I’m always amazed when people naysay nakedpastor for pointing out the abuse that goes on in the church. Many people believe that I obsessively focus on the rare cases of abuse, manipulation, control and silliness, thereby magnifying it beyond its minuscule dimensions. They believe that it is rare and that nakedpastor appeals to a very small band who’ve experienced it. They grow impatient with my constant critique of religious institution and spiritual organization, as well as what they consider the incessant whining of the walking wounded who’ve had these unusual and infrequent negative experiences. They, in the deluded spirit of misery-loves-company, insist that my critique draws the critical and forms a sob-story society who can’t let things go.
In my opinion the naysayers have their head in the sand or up their ass. What I am doing on nakedpastor is drawing attention to a pandemic. What I hope to do is in the spirit of what the gospels say Jesus did. He had compassion for the thousands of people who were lost and wandering like sheep without a shepherd. Their were religious institutions and spiritual organizations available to them, but they obviously weren’t interested in subjecting themselves to their oversight. For obvious reasons.
Sure, some have left for a variety of other reasons. But so many people have left the church because of their dissatisfaction with it. It has failed. Not by negation, but by perpetration. Many people will no longer put up with nonsense or abuse or manipulation or control of a group just because they are supposed to be a member of it. There is no more “supposed to”. So, more and more, we will see people extricate themselves from a codependent or toxic relationship for the sake of their own health. This does not always mean leaving THE church, but it may mean leaving A church or at least renegotiating their relationship to it.
I want to see people set themselves free. And I want to help them do it.
illustrating spiritual paths
LouiseM
October 30, 2011 | 3:51 am
but you are not offering any positive help to those who have really been hurt by an individual church or leader[s].
This sir, is a lie.
——I’ll leave that up to David to decide.
don bryant
October 30, 2011 | 6:30 am
I am 62 and have been a pastor forever. The reality is that NP understates what actually goes on in the church. I no longer try to defend it to the vast numbers who have had enough. Believe me, they are legion. Well, that may be an unfortunate reference, but you know what I mean. I didn’t make their decision to leave but I can’t even begin to try to convert them to returning. Churches do need order and boundaries, like any family. But when leaders feel those boundaries threatened, the atom bombs begin to drop. It’s a dreadful thing to see.
———-I am 64 and have NOT been a pastor forever. Just 14 yrs, and before that I worked in the timber industry. Of course it is a dreadful thing to see, and even worse to be the recipent of, and I know of what I speak. I was the recpient of terribe abuse by a pastor and his cronies. The most painful, awful thing I have ever experienced. However, I have see the other side too. I have see, immature, whinny, spoiled, selfish, bullies get upset cause they didn’t get their way or didn’t get an answer they liked, claim abuse, abuse, and leave the church and try and get others to go with them.
And there has been a share of them on this site screams their woes about some pastor and church. And what do they get, “Oh your poor abused…I feel and validate your pain.” Certainly there are those have valid complaints, but I believe few and far between as a whole.
I don’t expect you to agree with me, and that is fine–but that is my experience from the past. I have been fortunate in that I have not had anyone do that in the church I pastor. But that certainly was not the case in the church I was a part of before I became a pastor.
nakedpastor
October 30, 2011 | 8:43 pm
fishon: i would like to add that judgement means passing sentence too soon. you say i quit, etc. gave up. but you don’t know the end of my story. would you say Abraham quit by leaving Ur? Moses by leaving Egypt? Jesus by leaving the towns? Paul by leaving the synagogue? Luther by leaving the RC? I’m still in the game, even though you believe I disqualified myself. Your narrow view seems to think that you behind the pulpit with folks in the pews is the real game and I threw in the towel on that. Nope.
———Threw in the towel! No, no, you most certainly did not throw in the towel. I just think you gave up your voice to be a factor in the orgainized church. Do you really see your self as making an impact with it in the future? That is my point.
As far as being in the game, why sure you are in the game, and you have and will make a much bigger impact than I ever will. But not on or in the church, but most certainly with those who have left it. Now how that turns out; what the final results of that might be, I have no idea. I have no idea whether you will continue to validate their pain with no solutions, or you will move on to solutions. Listen, if I have missed you giving solutions in many cases, please show me, and I will apologize and seek forgiveness.
Ok, fishon it is.
As to those who have a say but are not part of ‘the game’, part of what I said was that former players can make good coaches.
As I think of it I can really only find local sports people as examples, not people you would probably know. Richie Benaud, a former cricketer still has the ability to comment on cricket. He was a commentator for many years and also still has an input into commentary. Of course, the players and commentators have the right to ignore him. Such is the nature of being ‘out of the game’, but many recognise his knowledge and perspective and at least weigh what he has to say.
