disappearing christians

Family Org, a web site of Focus on the Family cites a sobering statistic that should cause us to consider the way we relate, or don't relate, to those in our church family. I have no way of knowing if every detail of this statistic is accurate, but do know that many souls are leaving the church. Below is a quote that is scary, and sad:

Approximately 22 million Americans say they are Christians and made a faith commitment to Jesus Christ, and say that commitment is still important to them, but they have struggled with faith or relational issues and therefore quit going to church. Tens of thousands more will join their ranks this week.

When one considers the value God places on even one soul, and multiplies that 22 million times, it is beyond tragic. What must we, as the church, do to stop this migration from His body? It's easy to always condemn those leaving as being weak, if this is true, what are we doing to strengthen them in an effort to make them strong?

There are many professing Christians who have left the church and no one seems to care. No one in their church family has contacted them, and the one leaving feels that the church doesn't care one way or the other about them. If our blood brother or sister just disappeared, for whatever reason, we wouldn't stop looking until we found out exactly what happened, but if it's our Christian brothers and sisters we often just look the other way and write them off.

Not everyone claiming Jesus as their savior will remain faithful, but when 22 million Americans leave the church, something is definitely wrong!

ADDED NOTE: Al Maxey in his newest Reflections article; Churches of Christ in Crisis, describes some of the problems causing the church to decrease numerically.

unhappy soul

Spending time in a coffee shop sipping their horrendously foul brew is not always a complete waste of time. Many people you never see anywhere else are killing a little time, and looking for conversation.

A gentleman who comes in occasionally is generally ignored by the patrons, and even the waitresses spend little time with him; hello ... your order please ... and the usual hope-you-leave-a-tip smile. He is a rather small man in his mid-thirties with long stringy brown hair way past his shoulders, slightly paunchy, heavily scarred face, and a right eye that seems to meander without any specific purpose. He usually sits across from me at the counter (15-20' ft. away,) but one morning he plopped down on a stool beside me without uttering a word, or looking my direction.

I decided to make an effort to engage him in conversation:

"Hello, how are you today?"

No response. Okay, perhaps he didn't hear me, lets try again;

"Hello, hows things going?" (spoke with a little more gusto.)

This time he mumbled something; have no idea what. Okay, were gaining, lets try once more;

"Nice day huh?"

His first decipherable words were softly whispered;

"Not bad!"

Within minutes he was conversing quite well, and I discovered he had been in a car accident when he was only seventeen years old that put him in a coma for two years. He said it was his fault; he had been drinking. As a result of the accident the right side of his face is completely paralyzed (reason enough for a meandering eye.) He still doesn't say much to anyone, but he will nod in my direction when he's in the cafe, and occasionally speak to me.

Bad choices we make, even as teenagers, can often haunt us throughout our remaining days. This man knows other people ignore him because of his appearance, so he responds with silence. Over time perhaps God can work through me (or some other person) in such a way that this man will understand that Jesus died for him, God loves him, and his future can be unimaginably wonderful.

the church gossip

Anonymous email

Mildred, the church gossip, self-appointed monitor of the church's morals, kept sticking her nose into other people's business.

Several members did not approve of her extra curricular activities, but feared her enough to maintain their silence. She made a mistake, however, when she accused Henry, a new member, of being an alcoholic after she saw his old pickup truck parked in front of the town's only bar one afternoon. She emphatically told Henry and several others that everyone seeing it there would know what he was doing.

Henry, a man of few words, stared at her for a moment and just turned and walked away. He didn't explain, defend, or deny. He said nothing.

Later that evening, Henry quietly parked his pickup in front of Mildred's house . . . walked home . . and left it there all night.

freedom from tradition

The Sunday School System, Sunday night services, and Wednesday night study have great merit, but they are not scripturally binding on Christians, they are merely based in tradition. Anyone insisting that you must participate in a Sunday School program in order to be a child of God is wrong (not that it's unscriptural to go to Sunday School,) but it is unscriptural for another person to bind their personal opinions on other Christians.

Any group of believers who bind their traditional viewpoints on other believers rob them of their freedom in Christ, and enslave them like puppets to a human religious system.

