Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
The issue is the severe damage the movement has done to the lives of many through its heavy-handed wielding of self-assumed "spiritual authority."
This legacy is inexcusable and no amount of "rich enjoyment" on your part makes up for the pain it has caused. And it really is quite bizarre that you might think it would.
This, as far as I can tell, is something the members of the movement really don't discuss or take issue with. They hide from it, and pretend it's not there, like a wife turning a blind eye to a husband who abuses his kids.
Until you do something about it, until members take back the movement from the hands of the self-assumed few, you are going to carry in your consciences the guilt of being enablers of abuse. It's your dirty little secret that this forum is making not so secret.
That is the issue. Talking about your "rich enjoyment" is avoiding this issue.
|
I am not avoiding any issue and I do not carry any guilt about some brothers in some locality. As I said earlier, each local church is locally administered.
And, I do not understand about 'severe damage'. The worst thing that certain local churches in certain localities have been said to have done is quarantine people. How does it damage people?
Let me come back to Mr. X.
He was a senior pastor in a church and had members in the church he was responsible for. While he was in the denomination, the members of his church supported him financially. But, when he felt that some of the teachings in the denomination (clergy-laity, spiritual gifts) were not according to the Bible, he wrote a letter to the regional head of the denomination informing him that he could not continue in the organization and asked to be relieved of his responsibilities. The head of the organization accepted the letter and Mr. X left the organization. Within a month, the head of the denomination issued a letter to all churches under the organization asking them not to allow Mr. X to visit any of their houses nor attend any of the meetings.
Though Mr. X did not agree with the teachings in the denomination, he never preached about them while he was in the denomination. So, when he left the denomination, not a single member from the denominations came with him. He was alone and had to start from scratch. He had to struggle financially as well as he had no source of income. Today, he is still happy about the whole thing. And, I am sure he would take the same action again.
There are two things I want to highlight.
1. Mr. X does not regret the whole incident because he left the denomination willingly. He was willing to suffer hardships because of his conviction.
2. When Mr. X realized that he did not agree with the denomination, he did not try to create a confrontation. If he had preached against the organization while staying in the organization, it would have created a lot of bad blood with the organization and they may have had to expel him. But, since he left amicably, Mr. X has a good relation with the head of the organization till date.
So, I cannot understand how anyone can inflict 'severe damage' on someone.