Thanks for the Help, Not

My ex-wife and I have an acrimonious relationship, now.  A fact that is understandable, say, ten years ago or so, but at this point it seems rather, well, pointless.

She, as I, was brought up in the Christian Reformed Church.  A church I was a member of for thirty-one years, having gained admittance via birth.  I left the Church when I strayed from the marital path, and I haven’t really looked back since.  Even so, what I was taught in the Church, or told, being a Believer was all about; forgiveness, not being a part of the world, humbly guiding or advising individuals who stray from the path; are lessons that remain in my mind.

You see, I wanted to believe members of the Church meant or practiced what they preach.  Not that I necessarily do, mind you, but even though I left the Church, I thought I could approach the Church, contritely, honestly, for some of that guiding and advising, the mediation that is preached by Christians everywhere as living in Christ.  I was wrong.

I wrote two letters to the Church, some time back, requesting, no, imploring, their mediation between my ex-wife and myself.  It had gone on long enough.  My first letter was ignored.  So one month and three days later, I wrote a second letter.  A week later, I received a response.  The Church declined, stating, as part of their reply,

”...we as elders do not feel that we have the right or the responsibility to involve ourselves with these matters."

Fine.  The elders are correct in stating that they do not have the right to involve themselves in these matters, or any matters for that matter, but I wonder why elders believe they can involve themselves in individuals lives, in a disciplinary manner, when the individuals are members of the Church?  Even so, I was giving the Church the right to involve themselves, I desired their help, and they refused.

As to the elders denying their responsibility, well, that’s one of the most un-principled statements that could be uttered by a Christian, at least if one is to believe what is preached from the pulpits of churches everywhere.  But the responsibility preached is not really meant, it is merely a raining down of verbal blows before the collection plate is passed, it seems.

I’m not angry with the Church, or my ex-wife for that matter, for if I deem either of them worthy of my anger, I am simply wasting my energies on irrelavant foolishness.  That doesn’t mean I do not feel the whip of acrimony, it only means that I can bear it with the same ease with which a duck sheds water from its back.

I smelled the decay, as Nietzsche writes, a long way off, but in this case, I absorbed a snout full.

Posted by on 07/28 at 04:21 PM

  1. John Venlet: I’m not angry with the Church, or my ex-wife for that matter, for if I deem either of them worthy of my anger, I am simply wasting my energies on irrelavant foolishness.

    Since you freely admit to being the party who surreptitiously violated his sacred oath (your voluntary wedding vows) why would you presume to be the aggrieved party?

    Isn’t that kind of like the burglar stating that he isn’t angry with all of the people he stole from?

    Posted by  on  07/30  at  12:39 PM

  2. Once again, Serpent, you comment wide of the point.

    Posted by  on  07/31  at  03:36 AM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: Hitting the Right Notes, Evidently

Previous entry: Well, It Would Save Alot of Money, and Prevent Much Lying and Additional Theatrics

<< Back to main