In response to:

Fellowship in the Woodlands

manzana Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 10:47 AM
in 1996 I asked my pastor why the church was not speaking out against the things that were happening in Washington DC. This was at the time when Clinton was polluting the oval office. He responded that churches were prevented from making political statements. I argued this was not political, but was moral, and was an opportunity for every church in the nation to point at what the president was doing, and tell their youth (and adults as well) that what was being done there was WRONG. He disagreed, and I left that church. I later learned that the music pastor at that church (enroute to becoing another megachurch) was discovered to be fooling around with somebody. Moral relativism comes to roost when you do not address it in its face.
DaveZ2 Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 12:59 PM
I get that you left that church because of the obvious moral compromise of the pastor. You are mistaken, however, in believing the sexual sin of a suboordinate minister would have been prevented by a better pastor. Sexual sin exists in the strictist of fellowships. It is, and probably will always be, the thorn in the side of ministry. The decision for any individual to sin comes from the deficits in their own walk with God, not their pastor's.

Most of America's problems are cultural. Even our economic problems stem from the cultural rejection of personal responsibility and the acceptance of collective responsibility. And none of our problems would be as bad if the church was still shaping the culture instead of merely responding to it. I was reminded of this during my annual holiday trip home to The Woodlands, Texas.

I've attended Christmas Eve services four out of the last six years at the Woodlands Church (formerly Fellowship of the Woodlands), which is a Southern Baptist mega church that keeps its Baptist affiliation well hidden from the general...