Touche, Pastor Frank, Touche
Posted on March 30th, 2007 by Reformed Pope into the Uncategorized categoryI do believe Frank Damazio just referenced this blog in his last sermon. It comes at about the 16 minute and 42 second point in this sermon. Here is the email exchange between Justin and I regarding it:
RP:
Frank just referenced us at the 16min 42sec point of his latest sermon. And he doesn't read our blog…right.
Catalyst:
Actually, it was a pretty good put down. Makes us look petty.
Touché, PF, touché.
Did you listen to the whole sermon? It sounds like a lot of people are fed up and leaving, and this is his way of trying to get them back.
RP:
Yeah, I listened to the whole sermon…fairly boring…much like Marc's sermon last week. They are on this whole "Community" kick, which is all a bunch of obvious stuff about how they need to care for each other and love each other and watch out for each other. It's all good, but it's not exactly ground breaking stuff.
Marc set the stage last week and this week Frank followed up with a "We (the pastors) were never meant to do it all on our own. We need you to do your part in reaching out to each other through small groups etc…"
The sad thing is its all a bunch of bull. CBC want's to control anything that would damage them, but apparently won't waste their time working with issues that could damage individual people…and it's all about Community with in THEIR church. The rest of the world can just go to hell I guess.
I don't know if people are leaving (more than they normally do), I think this is just part of their standard manipulation technique to convince people how important their church is.
Whatever…I'm just glad that Frank is finally firing back at us. Good for him.
Update: Here is a short clip of the mention in Frank's sermon.
It's not that impressive, except that it's been two years in the making.
RSS feed for posts
March 30th, 2007 at 7:39 am
Can you link directly to the sermon download?
March 30th, 2007 at 8:03 am
It’s hardly a mention. Just if you take it in context, he’s implying that we left the church because we were bitter and we have nothing better to do than start a website about the church.
For what it’s worth, I never left because I was bitter or because people stopped talking to me. In fact, I never made a conscious decision to leave. I just kind of moved on with my life and stopped attending. Not a big deal.
And we only started the “website” because it made us laugh. And when they tried to sue us for stealing their logo, Oh did it make us laugh.
Anyway, despite the constant plees for money. It’s such a lame church, I can’t believe anyone still goes there. The sermons are boring and the worship is a pathetic rip off of Hillsong. But hey, to each his own. If you like milquetoast sermons served with a lisp, go for it.
March 30th, 2007 at 8:11 am
That’s “lithp”, moron!
March 30th, 2007 at 8:17 am
It makes me laugh too.
March 30th, 2007 at 8:49 am
Well…at least he was preaching on community instead of tithing….
March 30th, 2007 at 9:11 am
That is too funny.
You best get over your anger and hatred of Frank and CBC and the other pastors and elders
March 30th, 2007 at 9:13 am
Next week: Community Tithing
March 30th, 2007 at 9:38 am
The church I used to go to had a whole thing on covenant community early in the 90’s, which I bought at the time thinking it was really going to happen i.e. leadership doing their part in the relationship, the followers doing our part bringing our all to the table. It must have been a Frank teaching since we were always using some huge manual of his. In theory we would all work together caring for each other, helping each other with our children, our lives, all while we did the work of the church.
I have to say this teaching was the beginning of the light going on for me that something was skewed in this church. After a year or so of covenant community groups, and lots of leadership meetings to talk about it and what we were supposed to be doing, etc, the reality began to set in that covenant community was never going to happen. It was never meant to be what was sold to us. It was just a bunch of more meetings. Not that leadership didn’t work hard in building their kingdom, but relationally it wasn’t there between leadership and followers. The teaching had promised too much of what they were never capable of delivering. They should have never pushed the covenant part and just kept it truthful saying “For this thing to work, we need your help, we all need to work, but don’t ever think we (leadershp) will be there for you relationship-wise. We aren’t your parents, we aren’t your friends, and even though we are your brothers, we basically want to function like CEOs of the company and that’s how we want to treat this.” At least it would have been realistic and we wouldn’t have expected them to deliver on the whole family aspect (yes we were told they were the parents and we were the children) and that our covenant relationship is like a marriage yadayadayada.
