All posts by Tony

Crumbs of Wisdom

Here is another collection of wisdom quotes, along with some beautiful prose snippets, from various sources. Enjoy!


Of course, maybe it was […] pure chance. I find this unlikely, however. Chance is never pure.

– Iain M. Banks, Transition


The Heavenly scene is umbilically related to the earthly

– Tom Wright, Revelation for Everyone


[Nicodemus] “So you would place limits on the Almighty?”

[Shmuel] “None that are not written in Law”

“And so, if God did something that you felt contradicted Torah, would you tell Him to get back in that….box that you have carved for Him? Or, would you question the interpretation of the Torah?”

“When I was a student, I knew all of your sayings. I read every word you wrote. Your teachings were so sturdy; so reasoned, and pure”.

“We are still students, Shmuel! All of us! Our understanding will never be complete!”

“It frightens me that I can no longer predict your rulings….”

“And fear alone ensures we remain ignorant. Asleep in the safety of rigid tradition!”

– Nicodemus talking to the Pharisee, Shmuel, The Chosen S1 Ep.6


The thing that annoys me most is the hypocrisy and goalpost-moving of the God crowd. They beat people over the head with their Rulebook, and they themselves ignore the parts of it that don’t agree with their actions. A friend once told me that the Church is at the same time the best, and also the worst, witness for Christ that there is. I would agree with the second descriptor, not so much the first. It also makes me think that some of these people have been following, and indeed inventing, a counterfeit faith. This is what happens when the unclean put on the clothes of the righteous. Their outer apparel makes no difference; you can still smell what they really are..

– Me


I do wonder if the idea of the Holy Spirit ‘convicting’ a believer of ‘sin’ is a bit of a false concept. The idea comes from John 16:8, where Jesus says that the Spirit will convict the world of sin, judgment and righteousness. Note that He said the world – that is, in Christian (or, at least, Evangelical) thought, everyone who is not a Christian – but He didn’t mention the believer. So, does the Spirit actually convict a believer? I don’t believe He does. Sure, it’s common and generally-understood parlance in Christian circles to refer to being ‘convicted’ by the Holy Spirit, but I strongly suspect that the condemnation inflicted on believers by others, and indeed by the believers’ own consciences, have been conflated with this idea of the Spirit’s gentle promptings on things. There’s a huge difference between the gentle Voice of the Spirit and the voice of the accuser – whether that’s an actual ontological being or simply a person’s own conscience.

– Me


The Squadron Commander held forth with a pint tankard in his hand, the floor temporarily his: seniority did not necessarily obtain the attention of an assertive bunch of young men who did almost every week what the Light Brigade did once and once only.

– Richard Townshend Bickers, Panther Squadron – the quote takes place in a fighter pilots’ briefing room during WWII


Prayer is God’s way of empowering the powerless

– Me


Brake on … rev up … let her go and the exhilarating punch in the back, the surge down the runway with the needle on the air speed indicator moving rapidly around the dial. Lift off, wheels up … clonk-onk … the oppressive heat at once swept aside by the rush of wind past the open canopy. The familiar blizzard of impressions. The narcotic intensity of knowing that anything might happen before you put your wheels down safely on the ground again. The slow, rhythmical unfolding of the landscape as you climbed. The cumulative, incantatory power of the roaring engine a few feet in front of you. All the mesmeric, fascinating characteristics of flight, the freedom of the air.

– Richard Townshend Bickers, Panther Squadron


I went down to the crossroad and made a deal with a man that I liked very much. He told me that in exchange for my thin watery soul he would put me in a position where I could create the misery that I dread for myself. I could inflict that misery onto people who are the least of Jesus’ brothers and sisters. I would feel powerful and get money, neither of which I deserve. It was an offer I could not refuse. I wasn’t using that weak and pitiful soul anyway.

Thanks, Satan!!

– Blog post by ‘Jeff’, referring to a particularly soulless public servant in America. That’s all I’m saying.


Linked with that loss of joy, you [certain Christians of a serious and miserable persuasion] will likely also have lost your sense of humour, partially because you have to be selective about what you allow yourself to find as funny, and also because laughter needs some sort of joy to fuel it – and your joy tanks are dry.

– Me


If [a certain famous and powerful public figure] was any less self-aware, he wouldn’t be able to see his own reflection in the mirror

– Brian Taylor Cohen


Most church leadership is about getting people to do what God isn’t actually calling them to do.

– Me


Home is the place where, when you get there, they have to take you in

– Robin Frost


Despite these foul people (Yes, indeed, charlatans! These people are of the synagogue of Satan; those who claim to be [believers] though they are not… (Rev 3:9)) stealing and polluting the name of my faith, I will still call myself a Christian. This is my name; my birthright. I know who I am in Christ and these thieves are not taking from me the right to bear that Name. ‘Christian’ means ‘Little Christ’, and that’s what I am. And I always will be.

– Me, commenting on corrupt people who name themselves ‘Christians’ for political purposes.


Yes but your idea is greater than your self-doubt

– Anon


Doing ‘works of faith’ in the Kingdom of God is not about numbers; it’s about calling. Whereas the world’s emphasis is to be ‘seen to be doing’, the Kingdom’s emphasis is actually to not be seen doing anything

– Me


[In our group] there are no tricks, no half-measures, no false promises, no crossed fingers when it comes to our welcome, affirmation, and celebration of LGBTQ+ people. We affirm the LGBTQ community in all its variations, colors, identities, and expressions.

– The Faith Community https://thefaithcommunity.org/about


If the Bible is absolute authority, then it would not need people to tell us that it is. Because what happens then is that the authority you are believing is the person who tells you that the Bible is absolute authority. Therefore, if the Bible needs their authority to validate the Bible’s authority, then it is not the absolute authority, the person telling you is.

– Me


What if deconstruction is sometimes less about losing God and more about losing an image of God that was too small?

– James Pence


Solid doctrines don’t really have a place when God is constantly moving; concrete foundations are not very mobile.

– Me


Here’s [a truth] I know will unravel a whole web of lies: God is good and I am good with God.

– Debbie


[And] what butterfly ever benefitted from taking flying lessons from caterpillars? Not wanting to sound arrogant but they [people in most churches] have nothing to teach me. I can still learn from them, but not from what they teach – there is a subtle difference.

– Me


“More than 40,000 Protestant sects (e.g. INC, ADD, BAC, SDA, Mormon, JWs etc.) all believe that the Bible is the only and single truth of God, and yet they all contradict each other with that very same Bible.

“So how can a single truth written within that one Bible create thousands of different opposing and contradicting doctrines? Could it be that man personally interprets the Bible and create his own new ‘truths’?”

That is very much the case. For me, I rationalise it by thinking about how God meets each individual where they are at, and speaks to each individual in a way that they themselves need to hear Him. That same Bible can help with that. The problem comes when people try to apply what God has spoken to them, personally, to others as if one size fits all. Because it doesn’t!

– Anon


Autism is one reason why I love cooking so much. And working (well, now retired…) in a chemistry lab, which amounts to the same thing. Attention to detail, timings, ingredients, weights, methods…it’s all there and I love it. Plus, unlike in a chemistry lab, you get to eat the results!

– Me


A woman told me she found our church because she Googled “church that won’t make me feel like garbage.” I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. Maybe both?

– Beau Stringer


[Hard-hearted] people, like the legalists in Matthew 12:22-32, miss out on what Jesus is doing because they are so convinced that they are more right than He is.

– Me


Faith doesn’t mean that we’re able to explain suffering. Faith means that we can survive it without losing hope.

– James Pence


“You are allowed to examine ideas. You are allowed to change your mind. You are allowed to believe differently—or not believe at all—without surrendering your integrity, principles, compassion, or capacity for goodness.”

— Lloyd Evans

The White Throne Judgment – Reblog

This entry is part 30 of 41 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism

As my regular readers will be fully aware, I really detest the way in which fearmongering is used by vicious church leadership in order to keep their ‘flock’ in line. Fear of any kind has no place in a believer’s life. The most common phrase in the Bible[1] is ‘Do not be afraid. That has to mean something! But of course it is conveniently and deliberately forgotten by manipulative pastors using fear as a control tool. And in no place is the fear tool more used than in end-times and afterlife threats. You know, they threaten people with ‘hell’; with a ‘great tribulation’; being ‘Left Behind’ at the Rapture, and all that sort of thing.[2] Probably the most fear-filled aspect of these ideas, for most people including unbelievers as well as Christians, is the idea of the ‘Final Judgment’. This has, of course, been gleefully adopted by fear-mongering control-freak ‘christian’ leaders all around the world. The general impression I get (and I admit that I myself once loosely held!) is that every person’s life – especially, of course, featuring the bits you’d rather no-one else saw! – will be projected in full glory on some giant heavenly screen for everyone to see and judge you for, never mind God’s judgment on top of it! And so that’s the misconception I will be addressing in this post. Granted, it’s not entirely Evangelical theology that holds this stuff as a doctrine, but as part of Evangelicalism’s toolkit of abuse, it is of course widely used and abused to damage people. And that’s why this reblog is in the ‘Problems of Evangelicalism’ series. Here we go:


“I wish that it wasn’t called “The White Throne Judgement” the way it describes it. The way it’s been described.
“We each stand before God. Who weighs every thing we have done in life. And determines our reward.
“It sounds terrifying. To be before everyone. And have them see my life. To be on display.
“And the word judgement just seems so ominous.
“It makes me scared. Like nothing. No matter how hard I try here on earth. There will be nothing besides disappointment”.

The above is a quotation from a very worried Christian lady, writing it as a post in a Facebook group I am in. And this present piece is intended to encourage any who find themselves in a similar place with regards to worry about any future judgment[3]. There is a concept in some Christian circles called the ‘Great White Throne’ Judgment. It’s based on the passage in Revelation 20:11ff which says, “Then I saw a large white throne and the one who was seated on it; the earth and the heaven fled from his presence, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne. Then books were opened, and another book was opened—the book of life. So the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to their deeds”. And it goes on to say that anyone whose name was not found in the Lamb’s Book of Life, etc. etc. will be thrown into the ‘lake of fire’. Or something. To give just one illustration of how many unfounded doctrines are based on this section of Scripture, let’s just consider this one point: that there are some who say that this judgment is only for unbelievers. Well, in its defence, the passage does not say this at all, nor do the following verses; quite the opposite in fact, if you study them correctly. So straight away we can see that the passage, and its modern interpretation, is not only very dangerous in terms of emotional health, but it also has the potential for massive misinterpretation by believers of all flavours. And I won’t even give them the benefit of the doubt and say they are ‘well-meaning’ believers, either, because usually their objective is to instill fear in their readers/listeners. Which, when we are dealing with a God of Love (1Jn4:8b), in Whom there is no darkness (1Jn1:5), and Whose perfect Love drives out fear, (1Jn4:18) has to be a non-starter. So.

Let’s just say that I noticed the cry of distress in my sister’s Facebook posting and, amongst other gentle-hearted believers, I too tried to add my version of comfort to the help she was being given.

Here was my first response: “I make light of the White Throne Judgment for two reasons: 1) It is an exaggeration made up by vicious people who want Christians to live in fear, extrapolated from a single, obscure verse (Rev 20:11ff) in the most obscure book of the Bible*, and 2) A great white throne is actually a toilet[4], so I really can’t take it seriously like, ever. *Regarding Revelation, I was made aware of this caveat by a friend on FB (whom I am still badgering for the original reference): ‘[The early church fathers, when considering whether to include the book of Revelation into the canon], decided NOT TO DO IT without the following strict conditions: 1) It was not to be used for any major doctrine or in any liturgy of the church; 2) It did not have the canonical authority of the other New Testament writings; and 3) It was never to be taken literally in any way, but only metaphorically, as an encouragement for Christians about to undergo major persecution and bloodshed’.[5] “Whether or not this information is apocryphal, I do think it is a reasonable way of interpreting any passage in Revelation, especially since it is obviously written in an Apocalyptic style which means it is essentially a cryptic message written for those who were originally to receive it. And they would have understood the cryptic meaning. For us, nearly 2,000 years later, any exegesis of the book must at least take that factor into account and, bringing us back to that original quote, our application of the book must be done with that in mind. Note that I am not suggesting, even for a microsecond, that Revelation should not be in the canon; far from it. But, to me, those three principles, supposedly given by the early Church Fathers, should be borne in mind. Especially since this is the only book in the canon where we find almost blasphemous caricatures of Jesus, and his purported horrific end-time activities, that do not fit even slightly with the rest of the New Testament’s accounts of Him”.


I also wrote this in a separate comment, after further pondering: “There is no Scripture that says that your entire life will be played back in IMAX quality for everyone to see. Fearmongering preachers have tried to twist Jesus’s words about ‘nothing shall remain hidden’ in order to scare people into thinking this…could I suggest that ‘by their fruits you shall know them’? If those thoughts are causing you worry and sadness and fear, then those thoughts are not from God? Therefore, the people who put them there were not speaking words from God. As a believing Christian for whom Jesus died and dealt with your ‘sin’, could it be that those sins have been removed forever, as far as the east is from the west, and that God shall ‘remember your sins no more’? Yes! That’s all true! Why should you live in fear, which perfect love casts out? Why let the curse laid on you all those years ago, by those fear-selling preachers, why let it dominate your life now? Walk free of it, sister. The part in Hebrews 12:1, where it refers to the ‘sin that so easily entangles’, well I believe that this passage is referring to the entanglement caused by the constant fretting and worrying about ‘sin’; ‘Did I do something wrong today?’ and so on[6]. You are allowed, nay, you are required to throw off that worrying about ‘sin’. Let not the sin-police take away your peace. Don’t listen to the accuser, who also wants to steal, kill and destroy: Steal your peace, kill your joy, and destroy your freedom. Don’t listen to him”.


And I think there is a lot more to be said, too, but I didn’t say it. Instead, let me finish by quoting another dear sister on that thread who was equally encouraging, but from a different angle:


“I am curious, what are you basing the idea that everyone would see all that [having the life on display].

I have pondered that moment a lot. But never put that angle on it. I tend to think we cannot fully project what that will be. I usually project it as me before God, & it’s my mind/soul that is enlightened, & sees myself fully as God always has. A major paradigm shift that is not possible here in this life.
 
If I do ponder other souls present in heaven I recall that they will also have been changed by seeing themselves & by extension others as God sees them. None of us will have our limited prejudices we do now. I think humility would be the overriding attitude of all in the Kingdom of Heaven. Pride, & our limited knowledge really does prejudice & limit everyone’s thinking & perspectives here. That won’t be an issue there. Whatever people do see & know would be tempered by seeing themselves & their own life in God’s view.
I my life experience the more clearly I see myself in truth that helps me be more empathetic with others shortcomings.
 
But again I have my doubts others would be so privy to our own judgment before God. I would rather not know all that about everyone. I just have a hard time believing that shame or guilt lasts long in the presence of God. It would be quickly consumed leaving redemption & love in its place. I do want to build up unconditional love, goodness, all the fruit of the Spirit in myself because I think that is what survives before the all consuming presence of God. I pretty much know I will not perfect that in this life.
 
So many people for centuries have tried to control others by using guilt & shame to attempt to control behavior. I see that as a failing in the Church. It is a failing that many of the best theologians have discussed throughout time. Some Prophets & Rabbis even before Christ had a glimpse of this truth.
 
I believe there has been this “Continuing Grace of the Gospel of Jesus Christ” in play since he was physically here. There is always this controlling element out there pushing to bring condemnation back onto us. Then there is another element that pushes us to grow past that attitude & live with God in full control in our hearts. That pushes for more freedom of the believer. It goes back & forth, but for instance look at how much & how incredibly brutal the Ancient World was in the use of capital punishment. Not just death but torturous death on the idea of setting fear of punishment onto people.
 
Statistically today we have hard data that corporal punishment is not an effective deterrent. Reform, treatment for mental & behavioral health & retraining has a stronger effect, but there is no perfect system certainly not yet.
 
I think shame & laying guilt into others is highly ineffective as it never deals with the cause. But we are surrounded by control freaks who believe heavily in it. True guilt when we have it, tends to motivate us to change. We might struggle with that in the process. Shame always gets in the way of real growth & repentance. God is more interested in true guilt. Evil wants us mired in shame & feeling incapable of change. This is not direct onto the specific topic of our judgement. But this issue of shame versus true clear guilt plays into how we tend to see that Judgement.
 
People put shame onto us for being different, for things they perceive as flaws, but every flaw has a flip side that is a strength to it that needs redirected. Often people shame us for things that are not a flaw at all. It’s just something they are ignorant about as a rule.
 
My goal for 3 decades now has been to throw off shame & false guilt laid on me by other people. I have found many aspects of myself that either need treatment or support, but with treatment & support have strength that has always been there. But for a good portion of my life I felt shame about my strengths because they were different than the expected norms. That is not my fault. That is societies ignorance in play. If people persist in ignorance once something like the autism spectrum is concerned they are in the wrong.
 
I am still intimidated at the idea of standing before an all-knowing God. But my confidence in how he loves me, made me with strengths & even delights in me at times has been mostly growing deeper & stronger.
 
I do go through tough times that really test that a lot. But often come out understanding God’s perspective better & his perspective is just a relief once I grasp it than what I projected it to be. I think wherever I am at the moment in that process the judgement will be more of a stripping away of things that have weighed me down, & a healing. More like a diagnosis & treatment for my soul.”
 

Wow. Well, that’s a lot to think about and take on board, so I’ll leave it there. But I sincerely hope that this piece has encouraged you, especially if you were in any way in fear of judgment. There is no room for fear in the Gospel; none at all. Walk free of it!

Grace and Peace to you

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 After the word ‘begat’, anyway!
⇧2 I actually enjoyed reading the ‘Left Behind’ series of books, if I’m honest, although I didn’t believe it one bit! And there are passages (I won’t spoil it!) which are ludicrous in the extreme…some of which in fact permanently changed my opinion of Rapture and parousia (Second Coming) theology away from the standard Evangelical norm, if indeed there is such a thing; so many different end-time theories being held all across Christianity as they are!
⇧3 I believe that the ‘Judgment of God’ that the Bible speaks of is actually a Heavenly judgment of restoration and relationship, not one of wrath and punishment.
⇧4 Hence, my use of a toilet for the header image for this post. Well, I think it’s funny, at least 😉
⇧5 I have quoted this before, in my article ‘Apocalypse‘
⇧6 I once preached a sermon on this very topic; the reference is here

Dear White Evangelical Church: This is Why You’re Dying

This entry is part 29 of 41 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism

Here is a profound essay by the brilliant John Pavlovitz, which mirrors closely what I have been saying recently in my work over the last year or so. It especially reflects some of the thinking and the points I made in my recent piece, ‘I Was a Stranger‘.

