# Reformed Circling?



## Andrew35 (Sep 2, 2021)

So I just read Aimee Byrd's latest post, "Confessional Communities," and felt myself somewhat disturbed.

The group therapy she advocates here, reviewing a book by a Dr. Curt Thompson, reminds me a lot of a currently trendy, Silicon Valley practice called "Circling" (see below illustrations for 6 goals of circling).

"Many of our relationships—not just psychotherapeutic ones—have common blind spots, power gradients, and limit to how helpful one voice (as compared to many) can be in helping us overcome shame. The confessional community gives us a place to engage in real time and space those phenomena in order to achieve greater states of integration, and therefore be more perfect, more whole, even as our Father in heaven is perfectly whole" (Thompson, quoted by Byrd).

Am I overreacting here to what is actually a healthy, Christian communal therapy practice?

This is a genuine question. Counseling is not my area of expertise, and I'm a loner by nature.

*Below is from a "circling" website












(from https://circlinginstitute.com/what-is-circling-method/)


----------



## VictorBravo (Sep 2, 2021)

Frankly, I don't know. I despise the buzzwords, but don't condemn the aim.

But I think a gathering of friends, after prayer, maybe over a glass of homemade wine, with a commitment to bearing one another's burdens and acknowledging our own sins, does the job admirably.

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## Taylor (Sep 2, 2021)

This just sounds like psychobabble.

Reactions: Like 8


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 2, 2021)

I don't mean to focus this on Byrd. It's just that she's the first I've heard about this, as I follow her blog.

When I followed the link, it seems that this book is enormously popular amongst a number of movers and shakers within the evangelical world. I was curious if anyone here was familiar.

I'm making a mental note to look more into this.


----------



## Taylor (Sep 3, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> ...it seems that this book is enormously popular amongst a number of movers and shakers within the evangelical world.


That's a near-sure sign that it is garbage.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1 | Funny 2


----------



## Jack K (Sep 3, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> When I followed the link, it seems that this book is enormously popular amongst a number of movers and shakers within the evangelical world. I was curious if anyone here was familiar.


That book won't go on sale for another month, so no one here will have read it unless they got a pre-release copy. And there's no way to know whether or not it will be enormously popular in the evangelical world. The most you might be able to say is that the publisher and author did a good job of collecting endorsements ahead of its release, and I'm not sure I would even say that. The list of endorsements is long, but the names are less prominent than they might be.

The author has written a number of other books, so I suppose one might critique those. The chart you posted above does sound rather pop-psychology buzzwordy, which doesn't appeal to me, but I don't see anything in it that's clearly unbiblical. It's hazardous to try to review a book without being able to actually read it.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 3, 2021)

Jack K said:


> That book won't go on sale for another month, so no one here will have read it unless they got a pre-release copy. And there's no way to know whether or not it's enormously popular in the evangelical world. The most you might be able to say is that the publisher and author did a good job of collecting endorsements ahead of its release, and I'm not sure I would even say that. The list of endorsements is long, but the names are less prominent than they might be.
> 
> The author has written a number of other books, so I suppose one might critique those. The chart you posted above does sound rather pop-psychology buzzwordy, which doesn't appeal to me, but I don't see anything in it that's clearly unbiblical. It's hazardous to try to review a book without being able to actually read it.


Well, I kind of wasn't, or wasn't necessarily asking for one.

What I was doing was putting out feelers to see if anyone knew anymore of this than I -- which is very little, at this point. Maybe this guy has broad name recognition? Maybe he's had a blog where he's been posting his idea, or put out other books on the same topic, or something? I don't know.

I didn't say it was "enormously popular in the evangelical world," but rather seems enormously popular among some _influential _in that broader world. I've definitely heard of some of the endorsers. Kwon, McCracken, and Begbie are names I recognize. And it has a "#1 New Release" button at the top. That seemed significant to me.

The chart itself (above) isn't from the book, it's from the "circling" movement I referenced, which I've heard called the newest Silicon Valley cult. The language and approaches are very similar -- even identical at some points -- hence my concern.

I'm just an overseas teacher who can barely keep up with my own field, which is why I ask questions here.


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 3, 2021)

Googling it shows unhidden associations with yoga...

Reactions: Informative 1 | Wow 1


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 3, 2021)

Our faith and fellowship is becoming horizontal when it should be vertical. As Reformed folk, that’s clearly our starting point (as well as our middle and ending point). Hard pass on this stuff and some of the nonsense Byrd is peddling. She makes some good points (sometimes) but the circles of authority she’s aligning herself is kinda…..


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 3, 2021)

Commenting purely on her blog post. Even the first paragraph is full of vile nonsense:

"Today I want to introduce his practice of confessional communities. It is a form of group therapy. In reading about this method of interpersonal neurobiological psychotherapy that Dr. Thompson practices, I thought about how our friendships need to be more like this and our discipleship in church. As Dr. Thompson says, “It is in communities like these that we encounter the possibility of being deeply known and where we ‘practice for heaven.’” These small group meetings of between 6-8 people create a space where people are seen, soothed, safe, and secure while they express their grief, trauma, and desires. It’s facilitated and led by the therapists, but the patients play a collaborative part in creating beauty together out of pain and unrequited desires. Both the being seen in a secure setting and the creative collaboration is healing, as this is what we all long for. In this way, the patients get to tell their story and be a part of one another’s’ healing. Dr. Thompson notes, "We need to bear witness to our deepest longings, our greatest joys, our most painful shame, and all the rest in order to have any sense at all of ourselves."

"interpersonal neurobiological psychotherapy" - wow sounds just like the Apostle Paul.

Why does Mrs Byrd find it so hard to have normal friendships with men and women? Does this stuff sound _anything _like normal, Christian friendship? Why is she obsessed with friendships with men? 

And is it really necessary to "bear witness to...our most painful shame" with one another? We confess our sin and shame to God, not to each other. There used to be such a thing as propriety amongst Christians. Where has that gone? Where have modesty and chasteness gone? People who like to talk about their specific sins to others tend not to be people who are ashamed of their sins. Sin is indeed shameful and that which is shameful should not be discussed in groups of people. Secret sins should be confessed to the Lord. They are generally not even within the purview of the session.

Apparently we need to engage in this group hysteria in order to have "any sense at all of ourselves". Frankly, one cannot be a Christian if one has no sense of oneself to begin with. If one has no sense of oneself as a sinner deserving of Hell and totally unable to save oneself; and believing that only the shed blood of Christ can wash his sins away, then one cannot be a Christian. What is being advocated here is narcissism dressed up as "healing". We look to Christ for healing, for the removal of shame, for succour in times of grief and affliction, for rest and joy.

There was not one reference to Scripture in that blog post. Apparently she finds these gossip sessions more spiritually rewarding than the preaching of the Word. That tells you everything. What she is peddling is spiritual darkness. Avoid it, and her, at all costs.

Reactions: Like 6 | Informative 1 | Edifying 1 | Amen 1


----------



## Jack K (Sep 3, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> Well, I kind of wasn't, or wasn't necessarily asking for one.
> 
> What I was doing was putting out feelers to see if anyone knew anymore of this than I -- which is very little, at this point. Maybe this guy has broad name recognition? Maybe he's had a blog where he's been posting his idea, or put out other books on the same topic, or something? I don't know.
> 
> ...


Sorry. Didn't mean to accuse you. Just pointing out that effective marketing can make a book look popular even when no actual customers have read it yet. And endorsers might really like a book or might just be doing someone a favor; you can't always know. Personally, I don't get too worked up about a book's influence until it actually hits some impressive sales marks.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner (Sep 3, 2021)

@Andrew35, when I saw your post title, my brain added the words "like buzzards." I thought maybe there had been some sort of arminian misstep about to be put to good use.

Reactions: Funny 4


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 3, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> Commenting purely on her blog post. Even the first paragraph is full of vile nonsense:
> 
> "Today I want to introduce his practice of confessional communities. It is a form of group therapy. In reading about this method of interpersonal neurobiological psychotherapy that Dr. Thompson practices, I thought about how our friendships need to be more like this and our discipleship in church. As Dr. Thompson says, “It is in communities like these that we encounter the possibility of being deeply known and where we ‘practice for heaven.’” These small group meetings of between 6-8 people create a space where people are seen, soothed, safe, and secure while they express their grief, trauma, and desires. It’s facilitated and led by the therapists, but the patients play a collaborative part in creating beauty together out of pain and unrequited desires. Both the being seen in a secure setting and the creative collaboration is healing, as this is what we all long for. In this way, the patients get to tell their story and be a part of one another’s’ healing. Dr. Thompson notes, "We need to bear witness to our deepest longings, our greatest joys, our most painful shame, and all the rest in order to have any sense at all of ourselves."
> 
> ...


The blogger (not a Christian) from whom I first read about circling referred to it as a form of narcissism whereby you construct your own story for others. But it's not your "real" story of course; it's the image of yourself that you want to project to others. We almost can't help that. And all the focus on authenticity within safe spaces creates new layers of power and deception. And potentially abuse, ironically enough.