My own father, retired from community development work, gets calls form former work colleagues, asking for advice on how to handle situations. Again, there is no obligation for them to follow his advice, he isn’t a part of the organisations they work for, but he has a voice nonetheless.
In a different ‘game’ I would think of ‘The Elders’. A group of retired political figures who have had a voice in many situations around the world but are no longer ‘players’ within the organisations they gained their notoriety in.
That’s just a few. The point is, walking away doesn’t mean you don’t have a voice. It does usually mean that you can’t directly muck in and make a change, but you can certainly agitate for change and have a voice.
I’m thankful for what you write… mostly because finally SOMEONE is giving a voice to what I have experienced.
Johnfom
October 31, 2011 | 12:30 am
The point is, walking away doesn’t mean you don’t have a voice. It does usually mean that you can’t directly muck in and make a change, but you can certainly agitate for change and have a voice.
—John, I agree, there are instances where leaving the game, with history, a good resume, and thoughtful reputation can give you a voice.
However, you use::::: Richie Benaud, a former cricketer still has the ability to comment on cricket. He was a commentator for many years and also still has an input into commentary. Of course, the players and commentators have the right to ignore him. Such is the nature of being ‘out of the game’, but many recognise his knowledge and perspective and at least weigh what he has to say.
——But John, being a commentator is not the same as having a voice within an organization. And to a point you make my point, though not in total, I’ll grant you that, when you say “…the players and commentators have the right to ignore him. Such is the nature of being ‘out of the game’….”
The point is though, John, after leaving an organization/church and then becoming somewhat well known for bashing it, well, the organization tends not to pay much attention. Of course there will always be a very small remanent that will listen, but not the huge majority.
And when David says things like:::”In my opinion the naysayers have their head in the sand or up their ass.” Well, do you really think that gives him a voice in the organization he left. I tell him I think he gave up, quite, and he says that I am very cruel. Yet he says I have my head up my ass, and that is what????
You said:but many recognise his knowledge and perspective and at least weigh what he has to say.
———John, there are millions upon million upon millions of Christians in the Church. We know that as fact. Now my question to you would be, how many is the “many” you allude to? I dare say I doubt if there are over 300 folks signed up in his blog. Ok, lets give him a thousand he reaches. And of them, John, how many are regular attenders in the church, for that is the issue. Having the ear of the church that I am saying he does not have.
I don’t make my observations to be unkind or cruel towards David. He is a brilliant, talented, gifted man. My brilliance, talents and gifts won’t make a pimple on his butt. It is just my estimate that he is thrown his God given talents away. It is my opinion that he has become bitter and tremendously frustrated [heck, he has admitted to that], and frames his anger in such a way as to help the hurting and the displaced, when in fact, he only facilates their pain and bitterness and give no substantive help.
Louise called me a liar for saying that. I could say, where is the proof that he is helping many? Helping them to move through their pain into forgiveness and service to Father. But he is right, the game is still in progress, so time will tell when it ends.
MAKE IT a great day, John.
And thanks for the civil discussion.
fishon
——I’ll leave that up to David to decide.
Leaving those who have really been hurt by an individual church or leader[s] to decide and speak for themselves regarding the positive help NP does or doesn’t offer would be good too.
When I used to work for IVCF the President of the organization said that criticism should only be offered if one is within the organization and can be of help in changing it. To criticize as one leaves becomes then not a criticism but a potshot. I get the point that criticism generally does more good from the inside than the outside. But there are times when the only way for the organization to get the point is to leave it and let others know why. One of the things I like about the rapidity of communication technologies is that those leaving are increasingly gaining a voice. They don’t just leave. They continue to be a part of the church by making the presence of their absence felt. The church is finding that they can’t wipe away traces of their ever having been there.