"For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery." Gal 5:1 ESV

Many Christians honestly believe that every time the door to the "church building" is ajar, you absolutely must be present in order to be a true follower of Jesus. Any person not attending these meetings are often considered unfaithful members, and soon find themselves on the outside looking in, even if the reasons for not attending these meetings are valid (not that they have to be valid.)

Enjoy your freedom in Christ, and don't allow anyone to hamper your relationship with Jesus because of their Pharisaical pronouncements on your Christian walk.

summertime hiatus

Summertime = less posting + more time to hang around the lake with my trusty hound dog.

discussions with a pentecostal preacher

Recently I had the opportunity to engage in a candid conversation with a Pentecostal preacher that revealed some interesting thoughts regarding how he, and other "pastors," perceive the Church of Christ.

He was curious why COC ministers always refuse invitations to work with the local Ministerial Association in supporting their efforts to create a better community, and especially to promote Jesus in the community. Evidently all (or nearly all) local churches partner in this work.

This group (by his definition) does not set any rules that govern churches; it is an informal group with the goal of making an impact in their city by working together to promote Jesus, and in no way geared to promote any particular church, or agenda.

According to many in the COC it is unscriptural to join such organizations based on their interpretation of 2 Cor. 6:14-16:

"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; ..."

These verses serve as proof-text for many in the COC for refusing to unite with other denominational groups for any reason, even when these groups are trying to better their communities by introducing Jesus to the unchurched. By twisting these verses into something not intended, we are insinuating that members of the Ministerial Associations are unbelievers, lawless, in darkness, in accord with the Devil, and not a temple of God.

Combining resources and working as a team with "denominational churches" has usually been taboo for the COC regardless of the situation, or the good that could be accomplished. Is it any wonder that in some communities the COC is viewed as cultic, isolationistic, and self-centered!

How can it be wrong for Christians from different "churches" to unite in a concerted effort to help their community? In the wake of Katrina many Churches of Christ did unite with other religious groups to help their communities, but it usually takes a full-blown catastrophe for this to happen.

Just wondering!

seeking unity as individuals

If any hope for unity (even within Restoration churches) is forthcoming, it will most likely occur because of individual effort rather than as a group.

We have sat around waiting for some sort of unification plan to unfold for years without success. This statement will probably get me in hot water with a few elders, but when you go for years and years with little, if any, plan to rectify our disunity problems, seldom hearing a word about our need for unity from the pulpit, or privately for that matter, I can't help but suspect that many of our leaders are too busy protecting our fenced-in position, and see unity as a low priority endeavor.

Perhaps this approach is oversimplified; but as individuals within a church, we need to find ways to seek unity, even when our church leadership apparently disagrees. It would be great to have our elders leading the way to unity, but my experience (along with many of my brothers and sisters in other RM churches ) give no reasons to believe unity is something being discussed, or pursued, by our leaders.

Rather than waiting for our "church" to initiate (which seldom happens) some sort of unity seminar (or whatever) focusing on drawing divergent churches together, we need to take the proverbial bull-by-the-horns, and within our own hearts have the courage to unite (especially with those we share RM roots) with our brothers and sisters who sport a different name on their "church sign."

I don't know how others approach this disunited mess, but when I talk to my friends in churches with different names on their signs, we discuss our positive feelings about our relationship to God, not accusing each other of our failings, but accepting each other as a part of the Lord's body with love, knowing we are truly brothers and sisters united in His cause.

Unity is certainly an attainable goal that Christians can strive toward without attempting to create every church into a carbon copy of what we think it should be, but with the realization that none of us are perfect (including us,) and we can all dwell together in peace and love fully recognizing each other as children of God; thus brothers and sisters.

crooked halo

The most visible, and stunning example of bad judgement in a person professing to be a Christian, I have ever witnessed, occurred several years ago in a combination restaurant/bar in my home town.

Many of the local church groups in our community formed a church baseball league, and the elders of the COC after long deliberation decided it wasn't unscriptural, or a known work of the Devil, so with their blessings we put together a rag-tag baseball team, and fought gallantly against the Baptist, Mennonites, the Church of God, and the champion Pentecostals.