While some of John’s points are more related to the Evangelical church in the USA – for example, he mentions a President, and we don’t have any of those over on this side of the pond! – still it is worth sharing in its entirety because a) people all over the world will read this, and b) the UK Evangelical church has always had political intentions[1] and I can easily predict that UK Evangelicalism will copy its USA relatives – they always copy others – and I can already see signs of this happening.

I have not shared this with the intention of it being a political piece, except in that it indirectly highlights[2] my assertion that the Kingdom of God is not of this world and that Christians can live above and beyond the considerations of mere worldly power. I wrote about that point of view in the essay linked to here. As I have said in previous essays, I do not discuss politics on this blog. At the same time, however, I did not want to detract from the power of John’s words by breaking his flow or his logic processes. He’s a passionate man with a passionate message, and he deserves to have it published unabridged. Some of what John writes about is indeed leaking over into politics, and that’s unsurprising because the thinking of a righteous person who has the mind of Christ (1Cor2:16) will naturally rail against the systems of the world that lack righteousness[3].

Over to John:



Dear
Whi
te Evangelical Church,
I have some good news and some bad news.
The bad news is you’re dying.

If you’re paying attention, you’ve probably noticed the symptoms.

Your buildings are slowly clearing, your pews gradually emptying, your congregations visibly aging away, your voice carrying less resonance than it used to.

The reasons for this are complicated and interconnected, but here are a few broad strokes:

You’re dying because of your hypocrisy.

People see the ever-widening chasm between who you say you are and what they regularly experience in your presence.
They see the great disparity between the expansive hospitality of Jesus and the narrow prejudice you are so often marked by.
They see Christ’s deep affection for the poor, hurting, and marginalized, and either your quiet indifference or your open hostility toward them.
They’ve listened to you preach incessantly about the immorality of the world, the dangers of greed, the corrupt nature of power, the poison of untruth, the evils of sexual perversion—and watched you willingly align with politicians embodying all of these.
They see that you are so often the very kind of malevolent ugliness that you forever warned was coming to assail the world.

You’re dying because of your wilful ignorance.

People are tired of your war on Science.
They are sick of your arguing with Biology.
They are exhausted by your attacks on women.
They are disgusted by your justifications of racism.
They despise your narcissistic nationalism.
They know the Earth is round.
They know it is billions, not thousands of years old.
They know dinosaurs walked it.
They know that it is warming rapidly.
They know people here don’t choose their sexuality or deserve their poverty.
They know whoever and whatever God doesn’t appoint Presidents or hand out weapons or attack people with tornadoes.

You’re dying because of your devotion to cruelty.

People watch you dig in your heels against others because of their gender identity and their sexual orientation; the way you continually exact violence upon them, the way you try to blame God and the Bible for your mindless bigotry.
They’ve seen your intolerance to other religious traditions: how you vilify anyone who finds spirituality and meaning outside of your precise expression of Christianity, how you so easily disregard the faith stories of those who don’t mirror your own.
They’ve watched you so revel in being the bully to those you were originally called to protect.

You’re dying because of your complicity in violence.

Good people have seen you so often be a haven for misogynists, domestic abusers, sexual predators, and white supremacists, who more often receive protection rather than condemnation.
They’ve heard your explicit silence in the face of a brutal and rising flood of open racism, of hostility toward immigrants, of anti-Semitism, of attacks on Asian people and Muslims.
They see your pastors and leaders misuse their positions and leverage their influence to victimize the most vulnerable and make them scapegoats for discrimination.
They’ve watched you be the last, hateful holdout in matters of gender equality, racial diversity, sexuality, and theological difference; lagging behind almost everyone in the world in the kind of goodness you say you aspire to.

It’s easy to be fooled into believing you’re well because you have the political power of a presidency behind you, because you can temporarily impose your will on this nation. But this frantic flurry of cruelty is actually the death rattle of a doomed and dying thing. The empty bombast and blinding lights of your megachurches are a hollow rally that may momentarily anesthetize you, but they cannot stave off what is coming.

Yes, Evangelical Church, the bad news is that you’re slowly but surely expiring as you are now.

The good news is that in your passing, something else is being born.

Rising in these days is a sprawling movement of disparate people, not bound by denomination or tradition or nation, who want to create something redemptive and life-giving here, who don’t care what it’s called, who gets the credit, or what building it happens in.

Its makers are conscientious objectors in your unending holy wars, choosing to step away from you in order to create loving spiritual communities, grow deeper in personal faith, escape tribal partisan politics, craft a healthier planet, reflect the character of Jesus, and hold onto their souls.

These newly emancipated sojourners are creating something of compassion and generosity and hospitality; a radically inclusive faith that opens the table, a spirituality that welcomes the world, a religion that does no harm: a working theology of love. These open-hearted human beings are unearthing the beauty buried beneath heavy layers of rigid dogma, ornamental religion, and institutionalized discrimination.

The soul is leaving a body that no longer serves it, and you are that body.

The bad news for you, White Evangelical Church, is that you are certainly dying.

And it’s very good news for the rest of us and for a Jesus you have long ago murdered in your midst.


Here’s the link to the original piece.

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 They want to influence society
⇧2 For those who have the eyes to see it, and the ears to hear it, anyway!
⇧3 This is very different from how Evangelicalism want to influence society; their ultimate political aim (although some of them won’t realise this) is at its end a society which is a theocracy; a society run by nutcase Evangelical leaders who believe they’re doing god’s will (and ruling on his behalf!) by imposing their version of ‘god’s’ rules and laws onto its citizens. This would be a completely evil outcome.

A Dark Testimony VII – The ‘Bad Apple’ Vicars

This entry is part 28 of 41 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism
A story of deliberately dishonest leadership in the Church of England

My last church was a Church of England (CofE) church, and I never had any major problems there.

However, my friend’s experience in ‘their’ CofE church was very different. They have written up their story for inclusion in my blog as a ‘guest post’, and I thank them for both their efforts and their courage in doing so. And they want to remain anonymous – fine by me! – and I am honoured to present my friend’s story below.

I’m not going to comment on the story[1].  I don’t think I’ll need to.

Right, that’s all from me; over to my friend:


My experience at the hands of a charismatic evangelical Anglican church, and its leadership.

I should preface this by saying that I am autistic – and although I have only known this for a couple of years, that isn’t to say that I have only been autistic for a couple of years; autism is a life-long condition. In common with many (or probably most) autistics, I was horribly bullied at school – simply because I was ‘different’ (in ways I shan’t waste time explaining here and now – the differences are, at most, only peripherally relevant to this tale). Those who were, in effect, ‘in loco parentis’ during the school day signally failed (with a few notable exceptions) to discharge their duty of care towards me; indeed, a few colluded and even, on occasion, joined in. My own mother decided, with no evidence whatsoever, that the reason I was bullied was that I wasn’t tough enough. So she decided that she would toughen me up. YAY!! Great stuff, I was bullied at home as well as at school. It should come as no surprise that I finished my school career pretty badly damaged, and with a complete distrust of authority figures.

During my last year of school, I ‘gave my life to Christ’ and became an evangelical Christian, thanks to a person who became a dear, dear, friend. I absolutely don’t hold her responsible, in any way, for the things which I shall describe below – she has never been anything other than a true ‘Follower of the Way’ (of Jesus Christ), and always loved me unconditionally, as who I was, rather than as a ‘project’ or someone who needed to be ‘fixed’.

Even so, it took me more than thirty years to learn to trust anyone enough to share the secrets of my abused past. That I did, eventually, ‘get there’ was down to the patience and care of very good (church) friends, who were consistent and ever-faithful in their love.

So that’s a bit of background, which may serve to illustrate why what I describe below was so devastating – when it may seem quite trivial if read without the above caveat.

Several years ago, the Anglican church I belonged to at the time ran the ‘Living in Love and Faith’ course, alongside most of the rest of the Church of England. It was billed as a conversation around the topic of whether or not LGBTQIA+[2] people could fully belong to the church, and receive all the sacraments (including marriage). Cutting a long story short, our particular course started out as a conversation, but once the leadership discovered that most people on the course disagreed with their ‘conservative’ (reactionary?) stance on the topic, and were far more ‘liberal’ and ‘inclusive’ than the leadership wanted them to be, it began to be turned into some very heavy, uncompromising, and essentially ‘tone deaf’ teaching (I’m not sure teaching is the right word to use – hectoring might better suit what happened). Things were done, during the official sessions, to try to ‘colour’ the result – in direct contravention of the ‘rules’ under which the course was meant to be run.

The course culminated in an extra session which the vicar tacked on to the end of the course, ostensibly so that we could ‘discuss’ where ‘our’ church was going to land on this particular topic. When we all arrived, we were surprised to find that the doors (two sets of double doors) had been wedged open (which was definitely not how they’d been on any other evening). The first thing the vicar told us was that the doors were open because if any of us disagreed with anything he said it would make it easy for us to leave – ‘other churches are available’ being his exact words, reeling off a list of churches he thought might suit us better.

He then proceeded to harangue us with his interpretation of the situation – riding roughshod over the careful groundwork the course had laid, starting by expounding the Church of England’s definition of marriage, and carrying on to tell us exactly what the (English) Bible has to say about homosexuality (and telling us to ignore anyone who cast any doubt upon the correctness of the English version he’d chosen). Faces across the room became gradually stonier – from ordinary folk through to eminent theologians who work at the university. Eventually, he wound up.

The curate completely misread the room, and launched into a fulsome vote of thanks. There was a little desultory applause – from probably a fifth of the room; and a lot of upset and very angry faces. I had, over the course of several years, worked hard to learn Ancient Greek, so as to be able to understand the scriptures in one of their original languages; I’d also made a particular study of the verses of scripture which (so-called) theological conservatives used to deny membership of God’s kingdom to those who were LGBTQIA+. I had become convinced that actually, there was nothing in scripture which could possibly preclude their being full members of the church – indeed, if they couldn’t be members, then neither could anyone else! Being told I was wrong, so vociferously, by someone who I knew was only parroting what he’d been taught, hurt. It was easy to understand the naked anger of the academic theologians in the room, whose hard-won professional opinions had been dismissed over the course of a few minutes by sheer ignorance.

Afterwards, over the next days and weeks there was a steady queue of people making appointments to see him, to tell him why they thought he was wrong, and also to protest at the way he had treated us; that queue included me. When it came my turn, he flatly denied having wedged the doors open, or that he’d suggested any of us leave, or that he had harangued us with his interpretation. He suggested that I had misremembered not only the tone but that facts of what had happened and what he’d said. So passionate and definite was he that I began to doubt my memory of the event.

I met one of the theologians the next day for our regular fortnightly coffee date, and he asked how it had gone. I told him, and he assured me that my memory of the events was well-nigh perfect – and that what the vicar had tried to do to me was classic gaslighting.

Bear in mind here that the first ‘authority figure’ I ever really trusted was a clergyman (it took decades before I shared any details of the abuse I was subjected to as a child with anyone, let alone anyone in authority), and you might get an inkling of the sheer devastation caused by the revelation that I’d been gaslit by my vicar – a man I’d worked alongside closely (as one of his churchwardens) for six years and had learned to trust.

That vicar left, not long after – ‘shuffled sideways’ by the bishop into a role which kept him away from public ministry – the volume of complaints about him had proved too much for even the ‘tone deaf’ functionaries at the diocese.

His replacement was said to be a very ‘pastoral-minded’ man (which was what we all felt the church needed after the earlier debacle). All seemed well, for a few months, and once I felt I might be able to trust him, I made an appointment and told him about my previous experiences. He listened, expressed sympathy, and assured me that he was open-minded and that he wouldn’t hold any of my ‘less conventional’ views against me – in fact he was rethinking a lot of stuff himself, having a sister who had recently ‘come out’. So that all seemed fine.

We run a group for a bunch of students – they come round every Wednesday during term times (and those who’re here year round come every week whether it’s term-time or not); we feed them, listen to their woes, and hold open-ended, open-minded, theological discussions in which ‘anything goes’; it’s all run on ‘Las Vegas Rules’ – i.e. what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas; to our pretty certain knowledge, everyone has always respected those rules.

The vicar sent a message to tell us that he needed to see us urgently. When we met, he revealed that ‘one of the students’ had complained that we were teaching them heresy during the discussions. He wouldn’t tell us who’d complained nor exactly what they’d actually complained about, but that we had to stop doing it, or he’d stop us running the group (how the heck were we meant to stop doing something when he wouldn’t tell us what the something was?). We would meet again to review it in a couple of weeks when we’d had time to repent and rethink what we’d been doing – oh, and from then on we’d have to follow strictly a programme of discipleship he would set…

Because, after all, he was responsible for what was taught in his church and he would have to stand before God on Judgement Day and explain why he’d allowed heresy to be taught in his church. (And this is one reason amongst many why I don’t agree with the idea of an ordained priesthood. Maybe I’ll talk more about that another time!)

We were hurt and confused. We tried really hard, over the following weeks, to work out what the complaint might have been, and who might have made it – so as to at least try to meet his demands. Our conclusion was that, in the absence of any evidence, and knowing ‘our’ students as well as we do, actually, he was making it up, for reasons best known to himself!!

When the time came for the second meeting with him, we insisted on there being an independent witness present; we’ve known one of the current churchwardens for four decades or so, and trust her; happily she agreed to be present. In the face of this ‘witness’, his tune changed and he ‘backed down’ almost entirely from his previous stance – he didn’t go as far as admitting that there hadn’t been a complaint, but he might as well have done.

But I can’t trust him any more… Despite his best efforts to be friendly and ‘open’, I’m not playing his game… I’m keeping my distance, and not falling for his ‘niceness’ – I know it’s an act – all he’s interested in is having power over others, and in building his pathetic little empire of sycophants. I remain unsure of where I stand, and not a little hurt. I’ve more or less stopped attending – unless someone we know is being baptised, or something like that. We’re still running a group for students – but almost entirely independent of the church’s scrutiny; recruitment isn’t a problem – ‘our’ students bring more students, who become ‘our’ students in turn.

A short time later, that same clergyman also ‘received’ (or so he said) an allegation of ‘inappropriate sexual behaviour’ against someone who, as a student, had been part of our group, and had stayed in the area and become a close friend. He was henceforth banned from all ‘ministry’ (even from serving on the tech team, presumably in case he ‘corrupted’ anyone by the way he changed the words on the projection screens or something). We know our friend; we knew, right from the very first moment, that this accusation had to be false. The situation got really messy, until, eventually, in the face of opposition from our friend and his fiancée, and with us acting as ‘chaperones’ at a meeting, the vicar again backed down.

The very next day, he revealed that ‘the diocese’ had now determined that the allegation was false and there was no case to answer (and no, none of us were allowed to know who’d made the allegation, what it was, what evidence there was, and nor were we ever party to the supposed ‘report’ from the diocese). Nevertheless, our friend would not be allowed to rejoin any church ministries until he had receiving counselling (from the vicar), to educate him on what constitutes ‘appropriate behaviour’. Our friend has since left the church, and wants nothing whatsoever to do with it – and I absolutely support him in that.

Personally, I think it all points to yet another ‘fantasy’ on the part of the vicar, and I don’t suppose he ever reported it to the diocese… He just wanted to exercise control over someone… And who cares whether he hurt them, destroyed their trust, or anything – so long as he had his pathetic little power trip. And I wonder – was the second incident a further attempt to ‘get at’ us, via our friend?

At this point, personally, I have decided to adopt an old saying as my ‘motto’ for dealing with clergy: ‘fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me’.  It’s not happening again – I’ve lost all trust in them.

Fuck the lot of them.

I hurt because the trust in authority which I’d ‘learnt’ over so many decades in the church has gone; I’m angry that clergymen of all people have been the ones to betray my trust; I’m grieving because I’ve effectively lost the family I’ve been part of for over forty years; I’m lost – I don’t know where I belong any more, if I belong anywhere. And all because of the ‘power trips’ of two ‘little Hitlers’.

I’m still passionate about Jesus Christ, and I still count myself as a (rather flawed) ‘Follower of the Way’ (to use the ancient phrase), but I think I would consider being called a Christian insulting, if that’s really what christians are like.


Header image shows a suitably dark picture of York Minster, one of the Church of England’s cathedrals.

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 Except just a single, general, observation regarding my main and ongoing reason for including this essay in my blog series: This kind of disgusting behaviour in churches is exactly why I began this series, and exactly why I will continue to share stories of people doing dreadful things to innocent people, in the very place where, more than anywhere else, individuals should be cared for, honoured, nurtured and above all loved. There is no excuse. These stories need to be put out there!
⇧2 The ‘LGBTQIA+’ acronym means ‘Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (or questioning), Intersex, Asexual’, and the plus sign refers to other sexualities that are not specifically mentioned in the acronym.

Changing Their Tune

How Evangelical Christians move the goalposts.

Some Christians, including most Evangelicals, move the goalposts in regards to what they claim the Bible says about, well, anything really, when evidence is presented that refutes one of their tenets they hold fast to[1]. That is, at least, if they actually believe the evidence –  many people simply ignore it because they don’t like it. A common human failing, in fact.

It’s not that they don’t believe something; it’s more that they say ‘Well, that’s not what we meant!’ or ‘We’ve never believed that!’, rather than just admitting they were wrong. Again, a common human failing.

A great example is this.

Many Christian preachers used to say (and indeed some still do) that ‘Jesus spoke more about Hell than He did about Heaven’.

When people found that a simple concordance search reveals this to be a lie[2], they changed their tune, and claimed that ‘Jesus spoke more about Hell than He did about any other subject’.

When this too was shown to be false[3] – and also incompatible with the previous assertion since if He spoke more about Hell than any other subject, then that would include Heaven, and we have already shown that to be false – they changed it yet again, to ‘Jesus spoke more about Hell than anyone else in the Bible’.

