Ship of Fools: When your parish "defects".

Thread: When your parish "defects". Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025207

Posted by Anyuta (# 14692) on :

Scenario. You leave a particular denomination/ jurisdiction/ religion/ whatever. You join another. You are happy in your new parish (or wahtever term is appropriate). Then the priest/ pastor/ clergy leaves/ retires/ passes on. The new priest (or etc) is of a very different bent. Many people leave the parish due to differences of oppinion with the priest, but many stay just due to the community. and many new people join. Then there is some issue within your broader jurisdiction/ denomination etc. And the priest decides to change to a different jurisdiction/ denomination whatever. taking the parish with him. So now you are without a parish (or at least without THAT parish) unless you also change to follow them.

Now imagine that the jurisidiction etc. that the parish now joins is the one you left in the first place.

Yeah, this happened to me. In my case, while frustrating and upsetting, it's not the end of the world. I have another option and can deal with it. and in any case probably would have left that parish eventually just based on disliking the priest. Besides, the two jurisdictions are now in communion, so it's not like one changing religions! nothing prevents me from attending services in the parish without changing my "loyalty" to my jurisdiction.

But here is my question: in a situation like that, what do you feel is your obligation in terms of concience, in terms of "obedience", in terms of "thy will not mine"?

Perhaps, as some have said, the change reflects God's will. then by objecting/leaving you are going against God. After all, the parish prayed about it before making the decision (as presumably did the priest).

I don't know what the debate question here really is, but it seemed like there must be one. This isn't so much about individual decisions about where one's faith is, but rather about the communal aspect of it, and what one does when the community chooses to change.

We (Orthdox) have a number of parishes in the US which converted as a group from some other denomination. I always wondered how on earth that worked, how they ALL decided at the same time to do this. I guess I always knew that it was not likely to be "all" of them.. some no doubt left at some point in the process. I just never really gave it overly much consideration, other than to wonder what possible sequence of events could lead to an entire congregation of "Assemblies of God" to convert to Orthodoxy.. and join a very ETHNIC jurisdiction.

If this is really not a debate suitable to Purg, hosts please move to the more appropriate location.

[ 16. March 2013, 15:22: Message edited by: Ancient Mariner ]

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :

God doesn't have boundaries. We do.

If God's will be done, we remain as long as we're affirmed by God, but leave when prompted to by God, and might be surprised by where we're led to next. Other people may get in the way at times, and they test our love to its limits, but the church needs those who truly serve even more at those times.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

Anyuta:

quote:
But here is my question: in a situation like that, what do you feel is your obligation in terms of concience, in terms of "obedience", in terms of "thy will not mine"?

Perhaps, as some have said, the change reflects God's will. then by objecting/leaving you are going against God. After all, the parish prayed about it before making the decision (as presumably did the priest).

..."thy will not mine"? Sez who? Since when has anyone gotten the will of God completely right? Anyway, since 33AD.

My attitude on these things is that if you earnestly pray about it, listen to people you respect on the subject, and come to a conclusion that isn't obviously sinful like leaving full of rage or staying and making life hell for those who disagree with you, God will give you a way that will be fruitful for you and the community you join.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

I figure every church has - and needs - two kinds of members. In the extreme, it looks like this:

1. This is "MY church." Period. No matter what happens, it's my church. I will simply out-wait any new pastor or change I disagree with. Even if they decide to dedicate the building to satan and replace the Eucharist with seances, it's my church and nothing is going to force me out.

2. I seek to connect with and follow God. If the church I'm attending inhibits my ability to sense God, or violates God's principles or preferences as I see it, I'm outta there. Our loyalty must always be wholly to God, not to the deeply flawed human institution misnamed "church."

Both groups are important. The "this is my church" bunch keep a church going and get it back on its feet when it stumbles badly, as many do now and then. The "I'm loyal to God, not to an institution" bunch remind us what church is supposed to be all about, and their departure may be a signal something has gone wrong in the direction the church has turned or drifted.

Each group tends to disdain the other. But they both matter.

As to vows of membership - last time I joined a church I promised my time and talent etc and the congregation promised to help me grow as a Christian. It's a mutuality - any community is by definition mutual. If that mutuality in broken by them, they turn the community a direction you can't really be part of, you are free; you may stay as not really part of the community, or leave to find a different community that embraces who you are. (Anyway that's how I see it.)