Another teaching around that time by Frank was the whole hub of the wheel thing. It emphasized the pastor as the hub of the wheel and dissed anyone who wanted to be a hub when we were all supposed to be spokes. It was insinuated if you had a dream or vision other than building the church you were wanting secretly to be a hub. It was all so skewed to have to lay aside what God had given each of us in dreams and visions to be a spoke in the wheel of your pastor’s dream. We’ve all been given stuff to do in this life in addition to what’s going on in the church and we should all be encouraged to pursue it to get it done.
Eventually leaving their fifedom was the best thing that could ever happen for me. I was finally free to grow up and be a real adult in God. Being in a healthier place, I now know it’s a non issue whether the church leadership stamps me with their approval. Why did it matter before? Because they set it up that way by pronouncing their approval on this one and that one and ignoring this one and that one and denouncing this and that to where we all felt that if we weren’t accepted or branded with their stamp of approval, we were somehow lame. (”Wayne’s World Wayne’s World - I’m not worthy I’m not worthy”)
March 30th, 2007 at 10:25 am
I don’t agree with the statement that Hank makes after his shot at City Business. He says something to the effect that any church over 100 people can’t be ministered to by a pastor and while I agree that there is a number where community gets lost, that number is 150 (at least if you agree with the research that Malcolm Gladwell references in Tipping Point). So, if we want true community, breaking into small groups isn’t the answer, but having smaller communities is! Church is about seeking and serving God, not economies of scale regarding the administrative cost per parishioner ratios. Mega-churches offer a lot of benefits, but building a cohesive community is not one of them. As a college buddy of Cat and myself who went on to seminary said to me when I told him about the groups my wife and I were attending at our North Jersey mega-church, “Wow, that’s great. You never have to leave your comfort zone.”
March 30th, 2007 at 10:46 am
I think this is right on.
March 30th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
I’ve been meaning to listen to this series because I had a pretty good idea of where PF was going as soon as I read the title. It doesn’t sound like my expectations were far off.
In reference to what Wayne said, it became clear to me in my last days there that “covenant” was not a two-way relationship to them. It meant complete loyalty to the pastor’s vision, but don’t expect any real relationship from any of the leaders. If you weren’t on staff, you were just a tither to exploit.
My thought after listening to the short clip: If the pastors aren’t meeting the needs of their members, then what purpose do they serve? How can you reach the lost if you can’t even take care of the sheep you’ve been given? If a pastor is someone who takes care of people spiritually, then how can a pastor have the audacity to say “I can’t take care of you because there are too many of you. You’ll just have to take care of each other. Oh, and we’re opening another 500 member campus in Whoville where I’m the pastor. Now give us more money.” Right, because that makes lots of sense. Talk about “sheep without a shepherd”.
March 30th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Great point. The pastor admits that he can’t (and isn’t supposed to) take care of his congregaton and then wants to expand…? Sounds like a pretty sweet set up to me.
March 30th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
In my experience, while community could extend up to 150, much beyond 20 becomes pretty hard to walk very closely with.
Jesus had His one (John) His three (Peter, James, John) His 12, then His friends up to perhaps another 5-8, then His 70, then His 120, then His 500, and finally a multitude, but when it comes to describing those He truly shared community with we don’t see much beyond the 12. The rest were beneficiaries of His teaching, but I doubt they would have said they “knew” Him.
I remember the days of coming into the domes, and 3500 folks to swim through, to get to the platform in time for service to begin, and to have to say, at least 30 times on the way to the platform “Hi, good to see you today, Jesus bless you…I must get up on the platform for the service to begin…pant, pant, pant.” Life in the domes was learning to shift my eyes from this person to that person, from one person to the floor, to the pews, to the ceiling, etc., just trying to avoid eye contact that might spark a conversation or a request for prayer or a request for counsel, on my way to the platform…knowing, if I wasn’t on that platform on time, pastor Iverson would take me to task for being late up there. It used to drive me crazy.