I tend to think that does make it dangerous. In my introverted opinion, there's a reason why we have boundaries with others. And a reason why we need established relationships like marriage, friendships, etc. to relax them.

I like a lot of you here. And I might share my needs and prayer requests. We're Christians, after all. And over time, in this limited format, you may learn more about me and I about you. But I'm not about to create a small circle of 6-8 people where we will bare to each other our deepest inner selves and "get vulnerable" with each other. That just doesn't sound healthy to me, particularly in this format.

Another blogger, commenting on this phenomenon, mentioned that an older female friend of his said that "whoever convinced young women that the secret of a healthy relationship is deep interpersonal understanding is guilty of some kind of a war crime.” Seems to be some wisdom in that. 

Intimacy and authenticity are good, but they need to come organically. And carefully. These are very powerful human forces, and just because it's framed in theological concepts doesn't remove any of the need for caution.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 3, 2021)

I would further add that groups like these, and the thinking behind them espoused by Mrs Byrd, isn't actually seeking healing but wallowing in one's own constructed victimhood. If we were serious about moving past hurt and shame we wouldn't be organising groups so we can talk about our hurt and shame to other people. We would be seeking healing and renewing and strengthening in Christ. Instead these people want their trauma or shame or abuse to be their identity and to be validated in that identity, but the Christian's identity is in Christ. The Christian's identity is his being conformed to the image of Christ: justified, sanctified and adopted. Christians may suffer grievously in this life but Paul says: "I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us." (Romans 8:18) The Christian response to suffering and affliction is not to wallow in our victimhood, to dwell on it, but to persevere and by grace to turn it to our good (Rom. 5:3-5; Heb. 12:11-14).

Reactions: Like 5 | Love 2 | Amen 1


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 3, 2021)

The bottom line is people are bored with the Gospel. They want scandal, and Driscoll, and controversy, and survivor blogs, and polemics. We can learn when things go wrong but when we dwell on them consciously we are getting away from what truly matters. I know it’s hard to shake the stench of sin but I feel bad for those that don’t have sound, Christ-centered, Reformed preaching to get them on track.

I think a sound church in a sound denomination is vital to shaking these distractions.

There’s a lot that perplexes us and Im glad for forums like these where we can bounce things off one another but there is no substitute for the God given means of grace and worship.

I wonder if Byrd’s church/pastor is failing her based on where she’s seeking comfort and confirmation.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Relztrah (Sep 3, 2021)

Like the rest of you, I am reluctant to criticize a book that I haven't read, and won't read. But when I saw this on the opening page of the Circling Institute website ... 

The Circling™ Method​*Is our proprietary, multi-stage relational practice and unique transformational modality. It is a dynamic group process that is part-art-form, part-skillful facilitation and part-relational yoga. *

... my eyes started to glaze over.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Sep 3, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> Why does Mrs Byrd find it so hard to have normal friendships with men and women? Does this stuff sound _anything _like normal, Christian friendship? Why is she obsessed with friendships with men?



This bit is what always gets me. I recall several years ago there were rumours of how she was developing an unhealthy relationship with a minister. These rumours, to my knowledge, were entirely false. However, anyone with any common sense knows that if a minister is perceived to get too friendly with an attractive looking female, the gossip mongers are going to gossip. The most sensible thing is for the minister to maintain an appropriate degree of distance between himself and the person in question (as far as his pastoral responsibilities will allow), lest he give Satan an opportunity for reproach.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Sep 3, 2021)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> This bit is what always gets me. I recall several years ago there were rumours of how she was developing an unhealthy relationship with a minister. These rumours, to my knowledge, were entirely false. However, anyone with any common sense knows that if a minister is perceived to get too friendly with an attractive looking female, the gossip mongers are going to gossip. The most sensible thing is for the minister to maintain an appropriate degree of distance between himself and the person in question (as far as his pastoral responsibilities will allow), lest he give Satan an opportunity for reproach.


I have no idea who this woman is, or about her character, but I will say it has always been really hard for me to understand how any person in a relationship can keep closer friendships with the opposite sex. I don't see anything healthy in such a thing.

Reactions: Like 9


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 7, 2021)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> This bit is what always gets me. I recall several years ago there were rumours of how she was developing an unhealthy relationship with a minister. These rumours, to my knowledge, were entirely false. However, anyone with any common sense knows that if a minister is perceived to get too friendly with an attractive looking female, the gossip mongers are going to gossip. The most sensible thing is for the minister to maintain an appropriate degree of distance between himself and the person in question (as far as his pastoral responsibilities will allow), lest he give Satan an opportunity for reproach.


From her book, _Recovering from Biblical Manhood and Womanhood…_





I’m uncomfortable with that line of questioning. It seems like it’s setting a carnal standard or lens to make a point. I guess she’s pushing back against a related, contrary perception. Or this could be a case of the straw man fallacy ?

_….”Why are we, over two thousand years later, still debating who can pass the offering basket?”_

….I guess I missed this debate…..

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Edward (Sep 7, 2021)

Relztrah said:


> *Is our proprietary, multi-stage relational practice and unique transformational modality. It is a dynamic group process that is part-art-form, part-skillful facilitation and part-relational yoga. *
> 
> ... my eyes started to glaze over.


In Texas, when we step in something like that, we just call it Bull ****. (Self censoring due to the sensitivities of more delacate brothers and sisters here. But there really isn't any reason to avoid embracing our Anglo-Saxon roots.)

Reactions: Like 3 | Funny 1


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 7, 2021)

Is “Reformed circling” akin to “Voltures circling” ?

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 7, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> Is “Reformed circling” akin to “Voltures circling” ?


You know those times when you make a title and don't think through other possible interpretations...? 

What I was actually doing was paralleling the hip, trendy, Silicon Valley, quasi-cultish practice of "circling" whereby you lay yourself bare to a small group of others in search of authenticity and sharing stories and pain and all that... and what appeared to me to be an Evangelical (in this case, ”Reformed“) version of the same. Then trying to think aloud through the implications. There's certainly a lot of overlap in language, concepts, and practice. 

Maybe that's fine? I don't know. I just found it worth exploring. This level of planned, structured intimacy doesn't appeal to me at all, personally. I'd rather go to church, receive the means of grace, and connect with people on an organic level.

I have read since that this guy (Thompson) has had public work for a number of years, so I might want to dig into that a bit. I.e., this particular book is just the latest of a trail.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 8, 2021)

A.Joseph said:


> From her book, _Recovering from Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: How the Church Needs to ..._
> View attachment 8335
> 
> 
> ...


That's a good point.

This kind of goes back to my history with Byrd's books:

I loved her first book; bought it for my wife. She really liked it too.

So when _Why Can't We Be Friends _was released a few years back, I immediately bought it as soon as it was available. My wife is East Asian, which may or may not be relevant.

She read it and I asked her how it was, and she said she didn't really like it.

When I asked her why, the only answer she could really give was related to what you said: It seemed to be responding to some kind of problem that we hadn't actually observed or experienced; and also, in her words, seemed overly focused on someone by the name of "Doug Wilson."


----------



## Ben Zartman (Sep 8, 2021)

This seems like the next logical step to the "small groups" weekly studies that were popular at one church we were at. The idea was that in a small group you were more comfortable, and getting to know your groupmates you could learn the Bible better. I always wondered why the Lord's Day wasn't considered the best time to learn the Bible.
Seems to me that circles of closer friends happen by themselves, when folk are united by another common interest--perhaps they live close enough together to visit conveniently; perhaps they went half-shares in a log splitter--but to meet for the sole purpose of talking about feelings? Bleh. The only friends I like are those that don't pester you to tell them your feelings all the time. I can't think of anything more fake or uncomfortable than having to tell one person--much less several--all of my innermost baggage. And I sure don't want to hear theirs.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 2


----------



## Osnah (Sep 8, 2021)

Having not read the book, I must say that this book sounds like a touch of man-centeredness splashed with mysticism, disguised as "Christianity" and should be avoided. I would say that this practice should be avoided at all costs, as they are introducing New-Age mysticism with elements of yoga, channeling, etc. 

From the Circling Website: 
_As everyone engages with genuine curiosity and shares their personal experience of being with you, you discover that who *you ARE is more magnificent* than any limited idea about who you “should” be. Because of this, Circling™ is often deeply nourishing and can lead to *spiritual insights* and *awakenings*.

Learn from Circling Institute partners Guy Sengstock, the original founder & genius of the now worldwide practice of Circling and Authentic Relating and Jon Cotton, a master circler with 30 years of experience teaching meditation, intuition & psychic abilities, firewalking, intimacy, & numerous other modalities._

From the owner (Guy Sengstock) in defining what circling is on a YT video:
"_Circling has been telling me what it is ever since the beginning. I feel like my job is to listen deeply to it.... It's a deep inner subjective relational yoga or meditation_."


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Sep 8, 2021)

Carnal Reformation (which is like methodology, intellectual alignment or program driven) is not inward transformation. One comes from below (I am not saying it is bad but it can be deceptive) and one comes from above (which I am saying is necessary if we are in Union with Christ because He brings it).