That too is almost right, except that in the passages where they think of Jesus as speaking about Hell, He wasn’t speaking of Hell in the way we understand it today. In the one instance where it was actually there, it was being used as an illustration – the Rich Man and Lazarus story – and even that does not fit with modern Evangelical doctrine on just about any level.

But the point is that they change their tune. They move the goalposts. And the really irritating thing about all this is that those who listened to, believed and proclaimed the earlier claims have now completely forgotten about them. They went on to the next claim without a second’s thought. And so on down the line. For more on the ‘Jesus spoke more about Heaven than He did about Hell’ thing, check out my earlier blog post here.

Another funny one is where they say the Bible is inerrant, infallible, perfect and yada yada yada[4]. Then, when they are challenged about the many different translations and how they say different things in some places[5], they’ll say that the Bible is perfect in its original manuscripts.

Which means that:

1) Since no surviving original manuscripts have yet been discovered, we have no way of knowing what was actually in them; and

2) Since any translation of the Bible is neither the original manuscript, nor of course translated directly from an original manuscript (because none exist), then it follows that no Bible – modern or older – is completely perfect, inspired, infallible or any of the rest of it; therefore

3) The authority of the Bible cannot be held to be complete in its absolute sense, because such a concept is based on a premise that does not exist (there are no original manuscripts) and also because by them claiming that only the original manuscripts are perfect, then it follows that other manuscripts are not perfect;

4) Many believers also don’t know that in the passage in 2Pet3:16, Peter refers to St. Paul’s writings as ‘scriptures’, even though they hadn’t been widely published yet, and were certainly not part of any recognised canon. The Greek word translated as ‘Scriptures’ in that verse is the word γραφας (graphas) or ‘writings’, as it is in 2Tim3:16, and the word ‘writings’ is translated usually as ‘Scriptures’ – which is an inferred translation influenced by the translator’s personal leanings. So in that way, we can surmise that even back in Peter’s time, the ‘writings’ were seen as inspired and sacred, but not necessarily Scripture as such. The only Scriptures they really had back then were the Hebrew Scriptures, roughly what we would nowadays call the Old Testament;

5) Another logical flaw in this is one that I have stated in other places, which is that if it takes someone to tell us that the Bible is the absolute authority, then this is self-contradictory because we are relying on the authority of the person/organisation telling us that the Bible is the ultimate authority. In this way, their vouching for the Bible simply means that they themselves become the higher authority. Ultimate, supreme authority does not need anyone to vouch for it; we should not have to be told[6]

6) Saying that the Bible is perfect and holds ultimate, supreme and absolute authority means that it is placed above God, Who alone is really the One with supreme, sovereign power and authority. This is in direct violation of the first of the Ten Commandments: You will have no other Gods before Me (Ex 20:3 and Deut 5:6), because the Bible is placed before God in order of authority.

So, in those ways, the Bible is not perfect. And it’s the reason why a) Jesus Himself contradicted Scripture (e.g. Mt 5:43) and b) Jesus sent the Holy Spirit in order to lead us into all truth (Jn 16:13). Only when He explains a given Scripture passage does it become ‘infallible’, which is fine because then it’s God Who is doing the teaching, yes using the Bible as a ‘tool’ or ‘channel’ for that teaching, but it’s Him Who does it.

Anyway I just thought I’d point out that ‘moving the goalposts’; thing.

Can’t let them get away with it, even if only because it needs to be reiterated that it’s about time Christians started using their brains!

Grace and Peace to you all!

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 Modifying what one believes, in response to evidence or experience, is actually a virtue. But in the way I’m describing and explaining it here, it’s not a virtue by any means!
⇧2 I was going to soften that and simply say it’s ‘untrue’ or ‘incorrect’, but the fact is that many preachers still deliberately claim that it’s fact despite knowing it’s not true. And so it’s a lie.
⇧3 And indeed only believable by people who do not know the New Testament
⇧4 I actually found a church website the other day where the Bible was the first thing they mentioned in their Statement of Faith. Not God, Jesus or any of the, you know, like really God things that should be mentioned first, but the Bible. Yawn 🤣 .
⇧5 The oldest manuscripts available also contradict each other in places; they never tell you that in church…
⇧6 Some might argue that we need to be told, by others, about authority. For example, the police, or the Government, are authority, and we have to tell each other that, but that does not make us a higher authority than the Government. But that’s fine; they can speak for themselves, plus it is stated in national law that they are the authority, and in essence they have placed themselves – or in a democracy, we have placed them there – and so it’s self-evident. This is not the same as an inanimate book. It cannot speak for itself, even in 2Tim3:16, where the Biblical claim of authority (misinterpreted verse in my view!) is set up by believers as claiming authority using a circular argument.

Van’s RV-9A

This entry is part 23 of 24 in the series Beautiful Destroyers
…and my Bembridge, Isle of Wight, Flying Adventure.

Last time I posted an article in this series was in 2020, in the midst of the Covid pandemic. The article was about G-VIZZ, the Sportavia/Fournier RS-180 Sportsman aircraft that I and a number of friends owned as a syndicate.

Sadly, we no longer own that aircraft. Since she was the only British-registered example of the aircraft, of which indeed a total of only eighteen! airframes were ever built, she was really expensive to maintain for various reasons, not least of which was the cost of spare parts, her age, and all this as well as our being a captive market to the very few specialist engineers in the country who were actually certified to service her.

And so, we sold her[1]. But, from the figurative ashes of our syndicate arose an even more beautiful flying experience.

Because we decided to build our own aircraft.

Allow me to introduce Alpha-Mike[2], a Van’s RV-9A[3]; a ‘kitplane’ aircraft of a class known as a ‘homebuilt’. The idea is that you get a series of boxes (very much like a giant Airfix kit), and a little tube of glue, and you build yourself an aeroplane in your garage 😉 Of course, it’s not quite like that, but essentially it’s that any halfway-competent engineer, including people who have learned basic car servicing and repairs and whatnot, anyone like that can build an aeroplane for themselves. They are less expensive to buy than an already-assembled plane[4], and you can customise the aircraft to your heart’s content as you build it.

Once it’s built, you then get in a qualified engineer from the UK’s ‘Light Aircraft Association‘ (the LAA), who checks your work for you. And then he gets in the aircraft, complete with his nerves of steel[5], and takes it for its first test flight. Wow, that takes some guts!

On an ongoing basis, then, we now do all our own servicing and repairs, and we have Alpha-Mike’s ‘Permit to Fly’ reissued (after an engineer inspection) once per year. Think of the Permit to Fly as being like an MoT test, if you will; it amounts to the same thing.

The aircraft is owned by Nigel, one of the former G-VIZZ syndicate members. Members of the group (we can’t really think of it as a syndicate because we don’t jointly own the aircraft) can fly her whenever they please. We even have a proper booking system. And this is the cheapest powered flying I have ever had, by far, so I can afford to fly more often[6].

And what flying! I’m going to get on with the main article now, and showcase this lovely aeroplane which is so much better in every way than any other aeroplane I have ever flown[7]. I’ve previously written about the Piper Warrior, the Cessna 152, and the RS-180; all aircraft I have flown on a regular basis. But the RV-9A is in a different league entirely.

(All the images in this essay are zoomable by simply clicking on them)

The RV-9A, like all of the aeroplanes I have flown – well, the powered ones, at least[8] – is a single-engined monoplane light aircraft, powered by an Avco-Lycoming engine. In Alpha-Mike’s case, the engine delivers 160hp of power to an aircraft with a maximum all-up weight of 970kg, as compared to the RS-180’s 180hp for 1100kg, or the Piper Warrior’s 1055kg powered by a 160hp engine, so there’s a fair difference in power-to-weight ratio.

Added to that, the clean airframe design, small forward profile (as you can see in the above photo) and optimised wing profile and even a ceramic coating, means that Alpha-Mike is a bit of a ‘hot ship’. She does 140kt[9] in the cruise – that’s about 160mph – and has an excellent fuel efficiency.

This is also, to a large extent, because she has a variable-pitch (VP) propeller. Unlike all the other aeroplanes I have flown, where the propeller blades have a fixed pitch (the angle they are set at on the propeller spinner), a VP prop can vary its pitch so that it makes it more efficient, taking a bigger or smaller ‘bite’ of the air with each revolution according to how it is set. This works in a very similar way to the gears on a car, so that it doesn’t have to stay in first gear all the time, but instead it can be set to lower RPM (and therefore using less fuel) if required. In fact, Alpha-Mike has a flight endurance of something like 4.5 hours on full tanks, assuming correct leaning of the mixture[10] and judicious use of the VP prop. So, not only is she fast but she’s efficient too[11].

So, we built her ourselves, then. Here’s a picture of her in her original hangar, where we did most of the work.

As you can see, we found the upper wing surfaces to be a very handy place to put all the tools and other bits of the stuff we were working on 😉 and she is pretty much complete in this photo, which was taken the day before her maiden flight. Once we’d shifted all that clobber off the wings, and reinstalled the left seat, we took her over to the fuel pumps to fill her up.

We had already done test runs on the engine, we’d calibrated various items like the ‘magnetometer’, which basically does the same thing as a compass, and so we got the brave engineer out to have a look.

Once he’d signed her off, he took her for her first test flight. Here it is, in all its glory:

Immerse yourself in the aviation vibe for this clip: the air-to-ground communications (we had an airband radio monitoring the Tower frequency), and the raw emotion in the voices of the observers. There was a whole group of us there; most of the people who had had a hand in her construction (about eight of us) were present for this maiden flight. You can hear someone near the end of the clip saying ‘Congratulations, Nigel’, and quite right too.

So, we had a brand-new Van’s RV-9A to play with!

Here is a photo of her instrument panel as it was just after construction was complete:

Originally, she had a single Garmin G3X EFIS (Electronic Flight Information System) – that big screen in the middle – and just a few of the traditional ‘clock’-style instruments on the panel: (left to right) airspeed indicator, altimeter, attitude indicator (aka the ‘artificial horizon’). The G3X handles just about everything, including the primary flight information such as airspeed, altitude, rate of climb and all the usual things, plus it has a built-in moving map display that runs on a GPS system, so that you’re never lost. The traditional gauges are there in case the G3X fails, which just never happens. Even in the event of an electrical failure, the G3X has an internal battery that will keep it going for several hours after mains failure.

Later, we refitted the instrument panel with a new layout, with no dials at all – a completely ‘glass cockpit’ – and also added in an autopilot system. Here’s the new panel; the autopilot box is the one at top centre, just under the ‘SmartGlide’ button[12]. Despite the G3X allegedly never failing, we also have two additional independent self-powered electronic displays: the Garmin G5 (the little box to the left of the main display); and the Garmin 720 on the right, the one that looks like a Kindle Fire or iPad. Between them, these three displays give triple redundancy on flight information display systems, even in the event of a total electrical power failure.

Here is the panel in flight, with the moving map display on the main panel (the purple lines indicate the route programmed in for the autopilot) and the PFD – Primary Flight Display, which displays all the important information such as airspeed, altitude, heading and so on. The sunlight today, up here at 4,000ft, is pretty harsh and also at such an angle as to highlight all the dust on the panel. Sorry about that!

What’s she like to fly? Well, in short, she’s gorgeous. Powerful, fast and enthusiastic. Once you open the throttle on the runway this little aeroplane is positively eager to enter her natural element. Before you know it, only seconds from a standing start she’s at 65kt; the ‘rotate speed’ or Vr, and she’s leaping into the air and accelerating as she climbs. Quite astonishing really, far in excess of anything I’ve ever flown before. Whereas with the RS-180 G-VIZZ, we’d routinely use ten degrees of flap for takeoff, and retracting them in the climb-out, we initially used that procedure with Alpha-Mike but we found out that even though we had flaps deployed, with all the extra drag they give, still she rapidly accelerated in the climb to speeds in excess of the maximum flap extension speed, thereby risking breaking something! And so we now don’t use flap at all on takeoff, even on short fields. She’s just too sprightly to need it!

Control harmonisation – that’s another way of expressing the ‘feel’ of the aeroplane – is excellent, with rudder, elevator and ailerons all beautifully balanced and without any of them being more ‘dominant’ than the others. For example, in the Piper Warrior II, another aeroplane I love, the slab tailplane does give a different feel because it has such a large ‘pitch authority’; it doesn’t need much effort to make the nose go up or down. The ailerons on the Warrior, however, are not as decisive as that, so that althought the Warrior is still a great aeroplane to fly, it doesn’t have the same balanced ‘feel’ that the RV-9A has.

View from the cockpit is simply stunning. While the occupants are not sitting as high up as they would be in the RS-180, and the windowsills are not as low as they are in that aeroplane (actually no aeroplane I know has the same view as the RS-180!) even so the view is excellent because of the bubble canopy. There’s only the one frame breaking the otherwise uninterrupted view. Lovely!

Landing can be a little tricky because the nose undercarriage leg isn’t very strong. This means that even though there are many elements such as crosswind, windshear, sink rate, airspeed and all the other multiple factors that the Pilot has to consider in order to make for a good landing, the thing that must remain high on the list of priorities for the RV-9A Pilot is that the brunt of the landing must be taken by the main undercarriage; the bits under the wings. The nosewheel leg, in fact, is not even considered to be ‘landing gear’ as such; it’s more a ‘taxying gear’, only to be used when the aircraft’s speed has decayed enough after landing to allow the nosewheel to be lowered safely[13]. This involves using a lot of back-pressure on the control column after touchdown, to keep the weight off the nosewheel until it’s safe enough to lower it to the runway. And even then, when I land this aeroplane, I only lower the nose when I can’t stop it lowering itself, when there is insufficient airflow over the tail to keep the nose up any longer; the elevator has lost its ‘pitch authority’, if you like. Even then, I keep on a good back-pressure on the stick because it still helps keep the weight off the nose as the propeller wash[14] still gives a little bit of elevator authority even at taxying speeds. But as long as this is kept in mind, flying and landing this aeroplane is a breeze, and indeed a real delight.

Bembridge, Isle of Wight Flying Adventure

Probably the best way to describe this aircraft is to let you see her in action, so here is a photo diary of an epic flying adventure I had in April this year.

As a bit of background, let me explain that my son David is also a Pilot, and he flies from Kemble Airfield in Gloucestershire. He asked me if I would like to do a landaway meet-up on the Isle of Wight; specifically, at Bembridge Airport right on the eastern tip of the Isle. He intended to rent a club-owned Piper PA-28 Warrior II to be his chariot for the day, and so we arranged to meet at Bembridge Airport at about 1045 local time.

This trip was something I’d always wanted to do, ever since I had visited the Island back in 2015, back when Fiona was still alive, and with my daughter Ellie and some caravanning friends too. We had stayed on a campsite right next to the airfield, and so Bembridge has been on my landaway wish-list ever since then![15] So it was arranged that David, his wife Stace, and myself, plus Oscar – David’s toy otter mascot who loves to fly with him and goes on every flight with him – would indeed meet up at Bembridge and spend the day together on the Island.

So, I booked the aeroplane and checked the weather forecast for the upcoming weekend – this was on the Monday before the Saturday on which we flew out. Looks good on the long range forecast but of course that can all go to trash on the day. Did the PPR request – that’s ‘Prior Permission Required’ – basically an online form you fill in to let them know to expect you. It’s important so that they can account for your aircraft as part of the day’s traffic pattern, but also for safety reasons; if you don’t arrive something like when you say you will, they will have emergency search and rescue procedures that they will implement so that they can come and try to find where you’ve pranged the kite[16]. Planned my navigation route – headings, heights, speeds, landmarks, turning points. Danger areas like military ranges. Checked the NOTAMs – the Notices for Airmen; telling you about important things en route that may affect the way in which you conduct the flight. Things like high obstructions (cranes and stuff) near airfields, temporary airspace restrictions, temporary danger areas maybe because of high-energy military flying exercises (meaning fast-jets doing practice dogfights), temporary airspace restrictions for things like airshows or displays by the Red Arrows, or maybe even ballooning events. Looked up radio frequencies and generated a communications plan. Considered diversion airfields to be used in emergencies. Checked with Nigel to make sure the aeroplane was serviceable. Briefed about the fuel state and what he wanted me to do with the aircraft on my return – like did he want her refuelling ready for him the next flying day, that sort of thing. Comprehensive preflight planning is key to any successful cross-country flight, especially where that will involve a landaway and/or liaison with multiple ATSUs (Air Traffic Service Units, so people like radar services, control towers, approach services and all that sort of thing. Complying therefore with the annoyingly (and deliberately) alliterative Pilot saying, ‘Proper Planning Prevents Piss-Poor Performance’, which nevertheless highlights how important the planning stage is to the satisfactory execution of the day’s flights. Most people who don’t themselves fly also don’t realise how much planning goes in to a cross-country flight, especially one involving a landaway, and even more so on one involving flight over the sea, which this one did of course. I’m flying to an island, remember! Also, making sure I have the most up-to-date aeronautical chart; checking that my equipment is in good order (like my headset, for instance) and that I have all my pens and flying gloves and baseball cap and sunglasses and all the other bits I need.

Here’s the SkyDemon chart for the route, with the intended track indicated by that thick magenta line. SkyDemon is a brilliant piece of software that aids greatly in the flight planning stage, bringing together all the information that the Pilot needs for the route. Some Pilots I know use it on their phones and it acts as a kind of satnav, a bit like the Garmin G3X system in Alpha-Mike.

Well, the Saturday dawned bright and relatively clear, so, armed with the current met forecast (the weather) and what we call the ‘Actual’ (what the weather is like right now at the relevant airfields including diversions, and their TAFs: Terminal Aerodrome Forecasts; what the weather forecasts are for the airfields in question), off we trot for Exeter Airport.

Alpha-Mike lives in a hangar on the secure and non-passenger-related north side of the airfield, so I need a special (and expensive!) ‘Northside Pass’ to get in, and so I make sure that this is also in my bag before setting off.

Arriving at Exeter, I dragged the aeroplane out of the hangar and did my preflight walk-round inspection, where I look for potential problems on the aircraft, check the oil and fuel levels, make sure the windscreen is clean, and all the other minutiae that make for safe flying. Better to find a fault on the ground rather than have that problem announce itself up in the air! Once done, and once I’d refuelled the aircraft, it’s time to book out – that’s where I tell the Exeter Air Traffic people where I’m going and when I think I’ll be back; a bit like the PPR mentioned above and for the same reasons – and in we get. I had donned a lifejacket and PLB because I’m going to be flying over the sea. It’s only for six miles or so, but there’s a reason why it’s called a lifejacket! And the PLB is a Personal Locator Beacon; a radio device that you activate once you’re down in the drink[17] and floating hopefully the right way up, so that Air-Sea Rescue can find you.

