Posted on

Church #50, White Couch Albany

Date: 2/9/14

Church name/type: White Couch Albany, a non-denominational church with origins stemming from a mixture of Southern Baptist and Assemblies of God groups

Pastor: Pastor Mike

Style of worship: A message about communion was bookended by music. I’m told this format is not usual and that it was light on music this time.

Overall Impression: neutral

Thoughts:
I had heard this place was fresh and new and different, so I had some expectations going in; however I just didn’t get any sort of vibe from the place. It just felt kind of flat. Maybe it’s the new building, or the snowy lack of attendance. Or the fact that I came at the end of the year and found the doors closed. Yeah I tried to attend this church once before at the very end of the year. Unfortunately for me they had no service that day, and no notice on the website to explain this. They couldn’t even leave a note on the door? So maybe I was annoyed with them from the get-go. I’ll start again and try to examine what I did find at this church.

On arrival in my car I found several young adults in the parking lot with shovels. They motioned me inside with smiles. I had come at exactly 11am, but the service was not quite starting and I took a seat. The rest was rather straight-forward. We exchanged high-fives at greeting time rather than the standard handshake. We had communion together by filing up front. That was just a little weird because we were instructed to come up as we felt led…no one really went out of order however.

The main point of this service was the sermon. It was really a description of communion and what communion represents. To me it was sort of like hearing the Catholic liturgy with explanation breaks. Every Catholic knows the story of Jesus serving bread and wine and calling it body and blood. It’s imbedded in what the priest recites every. single. week. Even the part describing Jesus as the lamb of a new covenant in blood. And the bit about this new Lamb’s blood taking away the sin of the world. Heck, I can sing it in Latin even. But for the unfamiliar, I will assume this was an interesting sermon. I liked the fact that pastor made mention of the Last Supper as a Passover meal. That is what the bible calls it. Thematically Jesus’ death is seen as a parallel to what happened at the original Passover. In both cases a lamb was slain and the blood saves the children of God. As to the idea that Jesus was celebrating a Seder with his disciples- I have heard that’s not quite correct. It seems like the Seder used today was not yet solidified into it’s current form when Jesus was on earth. So whatever Jesus usually did for the anniversary of Passover, it would have been rudimentary at best compared to a Seder today.

Of course, there are some scholars who think the juxtaposition of the Last Supper with Passover was retconned by the writers of the gospels to make the point more fully about Jesus making a second covenant. I guess I’m ok with that. Sometimes I wonder if I let biblical scholarship chip away at the bible, what will be left? But then again, God made us to be able to think, and that’s important if one is actually interested in the truth. I think learning more about this stuff can actually make my faith stronger. Jesus could certainly have made a comparison to Passover without necessarily using the anniversary of that day. Plenty of things could be different about the specifics in the bible and I would still love the stories. I guess that’s the best thing I got from this week’s service. It made me reexamine what I love about the stories and realize all over again that changing beliefs will not wreck me or my faith. Ultimately it doesn’t matter if Jesus was having Passover as his last meal. It doesn’t even matter to me if Jesus died to save the world or just to save twelve men from execution. That’s powerful. He asked us to remember it and we do.

Negatives?: There was one odd bit. We were listening to the in-depth story of The Last Supper. It was probably around the part where Jesus’ death takes away our sins. Pastor explained as kind of a one-off that when we sin it makes Jesus sad. This was meant as a reason to not sin and it even seemed like the pastor was getting a little bit emotional as he spoke about it. I find it somewhat odd to hear a statement like this. The way Jesus feels about us should be the last reason not to sin. The first reason should be the other person we are hurting and the second reason should be the damage we are doing to ourselves. If Jesus is so kind and awesome and one-with-God, he can handle Himself to be alright even when we are sinning. I feel like this reason serves as a guilt inducement and very little else. So that was at least kinda strange.

