Review: Grace Seattle
Benjamin Ady III recently sent this thoughtful survey in…
Church Name - Grace Seattle
Church Website - www.GraceSeattle.org
Date Attended - October 15, 2006
Overall Rating - 5. Plain. Inoffensive.
Was the building easy to find? If you drove, was it hard to find parking? How about the exterior or interior signage? What would you do differently?
To be perfectly up front, I need to let you know that I’m currently in the process of officially unbecoming a member of this church - I used to attend, but haven’t been to a Sunday service in some 6 months, and haven’t attended regularly for longer than that. So it was totally easy for me to find. My dad actually came to the end of one of the services here to pick up my kids once, and he complained that there were no handicapped parking spots. My dad has limited mobility so this was annoying for him.
Did anyone approach you and speak to you before the service got underway? If so, how did you feel about that? Can you share their name(s)? Did you know them before your visit?
I spoke briefly to the person organizing the service because I was slated to read a scripture passage. Members get slated for a volunteer duty like this reading every couple months. I’ve actually gotten someone else to cover for me the last 3 times because I didn’t wanna go to the gathering. This time, however, when I got the email saying I was scheduled to do this reading, I thought I’d go because it would be interesting to do this survey. Another guy I know came up and shook my hand and we chatted for a moment. I felt fairly ok–like people were friendly but not pushy.
As you observe the people “doing their church thing,†what goes through your mind? Are you able to understand why they do what they do? Do they seem sincere?
This question touches on part of what has happened to me. I used to be a bit like these people. That is, I used to sit through Sunday morning church services and experience some kind of meaning. And this is no longer the case. It seems very strange to me. I spoke to a lady this morning, and I said “Why are you here?”And she said: “That’s a Loaded question.”
“Oh, sorry-I didn’t mean to be offensive.”
“No, not at all. A while back I came home to find one of the boarders who stays in my boarding house, a 25 year old young man, dead on the floor. They did an autopsy and multiple tests and could find no reason for him to have died. This made me think that there must be something more. A friend of mine came to this church, and I started coming with her, and it worked for me.”
I know that feeling. There are things that work for me. Sunday morning church is no longer one of them. These people are sincere at some level, but I no longer get it.
What do you think about the rituals (the liturgy or the program)?
It was very scripted–all spelled out in the program they give out to everyone–exactly what happens and in what order, who is supposed to say and do what and when they are supposed to do it. It felt at one level very safe and relaxed and orderly. And yet I also had the fearful sensation that if I accidentally or purposely somehow messed it up, disrupted the order or the safety or the relaxedness, that everyone would be quite shocked and upset with me.
What did you think of the music? Did you enjoy any of it? Was it boring? Write down the feelings you had while watching or participating.
The music was excellent in the technical sense-of course, this is coming from the point of view of a very amateur musician. There were two violinists, one cellist, 3 wind instruments, one brass instrument, one electric bass player, one drummer, and one vocalist. It had the feeling of classical music, rather than popular music. I greatly enjoyed listening to it. If I allowed myself to pay attention to the lyrics, however, I got two strange feelings. The first was that the lyrics largely just didn’t make sense to me. I knew the meanings of the individual words, but the overall sense seemed very strange to me at times. The second strange feeling was that when everyone was singing, they seemed to be neither A. connecting with the sense of the lyrics nor B. enjoying singing. By (A) I mean that it seemed to me that some of the lyrics, which were based mostly on classic Christian hymns and poetry, were speaking of things that were enormously intensely good or enormously intensely sad–earth shattering, in some sense, and yet the congregation while singing did not seem (from outward appearances) to be much affected. By (B) I mean that I personally have had a very small amount of voice training and I do love to sing and sing well. The congregation, on the other hand, seemed to be mostly singing for the sake of getting done with the song-almost… mumbling (again from outward appearances).
What did you think of the prayers? As you listened to the prayers, what did you learn about the people, either good or bad? Did they “major in the majors†or get lost in the minors?
I liked the prayers, especially the ones printed in the program which were read as a responsive reading during the service. They seemed to me to be the one part of the service where the congregation was focusing outward–away from “me” and “us” toward “they and them” –in a good way. For instance “…may the whole world live in peace and justice …”. This is a prayer that I can very much pray.