Ok, so start her up, program the navigation computer and autopilot, perform the power checks and pre-take-off vital actions from the checklist, and then call for taxi clearance. Lined up on Runway 08 at Exeter and cleared for take-off, the view gave me the usual (but somehow always new) thrill of anticipation of adventure[18].

There is no finer view in all of aviation; I am going flying, right now, and I am going to interface with – and indeed become a part of – this singularly unique, finely-tuned and indeed beautiful piece of machinery called a Van’s RV-9A. And today she’s going to carry me nearly 100 nautical miles, in under an hour, to meet family for a lovely day out. What can be finer than that?

As always, take-off and climb-out are busy times so there’s neither time nor mental space for photography. But once established at the correct altitude, and in the cruise with the autopilot engaged, I am now hands-free for photography, as well as being eyes-free to keep a good lookout[19]. So here’s the first shot, of the Devon town of Honiton about four miles off my port beam (it’s visible just above the wingtip):

This is the Garmin G3X showing the PFD in full-screen mode, with the aircraft position shown on the mini-map inset on the bottom right. You can see that we are just a mile north of Seaton, East Devon[20].

Axminster, East Devon, just forward of the wing

The view forward from 3,000ft, with Lyme Regis at the bottom of the photo, and with Chesil Beach and Portland Bill just visible. It’s quite hazy up here this morning. But it’s still utterly, utterly glorious. 

Coming up on Dorchester:

Portland Bill and Weymouth Harbour just visible in the murk. Actually, visibility today is excellent for aviation, just not so much for long-view photography.

Coming up on Poole Harbour, Dorset

Brownsea Island, Poole Harbour. This island was the inspiration for the fictional ‘Whispering Island’ in Enid Blyton‘s ‘Famous Five’ book, ‘Five Have A Mystery To Solve‘.

Bournemouth coming up. I’m now what we call ‘feet wet’ (flying over the sea), but I also happen to be within easy gliding distance of the land should the hamster die[21].

See what I mean about the superb view from this aeroplane?

Approaching Hengistbury Head, Dorset, the turning point which will set me up on my new heading over the sea, heading out to the Isle of Wight.

At the same time, Oscar the Otter (whom I mentioned earlier) is at the controls of David’s Warrior aeroplane, most likely somewhere over Hampshire.

…while my autopilot system executes the coasting-out turn over Hengistbury Head for me. The town visible aft of the wing, there, is Southbourne, Dorset.

The view down the Solent through the murk, from just past Hengistbury Head. This is because it’s early morning; this will all burn off later in the day. The entire Isle of Wight lies to the right of picture.

The Needles, IoW

Taking over control from the autopilot for a few seconds, I racked the aeroplane into a fairly steep left bank so as to get this lovely shot of the Needles with their Lighthouse:

Now transitioning to manual control for a lovely sightseeing tour of the south coast of the Isle, I could still use the autopilot temporarily to hold the aircraft straight and level in order for me to take photos as required. This is Ventnor Downs, the steep hill above Ventnor. There are the remains of a WWII Chain Home radar station up there, which was attacked by German dive-bombers at the start of the Battle of Britain in 1940. I visited the site back in 2015, and there’s still a lot of interesting military archaeology up there. For a World War II geek like me, anyway…. 😉 

And now, coming up on Bembridge, the town on the Eastern tip of the Isle of Wight. The Solent, Porstsmouth  and Hayling Island visible in the distance.

Meanwhile, having relinquished control back to David, Oscar is now enjoying the view of the Hampshire countryside out of the passenger side window of the Warrior.

…while I have my target in sight! Bembridge Airfield’s main runway 30/12, just above the wingtip as I roll in to a sort-of ‘crosswind’ leg to set up the circuit. Runway in use today is Rwy 12 which runs in a south-easterly direction, so I’m looking up the opposite direction in this picture. I need to set up so that I will be landing in the direction that, at the moment, is towards the camera. Things get a bit busy from now on, positioning the aircraft, so as to join the circuit while at the same time avoiding annoying the neighbours by overflying their greenhouses, that sort of thing.

Aaaand safely on the ground at Bembridge Airport. Runway is concrete but the parking is on grass, so as I mentioned above, I have been really careful to keep the weight off the nosewheel while taxying on the uneven grass surface. Now I’m parked up and looking across to the Britten-Norman aircraft factory to the north east of the airfield.

This is the Propeller Inn, Bembridge. I spent many a happy hour there in 2015 with Fiona and our friends on our camping holiday. More on the Inn later!

G-CSAM parked up at Bembridge. I was the first arrival of the day; it got a bit busy later on!The Cirrus aircraft with the red tail, parked beyond Alpha-Mike, is a Canadian-registered one. A local asked me if it was my aeroplane because I was wearing a Canada baseball cap… well I need something to keep the sun out of my eyes when up in the sky, and my brother (who lives in Canada) had sent me it a number of years ago, so I use that. You’ll see it in a later picture.

On the way to check in at Air Traffic Control, thought I’d bag this lovely view straight down Runway 30; the footpath passes directly across the extended centreline.

Back on the airfield after paying my very reasonable £15 landing fee, I got this nice shot of Alpha-Mike on the deck with her flaps down. What always gives me a really strange feeling during a landaway is that I look across the airfield at the parked aeroplanes, single out ‘my’ aeroplane, and think like ‘Crumbs, I came here in that, and that’s how I’m getting home too’. Similar to parking a car, I suppose, but evoking an unparalleled sense of wonder at the same time.

Anyway, In the background, there’s the treeline…and behind that treeline is the caravan site where we stayed in 2015 for that holiday I mentioned. Although now it’s all static caravans, not touring caravans like mine.

Listening out on my airband radio, and also watching on my phone app, I could see David’s Warrior aeroplane approaching the Isle from the mainland. Because of this, I was ready to shoot this video of his landing using Alpha-Mike’s tailplane as a rest 😉 You can hear the radio chatter on my airband radio. The strange buzzing engine sound is not David’s aeroplane; it’s another aircraft off-camera that had a weird sort of buzzing noise for its engine sound. Maybe it was powered by an electric shaver or something, I don’t know.

So once we’d met up, hugged and signed them in, we set off on a lovely walk down into Bembridge town proper, including a yummy lunch at the Harbour View Cafe. After wandering along the beach for a bit, we walked back up to the airfield. Many more aircraft had arrived by this time! Alpha-Mike is third from the left in the front row; David’s Golf-India is fifth from the left, next to the Canadian-registered aircraft to the right of Alpha-Mike.

Here’s a close-up of David’s chariot for the day, the beautiful Piper PA-28 Warrior II, G-EDGI.

Now we were back at the airfield, we popped in for a lemonade at the adjacent Propeller Inn. Like I said, I had stayed on that caravan site next to the airfield in 2015 for two weeks, and since then I have always wanted to do a landaway there. Although there’s now that treeline we saw earlier blocking the view from the campsite, and the Propeller Inn is under new ownership – they have sacrilegiously removed all the aircraft models from the ceilings[22] and there was a bartender bot with absolutely no personality whatsoever; couldn’t even call him an NPC as he had no script – anyway things haven’t changed all that much over there. Things hardly ever change on the IoW, except that now they have a decent phone signal.

But we had to leave at some time, so we said our goodbyes and boarded our aeroplanes to fly home again.

Here’s the view down Runway 12, lined-up and just prior to beginning my take-off roll. This view is simply unbeatable:

 

Five minutes after liftoff and already at 3,000ft, here’s a view of Shanklin, IoW, with Sandown just to the right/East. Sandown airfield is visible in the centre of the photo. From up here, I could see the entire Island and the Solent, Portsmouth and Southampton all in one go. Simply stupendous.

Time for another scenic cruise around the south coast of the IoW, and here’s Ventnor Downs again. Note how much the visibility has improved. You can see for miles now.

Coming up on The Needles again, the western tip of the Isle of Wight.

What happened next was almost unbelievable; one of those things that happens occasionally when flying. It was completely unexpected when the Bournemouth Radar controller, from whom I was in receipt of a radar service[23] suddenly called me up and said, “Golf-Alpha-Mike, traffic is a Spitfire, one thousand feet below you on a parallel heading. He’s probably headed for The Needles”. I heartily agreed that looking out for a Spitfire would be a great idea and she told me it was in my 2 o’clock low. So I looked and Tally-Ho! – I’d spotted him[24]; the Spit was very low on first sighting; as she said, about 1000ft below me, and I kept sight of him for about a minute then lost him in the background clutter. A minute or so later, I glanced at the Needles, which I was just passing, and there he was! The aircraft can be seen in this photo if you zoom riiiight in just left of centre, and just in front of my wing. As is always the case with amateur aerial photography, he was a lot closer in reality than he looks in the picture! This was very much a point-and-hope shot which fortunately worked out rather well. The black thing at the bottom middle of the photo is the Needles themselves. Can you see the Spitfire? What a great thing to have briefly shared airspace with such a legendary aircraft! 

After my epic encounter, I still had to cross the Solent! Here’s Hengistbury Head coming up ahead. The black marks on the picture are the way in which the camera picks up the propeller blades whirling around.

Over Hengistbury Head, a lovely shot looking at early evening mist in the direction of Swanage. Poole Harbour to the right of the shot.

Swanage and Ballard Down, with Studland in the foreground. Look how clear the air is.

Portland Bill and Weymouth again. If you compare this photo with the one from the morning, you can see how much the visibility has cleared up.

I don’t often do selfies but here’s me displaying the ‘RV-9A grin’. It’s going to take me a few days to lose that, I think. And there’s my Canada ball cap too:

Final shot of the trip, approaching Lyme Regis to my left. After this, things were a bit busy, so no more photos I’m afraid. Flying almost directly into a low-ish sun, with haze still present over home plate despite the clarity here, and trying to look out for other aircraft in that muck too, also trying to see my home plate at Exeter coming up. Certainly not a time to be mucking about with a camera, even with the autopilot in operation. 

So, like I said, a lovely day out and it took me at least a week to lose the grin! And what an adventure, especially with the Spitfire sighting![25]

The RV-9 grin. What a lovely aeroplane and I am privileged beyond measure to be trusted with flying this little beauty. And also to have been able to share, in some small measure, my adventure to the Isle of Wight. Even now, over a week later, I am still enjoying flashbacks of the things I saw and experienced on that trip. I will go again this summer, I think!

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 She now lives at Lasham, home to one of England’s main gliding clubs. Given that she has a glider-towing attachment, I would not be surprised if it were the case that they were using her for that purpose.
⇧2 The aircraft’s name is given by the last two letters of her registration, so, ‘Golf Charlie Sierra Alpha Mike’, becomes ‘Alpha Mike’.
⇧3 The designer, Richard VanGrunsven, uses his initials to name his different aircraft designs, hence the initials ‘RV-9A’. The RV-9 is the tailwheel version; the RV-9A (like Alpha-Mike) is the tricycle version with the nose wheel
⇧4 Although, Van’s Aircraft do actually sell completed aircraft too.
⇧5 To put it politely 😉
⇧6 I used to fly gliders back in 1991, with the Leeds University Gliding Society, but as that was affiliated with the RAF Gliding and Soaring Association, it was heavily subsidised and therefore very cheap.
⇧7 The sole minor exception is that she has only two seats rather than four, but that doesn’t really matter as I have very rarely flown a four-seater with a full load of passengers, and in any case the logistics of getting four people together to go flying all at the same time is quite something!
⇧8 Over the course of my flying ‘career’, I have flown something like fourteen different aircraft types, including four gliders (Grob Acro, Schleicher Ka-2, Schleicher K-7, Schleicher K-13) and ten powered types (Cessna 152, Cessna 150 Aerobat, Diamond DA-20 Katana, Piper PA-28 Warrior II, Piper PA-38 Tomahawk, Robin R2160, Ikarus C42, Sportavia RS-180 and of course the Van’s RV-9A).
⇧9 As opposed to 90kt (100mph) for a Cessna 152 and 100kt (114mph) in a Piper Warrior.
⇧10 ‘Leaning’ refers to the adjustment of the fuel/air ratio (the ‘mixture’) going into the engine, by using the red ‘mixture’ knob visible on the photos in this article. As the air density decreases with altitude, you can end up with too much fuel in the mixture – known as a ‘rich’ mixture – so you need to make the mixture more ‘lean’ (hence: ‘leaning’) in order to correctly match the proportions of air to fuel. The reverse happens as you come down; the air gets more dense so there will be too little fuel in the mixture (it will be too ‘lean’), so you need to enrich the mixture again using the mixture control.
⇧11 Having the VP prop also meant that the group’s Pilots had to have additional training to get the VP prop rating put on our licences, as we also had to for the Garmin EFIS (the Electronic Flight Information System or ‘glass cockpit’) too. So now we are all VP prop-rated and EFIS-rated Pilots as well as our basic Private Pilot’s Licences (and I have a Night Rating as well, of course). These ratings are lifelong and they mean that we can now fly any aeroplanes with VP props and/or EFIS avionics.
⇧12 This activates emergency glide protocols in the event of an engine failure, including turning the aeroplane towards the nearest airfield within gliding distance. Really clever!
⇧13 Taxying is the term used for driving an aeroplane around on the ground, as opposed to up in the air.
⇧14 Propeller wash, or ‘prop wash’, is the high-speed airflow around the aircraft’s fuselage caused by the propeller acting like a giant fan, which, I suppose, it is…. 😉
⇧15 A ‘landaway’ is exactly what its name suggests: a landing away from your home base. Most private pilots’ sport flying careers consist of simple local jaunts where they take off from their home plate, fly around the local area a bit, and then return to the place they set off from. A landaway is where you fly out to another aerodrome and buy a coffee, lunch or breakfast, then fly back to base after you’ve had a wander around on the ground at your landaway destination. With G-VIZZ, one of my favourite landaways was the short grass strip at Bolt Head near Salcombe, Devon. I’d land there, go for a lovely cliff-top walk, then return to the airfield and hop back into the aeroplane to fly back to base at Exeter.
⇧16 Where you’ve crashed 😉
⇧17 The sea!
⇧18 The blue hangar in the middle distance, to the left of centre, is the hangar in which we built the aircraft.
⇧19 I could really get used to that autopilot!
⇧20 For those who are used to interpreting a Garmin G3X display with autopilot, you may be wondering why the autopilot is executing a descent when we are below the requested/preset operating altitude. That’s simply because I am still learning to drive the thing; using an autopilot is not as simple as just pressing a button and it takes over. Well, not once you get under the hood, anyway. I had sorted it all out within a few minutes!
⇧21 Everyone knows that light aeroplane engines are powered by a hamster running on a little wheel, under the engine cowling; this makes the propeller go round very fast.
⇧22 Sacrilegious, because how can you have a pub right next to an airfield, keep its name as the Propeller Inn, have a giant propeller stuck on the outside of it, and then remove all the pre-existing model aircraft from the ceiling in the bar?? Seriously, someone needs to be shot for that!
⇧23 A radar service is basically where the radar station has you on their screen; they keep a lookout for other aircraft in your vicinity and warn you if there’s any chance of getting too close to each other. No substitute for keeping a good lookout, of course, but it does add an additional layer of safety. It’s like having an extra pair of eyes.
⇧24 Tally-ho! was the code word adopted during the Battle of Britain in 1940, which RAF airmen used to tell their radar controller that they’d seen the aircraft (usually enemy!) that they’d been vectored to intercept. While it is not correct radio procedure nowadays to use ‘Tally-ho!’, still I do use it occasionally and they know what I mean 😀 I think I used it on this day, but I can’t remember for sure!
⇧25 Only twice in the past have I seen anything similar; on both those occasions I was flying in the same bit of airspace as the legendary Red Arrows. Once was in 1991 at RAF Dishforth near Ripon, where I used to fly gliders with the Leeds University Union Gliding Society, which was affiliated with the RAF Gliding and Soaring Association. Just as I was completing a winch launch at about 1000ft above ground, two Red Arrows Hawk jets flew over me about a thousand feet higher up and going in the opposite direction. There was an air display going on that day at RAF Leeming, ten miles further up the A1. So I could legitimately say I’d flown with the Red Arrows! 🤣 The second time was a couple of years after I got my licence. On one day in August 1999, I was flying solo circuit practice at Plymouth Airport when a voice came over the Tower frequency, “Plymouth, good afternoon, The Red Arrows!”. Tower was unfazed. “Station calling Plymouth, say again your callsign”. So funny. I’m afraid I don’t think he’d misheard, nor was it that he couldn’t believe his ears; I think he was trying to wind them up. I suppose you had to be there. Anyway, the unflappable Red One calls back, “Plymouth – The. Red. Arrows! Crossing ten miles north abeam your airfield”. And so both I and the controller looked, and there they were, a close group of little aeroplane-shaped dots in the distance which were nevertheless, very distinctly, red. I think they were on their way to display at Fowey in Cornwall, they do tend to display there at least once a year even to this day – although last year (2025) it was at Falmouth.

A Dark Testimony VI – Christy’s Story

This entry is part 27 of 41 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism
Trigger Warning – Contains stories of severe spiritual and religious abuse and trauma. You have been warned!

Here is a heart-rending testimony from my dear friend, Christy Lynne Wood; a lady whom I have never met in person but nevertheless I count as a friend because we support each other’s online ministries remotely.

Christy came from a background in the ‘Institute in Basic Life Principles‘ (IBLP) group, which I would name as a cult in just about every way[1] and founded by Bill Gothard in 1961. (That’s before I was born!) In common with many other Christians with whom I have had positive online interactions over the last decade or so, Christy is therefore a cult survivor. She has had the courage to identify and name the problem, and to do something about it. And now, she blogs about her wisdom and experiences. My heart always rejoices when I see a notification in my inbox telling me that she has published another blog post!