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

In my experience it's a matter of extremes. I will happily stay with a church through all kinds of problems, but there is a point at which the church has moved away from me so much, and in such an unacceptable direction, that it is necessary to move on. What I find interesting (and Belle Ringer's suggestions help cast light on this) is how some people leave so early in this process, before things get really bad - others will keep going way beyond what most people consider to be acceptable limitations. I guess everyone's cut off point is different.

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :

<tangent>

AOG to Orthodox?

Really?

How is that possible??? Can't think of two further extremes! [Eek!]

</endtangent>

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

You go (or stay) where God is calling you. It is entirely possible that the plans he has for you and for the person in the pew next to you may be different. No disobedience, just different roles in the body of Christ.

Posted by Jon in the Nati (# 15849) on :

quote:
AOG to Orthodox?

It isn't quite as crazy as it sounds. Ever hear of the Evangelical Orthodox Church? It had its origins in Campus Crusade for Christ in the 1970's, when some of the leaders started reading heavily in patristics and ancient liturgics, and sort of started to marry the divine liturgy to evangelical Protestantism. Eventually they formed a separate church body, a sort of idiosyncratic, non-canonical Orthodox body. It grew to about 20 parishes, became more Orthodox over time, and by 1987 the majority of the EOC joined the Antiochian Orthodox Church en masse, with their bishop Peter Gillquist becoming a priest. Other parishes which did not immediately join the Antiochians eventually entered the Orthodox Church in America.

It is a wild story.

[ 16. March 2013, 16:25: Message edited by: Jon in the Nati ]

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :

As I was reading the opening post, at first I thought it was about Lutherans & Episcopalians. Then Episcopalians and schismatic Episcopalians. Then Anglicans and the Ordinariate. Finally, ROCOR and Moscow.

Now, we're guessing some AoG/non-canonical Orthodox mashup and the Antiochians.

At the end of the day I think this is not an issue that can be discussed in the abstract terms of denomination/jurisdiction/religion/whatever, but only in the concrete reality of particular ecclesial communities.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
You go (or stay) where God is calling you. It is entirely possible that the plans he has for you and for the person in the pew next to you may be different. No disobedience, just different roles in the body of Christ.

This. The Priest and some of the congregation members are being called along one path, you and some others are being called along another. Provided everything else is above board, there's nothing wrong with that.

Tubbs

Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
You go (or stay) where God is calling you. It is entirely possible that the plans he has for you and for the person in the pew next to you may be different. No disobedience, just different roles in the body of Christ.
This. The Priest and some of the congregation members are being called along one path, you and some others are being called along another. Provided everything else is above board, there's nothing wrong with that.

Tubbs

This can even happen among churches in the same ecclesiology. I left my last parish because the priest was getting in the way of me worshipping God. This is the same man some of my friends call a "wonderful spiritual director". His mannerisms irked me. Now I am in the next parish, while remaining within the boundaries of the first. A much more comfortable fit. Personalities matter; yours and others. In the end you go where you fit.

Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :

To lose one parish may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.

[Smile]

Posted by cattyish (# 7829) on :

If things have changed for the person who left an uncomfortable fit, or if the uncomfotable fit has changed to a better one, then it might now fit. If not, move on. You don't cease to be part of a body by changing clothes.

Cattyish, currently Church of Scotland, much to my surprise.

[ 17. March 2013, 08:43: Message edited by: cattyish ]

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
You go (or stay) where God is calling you. It is entirely possible that the plans he has for you and for the person in the pew next to you may be different. No disobedience, just different roles in the body of Christ.
This. The Priest and some of the congregation members are being called along one path, you and some others are being called along another. Provided everything else is above board, there's nothing wrong with that.

Tubbs

These are very helpful observations. Thank you, both.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

quote:
AOG to Orthodox?
It isn't quite as crazy as it sounds. Ever hear of the Evangelical Orthodox Church? It had its origins in Campus Crusade for Christ in the 1970's, when some of the leaders started reading heavily in patristics and ancient liturgics, and sort of started to marry the divine liturgy to evangelical Protestantism. Eventually they formed a separate church body, a sort of idiosyncratic, non-canonical Orthodox body.

And what about the (British) Catholic Apostolic Church of the late 1800s? "High Church" charismaticsm!

Posted by otyetsfoma (# 12898) on :

The Catholic Apostolic Churc still exists, but no longer has or even can have, an ordained ministry. But they still own property: church buildings they allow other churches to use. Their German branch did not accept the extinction of their apostolate by death, so they reorgaised themseves as The New Apostolic Church.