Pat Pope: great blog on Fear & Anger and Theological Belligerence
Fear Leads to Anger: Unpacking Theological Belligerence (google)
I confess: I love it–belligerence and all. Makes sense. Rather see the fear and anger upfront and maybe put in play, than covered over with smiles and hugs the institutionalized kiss of christian fellowship. (Pray for me, all ways)
Blog Answers
Wow! It looks like a lot has been said since I was last on. I would like to try to answer the questions directed at me, and offer some further observations. But first, I want to offer my deepest and very sincere apologies to those that feel they were abused by God’s church. You are absolutely correct that this should have never happened. It is wrong. I am very sorry that it happened to you. I need to tell you that I too have had to deal with abuse/ wrong behavior in the church. I have been through a church split, had a group of people try to get rid of myself and the senior pastor (I was the youth pastor at that time), and later had an associate of my own that stabbed me in the back and tried to turn the people of the church against us after having been their longest term pastor. I know what it feels like, but I don’t leave. I might choose to attend a different local church, but as has been pointed out there are many churches that aren’t like that. Leaving the church because someone misused their authority, or emotionally abused us (physical abuse is a whole different issue) is a ridiculous answer. If that were the answer then we should pull all of our kids out of school, because there have been school officials who have abused. There have been police officers and political leaders that have abused, so we should all leave the USA. Children have been abused in their own families, perhaps we should pull all kids out of families. And for that matter David has already said that the cruelest thing ever said to him was in this conversation, maybe we should all pull out of blog conversations. (If this was truly the cruelest thing ever said to him, then it must have been something really minor that drove him from the church.) You may think my illustrations here to be ridiculous, but that is the same way I think about leaving God’s church, because of other people. The church certainly isn’t perfect, but then neither are those who aren’t a part of it. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”.
David, you said my last post was very “Predictable”. OK, so what is wrong with that? I have never seen anywhere that predictable was bad or wrong. Maybe it was predictable, because after all your years of pastoring, you know it is right. But I do need to correct you. You said that I said you couldn’t rock the boat now. That’s not what I said. Go ahead and attempt to rock all you want, I said it would be ineffective from the outside. (Several others have pointed this out.) Being a sports commentator is not a valid comparison. Those people are still on the inside, but unless they are actually one of the coaches, they will have little or no impact. For instance, David, you have been doing this blog for awhile now, what have you changed? It seems that 95% of your “followers” are outside of the church also. What has all of this ranting changed? If it really has made a difference, why aren’t you back in the church? Is it possible that your “graffiti” isn’t really reform driven, but driven by a desire for vengeance? David, you said you are a Christian, what happened to “forgive as you have been forgiven”?
With the exception of the former church custodian, no one has really defined what they mean by abused. They talk about what preachers said. Was it Biblical? So many want a form of Christianity that tickles their ears, and not what the Bible says. Many just don’t want to submit to the authority of the Word, and so they persecute the messenger. Let me give a personal example. I pastured a church where gossip had become a problem, and was driving people away. (You might say they felt abused by it.) So I preached hard against it, went to my board and developed a plan to deal with anyone caught in it. The first person, caught red-handed, when confronted left the church claiming we had abused her. It simply cannot be “abuse” both ways. Otherwise it is a no-win situation. My question is which is abuse and which is legitimate exercise of spiritual authority? Which have you really endured, and/or run from? David, you say you were abused by the church, but you were the pastor. What were you doing to protect the integrity of the church, and set an atmosphere that wasn’t conducive to abuse? We know that most of the time the atmosphere in the church is determined in large part by the pastor themself.
The other objection I have to what has been asserted is that this “abuse” drove people to drink or other unhealthy habits. I cannot accept this. Even for those that were truly abused, they made their own decision as to how to respond to it. As much as the church’s behavior may have been deplorable, I am still responsible for the decisions I make. Many others went through the same thing and did not resort to unhealthy behavior. (Read Paul’s account In 2 Corinthians 11 of what he went through and stayed true.) Beyond that, I pose this thought. If all of you “good people” leave the church, and leave it in the hands of evil abusive people aren’t you equally responsible for the evils that you see today “he who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it sins”. I wonder what a church formed by many of you would look like?
I was asked if I believe church attendance is necessary. Yes, whenever reasonably possible. Read Hebrews 10:24-25. I was asked what church Jesus attended. It was the organized church of His day. (Luke 4:16). If anyone could use the copout of being abused by the church and not going it was Jesus. But He didn’t. (David, doesn’t being Christian mean, if nothing else, that we live after the pattern of the Christ?) Jesus even instructed His disciples to obey the teachings of the church leaders (Matthew 23:2). So yes, for these and many other reasons I believe that church attendance is very important. Some say they leave because it is just easier. Wow, since when is life about what is easier? That is nothing but escapism. It would have been easier for Jesus to avoid the cross. I am very glad that He didn’t choose that way. Choosing the easy way never brings about needed change.
My final thought is this. It is purported that all of these posts are for the purpose of influencing change. I recently heard a definition of power that said it was the ability to bring about change and influence outcomes. It seems that is what David and others here allegedly seek. But Jesus said you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you- Acts 1:8. This power is received through a Pentecostal type experience like that that occurred in Acts 2. (Notice that that occurred when the church gathered together.) I suggest that those that are really about wanting to influence change seek the infilling of the Holy Spirit and use that power within the church to affect the desirable and necessary changes that you seek.
as a counselor I can tell you approximately 68 % of my clients over the years have had some kind of spiritual abuse from a church, or individual Christians. Obviously, they would like to keep it all a secret. I think a great symbol for the word dysfunction would be a picture of a church building.
