Why I no longer go to an evangelical church

I make this list knowing that there are Protestant churches that probably try to address these problems. And there are always a handful of awesome, good people in every church. Anyway, in no particular order:

1. I hate being judged on my salvation narrative.

2. I hate being at a church where most of my leaders are men and they have no idea what patriarchy means or its insidious effects.
3. I hate that I have to listen to one person's interpretation of a passage and accept it as the word of God, or at least that God is speaking through him. And so often it's cherry picking or decontextualized.
4. I hate that pastors/ministers wear such garish costumes and expect/demand respect.
5. I hate the performance of church. Dress up, small talk, pretend to feel something every week. I especially dislike the competition of performance. Who looks more godly today? Whose family looks more godly today?
6. I hate feeling like I have to be on my best behavior, when there is nothing wrong with my daily behavior. Feels fake.
7. I hate that everything has to do with God. Instead of living your life, everything becomes spiritualized. Very puritan. I also hate that we are constantly encouraged to "know" God. How much do we have to "know" him and "feel close" to him before we just live out what has been asked of us?
8. I hate the music and drama and art. Because there is no room to explore "sin," there is no room for creativity. Every song or skit or whatever has to end on a redemptive note. Formulaic.
9. I hate defending my own views or interpretations to everyone. EVERY ONE.
10. I hate being called a "strong woman" as an insult.
11. I hate being called "proud" or "unteachable."
12. I hate the obligation people have to serve each other or help each other, but not necessarily because they genuinely like or care about you.
13. I hate that there is an agenda to evangelize. Most church people don't have relationships or friendships with true non-Christians. I do. And I don't want to evangelize to them...it's cheesy and fake.
14. I hate that churches think becoming saved is the answer to addiction. It might help some, but not many.
15. I hate that church is so ridiculously far behind the secular world in terms of social justice (race, poverty, women's rights, sexual orientation, gender orientation). What a shame. What a damn shame.
16. This list can go on forever. I hate that if you stand up for what you think Jesus stood up for, you're chastised.
17. I hate any church culture of dating. Like, really hate this one.
18. I hate that anything you talk about in church has to be backed up by the Bible with circular reasoning. I also hate that the Bible is read literally. GOD! That's an annoying one.
19. I hate the using of God to further your own agenda or desires. This is done through counseling, prayer, sermon, Bible study, etc.
20. Last one...for now...Being part of a church, instead of having a community that loves and serves each other because they live together and need each other, is an arbitrary group of middle class attendees who ignore the radical teaching of Jesus and settle for a church life of feelings, occasional good deeds, and mediocrity.

Just as I wrote #20, I thought of five more! I could be here all day.

What I did like about church, but it's not enough to ever draw me back:
1. Choral singing
2. Feelings of bliss or catharsis
3. Feelings of comfort or community, once in a while
4. Bible passage close reading time
5. Having church people who are willing to help you move or bring food when you're sick
6. Feeling of purpose when reading the Gospels

John Piper and Patriarchal Christianity

John Piper's blog has a piece about women's roles and it's really problematic.

What I find infuriating about John Piper and his ministry (and its popularity among evangelicals) is that they refuse discourse. They consider the Bible to be immutable, but only immutable in their interpretation of it. REALLY, how difficult is it for husbands to "accept" their leadership roles? How difficult is it for men to accept the will of God by accepting their assurance of power in the church?

How insulting to couples who find their own way, making things work with each other. Like there is only one way that couples can "make music."

My husband and I have "inverse" roles in many ways. We work out systems around what is most effective, and what helps us love each other more. We make decisions together. We sacrifice for each other. The idea that I need to submit to him in a first century manner is astonishingly closed-minded. And what about my friends who are in same sex relationships and don't define themselves husband or wife? We aren't allowed to be complementary or harmonizing? Not according to Parnell's (Piper's) point of view--it's "un-biblical," thus un-glorifying to God.

He quotes a "pretend" conversation he had with a woman he heard at a conference. This is how he describes her: "The topic was content strategy on the Web, and the woman doing the talking was a respected author and guru in this particular field. She had brilliant insights on online trends and offered memorable one-liners, and somehow managed to bring up “sexism” at least four times. Her topic had little, if anything, to do with gender, but it became clear that she had been the victim of mistreatment in the past. Her references to gender equality became so prevalent, in fact, that in certain asides it could have passed as a women’s empowerment rally." 

My husband and I read this together and he articulated what I wanted to say so well: "Jonathon Parnell [i.e. also Piper] is a misogynist and an idiot. Parnell is obviously unaware that gender is no longer even popularly (never mind scientifically and theoretically) considered to be binary. For example, we have men with vaginas and women with penises. And it's not shocking. However, I bet he'd be shocked. Parnell wouldn't know queer if it was sitting in front of him. And like so many Christian men, he believes that transgressing traditional roles is a sign of abuse. What is actually shocking is that he jokes about sexual abuse and uses the joke to imply that the real woman he has an imaginary conversation with has been abused. So her problem is patriarchal violence and his solution is more patriarchy."

Right on.

He wants to defend his patriarchal views, against women who stand strongly opposed to sexism specifically in their industry. So he paints them as victims: they're lashing out against men because they're hurt. They sound like feminists but really, it's only because they've been wronged by a bad man out there. Anyway, they shouldn't talk about this at a web content strategy conference--take it to a women's empowerment rally!

Interesting to note that in this imaginary conversation, Jonathon Parnell, the author of this piece, can title himself "JP," yet titles the woman from Silicon Valley "SV." He speaks from his personal point of view. She has no name. A symbolic objectification.