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:

quote:
AOG to Orthodox?
It isn't quite as crazy as it sounds. Ever hear of the Evangelical Orthodox Church? It had its origins in Campus Crusade for Christ in the 1970's, when some of the leaders started reading heavily in patristics and ancient liturgics, and sort of started to marry the divine liturgy to evangelical Protestantism. Eventually they formed a separate church body, a sort of idiosyncratic, non-canonical Orthodox body. It grew to about 20 parishes, became more Orthodox over time, and by 1987 the majority of the EOC joined the Antiochian Orthodox Church en masse, with their bishop Peter Gillquist becoming a priest. Other parishes which did not immediately join the Antiochians eventually entered the Orthodox Church in America.

It is a wild story.

It's a very clerical story, if this video is to be believed.

It's all about the spiritual journey of their elders to the Orthodox presbyterate. Nary a word about the laity. You'd be hard pressed to know they had any.

Posted by Jon in the Nati (# 15849) on :

True, TSA. Gillquist claims there were about two thousand of them, which is not an entirely unbelievable number. No way of knowing if it is true, of course. Certainly the movement toward Orthodoxy appears to have been driven by the clergy and their discoveries rather than by the layfolk. But of course, I wasn't there.

Posted by Anyuta (# 14692) on :

The clergy definitely drove the specific situation I'm in. I doubt the congregation much cared one way or the other, aside from a few of us, and just wanted to continue to have the parish function. If the parish had insisted on staying put, the priest would have left, and they would have to search for a new one. which is not easy. so they switched jurisdictions rather than deal with the possibility of loosing the parish altogether.

I didn't want to make this thread about me and my situation (which is why I was vague in the OP). But for those who are curious, I grew up ROCOR, switched to OCA in the early 90s based on the situation at that time. I had always maintained some connection with the OCA cathedral in town as well as the ROCOR cathedral (my childhood parish), so that transition was not hard. The parish that I am talking about was created about 10 years ago (wow, can't believe it's been that long), and was OCA, until the relatively new-to-us priest, due to the situation with the last Metropolitan, decided he could not in good conscience stay with the OCA. I can respect his decision, I just wish he hadn't taken the whole congregation with him. Because I can simply return to attending the cathedral (and have done periodically all along), this isn't a huge problem for me, although I did love my local parish, and particularly loved that it was 4 miles from my house (vs. an hour away for the cathedral).
On the plus side, the cathedral has services in Slavonic, while the local parish does not, and I find the Slavonic service much more beautiful than the same service in English. And the music is better in the cathedral. so all in all, not a horrible change for me, other than the fact that on a Sunday morning, it's much easier now for me to say "oh, I'll just skip it this week".

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :

Anyuta, as someone else who has lived through near-death parish experiences, I can empathize with the trauma of denomination shopping on the part of parish leadership. It's never pretty.

The depraved cynic in me grumbles, "Who says the American Orthodox Diaspora is not congegationalist right down to it pious pierogies, papoutsakia, and baba ghanoush?"

But then, with the OCA Synod offending repeatedly by choosing as Primate refugees from The Episcopal Church (first Job, now Tikon; and, both not even fifty years of age!), I'd sure be prone to having that fissiparous congregationalist twitch, too.

We can only continue to pray for reunification of Orthodoxy in the Americas.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

The Church has been going through this sort of turmoil for longer than I've been alive. I can't help but to resent parish leaders that put their congregations (and denominations) though stuff like this.

Posted by womanspeak (# 15394) on :

Thank you for the helpful posts which I've just happened upon.

I'm thinking of having a sabbatical from my parish - defecting - until the encumbent leaves. I've felt very selfish about these thoughts, have prayed, sought clerical advice and will miss my close spiritual friends here. But our understanding of church is just too far apart. I grieve the ministry which has been shut down and the lack of prayerful support for the outreach and evangelism which I feel called to and the lack of welcome or accommodation for the inquirers with whom I minister.

Defecting will require some travel, but may be necessary for both my and the incumbent's sanity.

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I can't help but to resent parish leaders that put their congregations (and denominations) though stuff like this.

Indeed. If a priest decides that they cannot in good conscience remain as part of their current denomination then they should do the honourable thing and resign their position before leaving. They shouldn't try to take their (ha - "their" [Roll Eyes]

) congregation with them.

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
The Church has been going through this sort of turmoil for longer than I've been alive.

Something like 2,000 years, if I'm reading Acts of the Apostles correctly.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0