Christy’s post contains things that parallel closely many of the previous ‘Dark Testimony’ articles in my series ‘The Problems of Evangelicalism‘, and so I have now included it in that series. Although not strictly-speaking an Evangelical church, some of the IBLP group’s teachings have been gradually and insidiously introduced into modern Evangelicalism – such is the cross-pollinating nature of religion, even across different denominations – and so their attitudes have also been incorporated into Evangelicalism, including Christy’s old church, where IBLP principles were held by most of the families in the congregation[2]. That’s another reason why this is relevant to the series. In common with all Evangelical or pseudo-Evangelical groups, these are the sorts of things they don’t want you to know about. And that’s the biggest reason of all why they should be shared in public!

Anyway, Christy is herself an experienced teacher and an excellent writer who clearly and indeed prophetically expresses what is on her heart. Other than this short introduction, I need add no more to what Christy has to say. I’m sure you’ll find her story helpful.

Over to Christy:


Seven Years Ago Our Bubble World Shattered

Yet another story of spiritual abuse and religious trauma in the church

Telling My Story

Seven years ago, on March 9th 2017, our little Christian bubble world finally splintered into pieces. But we were forced to pretend everything was fine for two more months.

This is the first time I’ve purposefully and clearly written about this part of my story. I’ve hinted at it, skittered around it, and gave vague suggestions, but today I’m telling the truth. It’s a weird combination of re-traumatizing and validating.

I’ve had seven years to process, seven years to learn I’m not alone, and seven years to try and pick up the pieces so that I can heal. It’s not just my story though, it’s also my husband’s story and he has dealt with it differently.

So today this is for all of you who have faced spiritual abuse and religious trauma and been able to heal and grow, but it’s also for those of you who haven’t. It’s for those who’s faith has been shattered, who’s trust has been destroyed, and who struggle to step foot into a church. I want you to know that I see you and feel immense compassion for your pain. We all experience trauma differently and there is no “right way” to move forward (despite what the Christianese phrases tell you).

I met my husband at a Christian summer camp. We worked together at camp for a couple of years, so going into Christian ministry of some sort seemed like the thing to do. We were young, idealistic, and passionate about serving God. Four weeks after getting married, we loaded up a moving truck and our junky, little Honda Accord and took off for the state of Wyoming.

The town of LaGrange doubled in size for nine months of the year while the students were in town. In the summer it went back to the original 322 residents plus a few married couples like us. We spent three years in the Wyoming prairie surrounded by more cattle than people while studying at Frontier School of the Bible.

Having met at camp, we originally had dreams of doing camp ministry. Then my husband landed a part-time youth pastor job at a “local” church forty-five minutes away. We did everything as a team back then so youth pastoring a bunch of junior high kids was fun too, especially since the church ran a rustic camp for three weeks each summer.

After graduation, we came back to Michigan and started an internship at the camp where we first met hoping to eventually come on as full-time staff. Three summers and two babies later, we realized—much to our disappointment—that there was no potential for a job there. However, the church we’d been attending for the last couple of years needed a youth pastor. It seemed like the perfect open door, so we walked through.

Full-Time Ministry

Within the first few months there were red flags. But we were young, idealistic, and filled with the belief that this was God’s plan. It didn’t hurt that we’d just been used and abused at the camp where we interned, so the church felt healthier to us. It was easy to make excuses. Maybe we were just misinterpreting things. The senior pastor was probably just trying to make jokes and didn’t mean the hurtful things he said about my husband from the pulpit.

Sometime within our first year at the church, the senior pastor took a much anticipated three month sabbatical. I think he expected the church to fall apart without him around. Instead it thrived. My husband was relational, organized, and passionate. He never meant to try and usurp anything, but there was tension when the senior pastor came back that simmered under the surface for the next four years.

We saw flaws pretty quickly at the church, but we hoped that God would use us to help heal them. We knew that no place was perfect and we were willing to ignore or make excuses to keep the peace. Sadly, I’m much more realistic and skeptical these days.

man in black pants and pair of brown leather lace-up shoes sitting on brown carpeted stairs inside room
Photo by Ben White

There was tension between my husband and our senior pastor within the first year of working together. My husband believes that everything should be done with excellence. He is not afraid to push back when he feels things are unethical or wrong which earned him the nickname of “Pastor Picky.” The senior pastor had been in charge for enough time to want to keep power in his own fist. He didn’t appreciate criticism of any kind and had surrounded himself with elders who were either “yes-men” or solidly on his side. I didn’t know it at the time, but this is a pattern for abuse within the church.

It was never a healthy situation. My husband always struggled. But we loved the people at the church. The youth group was growing. It looked successful on the outside. I think we also like the title of being in ministry. It was part of our identity.

It All Started at Camp

I decided to back to camp for a couple of summers as a health officer. I should never have gone back. I knew how we’d been treated during our internship. I swore when we left that I was done. But I loved camp.

I’d found freedom in Jesus there. I’d met my husband there, my babies had been born there, and my dad was currently working on staff as the maintenance manager.

So I loaded up my two small children and we spent two summers riding around on a golf cart, doing clean cabin checks, handing out meds and Band-Aids, and comforting homesick campers. My husband worked at church during the day and then came and spent the evenings with us. Parts of those summers were amazingly fun! I’d always dreamed of being the health officer. I had a golf cart. My children thrived. I loved supporting the young adults on staff. But there were dark clouds too, especially the second summer.

I should have handled everything differently. But I was not the same person back then. I was still stuffing my leadership gift and passionately avoiding conflict. I was still trying to be sweet and not strong.

I should have confronted the abuse I witnessed. I should have boldly stood up for the broken people. I should have challenged the unethical behavior and the potential affair. But I didn’t. Instead I talked to other people who also noticed. We tried to figure out what to do together. And because we noticed a problem, we became the problem. I was labeled a gossip while the true problems were ignored.

I should have quit half-way through the summer. But I didn’t.

People who were involved in the mess at camp were also from our church, so the summer trouble followed us back. Big time.

And Followed Us Back to Church

I was distraught about what I’d witnessed at camp and also about the abuse my dad had experienced. (Little did I know that the exact same things would happen to us.) Seeing that I was a wreck, our senior pastor offered to counsel me. I use that word in the loosest possible way. For six weeks I sat in his office and spilled everything to him. He took what I said, tried to gaslight me, and then instead of protecting me, told everything to the other person who was at camp with me. I’ve never had an enemy before, but I did after that summer.

We tried—my husband and I. I knew that I hadn’t handled everything perfectly. I’d made mistakes, and I tried to reconcile. But it went from bad to worse. I was still reeling from the spiritual and emotional abuse I’d experienced at camp, still broken by what had happened to my dad and other summer staff members. Still upset that what looked like an affair was being ignored. Our pastor was the only one I could share with because he wouldn’t let me tell anyone else. And even though he was also abusing me, at least I had someone to talk to. Then he went on a mini-sabbatical for a month because they were adopting a child from overseas.

I honestly thought he told me that I could tell our new associate pastor and his wife if I needed to talk to someone while he was gone. And I didn’t tell her about the affair, just about the abuse I’d witnessed. She was a licensed counselor and I thought she might be able to help. Like any sane person would be, she was horrified at what I shared. So she told her husband. Who told the senior pastor when he got back. And I got in trouble.

I was called a gossip again. I was kicked out of women’s ministry with no hope of going back. I was no longer allowed to sing with the worship team. Every Monday, no matter what I did or didn’t do, the senior pastor would yell at my husband about how terrible I was and how I wouldn’t change.

Because he couldn’t break me. I refused to take all the blame. I knew that what happened at camp was wrong. And that what was currently happening was wrong. I refused to stop noticing the problem.

These were the hardest months of my life. They nearly destroyed me. I felt like the woman caught in adultery just waiting to be stoned.

We Should Have Quit

We prayed about quitting. We should have. But we loved the people. We loved the teenagers we worked with. We believed that God could work a miracle in the heart of the senior pastor. So we stayed. Until we couldn’t stay any more.

Eventually my husband was called into a meeting and told that we didn’t have chemistry with the senior pastor and therefore we were being forced to resign. It was March 9th. He was informed that the elders wouldn’t be telling the church until May and that if we said anything before that, or told the truth about what had been happening, we would be kicked out immediately with no severance package.

person looking out through window
Photo by Noah Silliman

We should have quit right then and there. But we didn’t because we were poor, emotionally ragged, and had two small children to feed.

For two months we carried this horrible secret. And every Monday my husband was told how awful I was being even though I was just literally hiding in the church basement making coffee every Sunday. It was the only ministry I was allowed to do. My husband endured verbal, emotional, and spiritual abuse during this year from hell. But we didn’t have the words to describe it as abuse back then.

During these two months, our pastor decided that I was such a mess that I needed professional help, so he sent me to Miriam. At the beginning of the first session I had three questions for her. I wanted to know if she was familiar with Bill Gothard’s teachings, if she thought they were wrong, and if she would promise to keep everything I said confidential from my pastor. When she confirmed those things, I poured out my heart for forty-five minutes. At the end Miriam looked at me and said four beautiful words, “Christy, you’ve been hurt.”

It was the first time someone validated me instead of blaming me. The church paid for eight beautiful sessions with her. I finally realized I was being abused and not going crazy. Sure enough, our pastor called after the first session, but Miriam had heard enough and refused to talk to him.

The End

Eventually they told the church. The senior pastor called a church wide meeting to announce “God was calling us elsewhere.” People were upset and confused. But we didn’t tell them the truth. We stayed quiet. The church originally asked us to stay through July, then it changed to the beginning of June. Shortly after our resignation was announced, we were told to stop coming to church at all because we were too sad and it was making everyone else sad. So it all just ended.

We got our severance, they got our silence, and we lost our community, our friends, our children’s godparents, and our identity.

Why Tell This Story?

There are plenty of people who question the validity of telling these kinds of stories. They push back by asking about motives, suggesting exaggeration, or claiming that we need to stay quiet “to protect God’s name.”

But the sheer amount of these stories says otherwise.

I’ve realized over the past seven years that for every story that goes public, there are probably hundreds that never get shared. For every one pastor who is exposed for being abusive and controlling, many others will go on abusing without being caught or stopped. This kind of thing is an epidemic in the church right now. I’ve read some wonderful and validating books. My favorites are in the picture below.

Not only do we need to tell these stories for accountability, but we also need to tell the stories so that those who have experienced this type of abuse can recognize that they are not alone. Reading Beth Allison Barr’s story of her husband’s forced resignation in The Making of Biblical Womanhood was eerily familiar—to the point where I wondered if they pass around a script. Hearing the stories on The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill validated my own.

It is helpful to know that we are in good company even if we are all a bit mangled.

Stronger than Ever Before

Personally, I’ve risen from these ashes with new strength. I see through lies faster, approach Christianese with more cynicism, and am quicker to call out abuse. But I’m also gentler and have less answers for those who have been through hell and come back. I have more compassion and empathy. I will sit and cry with you and say nothing.

My own faith in Jesus is more solid than ever. But I will also stand up and quit next time so that I can tell the truth. This abusive control we are experiencing is not Jesus and it needs to stop now.

If you have been spiritually abused, I just want you to know that you are not alone and it’s not your fault. You have been hurt.

Looking for God’s Grace

I’m going to close with Miriam’s ask for me after that first counseling session. She wanted me to look for God’s grace each day. It might be in a sunrise, or a baby’s smile, or a small green leaf poking out of the dirt.

That was something I could do.

Can you find it too?

macro photography of green grass
Photo by Emmanuel Mbala


Thank you, Christy, for your gracious and indeed enthusiastic permission to reblog your post! As you will see, I have just copied it and pasted it more or less straight in to my blog  😊

Here is the link to the original article

Grace and Peace to you all ❤️

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 They market themselves initially as a sort of personal improvement course, but this is just the ‘hook’; the ‘gateway’ to deeper involvement and eventual indoctrination, enslavement and abuse – some of which is of course sexual. They call themselves ‘non-denominational’, which has increasingly – to me at any rate – come to suggest strongly that they are some sort of cult. Certainly, the church I wrote about in my recent article ‘I Was A Stranger‘ would claim to be non-denominational. The term always hoists red flags for me nowadays! Although they are not a fully Evangelical group (they differ from Evangelical doctrines in several ways), their methods are pretty much the same in many respects, and so I am using Christy’s story as a parallel to the exact same things that happen in Evangelical churches. In addition, the IBLP are also strongly into home-schooling which, while a valid method of schooling children where the children can’t otherwise access education (say if they are housebound due to a disability or something), in other cases is simply a means of isolating children from the outside world so that they can be effectively indoctrinated without any interference from reality. It seems that wherever humans gather in the name of Religion, these things happen.
⇧2 It might be relevant to mention at this point that the extremely problematic and yet very popular TV series, ’19 kids and counting’ (or whatever number of kids they’d reached at the time of filming 🤣), was about the Duggar family who were/are still themselves part of the toxic IBLP movement.

Vision of the Valley – Reblog

This entry is part 26 of 41 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism

Nearly eleven years ago, I published this blog item about the way that hard and unbending Religion treats people. I used Don Francisco’s epic song, ‘Vision of the Valley’ to illustrate the concept, and also wrote quite a bit of prose to go along with it.

Back then, I had no way of knowing that now, over a decade later, I would be writing a blog series describing exactly the same issues in Christianity; the only difference being that I am being more specific and focusing on Evangelicalism, because that’s where I came from in terms of my faith point of view.

Since the original publication of my article, Evangelicalism has got worse. Without getting political, I am sure that my readers are well aware of the excesses and apostasy of, particulary, American Evangelicalism, but also noticed that British Evangelicalism is going in a similar direction. Heaven help us. Oh, Heaven, help us!

As we have seen from my recent extended piece describing the disgraceful ignorance of an Evangelical congregation near me, it is apparent that religious people are getting more and more polarised away from the very people . ‘The World’ – that they are supposedly meant to be ministering to; trying to ‘save’ them, even. They take more and deeper entrenched positions, they stubbornly resist the changes in society like as if they were trying to stem an advancing tide, all the while claiming that ‘it’s the World that needs to change, not the Bible’. They remain fully unaware that the very faith they are ‘trying to protect’ was itself once a ‘change in society’; Britain was not always a Christian nation (if indeed it ever really was). The ignorance of history displayed by these people is simply staggering!

But anyway, less of that. I will pass you over to the Tony of 10 1/2 years ago, where I describe why I was posting the essay I wrote, and what it was all about. And I am sure you will realise that, in terms of Religious polarisation, things have gotten much worse since then.


In 1991, the Christian musician Don Francisco published an album entitled ‘Vision of the Valley. The title track, ‘Vision of the Valley’ was a prophetic song depicting God’s feelings against the fake shepherds of the Christian Church; those interested in being leaders only for the money, the power and/or the prestige and social standing that the ‘job’ gave.

Now, almost a quarter-century later[1], I believe that this song is echoing what Father is doing in this time.

You see, for too long, many (but not all) churches all around the world have concentrated on god’s anger, judgement, ‘holiness’ (in this context, meaning his being ‘set apart’ from, or in other words allergic to, ‘sin’), rules and laws, and other unsavoury aspect of the character of ‘angry god’ portrayed especially in the Old Testament. Churches have been harsh and unbending, they have been unwelcoming to those that don’t fit in. The way they treat their members, at least those who deviate even slightly from the ‘normal’ behaviour, is reprehensible. They have persecuted the minorities – such as gay/lesbian/transgender people, they have rejected the widows and their children (divorcees and remarried people – see my article on this here) and they have shunned those who do not agree with them on absolutely every point of doctrine.

There are people bleeding and broken by ‘heavy shepherding’ – bullying, strong-personality leader types who make their congregation do things without question and order them around in God’s Name, and confront them with their ‘sins’, supposedly ‘in love’.

Love could not be further from these people. They are not being Christ to their people, nor to those outside. Is it any wonder, then, that the world looks in on the Church of today – whether that particular congregation is guilty of this or not; they are all tarred with the same brush by those outside – with contempt. This is the face of Religion – cold, hard, unbending, unmerciful. The Church, generally, is no longer seen as representing Christ  to the world – the Christ Who turned the cold face of Religion on its head and redefined how people can relate to God…..

So what Father is doing is that there are many people around the world who do represent Jesus, and He is raising these people up and bringing them out into the limelight. People whom before we ‘…hadn’t noticed’. People in every walk of life who love Jesus and love others. People like me, who have recently ‘come out’ as an affirmer of Lesbian/gay/transgender people. People like good friends of mine, who have realised that the harshness of the Old Testament is not a true reflection of God’s nature, and that proper interpretation of Scripture is essential in determining doctrine, if indeed you even need doctrine as such, but in any event at least where that doctrine dictates how you treat others.

Jesus is in this day reaching out to those who need Him in their lives. The broken, the bleeding, those damaged by bullying religion, those bound up by archaic rules and laws that Jesus came to set us free from.

So, here’s the song – Vision of the Valley – by Don Francisco, used here with his permission:

Vision_of_the_Valley

The vision came unbidden, at an unexpected pass
Where the winds of change blew colder
Whippin’ snow that cut like glass
But like an old man in regret
For foolish sins and wasted youth
The scene that lay before me
Had no beauty save its truth

For the wind came down the mountains
Never slow and never still
And the sheep were scattered shepherdless,
Alone across the hills
They were prey to every beast that roamed,
And entrapped by every curse
And they stumbled in their sickness,
In their weakness and their thirst

Below them in the valley,
The polluted waters flowed
Where the shepherds that were hirelings sat
And argued what was owed
And the ambitious and the abusive bragged
And they boasted on their might
And their profits from the slaughter
Of the ones who could not fight

And the wind just kept on howling,
As I cried, “Oh Lord, how long
Will your people be the victims
Of the ruthless, proud and strong?”
And at once there came an answer
In the quiet of my soul
“The time has come for judgement
And to make the wounded whole”

“For my heart is still a shepherd’s heart
I know each one by name
The ragged and the beautiful,
The healthy and the lame
And I myself will lead them out,
And I’ll feed them on the best
In pastures by still waters
In a place of peace and rest

O, but woe unto the shepherds who abuse my sheep and kill
With harshness and severity you’ve bent them to your will
And today I am against you as I take them from your hand
When the fire of judgement comes
The stubble will not stand!”