Did the speaker or pastor seem likeable? Weird? Is she/he a person you’d enjoy having coffee with? If not, why not? The speaker seemed quite likeable. I’ve actually had coffee with him on one occasion, quite a long time ago, and he was easy to talk to. I think we have very differing perspectives on things in general, and I wouldn’t necessarily hang out with him for fun.
How about the quality of her/his talk: does the speaker need public speaking lessons or is she/he pretty good? Did she/he seem engaged/sincere/condescending? I thought the speaker was engaged and sincere. It was not at all difficult to follow his talk. He definitely doesn’t need public speaking lessons-he has the air of being comfortable in front of a crowd and engaged with his audience. I would have appreciated some kind of pre and post summary-a “here’s what I am going to say” at the beginning and a “here’s what I’ve said” at the end. Also the talk felt a bit long to me. I had the feeling that it could have been trimmed by 10% timewise and it would have felt more energetic/compact/concise.
Did the talk itself hold your attention? Was it enjoyable? Thought-provoking? Relevant? Credible? Did any part(s) of it particularly stand out to you in a positive or negative way?The talk held my attention more than it normally did back when I was attending for the simple reason that I was in the process of evaluating it for this survey. I would not go so far as to say I found it enjoyable or even thought-provoking.I suspect I am not interested in the questions which the speaker was interested in.
I think the talk was relevant for people who are thinking about how to approach god, the proper way to approach god, and who thinks the bible is a good starting place for these questions.
I disagreed strongly with one thing the speaker said. He said “if you address your heart, the exterior behaviors will follow”.
I have not found this to be the case with me. I find if I want to change my behavior, I have to address both my motivations and my behaviors at the same time in order to change the behavior. I was a bit disappointed that the speaker did not address the war theme of the passage (I Samuel 7:1-15). The passage sees it as a positive thing that Israelites are killing Arabs, and it sees Israel as rightfully owning the disputed territory. I think this touches on some things that are very much present realities in the world. I suspect that the speaker and the congregation, who more or less appear to be middle class Seattleites, don’t at all buy into these implications in the passage. This was not addressed at all in the talk, which disappointed me.
Did anyone approach you and speak to you after the service ended? If so, how did you feel about that? Can you share their name(s)? Did you know them before visiting?I met and spoke briefly with a lady, which I described above.
I also met and spoke briefly with a dear friend, who knows I don’t go to church anymore and said “Benjamin, what are you doing here?” When I half sheepishly told her I was filling out a survey for ChurchRater.com, a blog that she knows about.
She said, grinning widely, “But you can’t do that–you used to go to church here!”
I told her I was going to be up front about that in the survey, which she acquiesced would then make it ok. Overall, the people seemed friendly but not overly so. It seemed to me that their demeanor matched up well with the demeanor of Seattleites in general, as described in this article (click here) -that is say, polite but distant.
Did you bring any adults or children with you to our service? If so, ask them about their experience. What did they tell you?
I brought my two and four year old daughters, who hung out in the nursery and the Sunday school, respectively. The older said she had a good time. The younger, who is in potty training, and whose evil father pathetically forgot to mention this to the nursery workers, had an accident and was too afraid to tell anybody. This was almost entirely my fault, but it made for a rather unpleasant experience for her.
How was your experience at the church overall? Did you enjoy it? Would there be any point in you going there again?
Overall, it was low key to the point of being boring. There were no surprises, nothing very shocking or appealing or enormously interesting. One had the feeling that everyone’s parasympathetic nervous system was working quite well. This of course could have been a function of it being 9AM on a Sunday morning. I probably won’t be going there again–I couldn’t really say I enjoyed it aside from the interest I had in it because I was writing for this survey.
If this church expects to attract people like yourself, what do you suggest they improve that you haven’t already mentioned?
I had the feeling that the church was very inward focused. Near the end of the talk the speaker said “You’re moving forward into your life, and God commands you to move forward into your life in weakness and dependency.”This seemed to be a focus of the talk and at some level of the whole service–how to move forward in my life, how I can or should connect with god. I think people like myself would want more of an outward focus–more of an acknowledgment that relatively we have it really freaking good in the world and what are we doing/can we do to focus on/help other people who have it relatively really freaking hard in the world. I also find the lack of interaction/invitation for interaction uninviting.
