It had to happen eventually, I guess.
I mean, I knew already the local megachurch we’ve been attending for almost the last year is complementarian by nature. Many of its sister churches are bold with the assertion that no stinking female will ever be in leadership in this dang church. But our church—if I should call it that—never really talked about it at all. I mean, it was obvious but unspoken. Since I didn’t really intend to be part of the church, but only attend it for awhile, it didn’t bother me much. (I’ll explain our intentions later, if I may.)
Yesterday there was the normal hype for a new sermon series: ON3 The 3 is a backward E. The subject is the trinity. Get it, three in one?
Well, I’m up for a sermon series on the trinity. Especially when there has already been, for the last year, lots and lots of emphasis on Jesus. This should be pretty good. Good preacher(s), good subject.
Well, the first sermon—I can’t remember if it was supposed to be an overview of the trinity or on the Father—turned out to be, rather, about relationships. Specifically, it narrowed down to the man-woman relationship in marriage. And though it wasn’t a hard sell kind of message, it was definitely taking the approach that the husband is over the wife and the wife is subservient. The words “submit to one another” were read, but almost glossed over. There was way more emphasis on “submit to your husband”. It really was a stand by your man message. I also learned that this is the way women want it, so men shouldn’t be shy about stepping up.
Now, I’m sure you need to discuss relationship when discussing the trinity. I’m sure you need to talk about relationship as part of God’s image in us. But I’m not sure you need to draw lines around women and say that the special part of God’s image that pertains to women is the Holy Spirit part, because women are good at convicting men of their sins and standing by as comforter. In fact, I’m so not sure of that that I might even edge toward calling it a soft heresy. I’ve never thought about dividing the image of God into parts before.
Anyway, after a year of very fine sermons, this one left me a little bit cold. Maybe there are some specific situations in the church of which I am unaware that made the pastor go in this direction. I’d like to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Now, about our church intentions:
I’m not sure what you would call our situation. I hesitate to call it church abuse. In fact, I’m sure it’s not that. But we went through some transitions in our former church that caused it to not really be habitable by us anymore. And I think you could at least call it some level of burnout, although I didn’t know it at the time. We needed to heal up.
The year at the local megachurch has allowed that healing to take place. We know almost no one. We rarely even speak to anyone more than a greeting. Everyone is in the same boat; no one knows who is a visitor and who is a member and who is anything else, so we all just tip our virtual caps to one another and go into the big room with the big stage, enjoy the kicking rock bands singing the great songs, enjoy a superb message, take communion, watch someone get baptized, and head out for dinner.
It really has been a healing time for us. No prep, no muss, no fuss. Sleep in later on Sunday and have a stress-free day.
I think the time of healing is nearly done.
I’m not sure if we are whole or not. Sometimes I think so and other times I know not. But we are missing the fellowship of a group of friends, dinner over a frank conversation, laughing at one another, and stuff like that there. We are missing it. We’ve avoided it for over a year because it was too painful. You see, lost many of our friends before we lost our church, and the loss of church completed the process. For the last year, it’s been the two of us. We have been not only best friends, but virtually only friends. It’s probably time to fix that.
So, it’s time to figure out what to do. One group I like pretty well has a doctrine that specifies a premillenial second coming. Can I sign on to that without believing it in any way the group would recognize? They also like the word “inerrant” to describe their view of scripture. I’m less than fond of that word. Should I let that matter? Would those unseemly things get under my skin a year later like the non-egalitarian stance of our current situation?
Is the problem in me? Am I too picky?
I don’t think so. I don’t want to ever end up in the situation again that we had to get out of. That was the most painful episode we have experienced and we don’t want to do it again.
Maybe we should take our current path to the next level and have a church of just the two of us. Of course, that doesn’t solve the fellowship problem, does it?
As background, let me say that we are not church-hoppers by nature. We’ve changed churches when we have moved and that’s about it. If you want a picture of faithful laypeople, you could have looked at us. Until last year.
If you are so inclined, we would appreciate your prayer support in this matter.