Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

This is a sincere and honest question.

There are many UPCI churches "loosening" up on their dogmatic stances concerning particular standards. There are many implications from these actions. Why? Well, you have a church that has been conditioned with rules-based holiness that inevitably forms into a tradition, and not to mention the subconscious conditioning that a person develops over years of this stuff.

So, when certain others of the church start trimming their hair, wearing make-up, etc what do the others that are content living the way they've lived? Doesn't the "stumbling block rule" apply to these churches? Should these churches be built from scratch and not implemented into rooted, seasoned churches? What about the youth groups -- how have they responded? I've heard, though many fight standards in favor of a true holiness (those who personally seek to please God, willing to give up anything if it hinders their walk), that instead, what happens in these "hybrid" churches is a picture of the ugliest of carnality. Pleasing God is back seat to new-found so-called freedoms. It's like the rebellious 18-year old who has the world to his own, but the entire, or half the church is that 18-year old. And "rebellion" in any degree isn't good.

Do you know a church that has made this transition well? Without collapsing and imploding (either in numbers or in spirit)? Surely, not all those who want to step away from dogmatic standards want a church culture of "anything goes." I know some on here see it that way (nothing we can do to merit his love, so quit worrying about it, etc), but not everyone sees it that way.

Interested in your feedback.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

It has happened successfully, but it takes YEARS. Often it literally takes the older generation dying off.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Ah

But Randy, can you name one that is successful?

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I can. And I can name even more "standards" churches that have failed on their own and all but disappeared without ever "letting down."

Just go through the list of Home Missionaries into your district from the last 20 or 30 years. What has become of all those works? Why? Which were "standards" based churches, and which placed an emphasis more upon relationship with the Savior? Who's still around?

Almost all were "standards" churches around here. Most of them are gone.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Who are they? What's their story?

Let's be fair and say there are poor pastors on both sides of the aisle. I've seen fly-by-night charlatan libs go nowhere, and I've seen Hitler Juniors never go anywhere. Likewise, I've seen many conservative churches succeed (at numbers), and ultra-lib churches succeed (at numbers). Fair enough? I'm not trying to combat con vs lib -- at least it wasn't my intention. I'm referring to this specific problem of hybrid churches.

Seems the few churches I can think of that fit this description (Michigan, Texas, California, Florida) are having some extreme challenges, especially with the youth groups.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

What kind of challenges?

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I can only imagine the challenges with young people or youth group. I think it really is important for these changes to be made slowly. Teaching and encouragment for a personal relationship with the Lord is so important.

I have had to do a lot of teaching on "all things are lawful, but not everything is expedient" to my teen girls. The hardest for me has been with my oldest who was the last to let go of traditions. She was still active in singing of our church, so although her sisters didn't, she still held to the standards. It hasn't been an easy time... I can only imagine what an entire group of teens would be facing when standards have been linked to their salvation for most of their lives.

The most spiritually grounded of my girls is the youngest, and she hasn't followed standards since she was in grade school. In school, she takes a bible to read and she is also the one who will defend her position with scripture. She is right now at UPCI youth camp, where she wants to be.. because she has a sincere desire to be closer to the Lord and grow spiritually.

I know it might sound funny, but you remove outward standards or guidelines and you find out real fast how strong someone's relationship with God is.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

You're right about the "hybrid" angle. At least in my opinion you're right.

I don't want to name names or places where the word "failure" is used. After all, I confess that the standards of success are based more on "man's measurements" than on anything eternal.

The place where I poured out most of the years of my life and ministry doesn't really exist any more. We were one of the outwardly "ultra-con" type places, but the senior pastor was really more of a "live and let live" type - at least when he could get away with it. Then an axe would fall over some trivial point, heads would roll and we'd be "holiness or hell!" again, until some new family showed up and won our hearts and things would kind of slide again.

The overall atmosphere ended up being kind of deceptive, but it literally took me years and years to notice that. We'd lure folks in with an "everyone's welcome!" attitude. Then the old man and his wife would go off to a "retreat" some place or get "counsel" from "friends" and heads would roll again.

Another thing, look up all of the churches that made the news as "cults" within the UPC and apostolic world. Google it. You'll find that all of them were "ultra-con" type places and that what got them into trouble was their emphasis on some aspect of "holiness." In the end, they ended up being too extreme for the UPC, but all of the old news accounts still call them "UPC" churches.

I think the biggest problem is one of deception. We deceive ourselves about our intentions and wind up deceiving others. The yo-yo effect of "extreme" to "open" to "extreme" and back again is what causes the most problems. How about just letting the Word of God determine our "standards?" If it's not in the Book, then be open to some different ideas. Being foundeed upon the teachings of Jesus Christ and His apostles is what "Apostolics" are supposed to be about. Wouldn't it be great if it were true?

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Being able to back up the "standards" with scripture?

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I have to agree with a point made above. It normally takes years.