Then darkness filled the valley
And I saw it take up form
Screaming winds and fire and lightning
More than any earthly storm
Where it passed were no survivors
For the land was cleansed and bare
But the streams flowed clear and purified
And the grass grew green and fair

I saw a man come walking
And his heart glowed like a flame
All the sheep began to run to him,
And he called each one by name
He spoke to them in gentle words
And he soothed their fearful minds
And he healed the brokenhearted
And the crippled, sick and blind
Then many others like him,
All with hearts that glowed the same
That before I hadn’t noticed,
From the farms and fields they came
They weren’t famous, wise, or noble
But they spoke a common word
A word the flock could recognize
And follow when they heard

They led them in green pastures,
By still waters in the light
Standing guard against the wolves
And other creatures of the night
Going out into the mountains
In the darkness and the cold
Bringing back the lost and wounded
To the safety of the fold
And the news went out around the world
In every street and town
That something wonderful was here,
That heaven had come down
And millions gave their hearts in trust
That long had been betrayed
And the bride at last was ready,
And the trumpet call was made

And the news went out around the world
In every street and town
That something wonderful was here,
That heaven had come down
And millions gave their hearts in trust
That long had been betrayed
And the bride at last was ready,
And the trumpet call was made

The ‘many others like Him’ are those people who, in this time, are spending time getting to know the Great Shepherd’s Heart, and then expressing that Heart to those around them. They are the ones who have forgotten their ability to judge others, and instead have decided to preach the Good News of the Kingdom either directly, or by the way they express the Love of Jesus in their lives.

Are you one of those people? Would you like to be one of those people? Maybe if you listen to ‘Vision’, your backbone feels like there’s electricity running down it right from that opening harp arpeggio right at the beginning of the song? Does your heart burn with the dual emotions of excitement of believing what God is doing today and the deep weeping for those so badly treated by those who should know better? Does your heart weep for those sheep, and long for them to be released into the freedom that Jesus bought for them? If any of these descriptions strike a chord with you, then the Spirit is indeed speaking this to your heart – so be encouraged! He will work this out for you if you ask Him.

What does this mean, then, for the ‘shepherds’? What is this ‘woe’ that the song speaks of, reflecting the passages in Ezekiel 34:2-10 and Jeremiah 23:1?

Quite simply, as people leave the churches of these people, they will be out of a job! Sure, their existing congregations might well stay the same size, since they will probably be made up of people who are equally hard and harsh. But as Holy Spirit works on the hard hearts of those people, and even on the leaders, they will come round to His way of thinking. And the Church will grow, but not the churches that are hardened, at least not with people who know their relationship with Jesus has saved them from the hell of a life lived on the streets without Him. They will form their own groups around those who go out and find them; in short, relationship will win over rules and organisation. Don’t forget that God loves even the harsh shepherds, and longs for them to realise their error and to come into the fulness of His Kingdom in this life. They are missing out on so much!

So, listen to the song again and again. Soak in it; hear its message, and if you are one of these hard-hearted people, then let the Spirit change you into the person you always wanted to be.


Edit: Here’s another version of the song, live by Don Francisco, in the 1989 UK ‘Vision of the Valley’ Tour. The keyboard player is Yorkshireman Dave Bainbridge, of the band ‘Iona’; I played piano at his baptism….

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 Of course, at the time I am publishing this reblog of the original essay, it’s now not only a quarter-century, but more like half a lifetime later!!

My God and King

“…. With Eyes for Only You”

Years ago now, I discovered this beautiful song by the brilliant and talented Shauna Chanda. I had discovered it during the time of intense personal grief, a few months following the loss of my darling wife Fiona to cancer in 2016. And it brought me great solace. At the time, I shared the effect it had on me, in a post in Fiona’s series that I wrote for the three years following her loss.

Back then, the only version of the song that I had heard was the Terry Macalmon version featured in my blog post in 2017. But lately I have discovered a gorgeous version sung by GMS Church in Jakarta, Indonesia.

Here it is:

As with so many worship songs, I find myself spontaneously worshipping along with the track, complete with hands coming up and everything else. I just can’t stop it; not that I would even try!

I know that recently I have been posting a lot of stuff about the Problems of Evangelicalism. And my, well I suppose you call them ‘criticisms’, still stand.

But as I have maintained throughout that series, there is also a lot of good that comes out of Evangelicalism, despite its flaws[1], and one of those good things is the worship music, much of which is amazingly good. And this song is one of the best, especially the way in which these guys present it. It just goes to show that Jesus isn’t actually too bothered about doctrine, and shows up for worship meetings wherever His people gather in His Name, just as He promised He would (Mt 18:20), and accepts their worship in Spirit and truth, again just as He said (Jn 4:23-24).

So, listen, soak, and just sit in the Presence of the One Who loves you so much.

Bask in His glory!

Grace and Peace be with your spirit ❤️

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 Some of them serious.

I Was A Stranger….

This entry is part 25 of 41 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism
“I was a stranger, and you did not welcome Me”
– Matthew 25:43 (ESV)
Passing the Test? – A Real-Time Experiment

I have a friend who began going to a church near me – a congregation that I’d never heard of – and they suggested to me that I might like it and even want to go. And, given how much my friend was being blessed in this church, I thought I might indeed take a look.

Being Autistic, I needed to check them out a little first. Autism, for all its amazing benefits – which I would not be without! – has some downsides too, the main one for me being that I have a perception that I will not fit in because I am so ‘different’; so ‘odd’. This has been the case since my schooldays; fortunately I have spent the majority of my Christian life in congregations where they accepted me exactly as I am[1]. So I wanted to see if there’s a chance that this one will accept me like that too.

Because of this, I adopted the sensible approach, and took a look at their website. I gave particular attention to their ‘Statement of Faith’ which (usually, anyway) sets out what they believe[2].

And fair enough, there it is: they’re an Evangelical church; they believe in Biblical infallibility (that is, the Bible is always right), and in ‘eternal conscious torment’ (i.e. ‘Hell’) for those who do not believe in Jesus. All clear so far 🙂

Nothing in their Statement of Faith presented any particular problem to me; no matter what church I attend, I am mature enough in my faith to be able to spit out the bones and eat the meat – to learn the things of God while internally rejecting those things that don’t sit right with my spirit in terms of doctrine or anything else. It’s a shame more Christians don’t do this! So, things look good so far 😊

But I still needed to do my Litmus Test. I have written on this before; the Litmus Test is where I ask a potentially contentious question[3] to see how they cope with it: how they answer; and indeed whether they answer!; and what they say in their answer. Using this method, I can make a pretty good guess as to how I would be welcomed despite my ‘differences’ and therefore how ‘safe’ I will feel in their group!

Because my questions have been ignored in the past, when asking other Evangelical groups the Litmus question, this time I’m going to keep track of my questions; the times I sent them, and any replies, so that my attempt at communication works out like a real-time experiment, with me writing down each ‘test’, and its result, in real time. In that way, it will read as a story; it will be productive in that you will be able to learn from what really happened, as it happened; and you will see my methodical approach to the whole thing. And I hope you enjoy it!

And so, to begin, I found their church contact page, and I simply asked them my question, via their online electronic contact form. Here’s the question as asked:


Hi there

I have been looking with interest at your church website and, in response to the things I have seen there, I wanted to ask a couple of simple questions about your practices.

Here we go:

—

How do you, as a church, cope with people of ‘different’ sexualities (like Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Queer etc. (LGBTQ+))? I have contacted churches with this question in the past, and have not once received a clear reply!

What I mean by my question is, how much do you integrate people of ‘alternative’ sexualities into your church? I’d really love to hear an honest answer from you on this subject.

For example, do you really preach ‘come as you are, don’t worry, we’ll accept you’, or is it instead the sort of thing where it’s really ‘come as you are but we want to change you’?

Or can an LGBTQ+ person come along and be fully accepted just as they are, without any expectation of changing to your pattern, along with any partner they may have?

Are LGBTQ+ people treated in any way differently from other people in the church? Are they fully accepted but with reservations? Would people be in any way judgmental about them?

And can an LGBTQ+ person hold a position of responsibility in your congregation?

In other words, can people feel ‘safe’ in your church?

I know that’s a lot – more than just a ‘couple’ of questions, in fact! – but I am asking all these honest questions in order to ascertain whether or not this is a safe church for all people, or just those deemed ‘normal’.

I look forward to reading your reply!

Thanks for your time

Anthony


So it’s Sunday 22nd March, and I’ve just sent that question off. Because this is being written in real time, I will now actually stop writing this essay for a few days, giving them until later in the week to respond, at which time I will resend the question if they haven’t already replied.


Hiding behind the Sofa!

It’s now Thursday, 26th March. Did they pass the test by answering the question? Or are they hiding, terrified, behind the sofa[4], hoping that the stranger (figuratively) knocking on their door (me!) will just go away?!🤣

Well, I’m sad to say that there was no response. I am still ‘in the dark’; I don’t know if they got my message and decided to ignore it (by hiding behind the sofa!), or whether it never got there, or if they just haven’t had time to read it yet! But I’m not going to just go away. I still don’t know how ‘safe’ I would be at that church, and I would like to know because my friend’s recommendation carries considerable weight for me. So, I’m going to try again a couple of times until either they answer, or it becomes plain that not only are they still hiding behind the sofa, but have possibly even been there for so long that they have died back there and no-one has found the body yet[5] 😂 .

And so, I am sending them the question again today (26th March):


Hi there, back on Sunday 22nd, I sent you a question about your church, and I was disappointed that I haven’t received a reply yet. I suspect you might have been on holiday! Anyway, I will re-send the question for you here, rather than have you troll through your inbox to try to find it. Here we go:

[Copied and pasted the original message in, verbatim]

So, again, let’s wait and see! Let’s also hope that the bodies behind the sofa aren’t beginning to smell too badly….


Monday, 30th March.

There’s been no response from the church yet.

It did occur to me that they may not be monitoring their communications from that contact page; their website is set up in the form of a WordPress blog (like this one) and their last posts were in December 2022, so just over three years ago. Maybe their comms aren’t being looked at, then. Maybe the guy who designed their website and monitors their comms is one of the bodies behind the sofa, and as such is terminally incapacitated 🤣

Or something.

Ok, then, let’s control that part of the experiment by sending them another, more innocuous message that doesn’t contain anything even remotely unusual. And we’ll send it via the contact form again because that’s the system we are testing with this message. I won’t write here the message I sent; suffice it to say that it was a routine sort of enquiry similar to ‘do you take a collection’ sort of thing, and giving a different email address from the one I gave for my previous messages. Who knows, maybe my other address was being blocked for some reason. You never know!

Now, if the message doesn’t get through, then no harm done; no-one will have read it. If, however, it does get through and they reply, then that tells me that they do indeed receive contact requests through their website and they are deliberately ignoring my original messages. The small subterfuge of asking a trivial question in order to try to get a message through is, in my opinion, justified[6].


Tuesday 31st March

Well, my innocuous message got a reply from the pastor! This tells me that messages sent via the online contact page are indeed being received; that they are monitoring communications sent via that page. And this leads me to believe that the Litmus Test messages I sent were actually received but were being ignored (back behind the sofa we go!). There are a couple of other possibilities. It could be that they don’t read their contact form messages all that often. That would explain the lack of response so far to my questions, but only if this is in combination with the pastor possibly needing to consult with his leadership team (if they have one; in common with most Evangelical churches, they probably do) with regards to the best line to take when replying to that impertinent LGBTQ+ query! It would need to be a combination of both late reading and working out an answer, because the receipt of the innocuous email shows that their system is working at a normal speed for electronic communications – i.e. it’s fast – so any delay in replying is a human factor. If it were me in their position, I would have written back and said something like ‘We’ll get back to you on your query; bear with us’, which would be fine. Well, kind of, anyway; if you think about it, anything other than a big, hearty ‘YES!!’ to LGBTQ+ inclusion has to be viewed as showing the strong possibility that actually they don’t accept people with ‘differences’. But let’s cut them some slack. There’s always the chance they might think in depth and come up with a decent policy.

As an aside at this point, let me also tell you something good about this church: they do welcome homeless people. Like I said, I had a friend at that church and they told me that there were all kinds of different people there, from professionals, to everyday blue-collar people, to farmers, to homeless people; you name it. I wonder then if they have any LGBTQ+ people there and, although they welcome them, they believed that my question was some sort of ruse? I mean, it isn’t; it’s a genuine question that will help me determine whether or not it is a ‘safe’ church for someone like me to attend. As I’ve already described, my neurodivergence means that I am someone who is very different from ‘normal’ people. This is why I do the Litmus Test; their attitudes towards LGBTQ+ people will be a good indicator about how they relate to ‘different’ people in general.

Another point about that church was that I recognised someone in one of their website photos, and I had actually met him a few years back – he was at work and he served me as a customer – and I just knew he was a Christian because I could feel the Spirit on him. And so yes, Jesus is ‘in’ at least one person at that church! 😉 I have no doubt that God turns up every Sunday and that the people walk with Jesus. No, sorry, I’m being facetious; I am sure that each person at that church knows the Lord, not just that one bloke. It’s just that what puzzles me is still that glaring point: so if Jesus is so much a part of their existence, like He is with me, then why the problem with answering contact requests? I still, I ehhh, well I just don’t get it. Like I said, my friend’s recommendation, and their favourable impressions of the church, do carry considerable weight for me, which is why I find it puzzling. Aaaaanyway….

Well, in order to give them another fair chance at a reply, I then actually emailed using a ‘proper’ email message, as opposed to simply contacting them through their website form. In this way, we bypass the contact form altogether. To check I had their email address right, I actually drove up to their physical premises! and found out their email address from their signboard.

So I emailed them, to that ‘official’ email address, the same message that I sent on 26th March, as above, and I now await their reply. I’ll give it a few days, as per normal, before I call it a day on the experiment, write it all up and publish. I have to say, though, that by now I would be very surprised were I to receive a reply to my questions.


Right, so now it’s Tuesday 7th April, the Tuesday after Easter this year. I’ve left it so long because I did them the courtesy of not burdening them with my terrifying question over the Easter weekend and thus spoiling it! 🤣 But I still have not heard back from them – good job I didn’t hold my breath; I’d be purple by now! – and so I’m going to write to them again in a slightly different manner; in the form of a gentle appeal. I’m using direct email and writing to the church email address, and also copying in the pastor on his personal email account. Here’s what I’m sending:

Please answer my question

Hi there

Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve been hoping for a reply from you regarding my question – sent several times and via different pathways – via your church contact page, and via direct email to your church email address which I got from the signboard outside your premises – about to what extent LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and other sexualities) people are integrated into your church. In my contact attempts, I set out clearly my questions, and gave a clear and valid reason why I am asking those questions.

It saddens me greatly that I have not yet received a reply. I do believe that the messages have been getting through to you, so I can see only five possible reasons for the lack of a reply:

1) I was wrong; the messages are not in fact getting through to you;
2) The messages are getting through to you, but you are on holiday or very busy, or both;
3) You suspect that my neutrally-expressed question is from someone who would not want to come to your church if they thought that LGBTQ+ people *were* welcome there;
4) You suspect that LGBTQ+ people would not want to come to your church if they thought they would *not* be welcome there, but you don’t want to put them off by telling them that;
5) You and your leadership team are as yet undecided on your stance on LGBTQ+ issues, or at least on how to respond to my questions. In which case, please acknowledge this with a simple, ‘We’ll get back to you’, unless of course you’re not going to get back to me!

Whatever the reason, I would like to make a final request that you answer my question, please, and, in its shortened form, it’s this:

*To what extent are LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and other sexualities) people integrated into your church?*

I have deliberately done you the courtesy of not burdening you with this over what is likely the busiest weekend in your church’s calendar!

I won’t trouble you with the question again after asking this time. That said, though, this isn’t going to just go away. Even though this is the last time I will ask, someone else will ask you again, sooner or later.

I hope this time to hear back from you.

Thanks

Anthony

Note how I have simplified it down to just ‘to what extent are LGBTQ+ … people integrated into your church?’ I also gave him five reasonable ‘excuses’. I really am trying to be gracious here!

Again, let’s wait and see…


Well, Saturday 11th April has dawned and still no word. Because they could indeed have gone on holiday after surviving the hectic Easter weekend – which is a realistic possibility – I am going to leave it until Monday 13th April before I publish this. Let’s give them every chance!

But in the meantime, let’s just consider the ‘no-reply’ reasons that I suggested in the email above. We may be able to glean something that might explain why I haven’t heard anything back.

1) I was wrong; the messages are not in fact getting through to you

This is not the reason; I know from the ‘innocuous question’ test that I asked that the mails are getting through to them.

2) The messages are getting through to you, but you are on holiday or very busy, or both

This is possible, which is why I’ve given them so long before publishing. But given that I copied my final email to the pastor’s personal email account as well as the church one, I’d have thought that it would have got through to someone at least. If I do hear back at a later date, and they were/are still on holiday, then I will update this essay to reflect that. Can’t say fairer than that.

3) You suspect that my neutrally-expressed question is from someone who would not want to come to your church if they thought that LGBTQ+ people *were* welcome there

…or (I will lump these two reasons together)

4) You suspect that LGBTQ+ people would would not want to come to your church if they thought they would *not* be welcome there, but you don’t want to put them off by telling them that

In other words, they are worried that I might not like their answer, for either of those reasons or maybe some other reason. In which case, if they’re in any doubt, they should ask for me to clarify the question, and not just ignore the email. Another church I once asked this question of, at least offered to come and have a chat with me, which I graciously declined. Now that’s the way to handle this if they’re in any doubt. But, especially regarding the opinions of other believers as I mentioned in point (3), it is worth mentioning that the fear of man (and man’s opinions) has to do with voluntarily placing the ownership of our lives into the hands of men, whether we realise it or not. We change our behaviour in order to be accepted. Well, there’s no need to do that, not ever. Jesus didn’t do it, and neither should we. It’s not about pleasing men at all, not even other believers who want you to conform. Your life, your reputation, your ministry, and your church belong to God, not to the people who would try to judge you. Proverbs 29:25 (KJV) says that “The fear of man bringeth a snare but whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safe”. It’s worth remembering that.

5) You and your leadership team are as yet undecided on your stance on LGBTQ+ issues, or at least on how to respond to my questions. In which case, please acknowledge this with a simple, ‘We’ll get back to you’, unless of course you’re not going to get back to me!

This would kind-of be fair enough, and, again, if they need to decide on something, then maybe they will contact me later – I will update the essay if they do. But there was also no ‘we’ll get back to you’ note either, so I seriously doubt I’ll hear back unless, as we’ve already considered, holidays.