The speaker did not indicate that he would like feedback. There is no place in this service for people to interact with the speaker nor with each other about the issues that the service is about. I find this frustrating.
Do you have any other comments you want to share? What questions did we (ChurchRater.com) forget, that we should have asked?
One other thing I noticed was the demographic of the congregation. There were about 80 people there, mostly aged 20 to 40 and mostly couples. They were largely white. There were *no* teenagers and *no* older people. It was also noteworthy that the church meets on Capitol Hill, one of the most ethnically and culturally diverse places in the whole of Seattle. If one walks down Broadway, the main street on Capitol Hill, one is sure to see multiple “strange” hair colors, outfits, piercings, tattoos, etc. But at Grace Seattle, all the hair colors and clothing was “normal”–no unusual hair colors, no unusual piercings, etc. I just thought this interesting.
Wow! Benjamin, thank you for the depth in this survey and the time you took to fill it out. You’ve piqued a lot of questions and ideas in my brain, as I expect will be the case for many of our visitors.
By the way, for those daunted by the detail and time Raters like Benjamin put into our surveys here, ChurchRater.com will be unveiling a new “quickie” (drive-thu?) version of our survey to cut down on time! More to come soon…
-pw
Comment by: Helen
1 10/17/06 6:38 AM | Comment Link |That’s how it was when I ‘visited’ the church I’d left. People were nice. (That was before I wrote the newspaper article)
That’s how I feel too.
Thanks - you explained very well why a) some people might be interested and b) you weren’t.
In my experience it’s typical of preachers to use a passage to illustrate their point and ignore the fact that the content of the passage itself raises a lot of issues in the minds of anyone who hasn’t been taught not to have those issues raised in their minds.
I had the feeling that the church was very inward focused. Near the end of the talk the speaker said “You’re moving forward into your life, and God commands you to move forward into your life in weakness and dependency.”
I suppose the idea is that by fixing yourself inwards you’ll get to be more outward focused. But it doesn’t seem like some churches ever get to the second part…
Yes…this is another of those things which people who don’t go to church would be amazed at but people who do go seem to accept. I remember how surprised Eliza was when she attended a service around Easter time of this year, at the one-way-ness of the preaching. She’s much more used to discussion. This has come up in her write-ups of the classes too.
Ouch…I hate when I mess up in ways that make my kids unhappy…
Oh well. Kids that age tend to be very forgiving and I’m sure you’re the sort of Dad who is easy to forgive!
Comment by: Peter Walker
2 10/17/06 10:41 AM | Comment Link |Brian McLaren has some great thoughts about “problem scripture” like the one you mention: God annointing the Israelites to eradicate another people group. He doesn’t go so far as Bishop Spong (read: “The Sins of Scripture”) but he does say, “I’m not ok with this. This is hard for me to take. And I’m going to wrestle with it while still trusting God - without saying I accept it as ‘good’ just because it’s in the Bible.” My paraphrase. It’s from “Adventures In Missing The Point” co-authored with Tony Campolo.
Comment by: April Terry
3 10/17/06 11:18 AM | Comment Link |I found this particular part of his survey interesting. It is something that I recently discussed with someone not long ago.
It happened when we were doing a study on spiritual gifts. There was a passage that discussed how we needed to maintain order within the congregation and take turns talking, basically. It struck me then how the early church seemed to be a place to gather and discuss scripture and yet our current church context seems to be a place to gather and listen.
I wondered a little what a church gathering would be like if people were afforded the benefit of being able to openly express their questions and views and even their disagreements.
Comment by: KSG
4 10/17/06 11:37 AM | Comment Link |This is why I think the way we do church (read:religious meetings) needs to be deconstructed. The current model of how church happens is a product of man and his desire for pre-eminence. (3 Jn 9-10)
Comment by: benjamin ady
5 10/17/06 12:39 PM | Comment Link |We got to attend Solomon’s Porch this last summer during our 11,000 mile 33 state road trip. It was actually after visiting here that I officially finalized my long-in-the-works decison to not do Sunday morning church anymore. It was very kewl. Their meeting was in a big room with lots of couches and lazy chairs and such all arranged facing the center, and a big part of the meeting was an interview with a person who goes there who has a really fascinating story (as I very much suspect everyone does) and who was able to be very real and very honest both about her story up-til-now and about where she is now.