Know the real thing and the false will be exposed.


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

Seems rather square to me.

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> Seems rather square to me.


Here we go, round and round!

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> Here we go, round and round!


What’s your angle with this post?

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> What’s your angle with this post?


Don't be obtuse!

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> Don't be obtuse!


I bet you thought this was acute remark.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> I bet you thought this was acute remark.


Indeed, I was trying to triangulate what would be the best response!

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> Indeed, I was trying to triangulate what would be the best response!


Fair. At least it’s not circular reasoning, otherwise we’d have come full circle by now.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Taylor (Sep 8, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> Indeed, I was trying to triangulate what would be the best response!





jw said:


> Fair. At least it’s not circular reasoning, otherwise we’d have come full circle by now.


Guys, please stop. This thread is now rect- due to you two -tangling.


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

That might be the worst ever, Taylor. For you to continue would be pointless.

Reactions: Funny 3 | Sad 1


----------



## Susan777 (Sep 8, 2021)

Osnah said:


> Having not read the book, I must say that this book sounds like a touch of man-centeredness splashed with mysticism, disguised as "Christianity" and should be avoided. I would say that this practice should be avoided at all costs, as they are introducing New-Age mysticism with elements of yoga, channeling, etc.
> 
> From the Circling Website:
> _As everyone engages with genuine curiosity and shares their personal experience of being with you, you discover that who *you ARE is more magnificent* than any limited idea about who you “should” be. Because of this, Circling™ is often deeply nourishing and can lead to *spiritual insights* and *awakenings*.
> ...


Deeply Satanic.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> That might be the worst ever, Taylor. For you to continue would be pointless.


Ouch! You made a line straight for his metaphorical jugular!

Reactions: Edifying 1 | Funny 1 | Sad 1


----------



## Taylor (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> That might be the worst ever, Taylor. For you to continue would be pointless.





SolaScriptura said:


> Ouch! You made a line straight for his metaphorical jugular!


Face it, you two: this tangent is over.


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)



Reactions: Praying 1


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

Well bless your little oblong heart, Taylor.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Santos (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> Fair. At least it’s not circular reasoning, otherwise we’d have come full circle by now.


I suppose you all have nothing better to do than to sit a round searching for the right angle?

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1


----------



## ZackF (Sep 8, 2021)

Taylor said:


> Face it, you two: this tangent is over.


There’s your sine.

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## ZackF (Sep 8, 2021)

Santos said:


> I suppose you all have nothing better to do than to sit a round searching for the right angle?


Who can circumscribe all of this folly?

Reactions: Edifying 1 | Funny 1


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> Well bless your little oblong heart, Taylor.


He may want to take us into the octagon!


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

ZackF said:


> Who can circumscribe all of this folly?


BASED


----------



## jw (Sep 8, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> He may want to take us into the octagon!


Our puns are no reason to get all bent out of shape.


----------



## Santos (Sep 8, 2021)

jw said:


> Our puns are no reason to get all bent out of shape.


You're missing the point!


----------



## ZackF (Sep 8, 2021)

Santos said:


> You're missing the point!


Three points form a plane truth!

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 8, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> Ouch! You made a line straight for his metaphorical jugular!


When I fight groups of clowns I always go for the juggler.

Reactions: Like 3 | Funny 3


----------



## ZackF (Sep 8, 2021)

Pergamum said:


> When I fight groups of clowns I always go for the juggler.


Leave it Perg to fight clowns and bet on midgets.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 8, 2021)

I guess we’re finding ourselves outside of these circles

Reactions: Like 2 | Funny 3


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 8, 2021)

Well. At least Byrd hasn’t yet succumbed to Wesley’s quadrilateral!


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Sep 8, 2021)

Re: Aymee Byrd...

For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.—2 Tim. 3:6-7​

Reactions: Like 3 | Love 1 | Amen 4


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 9, 2021)

More circles….











Reflections on the OP General Assembly, Part 2: Trauma-Informed Ministry and a Traumatizing Process


Photo by Elina Krima on Pexels.com I have learned so much through the last couple years of confronting abuse from officers in my denomination. There are some things that most of us just cannot be a…




aimeebyrd.com

Reactions: Wow 2


----------



## Irenaeus (Sep 9, 2021)

The problem with Byrd is that she is developing an entire theological approach around a personal grievance that she's not able to cope with. Regardless of what she thinks she believes, in actual practice, she doesn't have a Reformed view of sin and suffering. She thinks that hardships and offenses can be dealt with by bringing them out into the open and talking about them endlessly, and fails to realize not only that no end of talking will ever "fix" these problems but that the act of endlessly talking draws one's attention away from Christ, to self, and feeds and nourishes whatever sins may be present. That she had some good things to say is, I think, reasonably clear. That she was also, at the outset, subjected to some behavior unbecoming of ministers of the Word may be more debatable but I do think that's the case as well. But she failed to accept this as a consequence of sticking her neck out (rightly or wrongly*). Then, instead of responding as the apostle Paul does by counting her sufferings as filling up what is lacking of the suffering of Christ in her life, instead of responding with humility and meekness, she asks "How could this possibly happen to me?" and doubles down on the areas where she was wrong. She's turned inward, and now looks to self instead of to Christ. Notice that every post of hers assumes the premise: the unspoken "truth" behind everything she writes is that she was grievously and unjustly wronged with no corresponding wrong on her end.

And so now we have a theological oyster. Unable to rid herself of the irritant, she's surrounded it with layer upon layer of flowery language, creating yet another shiny pearl that is, at its root, nothing more than plain ole' theological error and confusion. Once again we have that far-from-unique American phenomenon of someone packaging their own theological journey off the rails and packaging their own unaddressed grievances and unsolved heart problems as a solution to the problems of others that you can buy or click "Like" or subscribe to. Congratulations, Aimee: you're the latest iteration of a very tired cliche.

*A woman always takes on a big risk putting herself out there as Aimee has. The debate over gender roles is one thing; _prudence_, I think, ought to suggest that women like Aimee are safer, and in a better position, if they have a man to go to bat for them and lead the charge. But how old fashioned and quaint of me to assume that the Biblical way of doing things is actually better for women and designed to protect them. Can't have people like me trampling on someone's right to self-expression and autonomy!

Reactions: Like 5 | Love 1 | Edifying 3 | Amen 3


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 9, 2021)

Irenaeus said:


> The problem with Byrd is that she is developing an entire theological approach around a personal grievance that she's not able to cope with. Regardless of what she thinks she believes, in actual practice, she doesn't have a Reformed view of sin and suffering. She thinks that hardships and offenses can be dealt with by bringing them out into the open and talking about them endlessly, and fails to realize not only that no end of talking will ever "fix" these problems but that the act of endlessly talking draws one's attention away from Christ, to self, and feeds and nourishes whatever sins may be present. That she had some good things to say is, I think, reasonably clear. That she was also, at the outset, subjected to some behavior unbecoming of ministers of the Word may be more debatable but I do think that's the case as well. But she failed to accept this as a consequence of sticking her neck out (rightly or wrongly*). Then, instead of responding as the apostle Paul does by counting her sufferings as filling up what is lacking of the suffering of Christ in her life, instead of responding with humility and meekness, she asks "How could this possibly happen to me?" and doubles down on the areas where she was wrong. She's turned inward, and now looks to self instead of to Christ. Notice that every post of hers assumes the premise: the unspoken "truth" behind everything she writes is that she was grievously and unjustly wronged with no corresponding wrong on her end.
> 
> And so now we have a theological oyster. Unable to rid herself of the irritant, she's surrounded it with layer upon layer of flowery language, creating yet another shiny pearl that is, at its root, nothing more than plain ole' theological error and confusion. Once again we have that far-from-unique American phenomenon of someone packaging their own theological journey off the rails and packaging their own unaddressed grievances and unsolved heart problems as a solution to the problems of others that you can buy or click "Like" or subscribe to. Congratulations, Aimee: you're the latest iteration of a very tired cliche.
> 
> *A woman always takes on a big risk putting herself out there as Aimee has. The debate over gender roles is one thing; _prudence_, I think, ought to suggest that women like Aimee are safer, and in a better position, if they have a man to go to bat for them and lead the charge. But how old fashioned and quaint of me to assume that the Biblical way of doing things is actually better for women and designed to protect them. Can't have people like me trampling on someone's right to self-expression and autonomy!


I am not willing to go that far yet. But, even as an early defender of Byrd I think she has made bizarre twists along the way and I stopped following.


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 9, 2021)

A.Joseph said:


> More circles….
> View attachment 8338
> 
> 
> ...


The same stuff I see in schools. It's very vague. Trauma is anything that one doesn't agree with that one has encountered.


----------



## ZackF (Sep 9, 2021)

arapahoepark said:


> The same stuff I see in schools. It's very vague. Trauma is anything that one doesn't agree with that one has encountered.


…and love doesn’t seem to be able to cover anything regardless of the degree of offense or time elapsed since the event(s).