Posted on

Church #49, New Horizons Christian Church

Date: 1/26/13

Church name/type: New Horizons Christian Church, a full gospel pentecostal church

Pastor: David Traynham

Style of worship: Praise first, talking (prayer and sermon) after

Overall Impression: I’m very torn. The people all seemed warm and friendly. The message from the sermon was a little off the deep end.

Thoughts:
I liked the music. The taking-your-seat music is just prerecorded game-show-sounding worship music. But the actual praise music was much better. One rather talented praise leader played keyboard and sang. At the same time he directed the congregation what lines to sing before they came up. The music was also displayed on screens at the front of the room. I used to hate those screens, but they are definitely an improvement over nothing, which is what I’ve been getting from churches lately.

Everyone who said hello to me before service, after, and in between was very friendly and huggy. No one seemed clingy and a few people even asked about my project; the usual lead-in of course was ‘How did you find us?’ I gave out several website cards. Pastor David also noticed I was new and said hello.

When it was time for the sermon things began to take an odd turn. The title was: There’s a War Going On. Well ok. Based on the title this could be about several things: actual war, war in ourselves to do right, war to find the resources to help those in need… But no, this was a sermon mostly about the end times. The end times are happening now! Or so I was told by Pastor David. We are aware that the end times are in progress because of all the floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, and the danger from the Olympics. And the shootings at schools, on the streets, in churches, and in malls. And all the laws being passed that are anti-God. I gotta admit I am sooo not with pastor on this. Natural disasters happen all the time. Shootings happen pretty often as well, except in places like Australia where gun restrictions are tighter. I guess I really have no idea what anti-God laws are being referenced here so I cannot speak to this one. My biggest problem with all the descriptive world ending talk is that it felt more like fear-mongering than anything else. Some of the descriptions of people killing and maiming others were pretty graphic. I came to church unafraid, was made to understand I should be afraid, and then was told I did not need to be afraid. But for someone listening and believing it all, how would they not be afraid? We heard that the end times are already happening, that everyone will be marked with a number in order to buy and sell. Good Christians who refuse would then starve. And if they did manage to not starve they would face beheading by a gillotine or some type of laser. I don’t have to make this up, it was all in the sermon.

In addition to thematic scariness, there were a number of stand alone statements that I found dubious. I’ll list them out and respond.

1) The anti-Christ will come from the office of the Roman Catholic Pope. The current Pope is just so liberal after all.
(I strongly disagree that the new Pope is problematic. He reaches out to the marginalized, making headlines doing so. That actually seems very pro-Christ.)

2) Religion has sent more people to hell than heroin or prostitutes.
(This statement was in a message about backsliders. Does this mean atheists have the advantage over churchgoers because they can’t slide back to anything?)

3) The world argues with the bible not by good arguments but by loudness of voice.
(This sounds like a stab at either biblical scholarship or non-Christians pointing out the bible’s contradictory nature. Guess what? The bible is contradictory.)

4) I don’t agree with them, but I have no problem with Hitler or Saddam Hussein. God has an end time plan.
(Just because God has a plan doesn’t mean we can forget about anything happening on earth. We still have to live here.)

5) People say – ‘Jesus has been coming back for years and isn’t back yet? Let’s live it up!’
(Does anyone really say this? I am skeptical that this is the way it works inside anyone’s mind. This also feels like a very weird statement to make given the fact that Pastor David’s advice to his grandson regarding death was not to worry and just enjoy life.)