The other kewl thing was that ‘the talk’ (the speach formerly known as the sermon) (in fact the talk was by Doug Pagitt, who talks about how sermons tend to be ’speaches’ here) was very much a discussion, where the speaker talked for a little bit about some things he’d been thinking about, and then everybody else was invited to dialogue over it–not as separate little groups, but as a big group–in other words, the speaker was not the only speaker–anybody could, and did, get to share their reactions, comments, and further thoughts right then and there. Very very kewl. I enjoyed it. I’d do it again.
Comment by: Jim Henderson
6 10/17/06 7:20 PM | Comment Link |Benjamin
Thanks for your honest and thoughtful feedback. I hope eventually this kind of idea catches on with a lot of people and that pastors will actually WELCOME this kind of input. For the life of me I cant figure out why they wouldnt want to know this kind of stuff. Where else can they get such helpful feedback for FREE
Comment by: Peter Walker
7 10/18/06 9:42 AM | Comment Link |It’s amazing to me, too, that Pastors often respond to “rating” with such vehement protest. We are so built and programmed to “protect the hive,” and defend the corporate machine.
It’s so unbiblical and yet we place all our faith (and salvation) in it!
Comment by: April Terry
8 10/18/06 2:01 PM | Comment Link |The pastoral figure in general is viewed as a leader, i.e., someone who supposed to be smarter, more intellectual, more learned. Often, there is an invisible wall between the pastor and the lay people.
Not being a churched individual, I approached a pastor once after a sermon to get the name of a book that he had referred to in his sermon and his response was to tell me that it was probably too heavy on philosophical terminology for it to be readable for me and for him to recommend.
He didn’t know me, didn’t know that I had a lot of experience reading philosophy, didn’t know that I was interested in the subject, but he shut me down without even asking me why I was interested.
In today’s culture, there are a multitude of people with broad ranges of interests and ideas, and whether or not they hold a masters in Divinity really has no influence on their level of understanding or their knowledge of matters of faith.
We are a more educated society than in centuries past, and it is certain that we have a lot to learn from each other.
Comment by: Peter Walker
9 10/18/06 3:53 PM | Comment Link |Wow April, what a slam. What’s his name, I’ll go have some “nonverbal communication” with him…
;) Kidding.
But don’t worry, you 21st century women probably astonish him and he just thinks it was weird for you to be outside of a kitchen without a grocery list. People like that don’t even deserve our attention, though they tend to (unfortunately, often) attact others like them.
I’ve actually had similar comments made about philosophic issues. Pastors who think studying philosophy is only for the exceptionally faithful - otherwise the philosophy will rob us of our faith.
Pretty weak faith (and religion, and god) if it dies from a little healthy questioning.
Comment by: Helen
10 10/18/06 6:34 PM | Comment Link |April, I’m sorry that pastor didn’t give you the benefit of the doubt.
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
11 10/18/06 7:14 PM | Comment Link |The pastor at the church I grew up in thought people interested in becominga pastor/going to seminary should study under him(he doesn’t even have a doctorate), because going to seminary (which he mockingly calls “cemetary”) would be too dangerous to them maintaining the “true” faith (that is, the stange sectarian abusive take on faith that this church has). Several people started actually studying under him to this end during the 10 years I was there, but (of course!) none ever “finished”.
Comment by: KSG
12 10/19/06 8:10 AM | Comment Link |Wow! Benjamin, do your comments in #11 ever sound familiar. (Did you used to go to my church?!) The whole “cemetary, oops! I mean seminary” routine is so old it’s moldy. I mean, all those guys who’s commentaries and Bible study aids get quoted in order to support the “that’s why we are the one true church” ideology have all gone to seminary (or did you think we wouldn’t notice).