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 9, 2021)

arapahoepark said:


> I am not willing to go that far yet. But, even as an early defender of Byrd I think she has made bizarre twists along the way and I stopped following.


It's a sad story: she really wasn't treated right. And her being a woman definitely had something to do with her treatment. Being an attractive woman didn't help. That can be threatening to men. Especially nerdy, theological ones.

But my impression: she was simply too invested in the movement she wanted to start to pull back and just be an "ordinary" congregant. And that's taking her in a weird trajectory with some strange friends.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Sep 9, 2021)

ZackF said:


> …and love doesn’t seem to be able to cover anything regardless of the degree of offense or time elapsed since the event(s).


Our society has been conditioning people to be "fragile" for a long time. The notion that if one suffers any kind of abuse, or even just grew up with a father who was not as emotionally available as one might have wanted (like 99.997% of humanity), this becomes the defining aspect of one's identity. You are a victim. And the damage is automatically assumed to be irreparable. Getting past such things is thought impossible. And telling someone to try and get past it is one and the same as denying their identity. So we have a society that has had the least amount of suffering of any generation in world history constantly imagining themselves to have suffered more than any other. It's really something to behold.

Reactions: Like 9 | Amen 3


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Sep 9, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> It's a sad story: she really wasn't treated right. And her being a woman definitely had something to do with her treatment. Being an attractive woman didn't help. That can be threatening to men. Especially nerdy, theological ones.


I don't doubt that's true in certain instances. But Byrd has a habit accusing or insinuating that men are sexist simply for offering a critique of her actual writings. You can't say you want to be treated equally in the arena of ideas and then cry "Misogyny!" when your ideas are subjected to scrutiny and critique.

Reactions: Like 10 | Love 1


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 9, 2021)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> I don't doubt that's true in certain instances. But Byrd has a habit accusing or insinuating that men are sexist simply for offering a critique of her actual writings. You can't say you want to be treated equally in the arena of ideas and then cry "Misogyny!" when your ideas are subjected to scrutiny and critique.


Exactly.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 9, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> It's a sad story: she really wasn't treated right. And her being a woman definitely had something to do with her treatment. Being an attractive woman didn't help. That can be threatening to men. Especially nerdy, theological ones.
> 
> But my impression: she was simply too invested in the movement she wanted to start to pull back and just be an "ordinary" congregant. And that's taking her in a weird trajectory with some strange friends.



I think the only thing her opponents felt "threatened" by was her espousal of heresy and egalitarianism and the platform she was given by purported conservatives from which to run her mouth. She should never have been on the Mortification of Spin podcast in the first place and she shouldn't have been defended when she started promoting heresy. If people _still _can't see what her agenda is and the danger she poses then it is due to wilful blindness and a very distorted notion of Christian gallantry towards the female sex.

On her blog she was ranting about the OPCGA not approving the organisation G.R.A.C.E. as a third-party "trauma counsellor". Well good thing the GA did decide it was best to wait as Boz Tchividjian, Founder and until recently the Executive Director of this organisation, amongst his promotion of many questionable content, just the other day gave his approval to the sodomite Pete Buttigieg becoming a "father" to two children who will now be subjected to his abominable lifestyle. "Who...not only do the same, *but have pleasure in them that do them*." (Romans 1:32b) This is the organisation Aimee Byrd wants auditing the OPC. Just one example of what she's up to. A wolf in sheep's clothing is a wolf whether male or female.

Reactions: Like 6 | Love 2 | Amen 3


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 9, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> But my impression: she was simply too invested in the movement she wanted to start to pull back and just be an "ordinary" congregant. And that's taking her in a weird trajectory with some strange friends.



Yeah, I think you nailed it. Not just anyone has aspirations to write a book. And I think her motives were probably a pure zeal for Reformed theology and doctrine. (I can't say for sure as I have not read her works, including her first one, nor do I know her background). But then maybe some decisions were made (and maybe Dr./Pastor Trueman may want to evaluate his part that kinda got the train rolling very fast in an unknown direction). The end result is that even though the OPC specifically is not her main target. The OPC will continue to distance itself. Im not saying Pastor Trueman or any other pastor should not be encouraging to a female member's embrace of the reformed faith. But I do believe there are some male aspirations and intentions that when taken on by a female, and I hope this is not too controversial, but I wonder if female leadership in all areas can create problems because the female may take on duties, attitudes, attributes and agendas that are unnatural from an ordained/God-intended (and ultimately proper) perspective. I'm not sure female leadership or dominance was ever presented in the bible as a good standard. Im not saying Ms. Byrd is attempting to be dominant but there may be shades of such a phenomenon brewing (despite some of her legitimate concerns). I also think some of the concerns of her critics had good merit but it got a bit hysterical. We can shoot down bad ideas and unqualified teachers without losing our hearts and our heads.


----------



## Irenaeus (Sep 9, 2021)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> I don't doubt that's true in certain instances. But Byrd has a habit accusing or insinuating that men are sexist simply for offering a critique of her actual writings. You can't say you want to be treated equally in the arena of ideas and then cry "Misogyny!" when your ideas are subjected to scrutiny and critique.


This is true. She has taken offense at the very notion that she is open to critique - this goes back to her inward turn referenced in my above post. It doesn't mean that there was some genuinely questionable behavior directed at her. But, whatever hints of a problem there may have been in her earlier writings, she has really doubled down on the wrong things. All of us have hints of a problem - the difference is between those who stay the course and those who decide to take a stand on precisely the areas where they are dead wrong. Whatever wrongs may have been done to Aimee Byrd, she is not an innocent bystander, and her posts make it clear that she is dabbling in all manner of increasingly questionable things. I'm all for reading and utilizing Catholic and secular sources, but there's a fine line between a Biblically sound utilization of such materials, and the wholesale absorption of non-Biblical doctrines as part of one's quest for self-generated healing. Byrd is now clearly on the other side of this fine line, reaching and grasping for anything that fits her preconceived agenda.

How I wish that people would look inward when it comes to identifying sin and outward (to Christ and to the manifestations of the work of the Spirit) when it comes to identifying righteousness. _That_ kind of Biblical double standard would save everyone a whole lot of grief. Instead we have people looking outwardly for sin and inwardly for righteousness.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## lynnie (Sep 9, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> I think the only thing her opponents felt "threatened" by was her espousal of heresy and egalitarianism and the platform she was given by purported conservatives from which to run her mouth. She should never have been on the Mortification of Spin podcast in the first place and she shouldn't have been defended when she started promoting heresy. If people _still _can't see what her agenda is and the danger she poses then it is due to wilful blindness and a very distorted notion of Christian gallantry towards the female sex.
> 
> On her blog she was ranting about the OPCGA not approving the organisation G.R.A.C.E. as a third-party "trauma counsellor". Well good thing the GA did decide it was best to wait as Boz Tchividjian, Founder and until recently the Executive Director of this organisation, amongst his promotion of many questionable content, just the other day gave his approval to the sodomite Pete Buttigieg becoming a "father" to two children who will now be subjected to his abominable lifestyle. "Who...not only do the same, *but have pleasure in them that do them*." (Romans 1:32b) This is the organisation Aimee Byrd wants auditing the OPC. Just one example of what she's up to. A wolf in sheep's clothing is a wolf whether male or female.


Do you have a link to your comment about Boz? Thanks. I hope you are mistaken.....but will check it out if you post a link.


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 9, 2021)

lynnie said:


> Do you have a link to your comment about Boz? Thanks. I hope you are mistaken.....but will check it out if you post a link.


He's right. I've seen the evidence shared about my Facebook feed, with multiple parties who followed him confirming it was legit. You have to have a Twitter account to confirm, though. (Sorry for this share.)

*UPDATE: Removed share through inability to personally confirm, although confirmed to me by multiple parties.*


----------



## Irenaeus (Sep 9, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> He's right. I've seen the evidence shared about my Facebook feed, with multiple parties who followed him confirming it was legit. You have to have a Twitter account to confirm, though. (Sorry for this share.)
> 
> View attachment 8341


I have Twitter and wasn't able to find this. Also, I think we should as a general rule be careful in rushing to conclusions based on a "like". Granted, the pattern of Boz's likes is very... interesting... but I need something more substantive to do anything other than just raise a mild question mark.


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 9, 2021)

Irenaeus said:


> I have Twitter and wasn't able to find this. Also, I think we should as a general rule be careful in rushing to conclusions based on a "like". Granted, the pattern of Boz's likes is very... interesting... but I need something more substantive to do anything other than just raise a mild question mark.


True. It may have been pulled? But it would have been odd to me, seeing my friend who follows him and multiple other people confirming (I don't have Twitter so couldn't confirm myself.) So I took it as legit. Maybe wrong, though. I don't want to spread disinformation, so will remove.


----------



## lynnie (Sep 9, 2021)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> Our society has been conditioning people to be "fragile" for a long time. The notion that if one suffers any kind of abuse, or even just grew up with a father who was not as emotionally available as one might have wanted (like 99.997% of humanity), this becomes the defining aspect of one's identity. You are a victim. And the damage is automatically assumed to be irreparable. Getting past such things is thought impossible. And telling someone to try and get past it is one and the same as denying their identity. So we have a society that has had the least amount of suffering of any generation in world history constantly imagining themselves to have suffered more than any other. It's really something to behold.