And finally there were some dichotomies that I felt needed to be presented as much grayer. Pastor David contends that all was chaos for the Israelites before Moses came down from the mountain with the ten commandments. Similarly, all is supposedly chaos within us before we are saved. I see that as too simplistic. It does not account for any kind of conscience until a person is introduced to Jesus (or Moses?). I know people who are and were capable of knowing right from wrong before being told about Jesus. We also heard from Pastor David about people who hurt others- killers and shooters. Pastor says they are selfish and suggests selfishness as the primary and perhaps only motivation for these events. This ignores many other factors including: depression, desperation, and mental illness -just to name a few. We heard how the current generation is the “un-generation” because of all the things they are not. Listed in 2nd Timothy 3:2-7 are these descriptors: selfish, proud, boastful, disobedient to parents, unthankful and unholy. This paints youngsters with pretty broad strokes. Should I assume those in church (like the pastor’s grandson) are exempt from these descriptors? We also heard that ‘flesh’ would love to blow someone’s brains out or sleep with someone’s wife. I have never thought either of these things. I am sure there are people who have never thought these things. We are not barely restrained animals keeping from murdering others because of Jesus. There is no reason to frame our impulses this way, even for those who deal with strong impulses. It seems like simply more scare tactics. To me that is a horrible way of bringing people to Jesus.

Any good stuff?: There was a portion of the message that reminded us that we are not here to judge others. We were told to remember that others belong to God and they have a purpose. Just because we do not know their purpose, we don’t get to treat them badly. So I guess that’s. Something.

Posted on

Church #48, Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church

Date: 1/19/14

Church name/type: Mount Zion Missionary Baptist, unclear if there is any further affiliation

Pastor: Dr Robert Bradly

Style of worship: Songs were sprinkled throughout the service, which had a regular and straightforward format. It included scripture, prayer and collective reading as well as sermon and call to the altar for group prayer.

Overall Impression: I actually really liked it.

Thoughts:
I arrived early this time and followed someone inside. I asked about the sanctuary and was directed up some stairs. Inside a bible study was happening so I sat a little back and tried to be quiet and respectful. The young woman leading the study took a second to say hello and handed me a book of the study material so I could follow along. The lesson was from Luke 14; the story of the wedding guests. We talked about the section in which Jesus instructs us to take the lowest spot at dinner, that we might be exalted to the highest spot. It warns that those seeking the highest spot will be downsized to the lowest spot. It’s a pretty standard Catholic lesson in humility and not seeking prestige, so it was not unfamiliar to me. I probably could have contributed if there’d been anything standing out to me. After the lesson was done several of the bible study membership approached me to say hello and welcome. Then they left me alone. They were very relaxed and low-key, which I like.

Once the service started a woman seated near me told me to come and sit by her; she’d tell me what was going on. I decided to take her up on this so I moved. (Minutes later, after I had decided to leave it in the other seat until the service ended, someone brought my warm hat to me from the seat I’d left.) My new friend’s name was Anna, and she told me what to expect at several key junctures of the service. Because of this and the format being listed in the church handout, I really had no trouble following along. At one point we were asked as a group for witness. This was more like news and updates. The sermon followed, continuing a few verses more into Luke.

The next part of Luke is again about a wedding feast. A man has invited a group of his friends to a wedding feast, but none of them show up. When he sends servants to them to ask what’s up, they beg off for various reasons. The host then sends his servants out to find anyone out in the street and bring them in as guests. One of the points that stood out to me in the sermon was the idea that this message relates to us today by representing the kingdom of God. We have to reach out to the people we don’t expect. We can’t only invite those we think belong. This is a strong message of accepting others and I really like it.

After the service a few more people came up to me to unobtrusively say hello. There was a bake sale in the basement so I hung around a bit and talked with a couple of the church members. They seem really nice. And they had what I’d consider the right balance of engaging me and leaving me alone. Everyone was warm but no one was pushy. Even during greeting time for visitors I didn’t feel forced- it was more ‘stand if you want to’.

Conclusion: I should come back here at some point.