Then, when the service was over, oh my gosh…my kids would sit in the pews and cry, wanting daddy to shut up and take them home, so they could eat lunch and play, but “oh no!” daddy was a big shot elder, and the kids could just wait while daddy “ministered.” There were many days when the service ended at noon, and I didn’t get out of the Church until after 2 PM. And people wonder why pastor’s kids struggle with going to Church when they grow up????
I feel awful for those days. I regret sooo much, and I can’t even imagine going back to them. I don’t regret the people. I loved and love the people. But, it is just so enjoyable to hang out with a small group of folks who gather, and then take walks with them, or hikes, or go to the movies, or play some game, or sit around and have a beer or a glass of wine. How I wish I could have given my kids such a simple and non legalistic environment to grow up into Jesus in.
Sooo, maybe community can happen, in some ways, at a number of 150, but on a regular basis…I much prefer much smaller numbers. Extended community beyond 20? For sure…but intimate community at 150???
Maybe this is why the early Church met in homes. Most mediterranean homes would have been large enough to handle around 40 comfortably, in their interior courtyards, but only the very wealthy had homes large enough to handle more than that.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Maybe the whole community should go out and buy food with their tithe, bring it back to church and eat it there in the presence of the Lord.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Is this where you shake the dust off your feet?
March 31st, 2007 at 7:00 pm
I relate to every single comment on this one! Wayne you are right on with your insights –when it started to become meeting after meeting hearing one person talk. I would rather have 4 authentic Christian brothers than a room full of 2500 people I only have time to say “Hi” too.
The visual picture painted by Tom is priceless –I used to feel like an MC running up to sit by the ‘important people’ –dodging the crowd to get where it mattered.
What a world –Wayne’s World –I too am not worthy and don’t want to be.
April 5th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
this website seems like a great place for the restless and annoyed to vent.
April 9th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Teron, I’m guessing you meant that as a dig or something, but I say…
AMEN!
And thank God for it!
I hated the person I was before I became restless, and I’m sure God wasn’t too happy with him either!
And as the “Kool Aid” has left my system I am thrilled I even have the capacity and understanding to become annoyed at some of the things you might hold dear.
And in the social circle I came out of having a place to vent is like an oasis in the desert!
April 10th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
I must say that i am dissapointed to see a website for people to air their issues about the church you’re all bagging. Surely this is not helpful with your own faith development and shows your level of maturity. You have all been hurt by this church in some way, please find a healthy way of dealing with your issues so you don’t become anti-church people…when you find the perfect church this side of heaven let me know.
April 11th, 2007 at 5:42 am
I don’t think any of us are “anti-church”, Mate. Though there are many of us who are “anti-institution” or “anti-religious kingdom”. Better to describe us as “pro-Church” (where the Church is Jesus people) and we’re just tired of seeing all the control freaks trying to cut sheep out of the Master’s flock to keep unto themselves and fleece to make a living from them.
Jack
PS - what does “bagging” mean down under? I know what it means in the US, and for the record, it’ll make a soprano out of you for awhile.
April 11th, 2007 at 7:12 am
AussieObserver…
come on Sharon…it’s a little obvious don’t you think. I doubt Frank will be to happy to hear you are commenting.
April 12th, 2007 at 3:40 am
Bagging = it means to put down or to riducule someone or something.
As someone who stumbled across your blog, it certainly appears that you are anti CBC…a Christian church… a part of the Church….. Jesus’ church…
As a youth worker in Melbourne, Australia I constantly battle the institution of the denomination I work within towards a better future. I certainly hope that you have done all you can to share your concerns with the church leadership. If they haven’t heard you, i’m sorry….but move on….
…and my name is not Sharon….