Following one of the games a baseball player decided he was in dire need of something to drink, so the place he chose to sate his thirst was a local bar, and what he chose to drink was several bottles of beer. As he was mingling with the drunks he became loud enough for me to hear his distinctive voice in the adjacent restaurant. I casually and carefully walked over to the door leading into the bar, and much to my chagrin ... it was one of the baseball players. He was celebrating a victory with a bottle of beer in his hand while wearing a dirty baseball jersey with; "CHURCH OF CHRIST" written in big capital letters on the back.

Needless to say "church baseball" is no longer a popular subject with this particular church.

More than likely all Christians at one time or another have been guilty of hypocrisy (yep! even me,) but for some reason this incident of my brother wearing his "church jersey" in a bar while getting drunk has left an indelible mark on my mind. You may know of worse indiscretions by Christians in public, but the jersey incident has to be ranked rather high on the bad judgement list.

where's the joy?

Christians should display more joy in their everyday lives than any group on earth; sadly this is not always the case.

Our days should be filled with joy, not walking around wearing mugs that would blend right in with the wanted posters in the Post Office. Christian joy should translate to smiles and friendliness, not frowns and gloominess.

Christians are not excluded from many of the same problems that weigh-down all humans, we often find ourselves in the same morass as unbelievers, and bear many of the same burdens, sadness, and guilt. Thankfully, those in Jesus have an ever present help that we can bet our lives on, and this alone should cause us to overflow with joy.

The first century church had a ton of joy even during one of the worst periods of Christian persecution in history. A few of our "church" tribes believe they have captured the essence of the early church, but seem to have neglected to restore the joy of being a Christian.

As His children, we realize God loves and protects us, yet we often mope around looking in every nook and cranny for the negatives, while the obvious blessings that surround us escape our notice. Counting our daily blessings should give us all the incentative we need to express ourselves in a joyful manner.

Like most Christians, I fail miserably at times to possess the joy that Jesus gives, and certainly don't always reflect a joyful image as I should, but one thing I have discovered; if I start out each day with a smile and a kind word (even if I'm dying inside,) people respond with a tidal wave of kindness and joy.

Perhaps if we spent a little time in quite contemplation we might realize the blessings we reap daily as children of God; our sins are forgiven, we have a God who listens to us, we possess the Spirit of God within us, we are blessed with a Christian community, and finally we have the promise of eternal life in the presence of God...surely this is enough to promote an occasional smile.

variations of unity

Understanding unity when applied to uniting different "churches" into one united body often becomes a little confusing, at least to me. When we speak of unity with other Christians, just what kind of unity are we seeking?

Listed below are four variations of unity (there are many more,) each with a different set of circumstances that will require radically different approaches if we're honestly seeking to unite in fellowship with those we disagree with religiously:

Unity within a particular tribe ... All the believers at one location who proclaim themselves the body of Christ, and work together as a separate church, yet are part of a larger group of churches sharing the same "church name," and belief system.

Unity between the individual churches (as described above) who all share the same "church name," but retain their autonomy while being loosely knit together forming a larger body, or denomination, of those who together (occasionally at least,) share similar beliefs.

Unity within the Restoration Movement. Churches with roots in the Stone-Campbell Movement who have divided many times over the years, and now seldom recognize each other as a viable Christian body.

Unity involving all churches regardless of their denominational name, who profess Jesus as their savior, even if there are drastic differences in their belief system.

It seems unlikely, if not impossible, to have Christian unity when one tribe presumes they alone are perfect interpreters of Gods Word, and refuse to fellowship anyone with a different opinion. Unity in Christ will only exist if we recognize that each person, or church, will never be the exact clone of the other.

In a small community where I was raised, one Church of Christ split over time into three separate tribes each sporting the Church of Christ name over their door. Each of these churches claimed to be the ONE and ONLY true body of Christ, and each believed they were following the perfect pattern of the first century church. They were not bashful about bad-mouthing each other, and totally refused to recognize each other as a body of Christ. A multiplicity of churches, each proclaiming themselves as the one and only body of Christ, is totally confusing to the unchurched; confusing enough to those already in the Lord's body.

Sitting around twiddling-our-thumbs waiting for churches we feel have apostatized to repent of their folly and come running back to the original fold is just not going to happen. Many of the churches split from the COC are content where they are; they see no need to return and resume the same old bickering that caused the divisions in the first place.