This comment is cringeworthy. Have you ever known somebody who as a prepubescent was raped by a pedophile for years? I have. Her own father no less. Saying " just get over it" is about as far from the biblical admonition to weep with those who weep as one can get. 


ZackF said:


> …and love doesn’t seem to be able to cover anything regardless of the degree of offense or time elapsed since the event(s).


That is probably true.....the horror of the trauma is as real decades later as when it happens. It isn't that they don't want to get past it and stop being controlled by the memories, but even the nightmares never fully go away, unless what I would term a divine miracle takes place in the mind/heart. 



arapahoepark said:


> The same stuff I see in schools. It's very vague. Trauma is anything that one doesn't agree with that one has encountered.


I hope you can change your outlook on this. Trauma is years of sexual molestation or beatings or even torture. You can't imagine what's out there.

We know a guy (related by marriage) who spent years in the 9 and under pedophile unit working as a detective for the State Attorney General. Most of the really yuck work online was done by women in the unit....he led a lot of the swat team type arrests, but didn't have to see all the footage. 

He'd sit and drink beer after beer telling me stuff with a haunted traumatized face, it was all so unbearable. There was the two year old and they traced her but never caught the guy. She died from the penetration. These films of little kids screaming while being raped get sold and are huge business. People, most horribly A LOT of teens, are so hooked that every night they have to watch it before they go to bed. They are addicted to the sickest and filthiest darkness you can imagine. Its one thing to watch adults doing it together acting like they are enjoying themselves. It is another to be glued to screaming four and five year old girls being raped. Every day, every night. That's what's out there and it is widespread. 

You want to tell that girl to just get over it??? Really??? I believe the power of God and His word can deliver and transform. But it can take years and so much work and needs so much help and support. Even then, there are scars. What I've read by Diane Langberg was really excellent ( WTS Grad); that's a possible resource. 

The guys making this filth and selling it online and running the show are often professionals. They put at least 300 men a year behind bars ( maybe 1 or 2 % women criminals too) in the state where my relative worked. That's one state out of 50 and they miss so many. He said they had doctors, lawyers, church staff, teachers, all kinds of professionals arrested. So many church goers. The guy said to me he can't trust anybody anymore. Its just horrible. 

Where Amy cares about deeply traumatized women, well, may the Lord bless her and steer her into biblical ways to help. It sounds like this latest circle gig isn't good. But don't provoke her or any other trauma victim into seeking garbage with quick trite answers like "get over it" that turns them off to your pastoral imput. Try reading some books on the subject. I liked Dan Allender years ago, not sure where he is at now. Harvest Ministries in Philly had great stuff for guys who were raped as boys and ended up in sodomy. Langberg. Even some of the secular evolutionists ( Bruce Perry) are extremely helpful in understanding the way Trauma imprints on the brain. You do a thousand things automatically from years of repetition. Well, its the same with the internal workings of a person who had years of childhood nighttime horror.


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 9, 2021)

lynnie said:


> This comment is cringeworthy. Have you ever known somebody who as a prepubescent was raped by a pedophile for years? I have. Her own father no less. Saying " just get over it" is about as far from the biblical admonition to weep with those who weep as one can get.
> 
> That is probably true.....the horror of the trauma is as real decades later as when it happens. It isn't that they don't want to get past it and stop being controlled by the memories, but even the nightmares never fully go away, unless what I would term a divine miracle takes place in the mind/heart.
> 
> ...


I appreciate what you say here, lynnie, and agree with you. And what you've written absolutely horrifies me.

At the same time, I have read some interesting things about trauma and trauma victims myself from psychiatrists, suggesting, among other things, that labelling and focusing on trauma can make it much more... traumatic. There are apparently numerous stories of people who have been abused as children, for example, going into horrible depressing and even blaming the very people who identified their trauma as such. Maybe there are cases where the most healing thing to do _is_ to occasionally tell people to "get over it," in kinder words? While not, of course, minimizing the heinousness of the sin.

In other words, in keeping with the thread, is bringing everything out in the open always the best solution for the victim in these matters? Maybe that question needs more consideration than it's generally given.

I don't know. But there's definitely a lot here about the human mind that we don't understand.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 9, 2021)

lynnie said:


> This comment is cringeworthy. Have you ever known somebody who as a prepubescent was raped by a pedophile for years? I have. Her own father no less. Saying " just get over it" is about as far from the biblical admonition to weep with those who weep as one can get.
> 
> That is probably true.....the horror of the trauma is as real decades later as when it happens. It isn't that they don't want to get past it and stop being controlled by the memories, but even the nightmares never fully go away, unless what I would term a divine miracle takes place in the mind/heart.
> 
> ...


Lynnie,
I don't disagree with you. My problem is that 'trauma' is being enlarged to become virtually meaningless. And that really hampers the truly traumatized.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Taylor (Sep 9, 2021)

I think bringing prepubescent rape into this thread is an astronomical escalation. It is really entirely irrelevant to this topic. As far as I know, Aimee Byrd was never raped. As traumatic as being criticized by men might be for her, it does not begin to rise to the level of sexual abuse—not even in the same galaxy.

And that is the very point. “Trauma” and “abuse” are being defined in such a way as to include any and every unpleasant experience. This is wicked, and ought to be labeled as such.

Reactions: Like 13


----------



## ZackF (Sep 9, 2021)

lynnie said:


> This comment is cringeworthy. Have you ever known somebody who as a prepubescent was raped by a pedophile for years? I have. Her own father no less. Saying " just get over it" is about as far from the biblical admonition to weep with those who weep as one can get.
> 
> That is probably true.....the horror of the trauma is as real decades later as when it happens. It isn't that they don't want to get past it and stop being controlled by the memories, but even the nightmares never fully go away, unless what I would term a divine miracle takes place in the mind/heart.
> 
> ...


My point had nothing to do with the examples you provided.

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Sep 9, 2021)

lynnie said:


> This comment is cringeworthy. Have you ever known somebody who as a prepubescent was raped by a pedophile for years? I have. Her own father no less. Saying " just get over it" is about as far from the biblical admonition to weep with those who weep as one can get.


Ma'am, your comment is cringe-worthy. It conflates minor forms of abuse with things like "rape." Get a hold of yourself.

Reactions: Like 3 | Love 1


----------



## Irenaeus (Sep 10, 2021)

lynnie said:


> This comment is cringeworthy. Have you ever known somebody who as a prepubescent was raped by a pedophile for years? I have. Her own father no less. Saying " just get over it" is about as far from the biblical admonition to weep with those who weep as one can get.


@lynnie, with all due respect for the scenarios you described, your entire reply is a straw man fallacy, compounded by an emotionalistic appeal. It's unfortunate, because you are right that REAL trauma needs to be handled with great care.

But in making that point, you missed a point being made not by one or two but by three people about the evils of our victim-obsessed trauma-generating culture. Further, you missed the way in which a faux-trauma culture cheapens and denigrates real trauma. When you have people running around getting triggered because someone mansplained, micro-aggressed, wasn't sufficiently body-positive or trans-affirming or inclusive of gender-queer-fluid-libera-demi-penguin-folk... OR, building an aberrant theology around the trauma of being critiqued by men... that kind of narcissistic pablum has a devastating effect on actual trauma victims. Nothing could be more dehumanizing to real victims, and the great irony of our society is that its quest for "authentic self-expression" has led to dehumanization on a massive scale. Millions of Americans are not much more "human" than the victims of fascist or communist regimes in the 20th century, the key difference being that we're gleefully voting it in ourselves as part of a nationwide mission to live out the principles laid out in the latter part of Romans 1.

For the sake of actual trauma victims like the ones you described, it would be nice if our society had the spiritual fortitude to deal with the faux trauma square on so that the word can begin to have some actual meaning again and so the victims can find some actual solace in this life if not in the next.

Reactions: Like 9 | Amen 1


----------



## danekristjan (Sep 10, 2021)

lynnie said:


> This comment is cringeworthy. Have you ever known somebody who as a prepubescent was raped by a pedophile for years? I have. Her own father no less. Saying " just get over it" is about as far from the biblical admonition to weep with those who weep as one can get.
> 
> That is probably true.....the horror of the trauma is as real decades later as when it happens. It isn't that they don't want to get past it and stop being controlled by the memories, but even the nightmares never fully go away, unless what I would term a divine miracle takes place in the mind/heart.
> 
> ...


I think you made some good points, but what you laid out is real, indescribable, trauma. What Byrd is referring to as "trauma" is people on the internet "being mean" (whether valid or not). That is something that one really should and can "get over" as a Christian.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 10, 2021)

lynnie said:


> Do you have a link to your comment about Boz? Thanks. I hope you are mistaken.....but will check it out if you post a link.



