ode to all the ridiculous people (part 2)

my attitude on society has not improved in the past week obviously.

this post is thanks to a family in my church that started an email war last night that has been going continuously all morning.

the current proposal that my congregation is considering has to do with what to do with the church parsonage.

i wrote an essay a little over a week ago (see ode to all the ridiculous people) on the church meeting we had about this. some people were reasonable, and some were all up in arms about considering getting rid of the current parsonage.

so that's fine, and we've moved on.

based on the concerns raised at the meeting, earlier this week, the church office sent out a mass email to every member whose email address they had with two files attached. one was a revised proposal of what to do, based on concerns raised at the meeting, the other was a letter explaining the background and research that went into it.

everyone on that list has access to everyone else's email on that list... it's over 100 emails. in the past, people have been reasonable about that. i've used it to find contact info for specific people i need to reach, but not emailed the whole freakin list.

anyhow, one family who spoke out loudly against selling the parsonage at the meeting last week wrote an email last night that called the new proposal to help the pastor buy a new house of his choosing and then list it as a parsonage immoral and unethical. they had emailed several christian financial groups and copied and pasted the replies and wrote a plea for everyone to vote down the new proposal again. in general, the father of this family frustrates me... most of the time he's a very cool person, but in voters meetings he's generally very vocal and against whatever is on the table... it's one thing to have strong feelings and opinions... what gets to me is that the way he presents them is rather disrespectful in tone.

side note: what my church proposes to do is what several other churches in the state have done as the question of housing new pastors comes up... in this way it's still a parsonage, but the pastor has some freedom of choice, and the church is still able to maintain equity instead of just liquidating assets... it's a little complicated to explain out if you're not familiar with church-owned properties, or with NJ property laws in particular, and it's beside the point... the main point is, it's completely legal and ethical, and was actually suggested by the district president and run by several lawyers before it was suggested to the congregation at large.

anyhow... in response to that email which went out unsolicited to over 100 church families last night, several people started writing questions back to the whole list this morning... several more started writing "people! take me off this list... this is my work email and i don't have time for 20 emails from all of you debating when i'm trying to work!"... and finally, the congregation president wrote a beautiful response back to the couple from last night along with responses to the questions flying around all morning.

the basic theme was. "dude, do you not trust your church leaders to do research and see what's allowable or not? the whole time we've been proposing options to the congregation, our lawyer has reviewed every possibility before it goes to you. if it were really an unethical way to resolve housing a pastor, do you really think we would have suggested it? i'm sorry that you misunderstood the proposal, but even more i'm sad to see that you didn't trust your board enough to ask us questions that concerned you instead of going behind us and pleading for the whole congregation to vote our proposals down."

for all the time that the various boards and committees have put into this, i was: (a) super annoyed with the family who wrote last night (not for the fact that they had questions and concerns, but for their tone (as usual)),
(b) super annoyed with the unsolicited flow of email through my inbox,
(c) super offended on behalf of the committees involved that this family and others in my inbox showed such distrust of their work as if they haven't really thought things through when they've put hours into figuring out potential solutions,
and
(d) i was super impressed with the response of the congregation president and with the clarity with which she responded, and while she admitted she was frustrated with the way this couple presented their questions, i was even more so impressed with the grace she still responded with.

if only people could restrain themselves from getting all worked up and actually go about things with a proper attitude, and talk things out. for example, if this couple had approached committee members instead of the whole congregation first, and said "this is what we understand and what we've researched, we think this is unethical, why are you suggesting it?" and gotten an answer then instead of trying to emotionally charge the whole congregation against the committee, the committee could still address the whole congregation on the response without everyone getting all worked up and without this family making accusations over things they didn't completely understand... oi...

this is long and not coming to a clear point... summary: there's a small but vocal minority in my church whose attitudes on business matters stir up frustration and get on my nerves... people can have questions... they should just ask them as questions, not turn them into pointed accusations before they have all the facts.

ugh.

the end.