But here's a thought... if a church falls into absolute spiritual chaos once the rules are gone it doesn't mean that the rules were good for them. In fact it testifies to the fact that the "standards" only taught them to live for the rules... not Jesus. When a person is seeking to live for Jesus they don't need rules. Sure, they might not dress ultra-con, they might have trimmed hair, they might wear a little makeup, they might have a glass of wine with dinner on occasion, or smoke a cigar at their son's birth - but they won't conceivably embrace that which is truly a violation of God's Law.

This is an example of how "church" is actually harmful for so many Christians. The Bible doesn't command us to go to church, it admonishes us to embrace Christian fellowship. I'll take Christian fellowship over church any day.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

From what I have seen this is absolutely the case.
No

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Here's a thought...

If they can't live for Jesus without the legalism... they never truly had Jesus. All we're seeing is the ugly reality that religious tradition was able to hide.

Just a thought.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I completly agree.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

This is the express danger of legalism. It codifies styles, manners, and customs that eventually become irrelevant to a society. After one or two generations are brow beaten into putting their trust in these codes things naturally take their course and change. When this change happens, the people are left not knowing what to do or how to truly govern themselves by Christian principles.

The issue with these churches isn't that they began to change (everything changes). The issue is that this is ultimately what legalism can do to a body of believers when it's run it's course.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

fixed my browser. :)Anyway....been there, done that. From a legalist ( not all UC's are legalists ) to lawless. Threw out the T-shirt.I am in between somewhere. The less I hear standards preached with the focus shifted to Jesus, His salvation, His love for me... the more conservative I desire to live. * shrugs *

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I agree with these points. The reason why, when you take it away, the thing blows up is a testimony of itself. It's bothersome, and I suspect keeping many pastors insistent on their old ways.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I'm not sure I believe this... at least completely.
It's akin to a Mormon seeing the revelation of the Gospel of Christ. They usually become an atheist first. Their world has flipped upside down. Doesn't necessarily mean they never had a relationship with Christ, and we shouldn't use it as a test. We should do what we can to not be a stumbling block. Which is why more and more I'm inclined to believe these guys should be planting new churches instead of steering a Titanic around, resulting in heavy casualties.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Isn't that an amazing paradox! It's so true.

Yet some, throwing out standards, think separation ONLY means your heart, and that is has NOTHING to do with how you present your body. Talk about baby with the bath water.

Thanks for your contribution on this thread. This discussion not only interests me, it bothers/moves/frustrates me.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Amen and Amen.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I have found this to be true, as well. When I asked the Lord to take away from my heart the desires of this world, and place within it His desires, I found I began to live more conservatively by the leading of the Holy Ghost. :)

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

But I'm sure that you don't mean conservatively JUST in dress ;)

I too, found that once I desired to KNOW Him more and to learn more of HIS ways, I was more conservative too. I was more conservative in how I talked, how I acted and how I lived!

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I haven't read this entire thread, but a church is like a big ship. If it changes direction too fast, it will tip over!

The successful churches have made changes very slowly. In fact, I still believe the best thing to do is to say nothing! No announcement is needed until the issue is forced. In some cases, it never becomes an issue. When preaching on standards ceases, things will evolve naturally over time.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Yes, I do know it is possible and can be done. The largest church in the state where I live used to be a very conservative apostolic church many yeasrs ago. They were traditional conservative apostolic in every way. They wore head coverings, uncut hair, no pants, no makeup, just conservative apostolics. The Bishop became ill and could no longer pastor full time. He placed the church in his son's hands. His son made a swift transition from all of the rules and standards. Now, that church has more than tripled in number, but really is the most successful church in the state.

Would I take on membership there? No

Have I been there to visit? Yes

Do I think sin is running rampant there? Possibly

Was sin running rampant there before the transition? Possibly, who knows!

Did people hide behind the standards and traditions as holiness? I am almost sure of it.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

This is one of the problems with legalism. Once you have it, it is extremely hard to get rid of it. It becomes a foundation. Start removing that foundation, and the structure begins crumbling.

It would have been great if we had avoided legalism to begin with.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I do think a pastor is probably better off starting over with a new congregation that doesn't have the legalism mindset. Otherwise, very slow changes and encourage people to study and pray for themselves before changing anything about their lifestyle. And be supportive of those who do not wish to change, as long as they aren't judgmental towards others.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I also think that without the legalism so many people have no spiritual identity. That what gives them a definition to who they are. They forget about Jesus himself, and replace it with the rules. When people move away from it, their faith is shaken.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Until the first Sunday School teacher that is causing ire because she has trimmed hair. Then the congregation has forced your hand. Slow is right, but when the hand is forced you have to say something. Your silence is a glowing endorsement and lack of speaking on the issue could create more gossip/drama.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I'm not impressed with whiners who complain about stumbling blocks. I used to be. But a guy from the church I used to attend believed that eating pork was wrong and he'd make an issue whenever we all went out to eat or whenever we had a church function involving food. It almost got to the point where people were afraid to eat pork or ham around him for fear of being a stumbling block. I got an attitude and said, "He needs to toughen up." I made a ham sandwich and purposefully sat down next to him and starting eating. He would barely look at me and tried to act all "offended". Get real.

Anyway... lol

I think these churches are in trouble because they were taught more about standards than being taught how to identify REAL sin. For example, let me ask you... what is "Sin"? Can you tell me?