April 12th, 2007 at 5:29 am
Just like Jesus battled the pharisees, teachers of the law, etc.? I always figured that was why Jesus was on the move so much and spent more time outside the temple in the wilderness teaching, than in, was to avoid the institution that wanted to oppress Him - that frustrated Him - enough to overturn tables and take a whip to those who defiled it …
Why don’t you really WWJD and leave that place rather than battle it constantly?
How is “battling” constantly consistent with Jesus who said “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.” (John 14:27 KJV)
AussieObserver who is not Sharon (Ozzie, maybe?) - I hope you’ll study “Shalom” and how it is SO important to the Jews, Jesus, and His followers, to guard and maintain your “Shalom”. It sounds like that place is making you lose your “Shalom”. For the sake of your “Shalom”, it might be appropriate to remove yourself from that place/situation.
If it is truly of the Lord, it will have His trademark “Shalom” (love, joy, peace, kindness, etc.) and not get you all riled up to where you lose the fruits of the Spirit of Peace.
Peace out, Oz.
‘Scrupe
April 12th, 2007 at 6:23 am
AussieObserver said:
I agree with you, because I see it as being exactly what Paul did, over and over and over again.
At the conclusion of the book of Acts, as though God were trying to tell us to do this once again, Luke gives us one last story from the pages of Paul’s life, and it was of Paul once again “battling the institution of the (jewish) denomination,” and having tried his best to help them see the real Jesus, as most of us here have tried to help our institutional leaders see the real Jesus and what His Church is really supposed to look like, Paul leaves yet another institutional denomination with these words:
God speaks to our hearts through His chosen vessels, who bring His truth to our lives, and when we will not hear He removes those vessels and leaves us to our deafness. Such was the case with Paul and the jewish institutional denominations of his day, and such is the case today.
Some of us here have spoken many many times, to our institutional friends and leaders, but they will not hear it. They plug their ears and beg us to go away and not speak any more of these things. After a while God has spoken to some of us to move on.
My question to you is, when He has spoken through you, and they have not listened, will you be able to hear Him say “move on,” or will you believe the lie that says all wrongs with the system can best be resolved by those who remain inside the system, trying to restore it from the inside out? If so, then you are unlike your Lord. Jesus came out of it, forsook it, called His own out of it, said it nullified His Word and ultimately crucified Him. Staying within it is only legitimate until Jesus says “come out of her my people.” I pray you will be able to hear that voice calling you, in the day He speaks it.
As for those of us who have heard that voice, and have “finally” obeyed it, we haven’t given up on Jesus’ Church at all. We are forerunners of a higher vision for it. We eat, sleep, drink, and dream of a Church that truly honors Jesus instead of the will of man. We press on towards the mark of our high calling in Christ Jesus, by calling our brethren out of that which Jesus is forsaking in our day, and to draw near to Him.
We have dedicated the rest of our lives to allowing God to bring forth a true manifestation of His Church in the earth…one that has a single focus on Jesus Himself, and that stands in continual opposition to the will of man, the agenda of man, the glory of man, the ideas of man, the rule of man, etc. We live to see a Church that loves Him, honors Him, glorifies Him, just wants to hear from Him, and absolutely WILL NOT tolerate man robbing Him of His Church, His bride, His beloved.
We address those within and without the systems of man’s religious ways to come to Jesus, outside the camp, and let Him wash their minds and hearts from all the man centered religion and religious traditions that have clouded their vision, wounded their hearts, and robbed them of Jesus.
AussieObserver, in all likelihood you will one day hear His voice call you to the very same ministry He has called many of us here to. I pray you rise to the voice. It will cost you your title, your salary, your respect, the perks you’ve come to enjoy, and sadly, very sadly, many of the precious souls you’ve come to know and love through your ministry among them.
When Jesus told the rich young ruler that he needed to leave all and come follow Him, and he would not leave because of what it would have cost him, it saddened Jesus’ heart to leave him in the corrupted system he had bought into, but He did it. Will you? Will all who are reading this blog?