Unity within a single tribe of Christians, while difficult, is usually realized to some degree, but unity with those outside our select group can approach the impossible!

complete lack of compassion

Recently a group of at least 40 climbers attempting to reach the summit of Mt. Everest walked past a man dying of oxygen deficiency. Their goal of reaching the summit was evidently more important to them then making an effort to save the British mountaineer's life; he eventually died.

Luke (10:29-37) gives us the story of the good Samaritan who went out of his way to help a man left half dead by robbers. The priest and Levite ignored the dying man and callously walked past, yet a lowly Samaritan showed compassion and helped:

"But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him." Luke 10: 33,34 ESV

The guilty climbers in this article; Hillary rips climbers who left dying man, will forever be haunted by their lack of compassion for a fellow human being. Life is often of little importance to the self-centered who put their ambitions far above the well-being of their companions. It would be interesting to know how they would feel if it was their son, or father, who they left lying in the snow to die!

Before condemning these men to Satan's future habitation; don't we basically do the same thing every day these 40 mountaineers are guilty of; walking past men and women who are dying in sin without Jesus and never offering help, or a word of encouragement?

our unfathomable creator

God, being spirit, is not restricted by human form, function, or appearance, but you already know this, so indulge me!

Many entertain an image of God they have seen in a Rembrandt or Michelangelo painting. Some think of God as having long flowing white hair, dressed in a snow-white robe while spending eons perched on a really fancy throne.

This impression many have of God seems way too restrictive. I like to think of God as covering the entire universe equally (or as equally as He wants to,) yet always being near us and working in our lives. Viewing God as a perpetual throne-sitter just doesn't make sense; not that He couldn't run the universe from one location, but how, and why, would God (a spirit) confine Himself to a chair!

Imposing human restraints on deity by our human imagination is always futile. God is not confined to any dimension of time or space, but able to transcend all dimensions even without wearing a cape. God can encompass all things, at all times, in all dimensions, with one hand tied behind His back...if He had a hand and a back.

unity concessions

The Lord does not approve of divisions in His body; yet we opt to divide over often insignificant opinions, occasionally over something as simple as personality conflicts.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that unless the divided churches rooted in the Restoration Movement find ways to unite, our prospects of forming any viable unity with churches outside the RM is probably not going to happen.

My overly simplified solution for ending divisions: Perhaps rather than having our occasional (and usually unfruitful) unity conference featuring our most articulate and well known speakers, why not just announce a great big ol' picnic BBQ and allow the conference to take place from table-to-table among the rank-and-file members. If we're truly seeking Christian union then we need to engage the total membership, not just a select few that often present their own thoughts rather than what the congregation desires.

Below are several concessions we might have to live with if any form of unity is realized. There are many more; perhaps you can add others, or give good reasons why we shouldn't concede these:

1. While we may have an aversion to instrumental music we don't have to use it, but we must be willing to allow those who are not adverse to using instruments to do so without condemning them.

2. Churches utilizing one cup, two cups, or hundreds of cups in celebrating the Lord's Supper should not cause divisions, we can choose what we believe to be correct, and let other churches make their choice as well .... it doesn't really matter!

3. Whether to use church contributions for orphanages, colleges, preacher schools, or other places we feel need our help will have to be determined by each church, and respected by other churches that don't agree.

4. Sunday schools are great, and we can continue to use this tool, but for church groups that don't believe it's right, then they should continue Sunday mornings sans the Sunday School System, without either group condemning the other. It should be the choice of each church, and all Christians should understand this is simply a matter of choice and not a life-and-death situation.

We don't have to concede anything that goes against our conscience that we feel is absolute truth, in fact it would be wrong. We just need to realize that as believers we are God's children, and while we may not agree exactly on the scriptures, we can still be ONE in Him.

prospects for unity

From birth my religious thinking was shaped and nurtured (warped might be a better term) by a church believing they alone represented the true church on earth. Things were simple in those days; identifying the Lord's church was as uncomplicated as reading the sign over the entrance into the building, if it said CHURCH OF CHRIST it was THE church (although this wasn't always true, some churches that wore the proper name were lost,) any other name written on the sign revealed an apostate church where I had no brothers and sisters to fellowship.