I’ve seen many young men submit and start to serve in the church in order to get developed for ministry, and in 27 years I’ve only seen a handful get ’sent out’ to minister in other locations… most either end up just leaving or they give up their dreams.
Comment by: April Terry
13 10/19/06 12:11 PM | Comment Link |Just to add to the comments here about pastors…
I don’t really want to dog pastors because I think it is such a difficult and important calling, but I wanted to talk about the separateness that happens between the pastor (whether because of education or not) and everyone else because I think it has a lot to do with our comfort in being able to express our opinions and question our faith openly with fellow Christians.
I’ve just noticed a lack of approachability in the pastors that I have met. They have a subtle form of “dictatorship” (and I hesitate using that strong of a word but can’t think of a better way to describe the hierarchy here). This is counter to what I think is really important to have, which is more of a servant leadership.
I believe that there are many servant leaders out there, but I am not seeing them in my experience and my experience is kind of broad in that way because I have a direct ministry and we attend different churches on the weeks that we don’t have our ministry.
I think I would be more impressed if I went to a church and wondered afterward, “Who’s the pastor?”
Comment by: Pastor David
14 10/19/06 12:19 PM | Comment Link |April, I am sorry that this pastor snubbed you. That was obviously rude and wrong.
That said, there is a difference between clergy and laity. It is, simply, two things (1) the education, and (2) the office. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think that clergy are any more spiritual, or that they necessaryily have stronger /better faith than laity. But, pastors do have 3-5 years of graduate level education and the experience that comes from doing this work.
Do I think that we should say that there are two “levels” of Christians, or fall into the worst sort of clericalism and pastor-worship? No. But that does not mean that we should therefore pretend that there are no differences at all.
Comment by: Pastor David
15 10/19/06 12:24 PM | Comment Link |I agree that pastors should not be quite so defensive. I do understand the instinct to stand up for your ministry, and to assert the ways in which things are going right. It is hard to take criticism (whether constructive or not) about something like this, because it is more than a “job.” For many pastors, it is also often the pastor’s identity, his/her hobby, and his/her passion.
Personally, I encourage these kind of critiques from my parishioners. I have a group of persons that I trust, and I ask them to bring to my not only their own comments and thoughts about my ministry, but also anything that they hear floating around the congregation. In my short time here, I have already found my ministry improved by responding to that sort of helpful critique.
Comment by: Peter Walker
16 10/19/06 1:49 PM | Comment Link |Pastor David, I love your perspective here and completely understand where you’re coming from. However, I’d remind you that you’re coming from the Lutheran tribe, where education is not just encouraged - it’s required of those who are ordained.
In the tribes I grew up in, particularly Pentecostal, you not only didn’t have to attend graduate school - you didn’t even have to have an associates degree! At the Assemblies of God church I used to attend, I had more education as a Masters-level Student than 6 of the 9 full time ministers. Several had bachelors degrees. Several had associate Bible College degrees.
If Masters level education were required by all churches I would feel a little more comfortable with your statement. And I don’t have the delusion that education fixes everything and makes us all better people… but I do like to think it helps…
;)
Comment by: NCxian
17 10/19/06 2:02 PM | Comment Link |Pastor David:
I’m curious about your view of the pastor as different from everybody else. It seems to me that this is an area that denominations vary dramatically about–does the pastor have a special “annointing”/”calling”/”authority”?
I am currently a part of a church that has a strong “priesthood of the believer” point of view, and there is not a bright line between paid “priests” and all us other “priests”. We also don’t have “sacraments” so there is no image of our pastor standing in the place of God for certain purposes. (We do the same things–weddings, baptism, communion–but we call them “ordinances” and nobody is believed to act as an agent for God). Do you hold to a contrary belief, and is that something that impacts your view of the identity of the pastor?
Comment by: Helen
18 10/19/06 7:44 PM | Comment Link |Pastor David wrote:
This is the sort of thing that puts me right off going to church.
For some reason, my education and my experience don’t count - but the pastor’s does…why??
Comment by: KSG
19 10/20/06 7:13 AM | Comment Link |The concept of a seperation between clergy & laity, as put forth by most traditional denominations in ‘word’ and most modern evangelical organizations in ‘action’ (props to the Vineyard crew for allowing people to “do the stuff”) is one that I believe exagerates what the Bible puts forth as Church leadership, and most definitely creates separation & division between brothers.