At the calling of Jesus I have left behind thousands and thousands of my brethren who either cannot hear this call or will not hear this call. I miss them terribly, but I have counted the cost, taken up my cross, and followed Him. And I don’t think I’m really “somebody” for having done so. My testimony is that whatever Jesus has done within me has brought me to a place I never would have imagined He could bring me to, to a place where I absolutely CAN NOT NOT FOLLOW HIM OUT. I’m a prisoner to His calling, a slave to His will, a man blindly in love with a Savior that was soooo obscured inside the system, and is so amazingly and awesomely clearer and more brilliantly the champion of my heart outside those systems.
I can’t go back, because I can’t imagine taking even one small step away from such amazing revelation and glory. I’m hopelessly ruined by it. I’m completely undone by it, and I hope it lasts for eternity.
When it’s your time to come out, write us again, and share with us what has happened to you. I guarantee you, it will be in a season where it will have blown your mind. You will say the same thing that millions and millions are testifying to, who have come out, “Oh my gosh, I never knew how beautiful He was. I never have seen Him so clearly. I had no idea what was in His heart for His Church. How could I have not seen this before? What was blinding me? Oh my God, a million thank you’s will never even come close to the gratitude I feel for your having delivered me from a system that was strangling me in ways I didn’t really realize until you called me out of it.”
See you there….
April 12th, 2007 at 7:21 am
Ok…Mrs. Damazio…whatever you say.
April 12th, 2007 at 11:22 am
FYI… Aussie Observer…. The head pastor/CEO of city bible church is married to sharon, who is Australian… thus the question if your name was sharon
April 12th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
FYI Living Life: Melbourne=CityLife Church=Hanks’s In-laws
April 16th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Heh!
I love it when people reveal their true selves.
April 17th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Tom,
you have a compelling argument….however…. the Church is the movement which Jesus institued. The New Testament writers call all Christians to ‘keep meeting together’, not to leave the church. As someone who has been a leader in a church of over 3000 people, i know the internal leadership struggles of the balance of ‘institution’ and ‘movement’. This a balance that is always in tension. I don’t believe for a moment that Frank is out for his personal gain before God’s glory. To use a ship example (like an old pirate ship): there are times that a captain of a ship needs to get all the crew working together, towards the same goal. My personal experience is one of working with disgruntled Christians who have lost the ability to relate with Jesus through the church, worship God in a large body of people and start to focus on the problems of the institution (the church).
God may well have been calling you out of this particular body of believers, but don’t tell me you have a ‘higher vision’ of Church.. you may have a different expression of your faith, but you cannot get a higher vision, unless of course you are Jesus!
When Jesus said to Saul, ‘why do you persecute me?’ Jesus was equalling the church with himself, the exact same thing. Anyone who persecutes, brings down the name of the church, brings down the name of Jesus. This is why i engaged with this blog, because any non-christian who may stumble across it will see, like I did, a bunch of Christians pulling down Jesus’ church….not something i would like to be found doing.
I belong to the Anglican Church (episcipalian church in the USA I think) and there is a great deal of history which directs the institution of the church. The battle i fight is to keep the church leadership focussed on the current and future reality of the world we live in and our children will have to live in. As with any organisation, there are issues and things i don’t agree with. But, I believe in engaging with the issues so as to bring corporate blessing and change rather than a personal autonomy where i have a wonderful relationship with Jesus, but not his church.
If you have the ‘answer’ to the problems of the church, I look forward to hearing the revival which will break out as a result of this fresh revelation. I also look forward to hearing of the issue-free, problem-free church which you will lead…
I know of CityLife church, it’s just around the corner from me. I have a very good friend who is a pastor in the church. I heard Frank speak at a leadership conference at the church and that’s why i was looking up his name on google. Am i a frank disciple? No. But i believe that as God in his wisdom spoke through a donkey, he speaks through me and he speaks through Frank…
As an observer, I would say if you are not happy at a church, discover what YOUR ISSUES are before the issues of the church. My expereince is that it is our personal issues which react with the issues of the church. It is far easier to ensure that we are healthy growing Christians than to change the church to meet our changing needs and wants.