Posted on

Transcripts, Fanfics, and the bible

So I’ve been transcribing episodes of this show I love called The Aquabats. I had already watched one particular episode several times and decided to try transcribing from memory. I do have a fairly good memory, so I figured I had a decent shot. I got many of the lines noticeably wrong. In fact, even while watching episodes scribbling furiously, I found I got lines wrong. Five lines would be said and I’d pause the DVR and try to get them all written down. The first line would be wrong. I thought for sure Ricky said, “No thank you. I swore off donuts in the name of fitness.”
In fact he said, “No thanks. In the name of fitness I swore off sweets a long time ago.”
And this was something I’d just listened to, with the actual intention of faithfully recording it. And I still got it wrong. Now try to imagine I heard it and then waited several years to record it. Now try to imagine someone else heard it too and wrote it down after several years. Theirs would almost unquestionably be different from mine. Perhaps a great deal different. Now translate them both into a second language and wait a couple thousand years…Do you see where I’m going with this? This is the bible; heard by several, written by others, translated across centuries. My own attempts at transcription bring this home to me so forcefully. I got it wrong within seconds of hearing it. This is the reason I do not hold with the idea that the bible is a book to be read as the actual words spoken by God and Jesus. As soon as Jesus said it, someone probably misheard it. I challenge anyone who disagrees to try transcribing a television show without pausing, and go back after and see what you were able to recall correctly.

There’s something else transcribing a TV show as a fan made me aware of. There’s this thing called fanfic; the word is an abbreviation for fan fiction. It is a story written by a fan of something. The something could be any existing story with characters and a universe. The fan fiction is written for these existing characters and universe, and often written to sound like the author who wrote the original story. It’s not just the further adventures of… but also a style parody. Good enough fan fiction makes you feel the original author may have written it. Biblical scholarship suggests the bible has this phenomenon as well. Several of the New Testament letters attributed to Paul are now thought to be composed in the style of Paul by someone other than Paul. It would seem the bible is partially fanfic.

What to make of all this? I used to have much more trouble with this idea. After all, there are pastors who see the bible as a perfect faithful recording that has never been mis-copied or translated, the phrases and words picked apart for meaning in every little word and phrase. In fact, I’m not even sure I have a problem with this approach except that it is touted as a source of further information about God. Perhaps in the case of word by word examination it should be thought of in terms of the gaining information on the ideals of the scribe/translator. Dig a little further and use a bible that examines the original language, giving footnotes, and you can look into the mind of the original human author, whether it be Paul or some fan of Paul’s. Listen to the overall story and try to find out what life was like for Jesus and what he was telling us about it.

In the end it’s all these things that make the bible special. When people use the cliché that something is like a rich tapestry, I think I actually get what they mean. Some kind of huge woven thing is just a bunch of threads. And you can look at the threads, if you want, and decipher who made them, how strong they are, and what their composition is. You can step a little back and see the twists and turns the threads make and figure out how the weaver did the work. You can step further back and see the patterns going on- admire the beauty of the colors and how they strike the eye. Take one last step back and you can take in the work as a whole and see it as one giant scene, a cohesive, or perhaps contradictory unit of some kind- busy with life and feeling. This is the bible. Taken many ways, taken together. But the thing about tapestry is, it’s a work of art. And with art you are supposed to see what you see and not what others see. No one else can tell you how to experience it- only how they experience it. You have to experience it yourself.

Posted on

Church #47, Wilborn Temple First Church of God in Christ

Date: 1/5/14

Church name/type: Wilborn Temple First COGIC (Church of God in Christ)

Pastor: Pastor Solomon Dees, although other leaders did most of the service and a guest Douglas H. did the sermon

Style of worship: exuberant praise was scattered throughout the service, mainly right before the sermon- sermon itself was sing-songish, rising to shouting- the end of service included prayer at the altar and communion

Overall Impression: The people seem really nice, although the message didn’t hold much for me.

Thoughts:
This is a predominantly black church and the service went very long. I was there around three hours. Still I found the way it was broken up to be optimal; we were never doing anything for too long and nothing became tedious. At least ten people greeted me before service, during service, and after service. There was a specific part of the service in which visitors were asked to stand and say a few words. They kind of spring this on you. They had asked for my name on one of the visitor cards but didn’t tell me what for, then after they read the cards they got aloud. This would not be an ideal place for anyone shy. Luckily I’m not very shy. While I was somewhat taken aback by the surprise request, I managed, saying my full name and describing my project in the briefest of terms.