Mary
October 31, 2011 | 9:40 am
as a counselor I can tell you approximately 68 % of my clients over the years have had some kind of spiritual abuse from a church, or individual Christians.
——-Mary, what kind of spiritual abuse?
If you want to see a group of people more alive, inclusive, and full of love, go to church.
If you want to see a group of people resistant to change, set in their ways, and full of prejudice, go to church.
It can be the best place, it can be the worst place. I am hoping to be a agent of change in this system and I feel I’ve lucked out on finding churches who are full of the former rather than the latter.
Furthermore, I think it’s good to talk about the church of the future and the future of the church. The future of the church is set, I think it’s not an institution that is going to go away any time soon. Yet what that church looks like, the church of the future, is in question. I hope to mold and shape it. You can affect more change from the inside than from the outside IMHO.
Hi Pastor Hayward,
please don’t let the naysayers get you down – when you’re leading from the front as you do, there are always people who try to drag you down. Going down an unbeaten path takes courage, which many people don’t have. You’re being used so brilliantly by God in your ministry here – keep it up and don’t let the narrowminded put you off!
Dr. Robert Mansfield: Thank you for answering my question about which church Jesus attended. You say Jesus attended the “church of his day” which was the Jewish synagogue. Didn’t Jesus come precisely to teach the Jews that there was a better way than trying to abide by so many rules and regulations? Did he go to synagogue because it was good or did he go to demonstrate that it (ultimately) was not good?
To me, a church and a synagogue are not synonymous. Therefore, I must continue to believe that Jesus never attended church. Even if I were to equate attendance at Christian church and attendance at Jewish synagogue, I could not have followed Jesus’ example had I lived in his day–because I am a woman. My attendance at synagogue would not have been required because a female body would “not have counted” toward the quorum of men required. My attendance probably would not have been desired, either. I would have been relegated to duties in the home or to the second story balcony where most likely I would not have benefited in any way from teaching which I could not see or hear (or offer).
Jewish women are still not obligated to attend synagogue. Some say this is because Judaism demands that your faith be woven into every aspect of daily life and is not proven or made secure by attendance at a meeting alone. Others say this is because women are relegated to an inferior position and kept in their place. (For more information see: http://www.jewfaq.org/women.htm and/or http://www.jewfaq.org/shul.htm)
My definition of “church” has definitely changed over the years, and I find myself leaning more and more toward the idea that the true bride of Christ is a group of living breathing people–not a building, not an organization, not a set of doctrines, etc.–just people who continue on the path toward faith in God. My thinking is still expanding and contracting around the concept of “church,” which is probably why I look at Hebrews 10:23-25 differently than you do.
To me it doesn’t matter if I stop attending an weekly service with a particular organization/building/denomination because they do not (and cannot) provide me with what I need to do what Hebrews 10 commands. Now, if I forsook my regular interactions with my “community” of friends who DO encourage me to hold fast to hope even when I feel like doubting or giving up and who DO stimulate me to love when I feel like hating or ignoring, I would be in grave danger. Without THAT community, the ones who know me almost as well as I know myself, I would certainly feel cut off from a very precious gift of God and might be prone to become either a deluded heretic or a lonely, curmudgeonly old fart. My community (albeit not a local arm of an organized denomination) keeps me from wandering too far off and getting lost in a forest of despair.
I found the articles at the following link to be very interesting. If you have time to take a look, Ben Williams presents some thought-provoking ideas… some of which I can agree with and some of which I struggle to reconcile with what I’ve been taught or what I currently think. Perhaps, all the hullaballoo around the idea of church is created because words have been mistranslated or replaced with others to promote an agenda. If you have time and the inclination, you can check it out at:
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/ecclesia/
Again, thank you for providing clarification of your previous comment.
I agree with Don Bryant’s first comment. I feel it all too often understated. For awhile me and 2 of my friends who left our church felt like it was such a unique experience. Sure every church has their downfalls (none are perfect), but surely what we walked through couldn’t be normal. But sadly, the farther I get away from it and the more I see other churches, I think it’s every where. I hate the harsh condemnation of people who belittle the abuse. It’s hard enough walking away, then people condemn!
I don’t always agree with you (theologically) but I love your perspective on things! It’s refreshing!
“Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets.” -Luke 6:26
looks like you’re on the right track! if only i could be so… lucky?