April 17th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
as God in his wisdom spoke through a donkey,
he speaks through me andhe speaks through Frank…April 17th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
Locutus….forgive and move on with your life!
April 17th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
I appreciated the Donkey-Frank comparison as well.
Aussie (Sharon),
I can’t help but think you are missing the point.
The church is an institution that is run by sinful men, it is not JESUS. Conceivably these sinful men could start leading “the Church” down a wrong path. Now you might be tempted to say “The Church is the Bride of Christ so no matter what Frank Damazio or Ed Schefter or any other pastor does, we can’t say anything because that would be bashing God”. When the reality of the situation is that if Frank and CBC started preaching an unpopular doctrine (say, God’s death on the cross wasn’t enough so you need to buy God’s love by giving them money) you wouldn’t have any problem with people standing up and saying this is wrong.
Well…that is where we are at. We love Christ and “the Church” (people not organizations) so much that we can’t stand to see the Gospel which Jesus gave his life for perverted by a few frustrated businessmen. So we write our unconventional blog and mock them.
Welcome to the club.
April 17th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Dear Aussie Observer,
Multilevel marketing operates on that same principle –just be quiet and
stay positive. Anyone who opens their mouth about the profit they are not
making is quickly shunned and said to be a loser.
The school of positive thinking is Norman Vincent Peale –a great idea but
eventually you run out of platitudes and ‘happy thinking.’ When you talk about problems and face them they can get better.
People often refer to the elephant in the living room –as you read on here
we’re talking about a stampede and the people just can’t pretend it isn’t there
any longer.
What if you are wrong and its really the Lord cleaning house? Food for thought to our brothers down under if that is where you are from, but maybe you should take a look at whats going on in your own neck of the woods
with Brian Houston and all the political fallout going on there. Yes your
news does reach over here as well. So maybe your press should have ignored that story about his father and abuses going on. How about the Catholic church–maybe that should have been swept under the rug.
So where does it end? Stay on here bro– it will make you ask questions about what should Pastor’s ethics be in this information age where it is really quite hard to hide things any longer. If we policed ourselves the world and press wouldn’t have to do it for us.
April 18th, 2007 at 5:38 am
AussieObserver,
What troubles me about your comments is that they are so full of presumption. I don’t mean that as a put down - it’s just the truth - which also happens to be the same truth for ALL of us.
The sad truth is, we are born in and of the flesh, are raised up in and by the world, and our minds programmed with the ways of the world, including the world’s way for salvation and reaching God through vain works of the flesh. Only after (for many of us) a lifetime of living in the world, where we learn the ways of the world, do we meet Jesus, who makes us born again by the Holy Spirit and sets out about the process of “renewing our minds” with the mind of Christ.
The renewal process takes a lifetime - because the error of worldly thinking and vision (flesh) has to be rooted out and replaced with the truth of Spirit.
There is such tendency to look upon the history and traditions of the institutional church, which most of us have been programmed with for a lifetime as right and correct and true because that is what we have always been taught and practiced. In that frame of mind, the only way to resolve the countless sins of the institutional church and myriad dogmatic errors, sinful denominationalism, etc., is to ignore them, trivialize them, and to ignore those who try to make an issue of them.
When I read your reply to Tom (who is no longer here), the underlying message I received from you, is that regardless of what any of us have been through, or have received as truth from the Holy Spirit, we are not to leave the institution that afflicted us and that continues on in sin by denominationalizing (dividing Christ’s one unified body), resisting and oppressing the Holy Spirit, forbids the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the assembly (tongues, interpretations, prophecy, word of wisdom/knowledge, etc.), forbids members to speak/share the portion of Christ in them, etc. Your reply seems to be “get over yourself” and return to the very institution that continues in egregious sin.
For many of us, who have been touched by the Spirit (baptized, filled, deprogrammed and taught), and renewed with the mind of Christ, returning to such a place as denies the Spirit and truth and community, is not an option at all.
The journey to truth, for me at least, has been “deconstructionist” - questioning everything I have ever been taught about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the scriptures, the church, etc.
