Month: March 2012

Faith in The Flesh

I was intrigued by a post on The Emergent Kiwi’s blog about Inking the Stations of The Cross.  The full story is here.

A pastor of a Montrose-area church recently challenged members of his congregation to live out their faith in an atypical way by getting tattoos that represent different Stations of the Cross, images of Christ’s journey from condemnation to resurrection.

These faith-inspired tattoos are a great outward demonstration of a person’s inward faith.

I’ve had a few interesting interactions around the idea of tattoos in the last couple of days.  It would seem that there are still a lot of people out there who don’t like them or don’t view them as art.  Cards on the table, I have tattoos and piercings – I think that has been noted once or twice by all and sundry.  I have tattoos that represent my faith and I also have tattoos that are “decoration”.  When I have more money (tattooing is an expensive business) I intend to have further tattoos to complete the look I want to eventually have.  These will also include images that represent my faith as it is an intricate part of who I am.

What do you think about this Stations of The Cross project that some members of the community in Montrose have become part of?

Guest Post: Moving On | The Theory Part 1, The Questions

A couple of months ago I asked Tim if he would like to write a few guest blogs.  Never one to shy away from controversy he has started to explore the issue of “what happens when you stop going to the same church”.  It is probably best if I hand straight over to him and invite you all to join in the discussion.



Every once in a while, one of my church-going friends will move away from their current church and (probably) begin attending another somewhere else.  And every time, every single time, I hear the same complaints from some of those left behind.

Apparently, anybody not completely satisfied with the way things are at their church is caught up in the morass of a consumer church mentality; anybody attending a church for any length of time has become part of that congregation for better or for worse, ‘til death do them part; anybody who moves away other than for reasons of distance or ‘being sent out’ is ‘scum’ and ‘we’re better off without them’.

All I know is that many of my friends have found themselves unable to carry on attending their current church.  I refuse to believe that they’re all flighty flim-flams who turn tail and run at the first sign of difficulty.  So, why does the remaining congregation take a huff in such a fashion?  Where does this attitude of ‘once you start you can’t stop’ come from?  It seems dangerously close to the ‘disfellowshipping’ or some of the practices as reported about Mark Driscoll’s Mars Hill establishment.

Does the church have any responsibility to those in its care?  Is it wrong for those who feel let down and failed to look elsewhere?  Is a congregation automatically better off without those willing to even consider leaving?  Are we meant to blindly follow our church leaders because we believe they’ve been put there by God?

In brief: yes, no, not remotely, and no.  More detailed answers will be following in the near future…


So what do you think about the issue of moving church?  What are your experiences of people leaving?  Why not share them here and see if the discussion bears fruit?