14 Responses to "Pastor Jeremy from Eastern OR…"

• Comment by: Peter Walker

  1 09/28/06 8:09 PM | Comment Link |

  Jeremy,
  I understand your feelings and reaction, and I’ve wrestled with the dynamics and merits of rating churches since starting on this site.

  Here’s what I wrote for The-Next-Wave e-zine about ChurchRater and what I believe to be its purpose:

  It seems a little sacrilegious to apply a rating system to… well, the Body of Christ. But that’s what I’ve been spending a lot of my time at lately.

  As the online host of ChurchRater.com, Jim Henderson (Off The Map) asked me to explore what would happen if people, Christians and non-Christians, started evaluating Churches through the same methods we regularly assess art and entertainment, business, and various products and services.
  
  What do you like? What don’t you like? What could be better? What should get dumped? Top selling points? Does it come in strawberry-banana?

  But why should we degrade the Church by exposing it to such impious practices?
  …

  Because all of us do it anyway, albeit in private conversations: every Sunday when we walk through those double doors. Or when we walk by a church and roll our eyes at the trite, kitschy anecdote on the reader board. Or perhaps when we stumble across a sermon on the local radio station.

  “I can’t believe he just said that!”

  “Do they even allow women onto that stage?”

  “They call this music?”

  “If I hear one more political tirade I’m going to scream!”

  “What if the pastor actually engaged the congregation in dialogue during the sermon?”

  The problem is, our real-world comments rarely reach the ears of those who actually have the power and wherewithal to do something about them: pastors, church board members and administrators. Our complaints, critiques, and even our well-intentioned suggestions usually live and die in dialogue between congregants, casual visitors or passersby. They are perspectives that could radically transform, grow and even save a lot of churches if we only had the guts to get those comments out there.

  And a lot of pastors are begging for this kind of feedback: “What am I doing wrong?”

  So is there a way to have these discussions without making them painful or embarrassing for either side?

  Maybe we can avoid taking ourselves too seriously. Perhaps we can have a sense of humor about how we look at ourselves… And I think that’s what’s key for many of us who would tend toward snobbery: we’re looking at ourselves.

  If I were to rate a church as too “stuck-up,” I’d better admit that my own church is awfully white (and pretty high on the collective pay scale).

  If I say a church is unfriendly, I’d better think about all the people I ignore, not only on Sunday mornings, but all of the time (most of us walk through life with blinders on, oblivious to our neighbors).

  If I decry a church for being too theologically conservative or too socially liberal… well, I’ve done my own share of flip-flopping on issues. I don’t know any Christian who has it all right (although I’ve met some homeless guys who probably came close).

  None of us are perfect, which is why we need the wisdom, insight and even constructive criticism of our sisters, brothers and neighbors. I hope you’ll download a rating form, go to church, and consider joining ChurchRater.com and the Off The Map team in continuing to rethink how we evaluate this organism called The Body of Christ.

  Jeremy, I appreciate you, your passion, your ministry, and even your distaste for what we’re doing here. But I hope you will at least believe that what we truly hope for with ChurchRater is a healthier Body of Christ!

  Thanks for visiting, and please feel free to continue here in this dialoge!

• Comment by: Jim

  2 09/28/06 10:24 PM | Comment Link |

  Jeremy

  Thanks for having an opinion and for expressing it. That is why we are here.

  CR helps us laugh at ourselves- religion makes us too serious and mean- by rating a worship service we expose the fact that while we may think of it as sacred it is really just a bunch of humans standing on a stage (BTW why do we have stages anyway if it isnt a show?) singing songs about God to each other and to God. Thats it - We make it sacred by the meaning we bring to it - WE say God is in it but others say “not for me” - so what - why not find out that others didnt think God was in it and talk about it so all of us can learn more about how to tell if God is or isnt in something - Why would we NOT want to know that? Why is that sacriligeous and why should we care if it helps us become better followers- Nothgin is Sacred except Jesus.

• Comment by: Peter Walker

  3 09/29/06 3:38 PM | Comment Link |

  But it still hurts to hear criticism. This particular situation - quite personal for my wife and I - is a reminder of how easily our words can wound. Even when meant for good.