The music at this church was very good. The sound was clear and the instruments were balanced well. I was actually able to understand the words to songs- the sound didn’t get lost in the space. This can be a concern in large old echoey church buildings. This building was previously a synagogue. The only features reminiscent of anything other than a Christian church are the six-point stars adorning an area at the front, and the square ceiling area set with colored glass tiles.

The message was given this week by a visiting pastor named Douglas whose last name I have forgotten. It was the same old stuff about new stuff. There were a lot of references to how Jesus can save you and give you what you need if you only ask. There was a focus on it being a new year with new beginnings. This was tied back into the fact that Jesus makes all things new and his forgiveness wipes away sin. All things I’ve heard before and they didn’t really speak to me in particular. There was a weird moment in the middle of the sermon when guest pastor compared God’s mercy to not doing too much “beating up on kids” so they “don’t get too bruised”…which I have to assume is a metaphor for a verbal scolding. Nobody advocates beating kids do they? I sure hope not. Pastors reeally need to pay attention to what they are saying. The rest of the sermon was the same clichés repeated and while there wasn’t much objectionable in it, they wasn’t anything outstanding as a great message either.

Cool communion points!: This was a first Sunday, the day on which Protestants usually do communion. For communion this time we all lined the center row and held hands. We were given a tiny plastic cup filled with juice and sealed over with foil. On top of the foil was a round wafer sealed in with a layer of clear plastic. Instant communion! This is great for germophobes because everyone gets their own little serving and no one is touching your food. This communion can go anywhere, won’t spoil easily and you don’t have to worry about wasting leftovers. While there is something gratifying in tearing a nice chunk of actual bread from a fresh loaf, in winter I’d like a higher degree of attention paid to preventing the spread of cold and flu. This style of communion seems just about right to me.

Posted on

First Century Sex

So I was curious about sex during the time Jesus lived because I presume this makes some difference in how we read the bible’s instructions on sex. I’m not one to try and claim that bible is a foolproof answer for everything because so much of it was tailored to the times. Mentioning shepherds and sowing all the time, for example, is not something I find super-pertinent because I rarely grow crops or deal with sheep in any way. But learning more about sowing methods and shepherds work gets at the meaning of certain stories better. So presumably we might better understand what the bible has to say about sex if we got more information on sexual ideas and practices at that time.

Wikipedia has a lengthy section on Sexuality in Ancient Rome with 500+ references, so I checked it out. I know this doesn’t quite represent the ‘microclimate’ if you will, of sexuality during the first 100 years of the Common Era (0-100 A. D.), but I thought hey, it’s better than nothing. So it sounds like male Roman citizens had the most freedom in terms what kind of sex was legal and generally thought of as acceptable. A male Roman citizen would be expected have a wife to have heirs by, but it was seen as normal that he also had other women or men, as well as the possibility of sex with male youths or any of his slaves. The women and slaves had it worst in this scenario because they didn’t have any legal basis for saying no to either a husband (wives) or owner (slaves). Wives and slaves were treated as property of male citizens, although women had slightly better standing; sex with a slave without the owner’s permission was not even considered rape but simply ‘property damage’. And I’m not even getting into the fact that prostitution was widely available too. So it sounds like sex back in the day was some seriously messed up stuff.

In a world like this, some people would be kind enough to consider the wishes of those they could use for sex, but not all. I have read previously that Christianity in its early form appealed especially to women and slaves. That makes a lot of sense in this case. Early Christians were often abstinent, sometimes even within marriages. Telling everyone to avoid sex, while very simplistic, was still an improvement over giving men the go-ahead to have sex with a variety of people without asking.

For another perspective on biblical sexuality from this time period, I’m going to point to a website I ran across called:
The Flaming Heretic
The post I’ve linked was very informative. It discusses how Paul (you remember Paul, he wrote most of the New Testament?) thought that sex should be avoided because the craving for sex harmed the spirit. His provision for those who ‘burned with passion’ to get married was really a way to cut this craving down to a minimum by allowing some sex once in a while. Presumably (and this is my conjecture) monogamy within said marriage would prevent more than two people from extra exposure to spirit-harming sexual feelings.

