Local Church Discussions - View Single Post

rayliotta · 03-22-2012, 09:35 PM

I understand that we try to separate the "leadership" from the "common members". What I think is interesting is just how hard it is for us to agree on what that means.

I think you have to spend some time, go through the "Letters of Affirmation" on afaithfulword.com. Letter after letter, region after region, locality after locality, elder after elder. This isn't just about the big dogs in Anaheim. And it's not just about a few regional big dogs, sitting atop a congregation of 400. Most Recovery churches are a lot smaller than that.

What about so many localities of 100 or so people, with 3 or 4 elders signing onto the solemn edict out of Anaheim? 3 or 4 out of 100 might sound small, but many times you're talking about 3 or 4 of the "core" families in the group, everyone's a big part of the "day-to-day church life", in each other's homes, sharing meals together, they're part of each other's lives.

None of this is a "bad thing". It's just the reality. How do you, really, separate the "leadership" from the "members"? I don't think it's so simple.

Maybe in 1980, back before there were the footnotes, maybe it was possible to treat the Anaheim leadership simply as a footnote. I don't know. But however it was back then, I don't believe that is the prevailing culture of the Recovery today. At least not in North America.

03-22-2012, 09:35 PM	#83
rayliotta Member Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 600	take me to your leader I understand that we try to separate the "leadership" from the "common members". What I think is interesting is just how hard it is for us to agree on what that means. I think you have to spend some time, go through the "Letters of Affirmation" on afaithfulword.com. Letter after letter, region after region, locality after locality, elder after elder. This isn't just about the big dogs in Anaheim. And it's not just about a few regional big dogs, sitting atop a congregation of 400. Most Recovery churches are a lot smaller than that. What about so many localities of 100 or so people, with 3 or 4 elders signing onto the solemn edict out of Anaheim? 3 or 4 out of 100 might sound small, but many times you're talking about 3 or 4 of the "core" families in the group, everyone's a big part of the "day-to-day church life", in each other's homes, sharing meals together, they're part of each other's lives. None of this is a "bad thing". It's just the reality. How do you, *really, separate the "leadership" from the "members"? I don't think it's so simple. Maybe in 1980, back before there were the footnotes*, maybe it was possible to treat the Anaheim leadership simply as a footnote. I don't know. But however it was back then, I don't believe that is the prevailing culture of the Recovery today. At least not in North America.