  It’s been quite a week for me: first I bring down heat from my old church, now I’ve offended another group we love.

  I think if I had been Luther (don’t worry, I’m not trying tocompare myself in any way) I would have recanted.

• Comment by: Dave Woolsey

  4 09/30/06 9:10 AM | Comment Link |

  A word of encouragement, I think rating churches is a great thing and should include every church. I felt the review in question here was very helpful as I have for years been evaluating worship services in my own denomination in an effort help us move forward (I have a bit of regional lay leadership responsibility). For a number of years I have used a “mystery worshipper” tool provided by another mostly irreverent website that uses an evaluation tool very similar to yours. Naturally, I was delighted to find your CR tool.

  Peter says “But it still hurts to hear criticism.” Sadly, we either don’t hear church criticism or it doesn’t hurt enough to make us address the problems that are noted. We should assume that all the negatives in our worship services hurt visitors. Which hurt do we care more about? So keep up the good work and don’t change the format to something that would have to be re-named “Church Affirmation”.

  Dave Woolsey

• Comment by: Jim

  5 09/30/06 10:59 AM | Comment Link |

  Peter says “But it still hurts to hear criticism.” Sadly, we either don’t hear church criticism or it doesn’t hurt enough to make us address the problems

  I agree - it simply doesnt hurt enough to move us to make a difference yet in church. We get our feelings hurt and are not concerned enough about their feelings

• Comment by: Helen

  6 10/1/06 4:55 AM | Comment Link |

  Jeremy wrote:

  Now setting aside how I feel, I have a couple of questions about the motive and intention of “rating” churches. What exactly is the point? A church being evaluated by Biblical standards and precepts is an absolute must, but I am honestly intrigued about this “rating system”. What is the constructive purpose of “rating” individual churches by “man’s standard” and posting it on a website? Not saying that some of the questions being asked are not relevant, however, what is the primary heart behind this faculty? It is unarguable to say, “There is no such thing as a perfect church,” and I quote this not as an excuse for my own home church, but as a point of communication. The stylistic differences from church to church spreads a broad spectrum, but focusing on the different styles of a church is kind of like “majoring in the minors”, would you agree?

  It is a given that the theological foundation and leadership will set the trend and focus of any church and I wouldn’t say theology and leadership is a minor issue, but what should be at the forefront? Jesus Christ! I guess I just don’t see Jesus being glorified in this church rating thing. And I am not so naive to think I am altruistic in my every motive for life, but I am willing to say, “Lord, search me and know me.” I guess all I am asking is that you would do the same in regards to the way you are “rating churches.”

  Jeremy, you’ve asked great questions and raised legitimate concerns.

  For me the point is that we want people to know “Guess what? We actually care what you think about this (our) church service. We value your opinion.”

  We wouldn’t expect any church to read a review and unquestioningly accept what it says as ‘the truth’ or as requiring them to make specific changes. It is the church leadership’s prerogative to decide how to run their church.

  You asked whether Jesus is glorified by church rating? We do believe that when we say to people “We care what you think and we value your opinion” (and mean it), we are doing something Jesus wants us to do.

  We would like churches to give this message to everyone who attends whether they are leaders, staff members, lay members, regular attenders or visitors.

  That’s why when we originally made the church survey available, we suggested that churches offer an outsider $25 to fill in the survey. Because if you tell someone “I’m going to pay for this” they know it has value to you. They know you mean it when you say “We care what you think; we value your opinion” if you also say “that’s why we’re offering you $25 to do this for us”.

  What does it say to someone, on the other hand, when you not only don’t pay for a review, but you don’t even accept it with humble gratitude but rather say “what’s the point of this? How is this Biblical? I don’t think this glorifies Jesus”

  Maybe you’re right - but even if you are, what does it say to the reviewer about whether you value his/her opinion when you respond that way?

  I wonder how a pastor would feel if when he stood up to preach, the congregation stood up and said “Actually we’re not really interested in what you think” and walked out?

  I know I just asked provocative questions; it’s because I think these questions need to be asked. In my opinion it’s time we evened things out a bit better rather than having most people in church listen and one or two talk.