Here is a screenshot of his likes taken from his twitter feed (still there at time of posting this comment). To me the word "like" means to like something, to approve of it. Some people have used the reasoning that "liking" a tweet can merely be a form of bookmarking it when one first sees it in order to go back to it later to respond to it. Well has he responded to it? Has he condemned this? If not I take him at his word, that he "liked" it.

Reactions: Like 4 | Informative 2


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 10, 2021)

Irenaeus said:


> @lynnie, with all due respect for the scenarios you described, your entire reply is a straw man fallacy, compounded by an emotionalistic appeal. It's unfortunate, because you are right that REAL trauma needs to be handled with great care.
> 
> But in making that point, you missed a point being made not by one or two but by three people about the evils of our victim-obsessed trauma-generating culture. Further, you missed the way in which a faux-trauma culture cheapens and denigrates real trauma. When you have people running around getting triggered because someone mansplained, micro-aggressed, wasn't sufficiently body-positive or trans-affirming or inclusive of gender-queer-fluid-libera-demi-penguin-folk... OR, building an aberrant theology around the trauma of being critiqued by men... that kind of narcissistic pablum has a devastating effect on actual trauma victims. Nothing could be more dehumanizing to real victims, and the great irony of our society is that its quest for "authentic self-expression" has led to dehumanization on a massive scale. Millions of Americans are not much more "human" than the victims of fascist or communist regimes in the 20th century, the key difference being that we're gleefully voting it in ourselves as part of a nationwide mission to live out the principles laid out in the latter part of Romans 1.
> 
> For the sake of actual trauma victims like the ones you described, it would be nice if our society had the spiritual fortitude to deal with the faux trauma square on so that the word can begin to have some actual meaning again and so the victims can find some actual solace in this life if not in the next.



Indeed and this ideology actually makes people and thus societies weaker. The apparent escalation of mental health problems today is not because problems are finally being addressed (whereas before they were ignored) but because we, as people and as a society, are weaker and less able to cope with the realities of life. This is a result of decades of a victim-mentality, coupled with an extreme narcissism and sense of entitlement, being inculcated in our young. And, of course, the over-prescription of drugs which are now seen as a cure for all ailments. This all makes for very fertile ground for what we are seeing today: the mass delusion of transgenderism, the hysteria over covid, the anti-racism agenda, the virulence displayed on social media, the inability to cope with things when they don't go our way &c. Aimee Byrd is not a victim of trauma she is a narcissist who, like many tomboys, is in rebellion against her own sex. Having always wanted to be one of the boys, she is aggrieved that godly men told her to stay in her lane. And so she launched a vicious campaign against them and when things didn't go her way she cried victim. And now she basically wants to overthrown Presbyterian polity because she didn't get what she wanted. All this does is undermine real victims of trauma and abuse. But she gains more publicity and sympathy, which is of course what this is all about.

Reactions: Like 3 | Love 1


----------



## Taylor (Sep 10, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> Here is a screenshot of his likes taken from his twitter feed. To me the word "like" means to like something, to approve of it. Some people have used the reasoning that "liking" a tweet can merely be a form of bookmarking it when one first sees it in order to go back to it later to respond to it. Well has he responded to it? Has he condemned this? If not I take him at his word, that he "liked" it.


Let's also not forget that Boz publicly criticized Samaritan for not accepting homosexual applications for adoption. And, to ensure they regretted such a decision, Boz publicly called on homosexuals to flood Samaritan with thousands of applications to bog down their system. Of course, the relevant tweet seems to have been deleted, so I cannot "prove" this happened. But it did. I saw it with my own eyes. Boz Tchividjian is bad news.

Reactions: Like 4 | Informative 4


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 10, 2021)

I think it’s great that the church is aware of potential blind spots. Paul’s epistles we’re vital in that area. But again, our worship and wisdom is ultimately vertical and that’s where our healing will come. It’s not an easy road. I pray our victimhood, often very real and sometimes perceived, does not define us.

@lynnie , I didnt fully read about the abuse stories you shared as I get very sensitive about those things. I couldn’t begin to fathom some of those horror stories. Those pastors, laymen and counselors who help the struggling trauma-affected are doing God’s work. But there may be some whose own actions may disqualify them for such work. May God bless and strengthen you sister in your interactions and service to those bruised reeds who suffer.

As far as the AB-GC fallout, I saw one name, in particular, associated with Geneva Commons, who I know is a good man, a good pastor, and I’ve seen him around here in the past. Others, I worry, seem a little imbalanced, like they could substitute for JD Hall on P&P….

As for AB. I caution to say anything in the truly negative as she has endured many arrows shot her way. But I do wonder if her OPC affiliation is part of her unique ‘brand’ at this point. Is an air of orthodoxy just a selling point to her? That is her call at this point. She wouldn’t be the first, male or female. A much more extreme Peter Enns comes to mind. Why would you want to teach at WTS when you are undermining their mission?


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 10, 2021)

His brother, right? “The congregant with whom Tchividjian had an affair accused him of “grooming” her.” https://www.relevantmagazine.com/fa...llian-tchividjian-is-starting-another-church/


----------



## retroGRAD3 (Sep 10, 2021)

Taylor said:


> Let's also not forget that Boz publicly criticized Samaritan for not accepting homosexual applications for adoption. And, to ensure they regretted such a decision, Boz publicly called on homosexuals to flood Samaritan with thousands of applications to bog down their system. Of course, the relevant tweet seems to have been deleted, so I cannot "prove" this happened. But it did. I saw it with my own eyes. Boz Tchividjian is bad news.


All of the Tchividjians are bad news

Reactions: Amen 2


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 10, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> Here is a screenshot of his likes taken from his twitter feed (still there at time of posting this comment). To me the word "like" means to like something, to approve of it. Some people have used the reasoning that "liking" a tweet can merely be a form of bookmarking it when one first sees it in order to go back to it later to respond to it. Well has he responded to it? Has he condemned this? If not I take him at his word, that he "liked" it.


This tweet traumatized me. Let's vent in circles about it!

Reactions: Love 1 | Funny 2


----------



## Susan777 (Sep 10, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> Here is a screenshot of his likes taken from his twitter feed (still there at time of posting this comment). To me the word "like" means to like something, to approve of it. Some people have used the reasoning that "liking" a tweet can merely be a form of bookmarking it when one first sees it in order to go back to it later to respond to it. Well has he responded to it? Has he condemned this? If not I take him at his word, that he "liked" it.


It appears that they are lying in a hospital bed together. What? Are they pretending to have given birth? So sick!

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## lynnie (Sep 10, 2021)

We knew a guy years ago, an elder at a PCA church who also worked at a ministry for gays and sex abused people. My best friend back then told me that his "success" stories were amazing. He had some of the worst perverts and drug addicts and many of them eventually ended up leading decent lives. Of course they were also part of decent churches eventually as far as I know, she heard at lot at her PCA. 

I had an opportunity to ask him once about it. He said that for the first two months of any new counselee he just offered compassion ( backgrounds were terrible, the emotional pain was immense). Then he began to gently move into their own sin as their greatest problem, and their sinful reactions to evil doers. He said you cannot start on the sin without understanding of the wounds. 

Even Jesus healed people first and said " go and sin no more".

It sounds like Amy is too geared to the empathy part and not moving on to the greatest problem, our own sin. I didn't read her writings so I'm not sure. A lot of women are like that though. Even Dan Allender said the hardest thing of all for him was trying to move from compassion on people who were terribly sexually abused to confronting their sin nature. But it must be done. I'll stand by what I wrote before though....it sounds like some of you guys are too quick to jump on the sin. Try weeping with those who weep first. 

Even if it seems trite, like just "hurt feelings", you don't know how deep it goes and how they are wired. Just start with the sympathy that the other person treated you rotten, and yes, it hurts. Then you can move to forgiveness and a sovereign God and all the rest. I've seen some things at PB in theological debates that seem pretty thin skinned to me but hey, to the person debating it is a big deal. 

I don't have all the answers. Just throwing out thoughts and not wanting to derail the thread. But I've seen Amy in the past be right on about some garbage in churches that should change. Maybe she's going off now, I just don't know. Its all sad.


----------



## lynnie (Sep 10, 2021)

Taylor said:


> Let's also not forget that Boz publicly criticized Samaritan for not accepting homosexual applications for adoption. And, to ensure they regretted such a decision, Boz publicly called on homosexuals to flood Samaritan with thousands of applications to bog down their system. Of course, the relevant tweet seems to have been deleted, so I cannot "prove" this happened. But it did. I saw it with my own eyes. Boz Tchividjian is bad news.


I just want to be 100% sure. This was Boz, not Tullian? I'll believe you, but I don't want to believe it. Ack. And no way it was a hack? I know people who got FB hacked and fake things posted, so can that happen with twitter? And then you try to clean up the hacks? Hope its not the real Boz. How distressing if so.


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 10, 2021)

Susan777 said:


> It appears that they are lying in a hospital bed together. What? Are they pretending to have given birth? So sick!



James White was talking about the staged nature of it recently on the Dividing Line. Why are they together in a hospital bed? Neither of them delivered the babies (and I thought there was a scarcity of hospital beds because of "the covid"?). Why are they wearing id tags (on different arms)?

