasons for the laws. There is a definite emphasis upon things being pure and uncontaminated. It’s another way the Lord demonstrates holiness.
grace
November 22nd, 2006 at 5:38 pm
What I find interesting about this event is:
1) The class topic was supposed to be on grace (or a book on grace)
2) The instructor dismissed the class as the issue became vocally real
It’s so easy for abusive churches to talk about things like grace as long as they never apply it to themselves, the church or organization which feeds them (literally).
The teacher asked you the question “do you think this church is legalistic?” and did not capitalize on the resulting answer and/or disagreement which ensued. Makes me wonder why he/she even asked you. Were they trying to coax you out to thump you on the head? Were they trying to lead a discussion which was too hot for them to handle? Did they want to minister to you but couldn’t stand up to your accuser? Did the instructor help the class resolve the issue?
No, sent you home and avoided it altogether. Leaving you sad, your abuser mad and the instructor bad.
Well, Jesus does not want to thump us on the head, the topic is not too hot for Him to handle and He wants to minister to us and can stand up to our accuser!
-lance
November 23rd, 2006 at 6:01 am
The original post is “too bad” for a couple of reasons…
One, it’s too bad there could not have been a genuine discussion of the Leviticus question. An adult church class, of all places, should be a place where the Bible is genuinely discussed…sorry for your experience, Sam
Two, it’s too bad someone didn’t explain that there are two basic kinds of “law” in the Bible: Moral and ceremonial. Ceremonial laws (hygiene, food, sacrifice, etc) were for a specific age and time as God developeod and set apart His people. Those laws were done away with in Jesus’ death and resurrection. Many of those laws were, and are, still helpful, but we are not bound by them in any way. The Moral Law (primarily the Ten Commandments) is sitll in force…and Jesus supports it, obeyed it perfectly, and keeps it before all of us as a “Gold Standard.” The Moral Law demands perfection and reminds us that we are far from being able to keep it - and therefore we need Christ’s atonement to cover us from our inability to obey and please God. In His perfect obedience to the Law do we find our only hope of salvation.
It’s also too bad Sam left the church…go on back, Sam,…that church needs your voice!
November 23rd, 2006 at 6:19 am
And herein lies the struggle. What constitutes a “ceremonial” law and what is a “moral” law. Because for my mother the two are often indistinguishable. I once tried drinking milk straight out of the carton, and she almost killed me.
November 23rd, 2006 at 7:20 am
Your comment about your Mom and milk is a good rminder that we look for clarity in the Scriptures…not our relatives. Your Mom created her own “laws” that had nothing to do with Scripture…Funny how family traditions/laws often color our view of Scripture - as if they were of equal value and Truth.
November 23rd, 2006 at 9:33 am
I was really just joking.
That said, the Bible doesn’t talk about some verses being ceremonial law and some moral law. This is an idea you believe to make the Bible more palatable in 2006. …not that there’s anything wrong with that…
November 23rd, 2006 at 11:04 am
Doug,
I would like to suggest that the two categories you mentioned do not work; many of the OT laws do not fall under either category (“ceremonial” or “moral”).
The two categories you mentioned sound canned, I’ve heard them before. A problem with canned phrases is that they do not resolve and investigate the problem; they answer the question too simplistically without reflection on the real issue (not that this was your intention).
As stated in your post you think “Sam should return to the Church because they need him”.
Have you considered that your reasons for him to return are out of concern for the organization rather than the individual?
You may lack understanding of what it does to an individual when they are accused (attacked) by believing members and abandoned by their spiritual leaders after making themselves vulnerable. This is, in effect, a form of spiritual abuse.
I’m just curious as to what makes you think this incident would not happen again? How long can an individual oppose legalism in a large church before they are labeled, ostracized and (although nobody would openly reject him) rejected by the people and leaders who are supposed to bring love, acceptance and truth?
Your thoughts?
-lance
November 24th, 2006 at 4:30 am
Who knows if the “incident” would happen again?…I don’t know enough about that church to make a prediction. I do know that winsome, humble, and thoughtful dialogue can sometimes get people to work through such issues. I always opt for exhausting all avenues of conciliation before “cutting and running.” Sam seemed sincere and every church needs sincere people to lovingly challenge us to be more Christ-like and Biblical in our thinking…therefore, I encouraged him to hang around. If there’s no progress, then, as Jesus suggested, he can “shake the dust off his fee” and move on to greener pastures.
November 24th, 2006 at 9:24 am
Doug-
“If there’s no progress, then, as Jesus suggested, he can “shake the dust off his fee” and move on to greener pastures.”
Greener patures implies “a better place somewhere else to commune with God”?
Seems like those with the strongest argumentative skills will retain their lifelong bonds and friendships. Would you agree that this could cause people in the church community to develop anti-bodies or devisive attitudes in order to protect themselves from what they see happen to those who are ostrasized spiritually and/or physically, from the church in the past?
This topic seems to reflect the very legalism which Jesus encouraged His followers to reject.
When people pour their life’s ambitions and work into the body of a church in order to build a foundation for their families, this “shake the dust off” /”greener pastures” rhetoric just doesn’t cut it.
You should be aware of this by your age…
*** I note that you used the word fee” rather than “feet” I can’t help but think this is where you heart may lie in the matter but that is for you to consider and not me to judge.
November 26th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
Doug said:
Lance said:
Doug said:
Thanks, guys. I was there for 1-1/2 years. That event was the proverbial final straw, after 15 months of abuse of 1 kind or other. We were invited back once, to a Christmas party, where we led everyone in Christmas carols and presented a Christmas program. Between songs, when we were sharing a few stories and reading scriptures, we heard one elderly man sitting close to us say several mean and spiteful things about us while the men around him chuckled in amusement. They refused to feed us before we sang unless we gave them back $30 honorarium for singing. So we skipped the dinner and told them to keep the money after we sang.
A few months later, my wifes brother asked us back to speak to the highschool kids during Sunday school. The trouble makers from before got wind of it and complained to the pastor who called me just 3 days before the date and rescinded my brother-in-law’s invitation. My brother-in-law was initially incensed by the pastor’s interferance. The pastor and trouble makers held a meeting about me and managed to convince my brother that I’m a devil and deserved such treatment.
They’re clueless (read: They know not what they do).
It isn’t so much that someone needs to oppose legalism there, as much as they need to let the Holy Spirit in.
Sam
November 27th, 2006 at 5:22 am
One wonders how such dysfunctional churches continue to exist…you’re right: an infusion of the Holy Spirit is desperately needed.
November 27th, 2006 at 7:13 am
Doug said
Ditto.
Great story.
-lance