There’s a sixth reason that I left out of the email because it’s not all that polite; remember I was trying to be reasonable, a) in the hope of getting an answer and also b) to not want to offend a brother in Christ. And that sixth reason is that they just decided to ignore the problem and hope it will go away. It’s very cosy behind that there sofa…. 🤣🤣🛋️ Well, I might go away, but my writing won’t 😂 This is the cowardly approach, to put it bluntly. What would it have cost them to reply to me? And even if the cost was huge, in whatever terms, would it not be worth it in order to rescue a ‘sinner’ from the pit?

There’s also the additional possibility that they think it’s all a joke or a ruse; that I’m just trying to wind them up, provoke them, or something else – maybe they thought I was a militant anti-Christian just using the LGBTQ+ question as a way of starting an argument! – and therefore to reply would be to feed the trolls. Well, in response to that, I’d say that while in this piece I have indeed tried to keep a humourous slant on most of the prose[7], the question was not asked as a joke, nor as a wind-up or provocation, and nor should it be assumed to be one. It should be standard practice to treat seriously any question from a new/unknown contact, unless and until they know for sure that it was a joke or something worse. As we have seen in my explanations above, the questions were genuine in that I was trying to ascertain how ‘safe’ the church would be for me, and that was clearly expressed in my original messages. That I could write it up, in the same manner as if it were an experiment, is simply my way of trying to make sense of it using the analytical mind that God has given me. So, it’s not a ruse; it is a perfectly valid question, asked for a real and clearly-stated reason.

To sum up all that blather: There’s just no excuse!


Monday 13th April, in the evening. Ok, still no reply after yet another week. In fact it’s been like three weeks now, just over. I’d say it’s time to stop the experiment, and publish my results.

And I will also send them the reassurance that I will not be bothering them again:

Lessons Learned

Hi [Pastor’s name]

Well, you’ll be pleased to know I won’t be asking you that LGBTQ+ question again. It’s sad that you didn’t feel that you could reply, by hey-ho; I’m sure you had your reasons.

I had hoped for better; [I then shared something personal which I won’t go in to in public, but it’s about me identifying with the pastor as a brother and fellow human].

Anyway, I asked the LGBT question because I was thinking of coming to your church, and I needed to know how safe it is for people who are ‘different’, as I openly said in my initial messages.

I’ll tell you straight off that I am not gay, nor am I of any other ‘alternative’ sexuality. I am actually autistic, and I have several personal disability issues that make it very hard for me to be in a public place, because I am so ‘different’. The LGBTQ+ question is simply a litmus test that I use in order to try to find out whether or not I will feel comfortable attending a church, despite my differences. 

And I had so much to give. I am a recently retired NHS professional and with a classical education; I have a Bible college qualification; and I have formal qualifications in theology. On 12th July this year, I will have been walking in love and power with Jesus for 46 years. I am a highly experienced and talented Charismatic worship leader, having led countless worship meetings varying in size from housegroups up to congregations of hundreds of people. I am a gifted musician, and I have also done much public preaching work. I have had extensive training and experience in ministering in spiritual gifts, with proven proficiency in words of knowledge, in prophetic ministry, and in spoken and written word, doing only what I see my Father doing. I have even ministered on a couple of occasions at Brunel Manor. However, I do not put my good works on show; I do not do things for human approval, so you’ll not have heard of me. I’m just a humble minister of Jesus who practises His work quietly and behind the scenes; I am one who does the will of his Father in Heaven.

Sad to say, then, that the lack of any answer to my question has made me completely sure that I will not attend your church, unless of course the Lord tells me very clearly that He wants me to do so.

I was a stranger, and you would not take me in. You wouldn’t even answer my serious question.

I have written this experience up factually, and have published it on my blog at

[Gave him the link to this article]

I haven’t named anyone, neither church nor individual. Jesus doesn’t work like that, and neither do I.

Grace and Peace to you and, despite your failure to respond to me, I pray every blessing on your ministry; Grace is not dependent on behaviour. We will meet in Glory, but likely not before.

Shalom, shalom

Anthony

I might get a reply; I might not. Probably not, given their previous record. And to be honest I’m not bothered whether I do or I don’t. I simply would not want to be a part of their congregation; I just can’t be doing with rudeness like that. And from fellow brothers in Christ too!

Conclusion:

The bottom line for the experiment, then, is this: They fail the test.

They fail to convince me that they are a church where Jesus would fraternise with ‘tax collectors and sinners’. If this were not so, then they would have proved it to me, simply by replying to my question. Sure, they may have homeless people there. But that’s not the whole story, as well they will know. Had they been an ‘accepting’ church, then they’d have given their questioner the benefit of the doubt, should any doubt exist. It seems to me that, in their church, judgment triumphs over mercy. And by comparing that attitude with their Rulebook, in James 2:13, I’d say they’ve got that back-to-front from how God wants it.

But it answers my question. It’s not a church I could go to, simply because I would not feel safe there. They failed to be up-front about a simple question; there’s no telling what it would be like to actually be in that congregation. So I won’t be going. I wouldn’t dream of attending a church where such an offensive attitude is displayed towards complete strangers. This is Evangelicalism at its worst[8].

Because they were not upfront about answering the question, to me that demonstrates that they are just as closeted and inward-looking as any of the other more culty Evangelical congregations. They will claim that they want to be a ‘witness for Jesus’, and they’ll want to try to grow their church by dragging in more ‘converts’, but this will happen slowly and at the end of the day their converts will be ‘..twice the sons of Gehenna that [they] are’ (Mt 23:15), because they will have to conform to the societal norm within that group – which is to be inward-looking. I have had long experience with groups like that, both from inside and out, and they look to be just the same old, same old as other groups I have been part of.

No, these people have nothing to offer me; there is nothing good for me here, and, conversely, I am sure that anything I bring from my own storehouses (Mt 13:52) would not be welcomed by them. And so, I have nothing to offer them either. If they had wanted my ‘services’, based on what looks quite like a resumé on my final message to them 😂 then that message would have been responded to in, shall we say, positive terms. I have also noticed that groups like this are absolutely terrified of people with ‘proper’ theological qualifications, even though these qualifications, in and of themselves, don’t really mean anything in terms of spirituality. I think it threatens their internal power and authority structures, but that’s just my personal opinion. These are people who are afraid of proper theology because it could end up changing, even if only slightly, their cherished beliefs; in short, they are not going to be teachable[9].

Also, the complete lack of any answer to the question, “…to what extent are LGBTQ+ people integrated into your church?”, means that the answer is actually this: They’re not.

And therefore they will also likely have difficulties in accepting people like me, with my ‘differences’. The Litmus Test has done its job and saved me from a world of hurt!

So, to sum up:

I was a stranger[10] and they would not welcome me. For whatever reason, they will not answer my reasonable question even though their systems are working.

Do they think that Jesus would be pleased with that attitude, given that He said that inasmuch as they didn’t do it for the least of these, they didn’t do it for Him?

I will leave you to ponder….

Grace and Peace to you all


As part of the process of writing this article, I also thought of a lot of things that might be useful for churches and their leadership who might be interested in beginning to accommodate LGBTQ+ and other ‘different’ people in their congregations. The work is pretty unpolished but it might be useful, and so I have published it as an Appendix below.


I Was A Stranger – Part II – Appendix
Discussion, Ramifications and Recommendations

(What it means if you hide behind the sofa!)

I wanted the results of the experiment to be constructive: for me; for my readers; and for the leadership of that church if they do follow the link that I gave them. And, indeed, I also want it to be constructive – indeed edifying! – for any person in a position of church leadership who might read the essay. If I am highlighting faults with the attitudes of Evangelicals, or indeed of any church, towards the full acceptance, or otherwise, of LGBTQ+ people, then it wouldn’t be right to just present the problems without proposing some solutions as well.

Let me begin by explaining that LGBTQ+ inclusion is becoming a major hot-potato issue in the church worldwide, and not just in Evangelicalism. Here’s an excellent quotation from Bill White:

“…non-Christians are asking the L.G.B.T.Q. question before they even enter the door as a litmus test[11] as to whether they will even come in the first place. We can argue about whether that’s fair or not, but we can’t argue about whether that’s reality. They simply will only come to a church that is welcoming of L.G.B.T.Q. people, and not what they call ‘pretend’ welcoming into what they call “second-class citizenship.”
– Bill White

I also found some good evidence of groups who not only see and appreciate the problem, but they also do something about it. For example (and it’s well worth reading carefully, and in detail):

“[In our group] there are no tricks, no half-measures, no false promises, no crossed fingers when it comes to our welcome, affirmation, and celebration of LGBTQ+ people. We affirm the LGBTQ community in all its variations, colors, identities, and expressions”

– The Faith Community (link is here)

That’s what I would call the proper attitude for a congregation who really want to welcome the ‘tax collectors and sinners’ that Jesus had no problems with welcoming and associating with (Mt 9:10). It’s important, then, for modern Christianity in general, and Evangelicalism in particular, to get up to speed with the issues that are caused when LGBTQ+ and other ‘odd’ groups are discriminated against in the church.

Maybe you might think I was hounding that church in my original essay, by asking the Litmus question several times. But I wasn’t. I had a genuine question that, as a potential new congregant, was perfectly valid and perfectly reasonable – and they should have answered it. In essence, it’s no different to asking them if they take a collection/offering, or what kinds of songs they sing. There was no need for them to hide what they think, nor is there any need for them to hunker down behind the titular item of furniture. If they have an existing ‘policy’ (for want of a better term), then they should just get it out there and tell me. If they don’t have a policy, then that’s what they should tell me. If someone asked, ‘Do you serve coffee afterwards?’, I’m sure that would have received a prompt reply. I mean, I haven’t even said I am gay or anything; I have simply asked how they integrate LGBTQ+ people into their group. And that’s all.

As my readers will know, I am a veteran Christian, coming up on 46 years of walking with the Lord; Bible-college trained and with a classical education including formal qualifications in theology; and with decades of experience in the anointed leading of Charismatic worship meetings, playing live instruments, doing musical ministry. I have a gentle, pastoral outlook that just wants to bless people; I just want to be Jesus to others. I’m not going to be modest here: I’d have been a real catch! But of course they didn’t know that. All they see is someone asking an awkward question about how well LGBTQ+ people are accepted. Surely not a major threat[12], nor any reason to not reply?

I don’t know; maybe they think I am gay myself, and therefore it doesn’t matter if this ‘sinner’ doesn’t come along; best be shot of me even before I begin with them! Maybe they’ve forgotten that Jesus Himself welcomed ‘sinners’, including prostitutes!, much to the chagrin of the Religious of His day. Maybe they are scared of damage to their reputation with other Evangelical Christians if they were to do likewise. Guilt by association. Jesus wasn’t bothered by that, and neither should any Christian be.

Well, here are some suggestions for people in leadership of this kind of church, who have been patient enough to have read this far. Kudos to you, if you’re one of them! The suggestions are meant to be constructive, but sadly many Evangelicals would consider them to be anything but. However, I’ll try. The points are raised in no particular order of importance and they are not necessarily linked conceptually with previous points. I probably even repeat myself on occasion. These points aren’t supposed to be a polished treatise like my other pieces, or even the main essay; they’re more of a ‘thought shower’.

  • Nowadays, more and more people are using this question, or a similar one, as a litmus test for churches. If you want to get people in to your church, you need to think right now about how you’re going to answer it, and what ramifications, and indeed consequences, your answer will have with regard to the growth and relevance of your church. And you need to have that answer ready.
  • I understand it that you don’t want to compromise in any way. On the one hand, you don’t want to ‘water down’ the ‘whole counsel of God'[13](Acts 20:27) because it’s “…the world that needs to change and not the Bible”. On the other hand, you also don’t want to tell the whole truth because you know that the truth, as you understand it, is unpalatable to ‘sinners’.  So, what do you do? Do you risk compromise by ‘watering it down’ to make it more palatable, or do you insist on your (likely to be unpopular) interpretation and put people off coming? If we’re being honest, you likely don’t want such awkwardly-different people in your group anyway. And so maybe you need to look again at the doctrinal points that you hold on to so tightly, why you hold them, and whether or not you can let go of them because they are not part of an unchanging truth; maybe they are simply ‘doctrines made by men’? (Mt 15:9) These are exactly the things that Jesus was talking about in that verse in Matthew; and these doctrines actually cause others to stumble.
When you find your belief system to be the thing keeping you from becoming a better person, summon the courage to become a better person than your beliefs.– Jeff Turner
  • Related to the above, remember that most if not all firmly held doctrines are based on someone’s (an individual’s or a group’s) interpretation of what various Scripture passages mean, when those Scripture passages were not originally written to us today anyway[14]. This is why dogmatic adherence to fixed, set-in-stone doctrines is not a good thing, especially when others are damaged, hurt or excluded by those same doctrines. The first few chapters of the Acts of the Apostles tells the story of a group of people whose faith (which isn’t even called ‘Christianity yet at this stage in the story) has taken a remarkable turn from their previous faith of Judaism, and their ideas are still in a fluid state and they’re trying to come to terms with it all. This is the normal state of being for people (i.e. you and me) who are constantly trying to make sense of the whirlwind of amazing things that God is doing in our time, just as He was doing back then in their time! So, what it should look like for people who claim they want to ‘be like the early Church’ is that they should be constantly changing the way they relate their faith to society, and be in a constant state of fluidity. Solid doctrines don’t really have a place when God is constantly moving; concrete foundations are not very mobile.
  • Remember that the people you are rejecting, or causing to stay away – which amounts to the same thing – are Jesus. “Inasmuch as you did not do this for the least of these, you did not do it for Me” (Mt 25:45). And especially, in my case, where I am a stranger – you don’t know me – and you did not welcome me Mt 25:43). You didn’t even say, Come along anyway and judge for yourself’, which would have been far better in terms of acceptance and even Scriptural – see John 1:45-46. Yes, you love Him; that’s not in doubt here. But you also need to love these people unconditionally – without conditions of any kind – just the same as God loves you. That’s part of what Grace means.
  • You may well be afraid, generally, of presenting a ‘bad witness’, by being seen doing things like smoking or swearing, but this is worse. Here, you are displaying a lack of transparency, the appearance of trying to hide things (or at least not declare things up-front, which amounts to the same thing) and indeed a knowledge or a suspicion of, yes, just how absurd and out-of-date many of your ideas are. But you need to rethink your idea of ‘the word of the Lord endureth forever’ (1Pet1:25; Ps 119:89; Isa 40:8), and apply that Scriptural concept properly and contextually in your lives and beliefs.
  • By not answering perfectly valid questions such as mine, you show a great disrespect for your questioner, because you are showing that their question is not worthy of an answer. In fact, I personally feel quite devalued in human terms, if I’m honest. I didn’t deserve to be ignored. You have devalued me even without meeting me, which is really quite an achievement! I would say that your stubborn ignorance in this case made me realise that you are not the kind of group I would feel safe joining anyway, for several reasons – not least the strong potential for rejection. So I am also glad that you ignored the question, because now I have not had to waste emotional energy on developing relationship, only to have it all count for nothing further down the line.
  • You are also demonstrating pre-judgmentalism, where you have judged the assumed motives or alignment of your questioner’s heart, but without sufficient evidence or personal context. God knows your questioner, and values them individually and personally. And so should you, if you claim to live in Him (1Jn2:6).
  • You will miss out on the unique gifts and talents of people who would have been able to give much to your congregation, both to your enrichment and to theirs. And that’s without you ever knowing them, irrespective of whether they were gay or not.
  • You may well pride yourself in the people you accept. Maybe you accept homeless people alongside mansion-dwellers, and that’s great. But if you reject certain types of people for other reasons – and let’s face it, those reasons are subject to your own personal decisions (we will accept homeless but no gays, thank you very much) – then you are no different from other churches who also reject people for their own, different, reasons and criteria. Maybe you feel better for being a church that does not reject the homeless, whereas ‘that lot down the road’ won’t let someone join the church unless they drive a BMW. Well, by rejecting LGBTQ+ people, and even innocent and valid questions about your church’s attitudes towards them, you demonstrate that you are, in fact, just as bad as ‘that lot down the road’ 🤣 . Acceptance based on behaviour is judgmentalism. If you accept me despite being ‘weird’ due to my autism, but don’t accept LGBTQ+ people, then you are showing a selectivity based on your perception of a person’s worthiness based on their behaviour or inclinations – and this is not a selectivity that God has. You do not reflect your Father in Heaven if you behave like this.
  • You may see this entire thing as being a persecution, or an ‘attack’ from the Enemy. Most Christian organisations, who are entrenched in their beliefs, pass off any criticism (even that intended to be constructive) as such, so that they feel justified in ignoring it. But fellow believers can also make edifying comments and criticisms that are supposed to help you. Iron sharpens iron, and all that (Prov 27:17). This means that the essay is possibly prophetic for you, in a similar way to how the prophet Nathan ministered to King David in 2 Sam 12. If this is the case, then you will have to ask the Lord what He wants you to do with the things you have read here, if indeed you have the ears to hear. Accept or reject? Spit out the bones and eat the meat (i.e. accept some of it, reject some of it)? Either way, do not miss out on what the Lord wants to do with your congregation in order to help you bear more fruit for Him.
  • Remember that, in damaging your own reputation, you are also damaging God’s reputation. So much of your effort is spent on not being a ‘Bad Witness’, and yet, sadly, this is exactly what happens when you a) are not transparent, b) ignore sincere questioners, and c) reject LGBTQ+ people – people that Jesus certainly would not have rejected, and that He died for while they were still ‘sinners’ (Rom 5:8).
  • Like it or not, ‘the World’ aren’t stupid; they know what Jesus looks like, despite the best efforts of the church to misrepresent Him. And in many ways I’m afraid they know what He looks like better than you do, because your vision is skewed by the rules you have to keep. And this means that they will not see Jesus in your congregation, because you do not behave like the Friend of Sinners. Whoever claims to live in Him must walk as Jesus did (1Jn2:6). In your zeal to remain faithful to the Bible, you are neglecting other more important parts of that same word. Woe to you Pharisees neglecting the important parts (Mt 23:23). In effect, you shut the door of Heaven in men’s faces (Mt 23:13). Ignoring a valid and polite question, which came with a clear explanation of its purpose, tells me that you have something to hide. Is it not a colossal red flag where any group, not just a church, is anything less than fully transparent when it comes to openly and unambiguously stating their beliefs?
  • If one of your main objectives is to save people from Hell – and I am assuming that a) you believe in Hell and therefore b) this is indeed your objective – then surely any changes you need to make with regard to the way you relate to people – any people – must be worth it? According to Jesus, it’s the sick who need a doctor (Lk 5:31). And in the way that you acknowledge that you yourselves are ‘sinners in need of a saviour’, you proclaim that not only do you need that Doctor too – don’t we all?! – but also that your particular need for the Doctor does not disqualify you from, for example, full inclusion in the Church, whereas others’ needs for that same Doctor – like being gay, for example – does disqualify them. If all sin is equal in God’s sight[15] then you yourselves are no ‘better’ than those you would disqualify from full inclusion and involvement in your congregation. If all sin is equal in God’s sight, then either you should not disqualify LGBTQ+ people from full inclusion including holding positions of responsibility in the congregation, or you yourselves should not hold such positions. According to your own rules, their ‘sin’ is no worse than your ‘sin’ in God’s sight. In some ways, they’re even doing better than you are: at least their ‘sin’ is out in the open. Only you and God know of your own ‘secret sins’ that you struggle with every day; these are not out in the open[16]. You know exactly which sins I am talking about.
    Don’t you?
  • If you discriminate (because that’s what it amounts to) against people in certain groups, like LGBTQ+ people, or smokers, or those with tattoos, for example, then you are declaring yourselves to be somehow ‘better’ than they are; somehow more ‘deserving’ of God’s Love and Grace, like the Pharisee in Luke 18:11. As your Rulebook says, you know that you should not consider yourselves better than others (Phil 2:3, Rom 12:3). In Micah 6:8, where it says,