I don’t really think I can get behind Paul’s view on this. I don’t think sex is intrinsically harmful. But I do wonder if he was equating sex with all the harmful practices at the time and going overboard regarding how to fix it. I do agree that it’s a ridiculous situation to restrict women and slaves to someone else’s agenda. Christianity seems a really progressive alternative because of the choice it offered: to refrain from sex.

Posted on

Mount Moriah, Glenmont, gave me a nonsense book

So I went back to Mount Moriah church randomly earlier this year because I was hoping to hang around afterwards- something I did not get to do last time. The service seems to run rather late and the second visit I couldn’t even stay to the end as I had work in the afternoon. So one my way out the door, one of the deacons or somebody came after me to ask if I was leaving. When I said I was, he gave me a book titled: Surprised by God in the Midst of Hell, A Pastor’s Story of Surviving Horrors in the Church World by Meredith Giles.

I’m not going to apologize for saying how bad this book is, since they chased after me to give it to me. Obviously they are looking to have people read it and that’s what I did. I will say it wasn’t as bad as the other bad book I reviewed on this blog. There wasn’t anything grossly offensive in it, it was simply a jarbled-up mess that made me sad.

The book seems to be both the story of the formation of Mount Moriah AND a sort of workbook to guide one through a crisis based on the author’s own crisis. The only problem is, it sounds like some of the worst parts of this crisis could have been avoided. While it’s clear the author experienced significant suffering and anguish, I think many of her decisions (like taking on half the church and the local denomination) made the problem worse. Quite frankly, it sounds like in some cases, she manufactured or subconsciously ramped up all the negative feelings she describes. Either that or she’s just a terrible writer who cannot describe the actual situation adequately.

Looking in the first chapter I find a story about the young couple, husband and wife, pastor and pastor, trying to find a placement in a church through the usual channels of their chosen denomination. They get an interview in New York State (Albany area obviously) and Meredith starts feeling apprehensive. She decides this church is wrong for them. Why? Beats me. Here are some passages that sort of almost explain it.

Where we came from, everyone was comfortable with each other, personable and friendly. Oh yes, people here were nice enough and seemed excited about us being there, yet it wasn’t the same…The congregation was thrilled that I happened to be an accomplished pianist and worship leader. This seemed to raise the enthusiasm of everyone to a higher pitch than I had seen in the stuffy board meeting. Of course, my husband preached a stirring message, explaining to them what he would expect if he came to be their pastor. I didn’t think they would think much of that. It seemed like a very conservative group and change may not have been the thing they were really looking for…Yet even as he spoke, people were responding as if receiving a drink of cold water after a long time in a dry, dusty desert. “Oh, no,” I thought. “Lord, You really wouldn’t make us come to this place!”

Well I’m completely failing to see the reason Meredith is freaked out at this point. And this type of thing continues throughout the book. The author spends more time describing her emotions than she does explaining what bad or good thing caused the emotion in the first place. She clearly felt strongly enough about this stuff to write a book on it, but I can’t feel any empathy for her situation because she never quite describes what is going on during all these feelings.

The book continues, describing the couple landing this New York job and setting up here. They realize after some time that the congregation is growing and a newer, bigger church facility is in order. The story meanders a lot with plenty of time spent on minute problems and visions and dreams, but the gist of it is, the church decides to purchase land and start work on a new building (again presumably the current Mount Moriah location). Trying to fund and manage the building project causes a rift between a person only referred to as ‘Deacon’ and the pastors. They wind up with a schism that turns into a nasty legal battle. But what I just said in two sentences, Meredith takes 233 pages to say. She spends a huge part of the book detailing her own emotional/spiritual turmoil but gives very little story. What she does give is blurred by lack of detail regarding the physical reality of the situation, and way too much focus on describing how the devil is behind it. This makes for a difficult read.

