| embonpoint |
01-26-2008 03:09 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by George
(Post 369194)
First hand knowledge - several very conservative young people in my relative's church friendship has been cut because they remain in a UPC church.
There was a post on ABN Global by a young man who was crying because his girlfriend broke up with him because he attended a UPC church.
A pastors daughter received a call from a Tulsa bound church youth asking her whose side she was on. The young person informed her if she chose the UPC they could not be friends.
Out of two or three witnesses.....
|
And if it would edify anyone I could give numerous examples of the shoe being on the other foot. Those who have been excluded from fellowship or otherwise denigrated because they did not have a particular brand or carry the right card.
Is it impossible to understand that after dealing with some issues like those described by Steadfast, or even of lesser magnitude, that a shepherd might decide that he has three choices
1. Let things continue as they are and deal with the issues and damage as they occur.
2. Address the real or perceived shortcomings of another church/fellowship from the pulpit or in private considering the ramifications of being a talebearer and damaging the confidence of people in the ministry.
3. Quit announcing and participating in those meetings he is not comfortable with and look for alternatives that he feels would be a safer environment to fellowship. For me I am comfortable with this choice.
My point being that some leave or lessen their participation in the interest of keeping a good spirit and not having to speak negatively about someone else. Will there be those who will take potshots? Yes, in my experience it will happen from both sides, having more to do with the character of the individual shooter than the particular group with which he aligns.
Each pastor has to make his own decision based on his area, experience, congregation and the actual issues being dealt with. There are at least theoretical pluses and minuses to each choice. It seems to me that most of the real contention arises when we begin to “pick at” and impute motives for these decisions. .
|