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 10, 2021)

lynnie said:


> I just want to be 100% sure. This was Boz, not Tullian? I'll believe you, but I don't want to believe it. Ack. And no way it was a hack? I know people who got FB hacked and fake things posted, so can that happen with twitter? And then you try to clean up the hacks? Hope its not the real Boz. How distressing if so.



It's Boz's timeline. A quick scroll through his timeline and likes would suggest this was a genuine like.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## jw (Sep 11, 2021)

ZackF said:


> There’s your sine.


Noice!


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 11, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> Indeed, I was trying to* triangulate *what would be the best response!



Equilateral or isosceles?


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 11, 2021)

Irenaeus said:


> I'm all for reading and utilizing Catholic and secular sources, but there's a fine line between a Biblically sound utilization of such materials, and the wholesale absorption of non-Biblical doctrines as part of one's quest for self-generated healing. .....reaching and grasping for anything that fits... preconceived agenda.
> 
> How I wish that people would look inward when it comes to identifying sin and outward (to Christ and to the manifestations of the work of the Spirit) when it comes to identifying righteousness. _That_ kind of Biblical double standard would save everyone a whole lot of grief. Instead we have people looking outwardly for sin and inwardly for righteousness.


^^^ If I could put a circle around these keen insights I would. But, alas! I am reduced to block quotes.


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Sep 11, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> The apparent escalation of mental health problems today is not because problems are finally being addressed (whereas before they were ignored) but because we, as people and as a society, are weaker and less able to cope with the realities of life. This is a result of decades of a victim-mentality, coupled with an extreme narcissism and sense of entitlement, being inculcated in our young. And, of course, the over-prescription of drugs which are now seen as a cure for all ailments. This all makes for very fertile ground for what we are seeing today: the mass delusion of transgenderism, the hysteria over covid, the anti-racism agenda, the virulence displayed on social media, the inability to cope with things when they don't go our way &c.


One would think that because of the sexual liberations the culture has been pushing from every possible outlet over recent years, that children would be happier people. Sadly the agenda has backfired so terribly. Kids seem more broken than ever.

"The rate of suicide for those *ages 10 to 24 increased nearly 60% between 2007* and 2018, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)."

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ZackF (Sep 11, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> One would think that because of the sexual liberations the culture has been pushing from every possible outlet over recent years, that children would be happier people. Sadly the agenda has backfired so terribly. Kids seem more broken than ever.
> 
> "The rate of suicide for those *ages 10 to 24 increased nearly 60% between 2007* and 2018, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)."


Social media.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Charles Johnson (Sep 13, 2021)

I came back to this thread because Byrd tweeted the PB was being mean to her, and I found three pages of geometrical puns since I last login in. Well done friends.

Reactions: Informative 1 | Funny 4


----------



## danekristjan (Sep 13, 2021)

Charles Johnson said:


> I came back to this thread because Byrd tweeted the PB was being mean to her, and I found three pages of geometrical puns since I last login in. Well done friends.


Ah, I see, critique of any manner is now "abuse". Arius would love to live in our day. Whenever your heterodoxy is critiqued or pushed back against, just cry, "abuse!", "racism!", "homophobia!", or "sexism!" and hordes of insecure evangelical and reformed men will circle around you to secure your voice rather than recommend you be taught the first principles of the faith again.

Reactions: Like 3 | Love 1 | Amen 1


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 13, 2021)

Charles Johnson said:


> I came back to this thread because Byrd tweeted the PB was being mean to her, and I found three pages of geometrical puns since I last login in. Well done friends.


I take responsibility for the discussion.

But not for the puns. I refuse to be responsible for those.

Seriously, though. She is thin-skinned for someone with a growing body of public work, isn't she?

Some of the comments on here were harsh, sure. Many were far more moderate. Some were insightful.

And then there were the puns....

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## wcf_linux (Sep 13, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> I take responsibility for the discussion.
> 
> But not for the puns. I refuse to be responsible for those.
> 
> ...



Maybe it's the puns that really caused her the most pain.

It would certainly be understandable.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 13, 2021)

Why should the PB "draw fire," be it from AB's antagonists or from AB? Is it our fight?

I don't think so, and making any comments (ignoring the puns) that focus in the least on _personality _rather than on substance seems like exactly the thing that validates a kind of _personality-driven _reaction (which is pretty much all twitter is good for). 

In my opinion, every comment that reduces earlier _personal _attacks on AB to mere "slights," and denigrates her reactions as "thin-skinned" proves the point that few responses to her work have been free from _personality-driven _bias. That's a shame.

If AB feels compelled to include a degree of _self defense _in just about every response to criticism, it might be because so many of the critics can't judge her work purely on its merit, but feel compelled themselves to add fuel to the ad hominem blaze.

Reactions: Like 1 | Edifying 2


----------



## Irenaeus (Sep 13, 2021)

As one of the more sharply critical voices, I will say that it's perfectly reasonable for Aimee to be upset. This is a public forum and we've taken direct aim at her on a broad front.

Do I agree with her assessment of this thread? Nope! Do I think the replies to her tweet contain at least as much bile as the harshest thing written here? See for yourselves. Does she ignore the considerable nuance and variety of opinion in this thread? Yes.

But let's nonetheless play fair. We can criticize her publicly and she can get upset publicly... no need to pile on her simply for being upset.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 13, 2021)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Why should the PB "draw fire," be it from AB's antagonists or from AB? Is it our fight?
> 
> I don't think so, and making any comments (ignoring the puns) that focus in the least on _personality _rather than on substance seems like exactly the thing that validates a kind of _personality-driven _reaction (which is pretty much all twitter is good for).
> 
> ...


Apologies for where I got sucked into this. 

Sometimes I just need to keep my mouth shut until I've thought things through a bit further.


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 13, 2021)

Charles Johnson said:


> I came back to this thread because Byrd tweeted the PB was being mean to her, and I found three pages of geometrical puns since I last login in. Well done friends.


Wow. No kidding.


----------



## retroGRAD3 (Sep 13, 2021)

If you read the twitter response, she basically did the exact thing that this thread criticized her for, literally the exact thing. Then, the rest of the people that came out of the wood work just all took shots at PB through ad hominem and didn't actually interact with the content at all.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 13, 2021)

retroGRAD3 said:


> If you read the twitter response, she basically did the exact thing that this thread criticized her for, literally the exact thing. Then, the rest of the people that came out of the wood work just all took shots at PB through ad hominem and didn't actually interact with the content at all.


I was a bit annoyed by the assumption there that nobody here -- or most, at least -- haven't read her work.

Many of us have read her books, listened to her on MOS, and follow her blog. I have, and appreciate(d) much of her work.

That's why I've been so disappointed with the direction her new stuff seems to be going. And why I'm interested in what she's up to at all.

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 2


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 13, 2021)

So we going to get doxxed?


----------



## Taylor (Sep 13, 2021)

Since Puritan Board has been accused of wrongdoing by the _indirect_ subject of this thread (this thread is really about "circling," not Mrs. Byrd), is there anything in this thread that is un-Christian, or could be classified as "ripping a sister apart"? Mrs. Byrd did not provide a single example of what she is so concerned about. And I am virtually certain that most of the commenters on her tweet didn't look up this thread to see what was actually said, but rather just took her analysis of it at face value. Sure, there have been some frank and direct criticisms of Mrs. Byrd's writing and ideas in this thread, but frankness and criticism are not sins.

In any case, I'm not interested in a platform war, and I'm sure the moderators are even more disinterested, so I'm not going to "reply" to Mrs. Byrd here. But upon scanning through this thread again, I don't think I've found any sinful speech. Perhaps I am missing something?

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 14, 2021)

Charles Johnson said:


> I came back to this thread because Byrd tweeted the PB was being mean to her, and I found three pages of geometrical puns since I last login in. Well done friends.



Aimee Bryd cries out in pain as she strikes us.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 14, 2021)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Why should the PB "draw fire," be it from AB's antagonists or from AB? Is it our fight?
> 
> I don't think so, and making any comments (ignoring the puns) that focus in the least on _personality _rather than on substance seems like exactly the thing that validates a kind of _personality-driven _reaction (which is pretty much all twitter is good for).
> 
> ...



Part of the criticism of Aimee Byrd is necessarily personal: as a woman she is going beyond the bounds set by Christ of what is appropriate for women in the church. And further to that she has made herself the subject of much of her work and her online commentary.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 14, 2021)

alexandermsmith said:


> Part of the criticism of Aimee Byrd is necessarily personal: as a woman she is going beyond the bounds set by Christ of what is appropriate for women in the church. And further to that she has made herself the subject of much of her work and her online commentary.


That is a fair criticism. But that needs to be properly parsed or it can easily turn to resentment for various sides of the discussion/debate.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 14, 2021)

Folks, we're four pages deep and time to either get back to the OP or call it done. If there is interest still in discussing the views in the book, drop personalities, and discuss the views. As to this new controversy, this is a public thread. Don't be surprised if you express an opinion, someone somewhere is going to be in the "someone said something wrong on the internet" mode and respond. Now add that the thread is about them, and they have their own platform and regulars. Even less surprising. We can't help if folks are unfairly critical of the board rather than discuss ideas and views, which is what this thread should be doing in an edifying and helpful way. If you engage anyone there or elsewhere, don't bring that here. Please follow Taylor's example.