Among the things I have learned about the types of institutional churches I always attended (non/anti-charismatic mainline denomination churches, LIKE presbyterian, methodist, anglican/episcopal), is that they are NOT churches, but religious institutions, often fortified by men against the instrusions of the Holy Spirit in the assembly of the saints. Try to imagine the reception in your typical non/anti-charismatic church to me or anyone else speaking in tongues! I don’t have to imagine - I know how I’d be treated - escorted out in a hurry and told never to come back!
How does one reconcile such tradition/practice/behavior? Would a church really take hold of a believer and throw him on the street for simply exercising one of the spiritual gifts as led by the Holy Spirit? Or is that the action of rebellious unregenerate religious people who do not want the Holy Spirit in their midst?
I say these things to you because you are in an Anglican/Episcopal church, with which I am very familiar having done many concerts in them over the years, and being friends with an Episcopal pastor here. They are, by practice ANTI charismatic, and as such, closed to me and any other brother or sister who is filled with the Holy Spirit.
City Bible Church and the other MFI churches are at least charismatic, recognizing the Holy Spirit, gifts, promptings / words of the Holy Spirit in the assembly. However, men have still exerted control over CBC/MFI churches, often quenching the Spirit and oppressing the saints who are spirit-filled, prohibiting them from active participation in the assembly (1 Corinthians 14:26, et al). And the few elected leaders have autonomous control of the moneys, they preach the tithe (which is a false / non-applicable doctrine for the NT saints), and then use the moneys they collect for other than that which they said they would. They stand in the place of God when anyone has discernment about them, always ready to silence the critics with a “thus SAITH the LORD!”
It is often in leaving such a place, that the Lord begins to bind up the broken hearted, heal, teach and release those who were formerly oppressed into true sonship.
You wrote:
What I would challenge you with is, to consider that Christian’s can and do meet together, in relationship, outside the context/confines of the institutional church all the time. We have Christ’s assurance that whenever or wherever any 2 or more of us meet, He is there, and that is an assembly of the Church.
As for leaving the church, do you think the church can be separated from the institution? If the people leave the building and denominations, are they still in Christ’s church? Who builds the church, Christ or men? Who decides who is in or out of the Church, Christ or men? I assure you, not one of us have left the church by simply walking away from the institution(s) of men. In fact, for many of us, it was in walking away from the institution(s) of men that we became joined with Christ’s church. For in so doing, I finally stopped following whimsical and greedy men, and following Christ exclusively.
G’day to you, AO.
Sam
April 18th, 2007 at 7:46 am
That was great Sam. I think that you have explained the idea of the church and the institution so well. It makes more sense to me now than it did before. Thank you!
April 18th, 2007 at 8:01 am
You bet’cha.
April 27th, 2007 at 11:56 am
AussieObserver said: about the IC and “I must say that i am dissapointed to see a website for people to air their issues about the church you’re all bagging. Surely this is not helpful with your own faith development and shows your level of maturity. You have all been hurt by this church in some way, please find a healthy way of dealing with your issues so you don’t become anti-church people…when you find the perfect church this side of heaven let me know.”
AO: When you said you’re “disappointed to see a website…air their issues,” I want you to know that this website has inspired a vision in my heart that EVERY church have such a blog so that the leaders of the church, IC or not, have less of a chance of abusing and lying to the people! To me, one of the major problems in the bishop-run Churches today is that the people have little or no voice, but are reduced to tithe-paying pawns.
We can debate all day long about the IC vs the non-IC church expressions, but the fact of the matter is that the agendas of top-down control of bishops and the manipulation and exploitation of God’s people for personal gain are found both in the IC and out of the IC. When my wife and I had a prayer meeting for awhile at our place, one of the brothers, who also attended a “house church” said that he could no longer attend out meetings. When I asked him why, he said that the leader of his “house church” said that all he needed was to attend their fellowship alone. ‘Different structure but same spirit of sectarianism and control!
