9 Responses to “Orthodox Paradox III: Conclusion? (Our Meeting Was Sabotaged)”

  1. Christopher McCulloh 19 June 2007 at 8:51 am #

    OMFG. Unbelievable.

    Why didn’t someone make the hurting stop? Was there not anyone leading the meeting?

    Those people should have received a loving swift kick out the door, with an explanation that these things they are doing are the EXACT reason why people want to leave, and why you needed a meeting WITHOUT them in the first place…

    I am happy that all of my WTF are usually quarantined to waitresses, salesmen and internet browsers. This makes me afraid of big churches. Although I do admit that my church has it’s own problems, just less people, so less variety, and less often…

    Oh, and mad props for recognizing that the poor are not the only ones who need our help. It’s just the feel good liberal mentality to throw a bag of money at the poor and think that you did some good, when really all you did was gave someone who does not know how to handle money, a bunch of money that they are now going to handle poorly and probably get themselves into an even bigger mess than they were in before…

  2. B 19 June 2007 at 10:22 am #

    Well, let’s just say I rebutted the hijacking comments immediately and reclaimed control of the meeting, but the fact remains that it still happened.

    Big churches? I don’t know if I call a church of 60-90 regular attendees big. I have a lot of friends who go to churches of a thousand or more… that’s big. And the good thing about a big church is that it is less likely to become ingrown and more likely to contain different points of view. I would call ours a medium size church, if that.

    I agree that some individuals shouldn’t have been at the meeting. I’m not sure what to do about that though. I guess you really can’t start picking and choosing who to invite. That’s the problem with opening up the floor like that, you get a lot of disagreement. I thrive on disagreement, but this meeting was more than differing opinions, it was differing viewpoints as to what the meeting was even about in the first place.

  3. Luke 19 June 2007 at 12:34 pm #

    Where do I even begin…

  4. B 19 June 2007 at 12:47 pm #

    That’s a good idea Luke, just don’t.

  5. Arthur 19 June 2007 at 12:58 pm #

    Although I’m sure I would have much to say on this if I had the time, I’m just hoping to win some money.

    Office Space? Like the guy who invented the pet rock?

  6. Luke 19 June 2007 at 1:19 pm #

    Thou thyself hast said it – and so I shant rant. :-) Cheers!

  7. B 19 June 2007 at 2:54 pm #

    Art wins the prize! One big honkin dollar is coming your way. Notice how I didn’t include the word “bill” in there, which means it could be made up of various coins.

  8. Chris 19 June 2007 at 7:30 pm #

    “it is less likely to become ingrown and more likely to contain different points of view”


    Also, I thought your church was more like 300, so it’s really not nearly as big as I thought…

    Glad to hear you reclaimed the meeting. Nice job.

    Every church has it’s problems. Whether it be a certain Nazi or a schizo loudmouth… No offense to either of those two I just called out, we still love you. In fact, the fact that we choose not to hate you shows that we love you even more than people who are ‘easily’ love-able, even if we do complain about you…

  9. B 21 June 2007 at 7:34 am #

    Wow, now that’s some name callin’. I wouldn’t go that far, for the record. I appreciate the sentiment though, and I’m still trying to figure out your logic at the end there… LOL

    Seriously, I get what you’re saying though.


Leave a Reply