These ideas in no way mirror the example Jesus gave us of servant leadership.
Comment by: Helen
20 10/20/06 9:34 AM | Comment Link |By the way, David H posted some very thoughtful comments about the difference between clergy and laity in a comment on CatE.
Comment by: Pastor David
21 10/21/06 6:50 PM | Comment Link |Obviously my comments touched a nerve with a number of you. Let me, before sitting down to reply to some of the follow up comments, offer my sincere apology to anyone who was offended or hurt by my comment about clergy and laity.
I often forget how little nuance is conveyed by words written in a context like this versus speaking to someone. I also often feel freer to speak my opinions a little more brashly in a setting like this than I would in person.
That said, I do have strang opinions about this, although perhaps I did not word what I had to say earlier in quite the way that I intended.
Comment by: Pastor David
22 10/23/06 1:24 PM | Comment Link |In #16 Peter said
Of course. It is a bad habit of mine to assume that the tradition that I am a part of is normative. Even when I move outside of my tradition, it is still in mainline churches where education is a requirement for ordination. Thank you for the reminder.
NCXian asked in #17:
Very good questions when we are wrangling with our theology of the priesthood/clergy. Yes, the Lutheran tradition does talk about the calling of a pastor, but never as a “special” calling. Luther is really the theologian who brought the idea of the priesthood of all believers to the forefront, and that is an important part of my theological heritage. Every Christian has a calling (vocatio). Every such calling is important — Luther used the analogy that when the cobbler does his/her work as well as he/she is able and to the glory of God, that is as holy (if not holier) than the calling of the priest.
What differentiates the calling to the ordained ministery is its function. For the good order of the church, some are set apart (ordained) to serve in a particular way … specifically, in my tradition, the preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacraments [of course, with that comes much more: the role of shepherd to the flock, the role of chief administrator of the church, etc]. Often when I describe my role it is to be a priest to and among God’s nation of priests (I would unpack that some if this were not already a long post).
Helen said in #18
Helen, I realize that my post sounded as if the education and experience and laity don’t count, and I apologize for that. Often, in attempting to keep posts in a setting like this brief and to the point, it is easy to lose the nuance of a point.
Yes, the experience and the education of the laity absolutely matters to me. I am daily learning from the lives and faith of the members of the congregation where I serve. I do not — in any way — claim to be holier, or more spiritual, or have a better connection with God than those who are not ordained.
What I do have is the privilege of being able to devote the majority of my time to the study of Scripture and thinking about the church. I have been selected, educated, and trained to be as qualified as possible to serve this function in a congregation.
Analogies are sometimes helpful, but only when we admit their shortcomings. Before resorting to an analogy, let me say that I realize that there are ways in which this analogy falls short, and places where the comparison falls apart.
I have lived with my body all my life. I know how I feel, things that make me feel better or worse, and how my body reacts to situations. Yet today I went to a doctor. That man — because of his training, education, and focus on the human body generally - was able to provide with insights and advice about my own specific body (which I remain the expert on). It does not mean that he is the only one who knows about bodies — we all do — but it means that he has been set apart to serve a specific function in our community, and we trust him to do so.
Comment by: Pastor David
23 10/23/06 1:32 PM | Comment Link |Realizing that I moved the conversation off in a tangential discussion (which I found humbling and rewarding), let me offer the following on the review itself.
I think this is a great reminder, and one of the great challenges for any church. There is a need to address the inner life. But when that appropriate and real need is overemphasized, the faith life of the congregation becomes self-absorbed. And, it seems to me that the inverse is true as well: when the appropriate and real need to talk about our interaction with the world is overempasized, it can stifle inner growth. It is a tightrope walk to keep the two in balance, and most congregations fail in either one direction or the other.
Comment by: April Terry
24 10/23/06 3:52 PM | Comment Link |Pastor David,
Let me be the first to defend your right to speak freely about your feelings on the issue.
