Years ago, I wrote a brief post about Bill Gothard and what I remembered about the two Basic Life Seminars and one Advanced Life Seminar I attended. I wrote that I remember Gothard presenting lots of rules and “princibles”, but that I don’t remember Gothard presenting the gospel.
Two months ago, I received an e-mail from an individual I have never before heard of in my life. This individual referenced my post on Gothard and sent me a link to a website that helps the “spiritually abused” recover.
More recently, a bloggie-friend posted a list of books she was either reading or going to start reading–and mentioned a book by C.J. Mahaney.
Someone, who I have never seen commenting on this friend’s posts before, wrote the following in the comments: “It has been shown that [C.J. Mahaney] doesn’t practice what he teaches.”
So what I want to know is, what do these folks think they are accomplishing in making such comments?
The man who read my post about Gothard undoubtedly stumbled across my blog somehow or another and found himself moved with compassion at the spiritual abuse I clearly described myself to have suffered. Desperate to do something to help, he searched relentlessly for a resource that might be able to meet me where I was at.
And surely the man who commented on my blog-friend’s post saw something in her writing that demonstrated that she was likely to be led astray by Mahaney. I am convinced that he was attempting to save his sister from false doctrine.
Right?
I kinda doubt it.
A more likely scenario is that someone with a beef against Gothard googled “Gothard” and maybe “law” and ended up on my site. Having found an accounting of my personal experiences with Gothard, he read liberally between the lines to determine that I had been “spiritually abused.” Having seen what he was looking for (although not necessarily what was actually there), he did what he had been intending to do all along. “Help” some poor “victim” of Gothard’s false teaching.
A more likely scenario is that someone with a beef against Mahaney either deliberately searched out or accidentally stumbled over a post in which Mahaney’s book was described–and felt it necessary to “share” his “knowledge” about Mahaney.
These men might even consider this e-mail/blog-comment trolling to be a ministry–correcting falsehoods within the church.
Yet this approach strikes me as singularly unsatisfying.
Perhaps some individuals have suffered spiritual abuse at Gothard’s hands. I am not one of them. Anyone who knows me and has actually talked to me about Gothard knows that I bear no lasting damage as a result of Gothard’s teaching (in fact, whatever I may think of certain of his teachings and whatever I may remember or not remember about how the gospel was or was not presented, Gothard’s teaching on “unchangeables” was quite beneficial to me when I first heard it as an early teen.)
But my e-mailer did not know me. He failed in ministering to me because he did not know me well enough to diagnose my problems or to provide an appropriate solution. Instead, he ended up being an annoyance.
Likewise, what the commenter said about Mahaney may be true. Perhaps Mahaney does not practice what he preaches. But my blogger-friend who mentioned Mahaney’s book is not promoting Mahaney’s lifestyle, nor is she uncritically accepting Mahaney’s teaching. On the other hand, what the commenter said about Mahaney may be false. Perhaps Mahaney does practice what he preaches. How does my blogger-friend know that she can trust the (I presume unknown to her) commenter?
Judging from this commenter’s lack of previous comments on my friend’s posts, the commenter likely knows little about my blogger-friend–and my blogger-friend likely knows little of him. As a result, his comment is little more than idle words. I doubt they will keep my friend from reading the book she had already purposed to read–and I doubt they will change her way of reading the book. The comment ends up being just words on a page, well-meant, perhaps, but meaningless.
Because ministry and correction flow from relationship, not from a cursory reading of words on a page.
Does this mean that ministry or correction cannot occur through a blog or an e-mail? No.
I have been ministered to greatly through comments on my blog. I have received needed correction to my thoughts and attitudes as a result of comments or e-mails from my readers.
But those comments that ended up being ministry (either as encouragement or as correction) had a few features not found in the aforementioned comments about Gothard and Mahaney:
1. The comments that ministered were comments based on a careful reading of what was actually said
The commenters bothered to read what I said, to try to ascertain my intent in what I had said, and to get background when necessary (by reading other posts or asking questions.)
2. The comments that ministered were comments from people who proved their care.
The commenters proved that they cared more about me than about being right or about proving another person or idea wrong. They took initiative to build a relationship with me, to also comment on the trivialities that I posted–instead of just bursting out of nowhere to correct me.
3. The comments that ministered were comments that took their authority from the Word of God.
The commenters backed up their encouragement or their correction with Scripture (or, at the least, with principles from Scripture.) They told me where they felt that I had erred in my thinking in relation to what the Word of God says–or they affirmed my actions or thoughts in relation to what the Word of God says.
So tell me, have you ever been ministered to by a comment on your blog? What were some of the characteristics I’ve missed? Have you experienced any not-so-ministering comments (like the one someone sent me about Gothard)? I’d love to hear your stories.