• Comment by: Jim

  7 10/1/06 2:58 PM | Comment Link |

  Jeremy

  What we call church is a modern invention of our history.

  There is nothing inherently sacred or biblical about the way we do church.

  We openly say that we want new people to come to our church service.

  That is all the motive we need to know why we should rate churches.

  If we are doing church for ourselves than who cares about all of this. We have become so accustomed to doing church for ourselves that it offends us to ask outsiders to critique our show.

  Why?

  What does our reluctance tell us about ourselves?

  Have we gone into the religion business and gotten out of the people reaching business?

  Finally - Even if we had no reason at all why should we NOT rate chuches given the fact that most young people dont return once they leave for adult life - not to mention how Non Christians feel about us

• Comment by: Jeremy

  8 10/2/06 4:22 PM | Comment Link |

  Rating a church and posting the results of that rating with no communication with the leadership of that particular church is pointless and not only pointless, but perhaps harmful. It has the potential to create offense… which granted none of us (believers in Jesus Christ) have a right to be offended, our rights are buried at the foot of the cross. A friend of mine stumbled across this particular rating of my home church and asked if I had read it. Of course I hadn’t, but curiousity got the best of me. I prayed that I wouldn’t take a personal offense and debated about even responding and I wanted my response to be as diplomatic as possible. I decided to challenge the motive and Peter to truly seek the Lord about the purpose, trusting Peter hears from God. Something I should have done in a private fashion not a public forum. So for that please forgive me. Which by the way, Peter I am not mad at you or offended in the least. I few final thoughts. If you choose to “rate” (sorry I still struggle with the very premise) a church could I make a suggestion that you approach the leadership with your findings. Then constructivly it can be discussed in a loving fashion. Any teachable and humble pastor will atleast prayfully consider your thoughts, but please don’t rate a church and let leadership stumble across it on the internet, because then it just comes across as “church bashing”. The response of leadership is not your responsibiliy, but now the ball is in their court. Other people can discuss the style and particular focus of a church they have no influence in and the leadership are totally unaware of perhaps some very helpful insight you may have.
  “Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies.”

• Comment by: Peter Walker

  9 10/2/06 5:52 PM | Comment Link |

  Jeremy,
  I appreciate your opinion here, and understand the heart of where you’re coming from. I agree that informing pastors is beneficial, too. In fact, what you’re doing here by providing dialogue and feedback on ChurchRater’s feedback is (to me) the epitome of what ChurchRater should and could be. A generator of dialogue and growth.

  I do disagree that this is “pointless,” because so many have been blessed, challenged and stretched by what we’re doing here. As I have said before, “I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of Christ Jesus,” and am far more interested in seeking Christ than I am in affirming the church establishment.

  Thank you for being present and willing to speak openly, and I am sorry your learning of this site was not ideal. I would encourage you to click the “Churches” button at the top of this site and get a feel for some of the other ratings and reviews done here.

• Comment by: Jen

  10 10/3/06 10:24 AM | Comment Link |

  Over the weekend, I asked Peter why the ratings (if unsolicited) had to include the name and location of the church. After all, most churches are so churchy that what one writes about a particular church could probably be said of a hundred other churches.

  But I admit that in part I asked that question because I am often far more concerned with not hurting feelings than I am with speaking the truth.

  I don’t have any answers to the struggles Jeremy has with the site and the intention, but I suggest that we often muffle the voice of truth, the voice of Jesus within our black and white walls, our protocol, our desire to protect the Church.
  It is my experience and sincere belief that *everything* good comes from God. Whether it comes from a church, from a yoga session, from an encounter at a supermarket, from outside of my religion, from a website. If it is good and it is truth, then Jesus is there.

  This website is about truth, and deep love for the Church and the Body. A Body and a Church that have been broken.

  Because I hear account after account from individuals who have been deeply wounded by the church, who have experienced broken trust and extreme sorrow within the church walls and have expressed their concerns, only to be turned away by leadership(or labeled as a dissenter), I often view the church as a dictatorship. A place where a very small, select group of individuals hold extreme amounts of power - I do not believe I am alone in this view.