For my part, I didn’t feel offended even by the pastor who originally made the comment to me because I understood something about pastors in that they are stretched thin in so many ways. I saw his response less as a slight and more as being unable to spend a few minutes explaining to me better what he was trying to say.
I think it is all part of the issue and I think it may have more to do with a pastor having limited time to offer than it does with any caste system (although there are times when a caste system may be involved as well). I simply brought it up because I wanted to explore it, and I think it was good to discuss in open discourse.
Your opinions were as valid as anyone’s and came from an experience that many of us do not have.
It would be a terribly boring world if there were no differences of opinion.
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
25 10/23/06 11:18 PM | Comment Link |Pastor David,
I’ve never interacted with any church that had an overemphasis on social justice issues to the detriment of …focus on personal growth. You seem to be saying this is theoretically possible. I am wondering if you have any examples in mind? I find it difficult to imagine a group of people having a big emphasis on social justice and not by implication growing inwardly as people. But then I do lack imagination sometimes (although, alas, I have overabundant imagination in areas where I’d rather not)
Comment by: Helen
26 10/24/06 2:40 AM | Comment Link |Pastor David,
I’m not offended by you sharing your opinion or by you personally. Thank you for being willing to share in an environment where others disagree with some of what you’re saying. That’s not an easy thing to do.
If I may use your same analogy - this is what has happened to me. I went to many doctors; I trusted them; when the medication they offered me didn’t work I made excuses for them. I started reading books about my health and found that what they said worked better than what the doctors said. I stopped trusting the doctors and going to the doctors for help because I was healthier when I followed my own intuition and what made sense in the books I’d read, than when I followed their advice.
So, I find it a little painful to hear someone talking about how they deserve to be ’set apart’ because of their superior wisdom and experience. Since their superior wisdom and experience didn’t work for me
Comment by: Pastor David
27 10/27/06 12:51 PM | Comment Link |Helen, April, & Peter,
Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. It is often not easy to tell how one’s words are received in a setting such as this.
I do not understand myself as being set apart because I am in any way superior to anyone else. The Lutheran understanding of the ordained ministry is, above all else, functional. That is, I am set apart not because of who I am, but so that I can serve a certain function in the church.
I have been in the church my entire life. I am the son of a pastor, and started doing church work beyond my local congregation when I was a freshman in high school. I have seen every type of pastor/priest. And yes, you will get no argument from me that there are pastors who are not helpful … pastors who are arrogent jerks … and pastors who just seem to not have it all together. But I have seen ever the worst of pastors able to reach out and help others, or preach in a way that reaches their congregation, or be present at the time of greatest need. The problem is, their gifts and talents in no way helped me or spoke to me.
I understand your distrust of the clerical system, and I sympathize with it. I hope that one day you might meet a pastor/priest who will restore your trust in clergy generally.
Comment by: Pastor David
28 10/27/06 12:59 PM | Comment Link |I do have specific examples in mind, but do not feel comfortable saying much about them (because there are things those congregations / pastors are doing well, and I do not want speak ill of them publicly. Just another one of those public / private distinctions we are talking about on the other thread).
I have known churches to focus on social justice almost exclusively. Yes, those churches do have internal growth, insofar as we are talking about the ability to be charitable (no small thing … although in mainline denominations it can tend to be driven by affluent white guilt and left-leaning politics rather than the gospel commands, imo).
But there are other, I feel important, ways that internal growth does not happen at those churches. I find lacking any sort of time looking inward and assessing one’s own condition - taking a real look at our own flaws and our own need for help (how much easier to reach out to help them, the less fortunate). I find lacking in many such congregations (but by no means all) the ability to struggle with the hard questions of faith - again, because all energy is outward focused. Most important, I have seen congregations unable to deal with internal systematic dysfunction, because the gaze was never turned inward.
I suppose there’s more to say on the subject, but the bottom line is that yes, I do believe that is not only possible, but also that in my opinion I have seen it happen.
