Bounced From Church

(Disclaimer: This is long!)

So I told you to come here to read about the reason we can't join First Presbyterian Church in Macon, where we were formerly attending. I'd like to start with how much we enjoyed the church and it's congregation. I don't know for sure that everyone we met were members or not. We attended for several months as visitors and everyone we encountered seemed kind and welcoming.

As Amy stated in on her blog, we actually attended a nine week class to learn about the church (history, philosophy, differences, etc.) and to let the pastor get to know us better. We both enjoyed the class, though we missed our Sunday School class equally. The Logos Class was led by Mr. and Mrs. Bridges, who were both very caring and compasionate people and good mentors for the class of young people, many of which were couples.


After completing the class, we were asked by Pastor Chip Miller to complete a Membership Application, which we did. Nowhere did it ask if we were leading lives in accordance of the teachings of the Bible. Nowhere did it ask if there were people poisoning their temples with chemicals like cigarettes or processed foods. The application did not ask if we were being good stewards of what God has blessed us like talents, skills, money, etc.

However, it did ask for our address, which we gave them. As it happens to be that Amy and I share the same address, we both gave them the same physical address on the app.

Several days later, Eric Ashley (Youth Minister) called to have a second lunch meeting with Amy and I. The first came may weeks prior, just for fun and fellowship. Anyway, the second meeting was to "clarify" something that he stated, "was no big deal."

Over lunch, Eric let us know that our living together prior to marriage was standing in the way of us becoming members. We would have to wait until after October 11, 2008 to join.

Knowing that co-habitating is not a sin, Amy was a little upset. Sure, there is the old phrase, "livin' in sin." But for one it's old. Second, it's not a sin. What the phrase implies is that the couple is "gettin' it on." Perhaps making such an assumption is a sin? So, Amy and I were mad that someone (we assume Eric and Chip) were picking one very small portion of our very large lives and making an assumption about it. Never did they ask why. Never did they ask IF we were having pre-marital sex. They only took one small portion of who we are and denied us membership to a church of nearly 1200 people.

The explanation was that 'by living together before we are married it may give someone else the impression that we might possibly be 'fornicatin'.

Eric said he didn't mind if we continued to attend FPC until marriage. Actually, he hoped we would. We just couldn't join.

Hugh?

So, if we attended, would it not appear that we were members?? I mean, if we got involved and attended every Sunday, wouldn't people that didn't know us assume we were members of FPC.

So really, Eric should have asked us to not come back until we were married. That way the image would not be tarnished.

This is obviously not one of my best post, rambling, fragmented and run-on sentences, etc. I'll just sum it up with the letters.

We had the last lunch, were "denied" and decided to visit other churches..After a few weeks Eric emailed the following....

Hey ya'll,
Just wanted to touch base. Haven't seen ya'll the last couple of weeks and wanted you to know that you've been missed. I also wanted to see if ya'll still wanted to move forward with pre-marital counseling in the New Year. I'm beginning to make plans for Jan and would love to set up some times to walk through some of that material with you. Let me know your thoughts when you get a chance.

I replied back...

Hey Eric,

We are looking at other churches in hopes of finding one we feel comfortable and welcomed in. Not that the members of FPC didn't....they did. We really enjoyed Sunday School too. It made for really good Sunday lunch conversation. But as you know, we have a problem with not being accepted as members based on our address. It seems to me that the church would have, should have, much larger issues to focus on than preventing two people that want to join from joining.

I can think of several areas of focus that would be much more important to concentrate on than the time and effort that has been spent on us.

You had the opportunity to get to know two young professionals, that give both our time and money to others, are caring, honest and kind. Two engaged adults that happen to share the same address for several reasons prior to our wedding, which is exactly 10 months from today. We will be the same people 10 months and 1 day from now, except for the fact that we will be married and 10 months wiser (or is it smarter?). To have the "red carpet" rolled out then and not now, seems insincere and not very loving. As if you only want what "appears" to be the best Christians.