Taylor said:


> In any case, I'm not interested in a platform war, and I'm sure the moderators are even more disinterested, so I'm not going to "reply" to Mrs. Byrd here. But upon scanning through this thread again, I don't think I've found any sinful speech. Perhaps I am missing something?


This is the most time I've spent in this thread. All I can say is that no one has reported anything as sinful or breaking board rules or Christian decorum.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 14, 2021)

I agree. We really need to circle back.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Sep 14, 2021)

I did a little bit of research on this topic. If I understand it correctly, it's not something I would practice, and I have always tried to be the transparent, open, interpersonal type person.

I love the people that make up the Church. But here's the truth which hurts me to say, and I wish were different, but in my years of being a Christian I have really come to see: many people are broken people, and if they are gotten too close to, they will break others. I've seen many "Christian" people who deep down don't really strive to be holy or loving, because they are concerned with the things of the flesh and the world. Such people I can't trust with the most sensitive and deep parts of myself, because in their evil they will end up hurting me through the experience. Lot's of people have caused pain in my life, sadly, when they had a good opportunity to bring happiness.

There are few people who I truly trust and can come to for healing. God primarily, my wife secondly, and then a few men I can confide in. This isn't shallow stuff, and I don't think just anyone is worthy of me exposing the deepest parts of my life to.

I know this is all very vague, but I have plenty of real life experiences in my mind.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## A.Joseph (Sep 14, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I did a little bit of research on this topic. If I understand it correctly, it's not something I would practice, and I have always tried to be the transparent, open, interpersonal type person.
> 
> I love the people that make up the Church. But here's the truth which hurts me to say, and I wish were different, but in my years of being a Christian I have really come to see: many people are broken people, and if they are gotten too close to, they will break others. I've seen many "Christian" people who deep down don't really strive to be holy or loving, because they are concerned with the things of the flesh and the world. Such people I can't trust with the most sensitive and deep parts of myself, because in their evil they will end up hurting me through the experience. Lot's of people have caused pain in my life, sadly, when they had a good opportunity to bring happiness.
> 
> ...


Remember, we are not Christians cause we are good. We are Christians cause we know(sometimes) we are wretched. What good is a faith and even a church in which we are fixed on each other. We are broken and loved. But we aren’t always so lovable and sometimes we can get a little downright toxic. That’s when I try to flea from others/and even myself to Christ. It’s a win-win. But we should strive to do better in relationships and interactions and not write others off. Especially in real life, as opposed to online.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Andrew35 (Sep 14, 2021)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I did a little bit of research on this topic. If I understand it correctly, it's not something I would practice, and I have always tried to be the transparent, open, interpersonal type person.
> 
> I love the people that make up the Church. But here's the truth which hurts me to say, and I wish were different, but in my years of being a Christian I have really come to see: many people are broken people, and if they are gotten too close to, they will break others. I've seen many "Christian" people who deep down don't really strive to be holy or loving, because they are concerned with the things of the flesh and the world. Such people I can't trust with the most sensitive and deep parts of myself, because in their evil they will end up hurting me through the experience. Lot's of people have caused pain in my life, sadly, when they had a good opportunity to bring happiness.
> 
> ...


Thank you, Ryan. I appreciated this.

This is exactly where I am with the whole business itself, and really what I wanted to open up for reflection (not the Byrd bits that we quickly segued into): Is the level of intimacy implied by the inciting post really necessary and/or desirable for authentic Christian fellowship? 

I would actually like to have this conversation with Byrd and some of the others who share her POV on this matter. I would like to hear their responses to some of our objections here.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## VictorBravo (Sep 14, 2021)

Moderation. I deleted a post--it was well meaning, but it brought discussion from a different platform. We want to avoid cross-platform back and forth.

From what I can tell, the discussion necessarily must stay on the topic as Andrew described above in post 114. There is no book so far for us to read and critique, so keep the topic to the general idea expressed by Andrew:



Andrew35 said:


> Is the level of intimacy implied by the inciting post really necessary and/or desirable for authentic Christian fellowship?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## bookish_Basset (Sep 15, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> Thank you, Ryan. I appreciated this.
> 
> This is exactly where I am with the whole business itself, and really what I wanted to open up for reflection (not the Byrd bits that we quickly segued into): Is the level of intimacy implied by the inciting post really necessary and/or desirable for authentic Christian fellowship?
> 
> I would actually like to have this conversation with Byrd and some of the others who share her POV on this matter. I would like to hear their responses to some of our objections here.


I would be really interested in hearing more thoughts on this.

I've been blessed with a few very warm and edifying Christian friendships over the years. But I've come to recognize those as rare and not something one can go looking for, exactly. At least for me, they've been gracious surprises.

Groups, on the other hand, have always been awkward for me. Our previous churches placed a lot of emphasis on small groups; the church we joined as newlyweds, in fact, stressed small groups as the place where "real" fellowship was expected to take place. I always found this confusing. That's not to say there weren't real blessings in these groups sometimes, but I didn't feel comfortable opening up and even dreaded being put on the spot. For a long time I assumed this was a problem with me -- that I was somehow resisting Christian fellowship -- but more recently I've wondered if there were assumptions being made about what constitutes fellowship, and if my discomfort was largely a personality thing.

Reactions: Like 1 | Edifying 1


----------



## Ben Zartman (Sep 15, 2021)

bookish_Basset said:


> I would be really interested in hearing more thoughts on this.
> 
> I've been blessed with a few very warm and edifying Christian friendships over the years. But I've come to recognize those as rare and not something one can go looking for, exactly. At least for me, they've been gracious surprises.
> 
> Groups, on the other hand, have always been awkward for me. Our previous churches placed a lot of emphasis on small groups; the church we joined as newlyweds, in fact, stressed small groups as the place where "real" fellowship was expected to take place. I always found this confusing. That's not to say there weren't real blessings in these groups sometimes, but I didn't feel comfortable opening up and even dreaded being put on the spot. For a long time I assumed this was a problem with me -- that I was somehow resisting Christian fellowship -- but more recently I've wondered if there were assumptions being made about what constitutes fellowship, and if my discomfort was largely a personality thing.


I believe there is authentic Christian fellowship when we sing together on the Lord's Day, and attend to the preaching and praying, and observe the Lord's Supper. That fellowship is far better to me than the awkward mealtime between services designed for people to speak to each other but which really ends up in stilted conversations about uninteresting things. I like all my fellow churchmembers a lot better when we're all speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs than when we're trying to converse with nothing in common but our shared confession, about which there is not much to discuss.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## wcf_linux (Sep 15, 2021)

bookish_Basset said:


> I would be really interested in hearing more thoughts on this.
> 
> I've been blessed with a few very warm and edifying Christian friendships over the years. But I've come to recognize those as rare and not something one can go looking for, exactly. At least for me, they've been gracious surprises.
> 
> Groups, on the other hand, have always been awkward for me. Our previous churches placed a lot of emphasis on small groups; the church we joined as newlyweds, in fact, stressed small groups as the place where "real" fellowship was expected to take place. I always found this confusing. That's not to say there weren't real blessings in these groups sometimes, but I didn't feel comfortable opening up and even dreaded being put on the spot. For a long time I assumed this was a problem with me -- that I was somehow resisting Christian fellowship -- but more recently I've wondered if there were assumptions being made about what constitutes fellowship, and if my discomfort was largely a personality thing.


First, I'll acknowledge what we've mainly been in the same small groups for the past decade plus a few. Even when there are friends in the group, or new friends made, it's just not a great context for "real" fellowship or "pastoral" care. For one, it's not the supernatural fellowship of gathered worship, word, and sacrament. There are special graces and special promises attached to those ordinary means. I don't see that there are any divine promises attached to such non-church gatherings. 

For another, it is too often getting care by the spiritually unqualified and unselected and not by faithful, ordinary shepherds and overseers. Even if there is an elder present, you're at the mercy of whatever your peers happened to pick up somewhere. Sometimes that goes well. Sometimes people go to weird places. Sometimes there is built-in oversharing. That's not the makings of a safe space, much less for an unusually edifying or healing kind of fellowship and care.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## alexandermsmith (Sep 16, 2021)

It is a beautiful thing when the Lord's people can gather together in their homes and talk one with another about Christ. The Lord absolutely uses such fellowship as a means of blessing His people. But these small groups are artificial scenarios where there is "guided conversation" and often people end up feeling awkward. Or you have certain people holding court talking about things which aren't very spiritual at all (as most books written for such groups cater to the flesh and not the spirit). There is also the issue of believers and non-believers being in the same company and that can be a hindrance to spiritual conversation. This approach to fellowship is the result of the church substituting the philosophy of secular therapy with true Christian, spiritual conversation.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