“He has shown you, O Man, what is good
And what does the Lord require of you?
To do justice
And to love mercy
And to walk humbly with your God”

…you need to remember that part of walking humbly with God involves not considering others to be in any way inferior to yourself, and you also probably don’t know that God is non-discriminatory in the way in which He gives His Grace. You see, if they don’t deserve it, then neither do you. Fortunately, though, Grace is not so much undeserved (which I know is the standard Evangelical line) so much as it is unearned – nothing you have ever done, nothing you are doing, and nothing you will ever do will make you any more or less worthy to receive God’s Grace. It is a free gift – by definition, a gift is free; who ever paid for their own gift? – and, unlike the standard threat to kids at Christmas where parents tell their child that if you do not behave, then it’s no presents for you, God does not have a naughty list (Heb 8:12). It doesn’t matter if you’ve been naughty or nice; God gives His Grace and His gifts freely to those who do not deserve them, either by actions or by inclinations. And the same criteria apply to those that YOU deem unworthy! But, you might argue, does that mean that a person can ‘sin’ as much as they like and God will still like them? Well, go and honestly work it out, is all I will say on that matter. Ask God for wisdom (Jas 1:5). I could give you some pointers, especially to my own articles, but this is the sort of thing you need to work out for yourself so that you can own your own conclusions.

  • Whether you like it or not, all Christians are one Body in Christ (Gal 3:28). This includes every believer, gay or not, smoker or not, alcoholic or not, gambler, adulterer, whatever. We are one Body. And you have no right to exclude some members of the Body on the basis of your own beliefs, whether or not you consider these as being Scripture-based. Remember you could be wrong, even if your beliefs are based in Scripture. You may think that ‘God never goes against what is written in Scripture’, but that is incorrect, because when Jesus said things like, “You have heard that it is written [something], however I say to you [something different]”, that’s exactly what He was doing; He was going against Scripture. Unless of course you are claming that Jesus isn’t God, which is something that I very much doubt that you would do!
  • Your idea that ‘whoever approves of these things shares in his evil work'[17] is a man-made concept derived from context-dependent verses from two particular letters in the Bible – these verses are found in 2 John 11 and Romans 1:32 (the latter being another verse that is routinely and blatantly ripped out of context). Many Christians use these verses to justify lumping people who support ‘sinners’ in with the ‘sinners’ themselves. Well, you will have to decide. Do you go with your interpretation of St. John’s or St. Paul’s verses, then, or do you emulate Jesus who associated with ‘tax collectors and sinners’ without mentioning their ‘sin’; without bringing it up at all in fact. The Religious of His time saw His association with these people as tacit approval of their ‘behaviour’ or their ‘sin’. How is that different, then, from you saying that whoever approves of, say, gay people, ‘shares in their evil work’? (2 John 11; Rom 1:32) Jesus accepted unacceptable people; He accepted those rejected by the religious. He even died for you while you were still sinners. Should not your attitude be the same?
  • People are more likely to want to come to your meetings if they know they’re not going to be judged or looked down on. Your attitude to LGBTQ+ people models what your attitude would be towards anyone who doesn’t fit in, for whatever reason. Remember that outsiders see Christians as people who love to judge others[18]. Outsiders want to know whether or not, should they join your ranks, they can lead a fulfilling church life including everything they are called to. But they’re gay, then you’re not letting them do that, are you? If it means compromising, then compromise, in the name of Love. Let mercy triumph over judgment (Jas 2:13)!
  • When thinking about caring for ‘the least of these, it is important to note that caring,  also includes valuing them as a person, no matter how ‘unworthy’ you consider them to be, by extending to them the same Grace that God extended to you when you (as you see it) weren’t worthy either. You have become so steeped in religious language, rules and procedures that you have forgotten what it’s like to be a person – say a sympathetic unbeliever or one who is considering believing – on the fringes. Holding these people at arms’ length is, again, shutting the doors of Heaven in men’s faces (Mt 23:13)
  • Let’s do a thought experiment. Just imagine for one moment being a gay person. You join the church, and you ‘become a Christian’. You begin attending a church, and you begin to form close and meaningful friendships with church members, and you invest time and money and talents into the church. No-one knows you’re gay because it just never occurred to you to tell them. But then, you find out (only two months after becoming a Christian) that god hates gays[19]. And he also hates those who affirm them, because guilt by association of course. So, now what do you do? In all innocence, you’ve joined this group of people who will suddenly all[20] have a beef against you. And you wish someone had told you before you joined their group, because now you have a ton of hurt, judgment and rejection to cope with, and you as a new, fledgling Christian who doesn’t know how to cope with all these ‘solid’ Christians telling you how wrong you are and how you have to change or leave. **Thought Experiment Ends!** Think: How would that situation make you feel? Can you see the problem here, in relation to the subject of this essay?
  • I think it’s also a reasonable conclusion that not only would you as a church not be good with LGBTQ+ people, but neither would you be good with those who support and affirm them. So, look at that! You’ve just alienated two groups of people that Jesus loves, for the price of one! Congratulations! Remember that your brother Christians who do affirm LGBTQ+ people are not ‘fallen away’; they are not ‘backslidden’ nor is it the case that ‘they were never true Christians in the first place’. Chances are they said the exact same ‘sinner’s prayer’ that you did, and have lived a Christian life very similar to yours in most respects. Maybe, then, it’s just that they have been listening to Jesus – Who, remember does contradict Scripture when it suits Him (see above) – and He has shown them His heart towards LGBTQ+ people. Maybe their hearts have grown in their walk with Him, and are now more aligned with His heart in this regard. That’s no reflection on you; no-one’s saying that you’re not a Christian or anything like that, or that you don’t listen to Him. It’s just that He has explained to them things that either He hasn’t told you yet, or He has and you weren’t listening or didn’t want to hear. Either way, He’s told them things that you haven’t heard yet, and that’s fine. Maybe now is the time when He wants to tell you these things, maybe not; I wouldn’t presume to tell you that. You will have to listen to Him for yourself.
“If you find that your heart has grown bigger than your doctrine, know that it is the doctrine that needs to go, not the heart that needs to be restricted.”
– Jeff Turner
  • What are you hiding and why? And are you hiding other stuff too? Shouldn’t you be shouting your acceptance and inclusion of ‘tax collectors and sinners’ from the roof tops? Jesus welcomed everyone! Churches who are not upfront about this sort of thing are a red flag; what else are they not telling people?
  • At the end of the day, your failure to even respond to, much less answer, my question, is indicative of cowardice. Yes, you’re hiding behind the sofa! I am guessing that you, like many Christians of the Evangelical persuasion, are running on fear rather than Love. This is the dark side of the coin with such a real and fervent belief as Evangelicalism gives. Yes, there is a real belief in God, in how much He loves us, and that He demonstrated that in Christ Who died for us while we were still sinners (Romans 5:8). God is real, Jesus is alive and lives in us, and we know that (well most of us do, anyway) by His Spirit. That’s the bright side of the coin. But that strong belief and faith has a potential dark side as well. It means that if God is indeed real – and our experiences with Him tell us that He is – then it also means that He’s entirely the wrong person to cross, to annoy, because of how powerful He is. He could wipe us out without even thinking about it. In other words, for some Evangelicals, their relationship is based on fear rather than Love[21]. People who believe that seem to think it’s too good to be true that God just accepts us as we are; surely there must be some sort of threat or fear or something involved? But Jesus demonstrated that no, that’s not the case at all. Jesus’s best friend, John the Apostle, put it like this,”And we have come to know and believe the love that God has for us. God is love; whoever abides in love abides in God, and God in him. In this way, love has been perfected among us, so that we may have confidence on the day of judgment; for in this world we are just like Him. There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear, because fear involves punishment. The one who fears has not been perfected in love”. (1Jn4:12 (NLT), emphasis mine) This is pretty straightforward to me, and if you want to choose the opposite, then that’s your loss. But if you dare to believe that although it seems too good to be true, it is actually true that God loves you and is not mad with you. This means, then, that He will not smite you or those you love, like a cosmic crime boss, just because you choose to pick the way of loving others, rather than rejecting them. Those who reject others are amongst those to whom Jesus says, in the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, “Away from Me, I never knew you!”, because when you rejected the least of these, you rejected Him.
  • Parallel to the fear of God is the fear of Men. Time after time, in the Gospels, Jesus tells his listeners that the opinions of other humans are not important. His teachings against those who pray in public to gain ‘cred’ with onlookers. Those who ostentatiously tip huge amounts of money into the temple coffers to demonstrate their spirituality. And there are others. Paul mentioned it too. And there’s the verse in Proverbs 29:25 which says that,
    “Fear of man will prove to be a snare,
    but whoever trusts in the Lord is kept safe”
    Refusal to answer my question based on your fear of judgment from other Christians is in opposition to that Proverb. Additionally, 1Cor2:15 says that the spiritual man is subject to no human judgment. So, what on Earth is it that you’re worried about?
    I’m sure that God will continue to come along to your meetings; that He’ll continue to bless you no matter what, simply because He’s like that.
  • Your lack of a reply also tells me how you might cope with people with doctrinal differences – in short, you wouldn’t!
  • You need to learn how to bring out new treasures as well as the old (Mt 13:52). The old really is old; it is tired, dusty and samey, and belongeth back in the nineteenth century where it doth originate. You have drained all the life and love out of your faith; all the vibrancy, and settled for a dull, grey, comfortable sameness where all your boundaries are defined and known. You believe essentially the same things now as they did 100 years ago, back when the mobile device you might be reading this on, right now, would have been seen as sorcery. You need to adjust to society, while giving serious thought to how relevant your interpretation of Scripture is in today’s world. You may not realise this, but many of today’s accepted ‘norms’, both in society and in religion, were once completely unacceptable. Gradually, even Christianity changes in order to ‘allow’ things that weren’t previously ‘allowed’. Failure to change with the times is not a virtue; a praiseworthy ‘sticking to the Scriptures’. It is in fact sticking to the old ways where Scripture actually does not designate such old ways as being ‘correct’ nor does it forbid doing things in new ways. Even deeper than that, the Scripture is fully capable of adapting, and being adapted, to whichever society or time period it finds itself in. What they believed back in the fifteenth century was very different to what we believe now, in just about every aspect of society. To adapt your behaviour and beliefs so that the Scripture is relevant in today’s society is actually to honour it, not to relegate it to irrelevance. This is one of the great beauties of Scripture, and to not allow it to do that is to do it a great disservice.
Concluding comments

And my final conclusion is this: No. That church is not a safe place, either for LGBTQ+ people or, for that matter, for anyone else who is ‘different’. This experiment has exposed red flags galore in this church; even just their simple refusal to answer a single harmless question tells me so much.

No, sooner or later, if you are a person who, for whatever reason, does not fit in, say by being the kind of person who might ask a slightly awkward question, then I can guarantee that you will suffer some kind of spiritual abuse in this church. Maybe not right away, when they want to indoctrinate you in order to ‘keep’ you, during the ‘honeymoon period’, but further down the line; it will happen. Maybe minor abuse, maybe major; the point is it will happen. If they have something to hide, then red flags they be a’flyin’; I’mma stay well away!

The only solution for these churches, if they want to continue to be relevant, is to offer full acceptance in every way, to everyone. In twenty years’ time, people will look back at the attitudes of Christians in this time and say, ‘Why were they so reluctant?’

Grace and Peace to you.

Further Help

If you have been challenged, encouraged or helped by this article, or if you are a member or supporter of the LGBTQ+ community, and you’re wondering if there are indeed churches in the UK who do support LGBTQ+ equality, then please check out the groups linked below to see how they do things. If you’re looking for a local congregation, well even if they don’t have a congregation near you, they may well be able to put you in touch with someone in your area who has similar values. Such churches are more than likely to be accommodating of people with all kinds of ‘differences’. One day, many more churches will do things this way!

Reimagine Church, Nottingham

Oasis Waterloo

 

 

 

Footnotes

Footnotes
⇧1 Although, as I have written in other posts, maybe this was because of my brilliant musical gifting; another Autistic trait! They’d put up with me if it meant I would play the piano for them… 😉
⇧2 On such websites, I also always look for their Safeguarding Policy. I am sad to have to report that such vital information is usually missing from most church websites I have checked out. There have been some I have found, though, that are really quite proud of their safeguarding systems, and they proclaim those systems openly and enthusiastically! And that’s great. 😁 Religious organisations, more than anyone else, should set up safeguarding as a matter of priority, given the strong association between religious organisations and child sexual abuse as well as other forms of abuse. Lack of a safeguarding policy is always a massive red flag to me, either because they haven’t thought of having one (unlikely given today’s litigious climate); they don’t think it’ll ever happen to them (they’re too righteous for that sort of thing ever to happen in their church!); they don’t want to be under someone else’s scrutiny (so, it’s a leadership accountability/power issue); or because it’s actually going on in their midst and they don’t want to prevent it (sick but possible; ’nuff said). Or maybe a combination of the above. I can think of no other reason why a church will not have a publicly available safeguarding policy set out clearly on their website. And that’s pretty poor really. Oh, btw, this church didn’t have one; not that I could find, anyway.
⇧3 It’s ‘potentially contentious’ because, for some, churches, the question I ask will be a non-issue; for others, not so much.
⇧4 The original title for this piece was going to be ‘Hiding Behind the Sofa’; hence the header picture of a terrified bloke who daren’t come out from back there….
⇧5 Check out my essay ‘Thinking In the Box‘ for a previous, true real-life example of this sort of behaviour, although probably nobody died behind the sofa on that particular occasion. But hey, who knows… 😉
⇧6 If you don’t think so, well I’m sorry but I myself will sleep just fine tonight 😉
⇧7 This is partly to protect my mind from the quite frankly offensive sheer ignorance and rudeness displayed by their ignoring my messages – which is at the same time both disgraceful and disgusting. I really don’t understand how ministers of the Gospel could be so rude as to not reply to a perfectly inoffensive question.
⇧8 Well, nearly so; I mean obviously things like child sexual abuse and stuff is a lot worse. But ignoring the messages is in itself a form of abuse, and that’s before I’ve even darkened their doors with my presence!
⇧9 I sometimes think that this is why so many churches just stick to reading and discussing familiar Bible passages, because of the warm and comfortable, familiar feeling it gives them. Which is fine, if that’s what they want, but for me nothing short of the fizzing, solid presence of God will do!
⇧10 They don’t know me, so by any definition I’m a stranger.
⇧11 Interesting how he, quite independently, uses the Litmus Test terminology that I too have adopted! I used it because I am a retired professional pharmaceutical scientist, so it meant something to me at least!
⇧12 I apologise for calling you Shirley, unless of course that is actually your name 😉 Yes, that’s from the classic movie ‘Airplane’ (1980), “Surely you can’t be serious?” “I am serious. And don’t call me Shirley” 🤣
⇧13 I mean here that you don’t want to ignore any important verses that you consider pivotal in forming your doctrines and policies. In practice, however, for most churches this usually turns out to be not so much the ‘whole counsel’ meaning the entire sweep of Scripture, as they claim they mean, but just the verses they have chosen to not ignore. People who claim that they proclaim ‘the whole counsel of God’ never actually do so.
⇧14 All you need to do is to look at the same passage in a number of different English translations of the Bible (I have twelve of these, including a Hebrew and Greek Interlinear, and a Greek-only New Testament Interlinear with a different Greek text; am I a sad man or what!) to see that the wording of the translations (even in the Greek) is slightly different. How then can someone hope to form a cast-iron doctrine on what is essentially a paraphrase of the original-language text, both in wording and possibly even in meaning?
⇧15 This is a standard  doctrine in some (but not all) branches of Evangelicalism, probably based on Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death”, and the nature of the sin required to qualify for that death is not specified simply because all sin pays the same wages: death!
⇧16 And knowing what Evangenitals are like (Evangenitals being Christians with an unhealthy interest in what others do with their private parts! 🤣 ), they are probably sexual ‘sins’.
⇧17 A standard argument to prevent gentle Christians from affirming (well, openly, at any rate!) LGBTQ+ people and their relationships.
⇧18 I have to be fair and say that this is a human trait, not just a Christian one. There are those for whom it appears that their entire purpose in life is simply to judge others. I wouldn’t want to live like that!
⇧19 For the purposes of this thought experiment, let’s say that ‘god hates gays’ is that particular church’s attitude towards gay people; not all of them are like that, but this hypothetical church is!
⇧20 And it will be all of them; the entire church will know within a matter of minutes. Church gossip is one of the most lethal and unstoppable forces in the Universe!
⇧21 And they’ll justify that by claiming that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. That’s not quite what that verse means….