« Iowa: A Love/Hate Relationship | Main | Apple Trees, Small Groups & Church Planting »

January 14, 2010


Nate Beaird


Even though I know what he's trying to say, I can't quite get behind it. I know that we get caught up in ourselves, and some churches are more worried about numbers than actually BEING Christ to people. The coma paintbrush doesn't get to paint every church. The faults of some don't cover the fact that even with al of our mishaps, the Church has still done more good than bad.

I like what you say, "can anyone imagine what the world would be like without the church?"

I concede that we've screwed up some things, and need to be better at a lot, but I propose that we always error on the side of sticking up for the Church...Jesus' true love.

Joshua Potter

I agree with this previous person. It is a broad brush people use when they talk about the failures of the church. Each church probably has it's own set of flaws. So does each institution i.e. marriage. I am reading "Why we love the church", and it is such a refreshing read. I too, tend to side with sticking up for the church, just as I do my family even though they are not perfect and make mistakes. I love them and am committed to them.

Paul Glavic

Galli's take on things is pretty pathetic. He seems trapped in a false story in which the results of our actions are in harmony with (or even mechanistically determined by) the God who raises up prophetic voices and the Messiah who called us to do greater things than he did and asked us to carry on the Way. Just another example of misplaced concern on church models when what we need is a reclaiming of the Story (which is far more hopeful and powerful than the rut Galli seems to be trapped in).

The comments to this entry are closed.