Another difficulty I had with the book was Meredith’s stereotyping of non-church stuff as negative. In chapter one she casually mentions that Christianity is in her blood. I’m not even sure what she’s getting at. Is her position as pastor more legitimate because her family includes pastors? Is she saying church is some kind of genetic predisposition? What would that even mean? Then there’s an incident she describes regarding a guy named Obie. She is in the throes of what sounds like a depression, in her room not moving. Obie stops by but she won’t come out and see him. He drops off a bouquet of flowers for her and leaves again. Meredith finds that this gift brings her out of her sadness makes her feel able to function. She explains that it’s not like Obie is really a church person and this is how she knows the gift is really from God. Somehow she manages to devalue this guy’s kind gesture, suggesting he could never have done it if the Spirit of God didn’t direct him. It’s almost as if she is writing this guy off as incapable of such a gesture on his own agency, simply because he does not regularly attend a church. That’s at best, rude.

I’d also like to mention that the notes at the end of chapters aren’t working for me at all. I don’t know who they are meant to work for. One chapter, for example, details a reporter appearing at Meredith’s office to try and get a juicy story. Meredith rebuffs her and warns the family to go to the neighbors so to avoid the reporter following them home. The end of the chapter offers the following questions ‘to ponder’ :

Do reporters have the right to barge into someone’s office with cameras rolling without permission?
What would your reaction have been?
What should the reaction be towards these women who were slandering?
Discuss the statement, “Be as wise as a serpent, yet as gentle as a dove- only be ninety percent serpent and ten percent dove when it comes to the tricks and attacks of our adversary and those he works through.”

These strike me as extremely leading, and pointless questions. The first two sound like the type of third grade reading comprehension questions designed to make sure little kids are getting something from the text. As a grown-up, I feel I’m past this. And that last question makes no sense to me. Is it advocating trickiness? Is it saying to defeat the devil, be like the devil? God’s ok with deceit now as long as you use it to flummox Satan?

This brings me to my next point actually. Much of what Meredith describes regarding “Deacon” uses imagery of the devil. She is convinced God is on her side and the devil is against her. Several times she describes messages coming from God. The problem with this is, the other side seems to believe the reverse is true. Her own words describe a meeting with their denominational leadership in which the higher up (presumably her supervisor) says he has a solution from God. His answer is to allow the two pastors and any of the congregation who wish to follow them, to leave. Presumably this means setting up their own church, possibly creating a new denomination. Meredith thinks this plan is terrible…except in the end, this very thing happens! They do break off from the denomination and they do set up their own church. They just do it with that nice new building. The crux of the matter is the land bought and the shiny new church to be built on it. What I really can’t understand is why Meredith and her husband drive themselves so hard to get this building from Deacon. If she really thought God was telling her to lead an offshoot group, why not just leave and start fresh? Trust in God and he will provide, right? She subjects herself to a giant headache of a legal battle and I cannot fathom her reasons. There is clearly pain on both sides from multiple parties. I’m sure I could write a book from the Deacon’s point of view along with his half of the church and it would say that God was with him and the devil against. All for a thing, a building. And it sounds like nobody won in the end.

Far from being inspirational, much of this story made me sad. From the protracted legal battle and petty jabs to the fact that Meredith’s obvious symptoms of situational depression, I just feel terrible for everyone in this story. Meredith never mentions once if she went to a therapist for all her anxieties even though it sounds like she really needed to. I worry about her and the church she is leading. She seems to think God speaks to her and that she and her husband have the market cornered on what God says. This has some very dangerous potential and has already been detrimental to her based in the pain she describes in this very book.

Posted on

What I figured out Christmas 2013

Winter can be a difficult time for me. The cold and the oppressive darkness make me feel so down. I’m affected by light and by the lack of light. I’ve known this about myself for a while now. Even knowing this though, in winter I would wonder specifically about my relationship with God. I have heard messages in churches and from individuals who would talk about the perfect peace and joy God could offer. Every year I would struggle to feel happy during the winter and every year I would wonder if there wasn’t some major point I was missing.