One of the primary objectives of the Restoration Movement was to unite Christians; yet over the years those within the RM have splintered into dozens of separate groups where fellowship, even between churches with the same heritage, is almost nonexistent. What started out as being a noble endeavor to unite God's children has regressed to the point that we seldom, if ever, seek unity with other Christians. Many in the COC honestly believe there can be no unity unless those who disagree with us completely drop their cherished beliefs and fully adopt our viewpoint-we are always right, and your usually wrong!

The religious world is not blind to the failure of the RM to achieve unity, and by our actions it's easy to see that we desire unity only on our terms. In order to have Christian unity we must find a way to show other Christians we truly desire their fellowship without demanding anything of them that God doesn't require.

Since no one is perfect, even the Christian, there will be disagreements on every conceivable doctrine, and if we expect every church to fall in line with our particular beliefs we will always be disappointed. Believe it or not, many people in what many of us might call false churches, actually are honest in what they believe, even if their wrong. Many in the Church of Christ are also honestly wrong in what they believe (this may be a shock to some in the Church of Christ.)

Some questions to ponder:

1. What will those in the COC concede for the sake of unity, and what do we expect other groups we discuss unity with to concede?

2. How well can we accept change after years of believing we alone have the perfect pattern for the church?

3. Do we really expect other groups to throw away their beliefs and adopt our viewpoint?

buddy, can you spare a dime?

Occasionally I stumble across some Bible teaching that just doesn't seem to mesh (at least in my feeble mind) with what's written in another place. If the teachings seem to conflict (by my interpretation at least) perhaps my understanding is shallow, or it's a mystery that just doesn't lend itself to easy interpretation.

Jesus clearly states in His Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:42 ESV) we are to give alms to those who ask:

"Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you."

Side note: What would you do if someone you don't even know asked to borrow your new $80,000 Hummer? Remember, were not to refuse the one who would borrow from us.

Paul (2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 ESV) presents a case for thoughtful giving. If we give indiscriminately to everyone who begs for help, we aid someone Paul tells us should not eat because they are unwilling to work.

"... If anyone is not willing to work let him not eat. For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living."

On the surface it appears these two passages of scripture place us in an untenable position, and wedges us between a rock and a hard place trying to figure out what to do when someone begs of us. Jesus says give to the one who begs, while Paul says if a man is to lazy to work he shouldn't eat.

When we provide alms to a beggar who is obviously too lazy to work (not referring to those truly in need,) he becomes useless to himself and society, and becomes dependent on handouts without seeing the need to provide for himself. By our alms we encourage laziness, and actually cause him more harm than good.

Jesus says give to the beggar, yet my common sense says don't give to the beggar; not without first checking to see if he's really in need, or just seeking to add my name to his list of suckers who support him. Sucker, or not, I prefer to err on the side of benevolence than to take a chance of rejecting my neighbor who truly needs help. It's not always an easy decision, especially with the overload of those on drugs, booze, and whatever, that are roaming our streets looking for an easy source of income to supply their bad habits.

a fragile religious freedom

For years we have lived in America with very little Christian bashing, but times they are a changin' as Bob Dylan rasped in his 1964 hit song. It has become the major goal of many atheists and the non-christian to undermine and scoff at our belief in a risen savior, and to deride our attempts to keep America a Christian nation. Their goal is a godless nation where we have no right, in any form, to proclaim God as our creator.

If we continue to sit around with folded hands,unconcerned and inactive, while a small percentage of our population rants against prayer, and other public displays of Christianity, we just may be looking for a good catacomb for our Sunday morning assembly. We must realize that our "church buildings" and "church signs" will eventually infringe on the rights of the non-christian minority, and soon (because of their loud protests) they will be the "squeaky wheel" our elected officials will be oiling.

We can still be Christians, but not permitted to refer to God or His Son publicly; pray, but only in our "church buildings" and closets. Basically just keep your religion and God to yourself, and don't promote your beliefs in a public manner.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer while imprisoned by Nazi thugs in Germany knew exactly how fragile religious freedom could be, and how it could be banished in a very short time. Read Bonhoeffer's Letters And Papers From Prison for a chilling account of life when religious freedom ceases to exist.

the perfect christian

Not only is it tough being a perfect Christian, it's impossible!