We are sure there are no members that were perfect when joining. So was each and every member directed to make changes and upon completion of those changes and proof that nothing in their lives could be construed as "un-Christian" or against The Word, allowed to join?

Are the members that currently sin on a regular basis (oh, that would be everyone) constantly having their memberships revoked and continually attending reformation classes or 12-step programs in order to be re-admitted?

It seems your stepping over quarters to pick up pennies when your efforts could be spent on much more important things. And it bothers us, because it appears the church is more concerned with the image it's members project on the outside than what is going on within them and how they (the members) can have a positive effect on their community.

Eric, I could go on and on, as I'm sure could you. We understand the position each one of you finds yourself in and know that it must be awkward, especially for you, considering the responsibility of dealing with this has been placed on you. This will surely be a in interesting story in your pastoral career and hopefully you will gain a lot from it, which I expect is part of Chip's plan. Either way, we are not angry with you and wish you the best.

So...we will be getting pre-marital counseling, but most likely from a pastor at the church we do join.

Merry Christmas,

Troy

About a week and a half later, Eric left me a voicemail asking me to call him in hopes of having lunch and discussing some things that seemed to be heavy on my heart. I have decided to pass on the invite as it seems I would be wasting his minutes (his life minutes). They have made their feelings clear and I think they are wrong. Amy and I have not changed our position on it and would have a hard time feeling confident in their leadership knowing so much time and effort is spent on micromanaging the image of the church opposed to focusing on the true goal of the church.

Sometimes you gotta pick you battles. Are you gonna pass on great in hopes of getting perfect, even when you know there is only one perfect and it's not a person?
Even if living together was a sin, would it be a big enough sin to deny membership to a church? What are churches for?? Isn't everybody a sinner?

So, that explains more than you probably wanted to know. If anything else interesting comes up regarding this, I'll post a follow up.

Oh, Mrs. Bridges did email us, wanting to know where we'd been. Amy and I both replied with a short explanation, but we've not heard anything back from her yet.

Stop Using Kids as a Weapon!

Geez! It is so wrong to use children as a weapon. You would think that would be a tactic only the Al Queda or Taliban would use, but noooo. Americans use that same strategy on a daily basis.

Some Americans use children as a means to get into other American's pocket books and wallets. Some are just sympathetic enablers that really love children, like Greenpeace and PETA love animals. Others, just want control of our lives in order to have control of our money. Either way, it is wrong. (Sidebar: a lot of what Greenpeace and PETA do is wrong too.)

See, until the Fair Tax is made law, taxes are not voluntary. To pay taxes, I have to give away minutes of my life. Yep, just like you, I have to give up one hour of my life to work in order to earn money. So, to pay $100 in taxes, I may have to work three hours. Some people may have to work ten hours and some may only work one. Nonetheless, we all have to trade a part of our life for taxes.

What amazes me is the audacity some Americans have to say that I should give up a portion of my life to pay for something they WANT. Having children is completely voluntary. You have to make a concious decision to have un-protected sex....then follow through with it. That is completely fine with me. But apparently many Americans don't plan ahead and then look to the government to FORCE others to pay for their housing, food and healthcare. That's not right.

Well Troy, some people fall on hard times even though they did have a plan. It's not always a simple as you make it sound.

I know. I know. But the amount of people we have sucking at the teet of the government trough is completely absurd and most should be cut off without any more notice than a note wrapped around a rock and thrown at their front door.

To see perfectly fat people sitting on the front porch of government housing (welfare housing) smoking cigarettes during the day is insidious. I see babies being carried around in nothing more than disposable diapers by mommys using food stamps to buy processed fish sticks. Meanwhile, who knows where daddy is. Hell, who knows WHO daddy is.

You shot it Tarzan! You eat it!

Don't push childern in front of the television cameras and say that if they don't get national healthcare or government healthcare, we are insensitive and hate children.

People that bring kids into this world when they can't afford them are the ones that abuse children with the intention of abusing society.

As John Stossel would say..."Give me a break!"