This post is from the defunct blog “Dying Church”
Jordon's just slammed church pundit sites like this one. Not sure if he's referring to this one, but I know in the past he's found discussions on church boring. Jordon writes:
If you are going to insist on "deconstructing the church" and continue to make broad blanket statements about the "church" let's remember that you are talking about the church that you had experiences with. Please clarify that. Not all churches are alike. My church has weaknesses and strengths and doesn't always deserve to be painted with your statements. Also, instead of talking about what they need to do, let's talk about what you are already doing. I have a blog where I say, "this is what they need to do", it is called Hockey Pundits. Sports lends itself to that because it is a spectator sport, church does not… I know that some of you feel that I am totally wrong. That you are called to be a part of a revival of the old and that may be true. People such as N.T. Wright are striving to bring renewal from the centre but it is slow process (yet one that God still uses) but even from that, complaining isn't going to change the church, it is ourselves being the church, day in and day out that will bring about change. We don't need more church pundit sites. They get old quick.
I know what he's talking about. I sometimes wonder if I'm spending too much time on the problem side and not enough on the solution. But, here, for what it's worth, is the response I left to his post:
The only thing I'll say in defense of "church pundit sites" as you call them (after all, I arguably run one) is that, at least in my case, it's written by someone trying to find his way. It's not meant as a pundit site or as a judgement against other churches, as much as me just learning my way along and trying to do a little better in this whole thing. Probably not helpful for someone who's already made the transition, but great for those of us who are still finding our way.