About twenty-five years ago a man caused a great deal of heartache to a small church he claimed as his family. He decided (in his own legalistic mind) that an elder must be perfect in order to shepherd the church scripturally, and went about promoting his agenda for perfect elders, and letting everyone know how corrupt the existing elders were...they were not perfect and should be replaced with those who were perfect.

Many in the church family (including the elders) attempted to explain that perfection was impossible for any mortal including those desiring to be an elder, but scripture, logic, and common sense meant nothing to him. He would always spout his favorite elder bashing scripture quoting Titus 1:7, 8 as absolute proof of his sound convictions.

For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined.

Being "above reproach" was equivalent to being perfect in his mind, and he didn't think the existing elders were qualified to be shepherds and should resign. No one in the local church met his standards to lead as an elder...they just didn't meet his flawless interpretation of God's Word.

After causing a lot of problems this man eventually left the church and was always quick to pronounce the whole group as a bunch of hypocrites. Unfortunately he died a very bitter man with no use for the church.

We're all far from perfect-even our shepherds, but expecting perfection in others when we can't meet the criterion ourselves is ridiculous!

when brothers disagree

Alan Rouse causes my brain (or whatever that pea-sized-thinking-thing is) to hurt! His current post seeks a method to reconcile differences between Christians, and between different congregations. This post is basically an extension of my comments on his post.

Our conflicting brothers guide is found in Mat. 18:15-17 (ESV):

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of the two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

These verses reflect the biblical process for resolving conflicts between brethren, but care must be taken to insure that following this process doesn't generate additional problems that end up worse than the original. If I honestly, though unjustly, perceive a sin has been committed against me, and I roundup some of my biased friends to confront the "sinner" as witnesses, and my biased friends deem the evidence to be weighted in my favor, this would be unfair. It would be unfair even if the brother was actually guilty as charged. Imagine the consequences if this Christian charged with sinning against his brother is innocent, yet because of tainted testimony he is suddenly treated by the church as a "tax collector."

We pride ourselves in conforming our thoughts to Gods' Word, but often the scriptures are twisted just enough to fit our way of thinking. If the brother in the previous paragraph was honest about solving the problem with his brother, he would seek unbiased brothers/sisters to establish evidence that would be fair to all concerned.

It's difficult to believe a Christian could not find it in his/her heart to forgive another Christian who sinned against him; whether the sin was actual, or perceived...but it happens.

I wonder if Jesus forgave those who sinned against him?

warm planet theory

Scientific proof the earth is warming.

the "group think" principles

Check out an interesting post at Believing Thomas that lists the actions and thought processes of people involved in "group think." Often the legalistic tribes of the COC approach the concept of being a church the same way.

Of the symptoms indicative of "group think" (a term coined by the psychologist Irving Janis) a couple thoughts on his list fit comfortably in some churches:

7. "Direct pressure on dissenters to conform": Unless you believe and practice the way we do your wrong, and unless you conform to our precise understanding of scripture your not acceptable to God, and not recognized as a Christian by our group. Seems like something I have heard before!

8. "Self-appointed 'mindguards' protect the group from negative information": In a few of these groups only the King James Version is the only authorized and acceptable Bible Christians should read. Any book written by someone not sharing the groups particular belief system is suspect, and shouldn't be read because it only confuses us with false information.

Some symptoms of decisions affected by group think according to Janis:

1. "Incomplete survey of alternatives": You probably know of churches that refuse to even consider alternatives to their paternalistic and traditional practices. Can you imagine one of these churches considering the alternative of allowing a woman to stand up in front of the congregation and participate in the process of passing the communion to other Christians-even if she didn't speak a word!

3. "Failure to re-appraise initially rejected alternatives": Once an alternative has been dismissed by some churches it takes an act of congress for them to rethink their position. Old traditional methods are the only acceptable practices-if it was good enough for Grandpa Jones it's good enough for me!

Christians involved in a "group think" (my-way-or-the-highway) church wouldn't even realize the listed symptoms applied to them. While Janis may not intend his findings to be exclusive to church groups, his study certainly seems to apply to some churches where I was a member.