Comment by: r. marsh
29 10/27/06 2:42 PM | Comment Link |I go to Grace and I know and love Benjamin and his family. I guess my question is more along the lines of wonder. I wonder how this website either decides to tarnish or embellish a church’s reputation or ministry based on one person’s estimations. How do you decide that this person is unbiased? Benjamin has claimed to be in the process of leaving the church and yet his tainted response is still put out there. I have the utmost respect for Ben and his family, having been in community group with them for the last almost 2 years, but although he offers his valid view point, I think it incredibly unjust to assess a church and it’s ministry based on one disgruntled view point. A Church isn’t going to be everything you ever wanted because humanity is always involved. I guess this whole process of rating churches is very inward to me… We talk about what’s not working for me in this church or that, how I was hurt by this or that, how about stop talking and philosophizing and do something. Get into your community and serve the poor, counsel the needy, serve with the heart of Christ. Start a group in your church that focuses on those things. Most Churches I know have some sort of missions program where they serve people. I just think it’s a cope out to leave and talk about your issues. If you don’t like something or think that something is unbiblical, fight the man, make Christianity and Christians wake up and remember the love of Christ and what that might look like in modern day culture… How can Christian’s affect change if we seek to be served to the tiniest level before we ourselves will serve others? I guess I just wanted to be one person from Grace that responded. I have been at Grace Seattle Pres. for many years , it has become my family, and even through extremely painful times a place where I have been very well ministered to.
Comment by: Pastor David
30 10/27/06 4:09 PM | Comment Link |R. Marsh,
I hope you will make it back to the site to read the replies to your comment, as I have a feeling that mine will not be the only one.
First, let me say that — other than being a part of the discussion — I have no official connection to the Church Rater site or the Off-the-Map organization, and I do not speak for them, but as a pastor who finds this project and the discussions on this site helpful.
I understand your distress. If I was unaware of this site, and happened on a review of the congregation, I would probably be upset as well. I imagine, primarily, you feel caught off guard, defensive, and somewhat betrayed. I do not, in any of the following comments, intend to say that your reaction is invalid.
That said, let me invite you to set aside that initial reaction, and share with you why I find this project helpful.
Very often, those who “run” churches only get feedback from “satisfied customers.” We very rarely hear from the visitor who came once and never returned. We very rarely experience our congregations from the perspective of someone who doesn’t share our background in our particular denomination.
This site offers that feedback. If we want our congregations to grow, we have to think about the perspectives of those who aren’t around to give voice to their needs and concerns. How can we attract the “unchurched,” the skeptics, and the seekers? Perhaps the best way to learn how is to ask them and really listen to their answers, which this site does.
Beyond that, the individual congregations reviewed here serve as sort of “case studies” that provoke discussions about more universal issues. Thus, as you can see in the comments thread, the review of your congregation led us to a discussion about the role and meaning of pastoral ministry in a way that had nothing to do with Grace Church.
There are ways that this process is beneficial to the congregation being reviewed, but only if the leaders of that congregation are willing to become a part of the discussion and listen to the input of others. But more importantly (for me) this process serves the church universal, by giving us all the opportunity to enter into a discussion about how our churches are perceived by the skeptics and seekers of the world, and how we can make our churches more inviting so that more people can hear the message of the Gospel.
Comment by: Peter Walker
31 10/27/06 5:27 PM | Comment Link |Pastor David,
A wonderful accounting of ChurchRater. Thank you.
R.Marsh, I appreciate your perspective here. You might be interested in visiting another discussion thread on this site where we recently dealt with a very similar reaction to yours.
Click here to read more…
I would say the same thing to you that I’ve said to the pastors at La Grande Foursquare:
Comment by: Peter Walker
32 10/27/06 5:36 PM | Comment Link |Comment by: benjamin ady
33 10/28/06 6:43 AM | Comment Link |Pastor David
What you said made a lot of sense to me–that ‘reaching out’ can be a way of avoiding introspection. And it really makes sense to me that this can become a problem when it comes to recognizing/dealing with internal sytem dysfunction. Thankyou for expanding your thoughts for me. I guess my baseline for thinking about churches has been the sect that I grew up in, and they had very little ‘reaching out’ in any kind of social justice way that extended beyond their own community *nor* introspection/ability to recognize/deal with internal dysfunction. It makes sense to me that there *would* be churches which focus outward to the exclusion of focusing inward as you described–I guess I was just a bit surprised cause I hadn’t really interacted with any of them. But I believe you.