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Sin is disobedience to God's commands and/or His voice personally to us; Missing the mark.

Elder saints, sweet and kind, growing up in church and this is all they know. They served God the best they could, were obedient to where they were planted.... young people, zealous for God, going along with what they were taught... it's to these that I use the "stumbling block" rule. The fellow that enjoyed fussing about pork was in no danger of stumbling, judging by his vocal objections that became nagging. It's greater than pork. It's living life, and all you know is Jewish law, then you meet Christ, and that's cool... but you're dizzy because the Law is no longer strapped on your back, instead it's written in their hearts. This is why Paul was being sensitive to these new believers. I think this example Paul uses often fits more with the hybrid church.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I agree, doing something that might cause someone to stumble into "sin" is presenting a stumbling block. But again... what is "sin"? You said,

I see a glaring problem with your answer as to what sin is. Because to "miss the mark" a mark must be definately set. What is the "mark" we are aiming to hit? For example, a young girl sees her older friend wearing pajama pants. Will this cause her to begin questioning why she can't wear regular pants? What if she sees her older sister wearing pants when out and about. Will this cause her to begin questioning why she shouldn't wear pants? Maybe. But is that being a "stumbling block"? I mean, is wearing pants a "sin"? If so, where does the Bible say so? My point is, God has set a sure mark for defining what is sin and what isn't. It isn't abritrary, based on a pastor or brother's opinion. Some say facial hair is a "sin". Really? So if I wear a five o'clock shadow... is that presenting a stumbling block? Where is that in Scripture?

My point is - what is "sin"? Define it definately. God has. ;)

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

What's your definition Aquila?

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I also began to live more conservatively... but it is in more areas of entertainment than dress... I've always believed in modesty... so not an issue...but I have a desire to please him in all things...from my heart... not a list of rules.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

The first church men and women wore robes...men had beards...ha....love you folks.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Aquila, I don't think sin is black and white. We can ignore God's promptings in our personal life, and begin to resist and disobey Him, and it still not be a uniform law for mankind. (James 4:17)

Circumcision wasn't sin, eating pork wasn't a sin --- but this was the issues Paul had to deal with when he talked about considering your brother. This has to mean something to us today. How do you interpret it?

I'm not talking about individual-by-individual, but I'm referring to it in the context of this thread: of larger, seasoned churches suddenly changing. In the individual context, I will be as cognizant as I can without offending my brother. Does that mean I keep my face smooth at all times? No. It's not written down, it's just an attitude. And it's not about seeing the other brother weaker than I, it's about understanding our mutual human condition, and fragileness. If we love our brother, our personal liberty won't be as important as our concern with their harm. How we dice that up... I'll keep it on this level. Slow is the way to go. Then again, like I previously posted, someone will force your hand, and what will you say? God give grace to our minister's lips. Let us not turn from rules and questionable doctrines into free-spirited asses that have no yoke... but let us realize the severe importance of God's soft and easy yoke, turning when we feel his tender nudge.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Again, point-being, many are afraid to follow their inclinations to change because of the devastation of some of the churches that have taken that step. Maybe in 10 years, these churches will survive. I think churches that decide to change on things should seriously meet with others and talk about the best way to do that.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

We took an old traditional UPC church in 1984 in a small town that had been there for over 50 years. Before we ever went, my husband told the board that he would not preach standards and he would not be a "spiritual cop". If that's what they wanted, they needed to look elsewhere. He has NEVER preached standards and wasn't going to start, but he does preach principles of the Word. They wanted us anyway.

As the church grew, the newer people came in and learned to be good Christians, but he never enforced the legalism on them. The church grew from 35 to about 650 before we left there to move to Jackson. We kept all the older saints except one, and she didn't leave over standards. Some of those older ladies still have the "Pentecostal" look, and I wouldn't change them for anything. It was a tremendously successful experience, but we never got up and made proclamations; it was just a slow change, and we taught the older ones to love the new ones coming in, even if they were different.

When we started the new work in Jackson in 2001, we just went in preaching and teaching as we always had, and these people (by and large) have never heard of UPC. It's a great solid church of sold-out fanatic people who strive to serve God with all their hearts. We had 902 Sunday and are in another building program.

So, Growing Pains, I hope we can qualify as one of your success stories, by the grace of God.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

I'm not sure all of them actively seek the changes that are made. And every church is different.

I am watching a church begin to change now. They don't know they are changing and would be angry if I suggested they were, but they are, none the less.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

That certainly qualifies as a success story.
You church planted in Jackson in 2001? In 8 years you have grown that much? The church is hungry for discipleship? Kudos to you! I think you'd be a person to pick on a panel. I'm sure there are some stories regarding that transition with the older church.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

God has been good to us. The transition we went through in the first church was completely smooth; I can't explain it except it was a divine move of God. His hand was definitely on that congregation. I have heard horror stories from friends, but we were just blessed through the whole thing.

Re: Con-to-Lib "Hybrid" Churches: Let's be Honest
 

Divine indeed! In your experience with others, what would you say, as a percentage, has been the case with churches in this situation.

I would love to hear your story sometime.