I think that Sam said it so well above about the definition of the “church.” Good job, Sam! When you look into the NT, not just the Anglican church history, we find that the church is the ekklesia, the called out ones. The church by its very definition and function in the NT does not necessitate an institutional or denominational form. Can you show otherwise? By the way, Tom has weekly meetings in his home. They love Jesus with all of their hearts and do much good for many.
When you said, “surely this does not help with your own faith development.” I trembled in fear for those you said you counseled about their problems with the IC! Sorry, but it apprears to me that you do not have a good understanding of basic psychology and how people process their hurt feelings. In my view, it is not by running from them or denying them. They must be dealth with directly, and, yes, if one can talk to their former IC leadership, even more the better. But, as Tom so well said, this is not always something that the IC leadership does so readily. And, why? In my opinion, it is because they are in the constant process of defending their castle-empires and, I’ve heard some of them say it with their own lips about dissenters who have left: “I’m really glad that they’re gone.” This is not the spirit of unity we encounter in the NT.
When you said, “It shows your level of maturity,” I felt rather offended and judged by your comments. Sure, I think that the blog could do without some of its mockery and sarcasm, but we are all growing in our faith and gradually processing our healing from being spiritually abused by IC pastors and leaders. I seriously wonder whether you really understand what spiritual abuse feels like and how necessary it is to “find one’s voice” in the process of healing.
When you said, in effect, “why don’t you just leave,” it shows your defensiveness of the IC. To me. I was asked to leave the IC because I began to rock the boat with my questions re: its theology. This is what over-controlling hierarchies want, if they can’t keep getting their money while shutting them up: all dissenters please leave quietly and don’t start a blog that our members can read for themselves and from which they might gather “contrary” ideas!
When you said that you are youth pastor of a 3,000 member Anglican church, I couldn’t help but wonder what your salary is, and, if you’re married with kids, how dependent you might be on it for your lifestyle and welfare. I might be totally wrong when I say this, but I know more than one person who defends the IC because of the paycheck they receive from it. This is not a judgment, this is simply a question to you about why you would be so down on us raising questions of the IC - and, it’s not always City Bible Church or Pastor Frank Damazio that comes into view.
When you said, “When you find the perfect church this side of heaven let me know, ” I cringed. This is so typical defensiveness of the hierarchical church that it is probably found in an official catechism somewhere. Brother, what do you expect us to conclude from such a remark? To tolerate sin, distortions of the Bible for personal gain, manipulation and abuse in the Church? To leave quietly and not confront our abusers? To stop voicing our opposition to certain IC pastors and/or doctrines that we consider false?
No one on this blog that I recall has ever said that after they had left the IC, that they had now found the “perfect church.” In my view, wherever we are, we need to be continually striving for more truth and more love. Wouldn’t you agree?
Lastly, do you believe that all of the verses in the NT in which Jesus addresses his disciples, or esp. the Twelve, apply only today to the institutional hierarchy of Anglican bishops through apostolic succession? If so, that will go a long way in helping me understand your condescending comments about those who leave the IC. Would you agree with this description of the Anglican Church from The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed., Elwell, Baker, Grand Rapids, 1984, pgs. 48-49?
“A worldwide fellowship of churches in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury (England)…”
“Anglicans hold that theirs is the church of NT times and the early church, reformed in the sixteenth century and waiting for the reunion of all Christians. Bishops are the chief officers of Anglican churches, with archbishops or presiding bishops functioning as ‘first among equals’…”
“The diocese is that group of parishes and missions under a bishop whose representatives meet each year for a diocesan convention…Each parish and mission is represented by laity as well as clergy…” Some bishops are still appointed. “The worship …varies widely but is characterized by an attempt to follow the liturgical year…” There is wide diversity with its ranks.
Does that describe your church accurately? …By the way, what did Frank preach on when you heard him in Aussie? What did you think about his message?
April 27th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Dave,
I’d be glad to deal with any comments about immaturity.
AussieObserver:
Neener, Neener, Neener!!!