Quote:
Originally Posted by Gideon7
I’m gaining much from the discussion everyone- thx for all the input. I realize I’m a newbie here and I hope this doesn’t come across as rude- but I’d really like to hear from Drake and Evangelical specifically here. (And any other current LC supporters- I think I’m correct in believing they are pro-WN/WL/LSM/LC? Please forgive me if I’m misunderstanding…).
My original post requested any sort of “smoking gun”- why folks left the LC… OR reasons from LC adherents “if you would maybe share the main reason you choose to stay in the LC given this (apparently) lengthy list of “smoking guns”. It certainly at least appears there are myriad reasons to have some serious questions concerning the LC.”
I’m really not trying to be sarcastic/divisive here- but if I was invited to “church XYZ” down the street, but found out they had a fraction of the controversy/complaints/lawsuits/sexual abuse allegations/power struggles/borderline false teaching/authoritarian practices/divisions/etc… that seem pretty well founded concerning the LC (*I’m sure some would argue this… but there’s plenty of LC “smoke”)- I’m pretty sure I’d not bother visiting. I’ve been quite involved in different types of Christian ministries for over 25 years- they admittedly all have their issues- but I’d say the LC/WN/WL/LSM seems to have a longer list than most.
But perhaps I’m really missing something? So I politely and sincerely ask- how do you overlook all these things? Some of them seem quite serious- are ALL of these accusations unfounded from your perspective? What is SO special about WN/WL/LC/LSM that it’s worth taking so much negative with the positive? It seems most Christian teachers/preachers/leaders down through the centuries have their pros and cons- I’m not grasping what makes the LC SO special? And for you non-LCer’s- why do/did you see folks stick with the LC- in light of all the allegations? I hope you hear my heart here- this seems to be a pretty open forum where people speak their minds- and I’m deeply curious- with so many other (apparently) healthier choices in town- why would/should someone visit the LC?
|
I have about 3 decades past experience with liturgical Protestant (the big ones), charismatic and pentecostal /community and SDA churches. I still fellowship with certain SDA and local church community members since leaving denominations over a decade ago (note, we say "leaving denominations" we don't say "join the LC" because in our minds there's nothing to join). For a period of a couple of years I met freely with both denominational and LC churches and I must say no voice of disapproval or dirty looks from the LC church. Many current LC members have family members who still attend other churches. I think some portray the LC as a black and white thing and it is not. There are good LC churches and bad ones. Ones that stay true to the ministry and others which compromise with the world. There is a wide variety of people not unlike any other church. I have brought friends and family members to my church and most say they love it. Some criticize it because it is not to their expectations.
Here is one thing that I see is a big advantage of the LC over others. In the early church a big part of fellowship, even the main reason for it, was enjoyment of the Lord.
This was somewhat lost during the middle ages as church became a place a person went to on a Sunday to receive some spiritual help from a qualified person, rather than a place people went to for fellowship with the Lord and others. Thus the fellowship resolved around the service, not the meeting. This concept is still seen today most strongly in the liturgical churches where the Priest is the main person to go to for anything spiritual. In parallel to this was the restriction of the Bible to the common man - only the Priest was allowed to interpret it properly. Probably at this time there were still groups (Anabaptist?) who met freely, independently of the mainstream church.
Since the Reformation has come and gone, the Bible was recovered back to the common man, but churches have still retained the concept of providing a spiritual service to spiritually desperate people who come every Sunday. Still today, what most churches do on a Sunday is called "services" because they have a pre-planned program of activities intended to render some spiritual help to the congregation, typically consisting of some worship/singing, some bible message, and some social activities. Most Christians attend church on Sunday but do not read the Bible or pray much during the week (the priest/pastors message is intended to make up for that). Also, because of the service structure, many lack the freedom for more spiritually mature members to participate freely in the service in a meaningful way (such as delivering a snippet message from the Bible). In this way, the weaker members are dependent upon the priest/pastor/service, and the stronger members are dissatisfied as they cannot exercise their spiritual gifts and callings freely because that is the job/role of the pastor/priest.
In the LC however a big advantage is the focus on the enjoyment of the Lord in a corporate way under the concept of a meeting, not a service, without predefined pastoral/priest roles that stifle individual participation. Yet conducted in an orderly and efficient way with a plurality of eldership authority structure that mirrors the early church.
Another reason the LC has an advantage is that they understand that the Spirit and Jesus is the same Person whereas the Spirit is largely unknown in other churches. Now you might be thinking "why is Evangelical now talking about the Spirit, what has that got to do with church?" the connection will become apparent in my summary.
These are the wrong concepts I've encountered in denominations:
The Spirit comes from the Word/Bible (technically, the Bible came from the Spirit)
The Spirit is a power/force (yes the Spirit is powerful but the Spirit is a person)
The Spirit makes you do crazy/silly things (some pentecostals talk about getting "drunk" or "stoned" in the Spirit) . To me this is just emotionalism/mesmerism..
The Spirit is someone else different to Jesus (hence, we can talk to Jesus and then talk to the Spirit separately). The Bible refers to the Spirit as the "Spirit of Christ" hence we can know they are the same Person - the Spirit is the presence of Christ, not the presence of some third unknown person. We in the LC understand that "in Christ" means the same thing as "in Spirit".
In summary, most other churches don't have a clear idea about who the Spirit is, and as a consequence this means their services are not "in the Spirit" or "in Christ", and the goal of church is to perform a spiritual service not fellowship/worship in the Spirit and truth. This is most strongly seen in the liturgical denominations. The LC understands both that the Spirit is Christ, hence there is no confusion, or fear, about the Spirit, and that God's intention of church is corporate fellowship in the Spirit and not performing a set of programmed services every Sunday. I think that compared to most churches, the LC prioritizes a more in depth subjective walk in Christ or in the Spirit, with much devotion /attention paid to God's Word and this is reflected in the meeting.