  I wish the church would give voice to its body, or I wish the body would make its voice be heard. I wish people were brave enough to speak truth. I wish they felt their truth would be received with love and open ears. But it is far too often received with aggression, defensiveness, hostility. And that response leads me to believe that the Church doesn’t really care for her people. Their feelings are unimportant, their wounds insignificant, their opinions not valued.

  Are we so concerned with our buildings and the establishments that we have created, with our pulpits and our sanctuaries and our pastors and music and our christiany-language that we have stopped simply following the voice of Christ? Because Christ is not always found in a building…quite often, he is found on the outside.

• Comment by: Marty

  11 10/4/06 8:59 AM | Comment Link |

  Jeremy wrote: “Rating a church and posting the results of that rating with no communication with the leadership of that particular church is pointless and not only pointless, but perhaps harmful.”

  I personally very much like the Church Rater and what Peter is doing here - while at the same time, I believe Jeremy has raised an interesting point that I think needs to be thought about and addressed.

  If we are really trying to be helpful to a pastor and church, wouldn’t we have to share that information with him/her?

  What are we really accomplishing if we only share it among ourselves? Are we just commissorating and getting our frustrations out?

  On other OTM Blogs we have had lots of great dialogue with pastors who have been invited to read what has been written and they have become very valuable parts of the discussion - and we have learned from one another.

  I think that by and large the ratings have been written quite tastefully - but would we write them a bit differently if we new the pastor was going to read them?

  What would the effect be if we regularly made it a policy to invite the Pastor involved to visit this site and provide their input - i.e. help us understand things that may not have been obvious to the rater and the rest of us?

  If we knew the Pastor was going to read what we wrote - would we be more likely to detail and emhasize the good things that we encountered and might that do more to helping the Pastor move in a positive direction than the things we didn’t like?

  How can we make the Church Rater an even more valuable vehicle to help make the world a better place?

• Comment by: Helen

  12 10/4/06 1:06 PM | Comment Link |

  Marty, thanks for your comments. I agree - I think it’s a good idea to invite the pastor(s) of churches we review to come here and respond.

  I sympathize with Jeremy being upset that he was caught by surprise by this review being on the Internet. I understand why it might look like we intended to criticize his church behind his back. I don’t believe that was ever our intent.

• Comment by: Peter Walker

  13 10/4/06 2:02 PM | Comment Link |

  Yes, I think the ideal is absolutely a give-and-take dialogue between bloggers, visitors, raters, congregants, leadership and pastors. As Helen said, leaving people out of that loop was unintentional and we’ll continually work on bringing as many perspectives as possible into the conversation. Great feedback Marty!

• Comment by: Howard

  14 10/23/07 1:08 PM | Comment Link |

  I’m so disheartened by all this. There is never a proper venue by which to criticize an expression of the church. From all the dialogue I’ve seen it isn’t a rating, it’s a judgment of the leadership and parishioners. To what end?

  The claim is that it will help the leadership see their issues. I disagree. If this was the Lords Blog then maybe the churches could take some constructive feedback out of it and effect change. This is in fact the opinions of men who may or may not have an agenda behind their postings. It is an attempt to put earthly bounds and guides around a place that is intended for spiritual worship of God. This modern invention we call church is not intended to be a place where perfect people meet and interact perfectly. It’s not meant to be the perfect expression of Christianity or the place to go hear perfect music performed in perfection. It’s a place where real lovers of the father go to worship him. It’s a place where faulted beings seek to shore up their faith and grow in their knowledge of God. This rating system can only weaken that process. It can’t help inspire or motivate anyone to love more or worship harder. Satin would love for every church to question itself and it’s worth. This site seems to help in that goal

  To start placing your measure on Gods people who bare the criticism of society for just deciding to meet at all is one more humanistic hurtle that does no good.

  The discourse this one article has caused must have Satin smiling. This will be my second and last post on this site. The email I’ve given is real and if you wish anymore conversation on this then feel free to send me a note. I don’t expect one but I would be remiss if I didn’t offer you a chance to rebuke what I’ve written directly to me.

  It would be pointless to post a reply here with the intent on my reading it as I will not again visit this site.

  Good day and may the Lord keep you and bless you.

Leave a Reply