This year I can finally say that I wasn’t missing anything. This year at Christmas I felt happy. It wasn’t because I read the bible more or prayed or obeyed God to a fuller extent. No. It was other stuff. I worked some things out by talking to people, I solved a few puzzles about how my brain processes stuff, and I realized that one of my migraine meds has been giving me mood swings and got that straightened out. And this year I was happy.

It makes me want to tell people. Because there must be other people like me who can’t get it. There must be other people who are trying to read the bible and pray and are getting nothing from it. There must be other people who think they are stuck in sadness because they are too faithless. This year I felt better. I did not find it in the places I was told to look. God did not reach down to help me, except perhaps in that he gave me friends and resources to figure this stuff out. And some of it (like the migraine thing) was at random. How many people will never find any answers and will have to deal with sadness always? Don’t get me wrong, if you do find happiness through worship or prayer or bible reading, that’s great. But saying this can be the case for everyone is wrong and should stop. I don’t mean this post to be a downer; I really am happy that some stuff finally helped me out a bit. I just wish I hadn’t sat on my hands so long wondering which thing I’d been doing wrong that I wasn’t getting to God.

Posted on

What I figured out Christmas 2013

Winter can be a difficult time for me. The cold and the oppressive darkness make me feel so down. I’m affected by light and by the lack of light. I’ve known this about myself for a while now. Even knowing this though, in winter I would wonder specifically about my relationship with God. I have heard messages in churches and from individuals who would talk about the perfect peace and joy God could offer. Every year I would struggle to feel happy during the winter and every year I would wonder if there wasn’t some major point I was missing.

This year I can finally say that I wasn’t missing anything. This year at Christmas I felt happy. It wasn’t because I read the bible more or prayed or obeyed God to a fuller extent. No. It was other stuff. I worked some things out by talking to people, I solved a few puzzles about how my brain processes stuff, and I realized that one of my migraine meds has been giving me mood swings and got that straightened out. And this year I was happy.

It makes me want to tell people. Because there must be other people like me who can’t get it. There must be other people who are trying to read the bible and pray and are getting nothing from it. There must be other people who think they are stuck in sadness because they are too faithless. This year I felt better. I did not find it in the places I was told to look. God did not reach down to help me, except perhaps in that he gave me friends and resources to figure this stuff out. And some of it (like the migraine thing) was at random. How many people will never find any answers and will have to deal with sadness always? Don’t get me wrong, if you do find happiness through worship or prayer or bible reading, that’s great. But saying this can be the case for everyone is wrong and should stop. I don’t mean this post to be a downer; I really am happy that some stuff finally helped me out a bit. I just wish I hadn’t sat on my hands so long wondering which thing I’d been doing wrong that I wasn’t getting to God.

Posted on

Christmas Eve Services

So I scoured my visited churches (those with webpages) for Christmas Eve services or Midnight masses. I found a handful of listings for very late services and want to record them here. Next year I can use this list as a go-to instead of searching my entire list over again.

Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception
Midnight mass
I have it from someone at St Francis that the Cathedral is the only Catholic midnight mass around Albany.

Cathedral of All Saints (Episcopal)
11pm

Delmar Presbyterian Church
11pm
I’m kind of upset with local Presby right now. Doing a web search turns up a website that appears to be theirs advertising an 11pm service. We tried to go last night and found it ending, having started at 10pm. So that’s either an old website or a current website that hasn’t been updated. Either way it’s bad and especially disappointing since I mentioned a broken website to them last time I visited.

Delmar Reformed Church
11pm
Confirmed! This is the church we eventually went to.

First Church in Albany (Reformed)
11pm

St Vincent de Paul (Catholic)
10pm

St Andrew’s (Episcopal)
10pm

First United Methodist in Delmar
10pm

St Peter’s Episcopal
9:30pm