how one non Baptist church handle the shower issue

[nodak]

Here's how one church we were part of handled the baby shower issue:

Showers were given if the mom was married and a member of the church, or if her immediate family were members and she lived in the community but had no church home of her own.

If mom had a church home, they held it and we attended.

If mom was unmarried, the announcement was made that our church (if she was a member) had need of baby supplies for a mom to be. If she was a community member instead, the announcement was that the community was in need of those supplies.

EVERY baby got gifts of clothing, diapers, etc. whether or not mom was married.

Only married moms got the fun of the nice party with grandma's and aunties in attendance. In reality, the baby couldn't care less about the party. That is all about mom, or more likely, grandma having their day in the sun.

Our church decided to reserve those "days in the sun" for those who first married, then procreated. That need not entail being nasty, shunning, or any of the usual complaints about doing that.

It was just one of those consequences folks knew going in to the situation--some things were accepted, others were not. Some behavior is rewarded, other behavior isn't.

Now, that said, the ladies in the church would really reach out to the unwed moms to be with lots of love and support. Public celebration? No. Loving aid and outreach? Absolutely!!

But we do live in a society where any negative consequences for choosing immoral behavior are seen as judgemental and mean spirited. I cannot do a thing about that, but choose not to be controlled by it.

 

[Gup20]

Here's how one church we were part of handled the baby shower issue:

Showers were given if the mom was married and a member of the church, or if her immediate family were members and she lived in the community but had no church home of her own.

If mom had a church home, they held it and we attended.

If mom was unmarried, the announcement was made that our church (if she was a member) had need of baby supplies for a mom to be. If she was a community member instead, the announcement was that the community was in need of those supplies.

EVERY baby got gifts of clothing, diapers, etc. whether or not mom was married.

Only married moms got the fun of the nice party with grandma's and aunties in attendance. In reality, the baby couldn't care less about the party. That is all about mom, or more likely, grandma having their day in the sun.

Our church decided to reserve those "days in the sun" for those who first married, then procreated. That need not entail being nasty, shunning, or any of the usual complaints about doing that.

It was just one of those consequences folks knew going in to the situation--some things were accepted, others were not. Some behavior is rewarded, other behavior isn't.

Now, that said, the ladies in the church would really reach out to the unwed moms to be with lots of love and support. Public celebration? No. Loving aid and outreach? Absolutely!!

But we do live in a society where any negative consequences for choosing immoral behavior are seen as judgemental and mean spirited. I cannot do a thing about that, but choose not to be controlled by it.

Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

 

[drfuss]

Here's how one church we were part of handled the baby shower issue:

Showers were given if the mom was married and a member of the church, or if her immediate family were members and she lived in the community but had no church home of her own.

If mom had a church home, they held it and we attended.

If mom was unmarried, the announcement was made that our church (if she was a member) had need of baby supplies for a mom to be. If she was a community member instead, the announcement was that the community was in need of those supplies.

EVERY baby got gifts of clothing, diapers, etc. whether or not mom was married.

Only married moms got the fun of the nice party with grandma's and aunties in attendance. In reality, the baby couldn't care less about the party. That is all about mom, or more likely, grandma having their day in the sun.

Our church decided to reserve those "days in the sun" for those who first married, then procreated. That need not entail being nasty, shunning, or any of the usual complaints about doing that.

It was just one of those consequences folks knew going in to the situation--some things were accepted, others were not. Some behavior is rewarded, other behavior isn't.

Now, that said, the ladies in the church would really reach out to the unwed moms to be with lots of love and support. Public celebration? No. Loving aid and outreach? Absolutely!!

But we do live in a society where any negative consequences for choosing immoral behavior are seen as judgemental and mean spirited. I cannot do a thing about that, but choose not to be controlled by it.

drfuss: Just wondering, do you have a category for the married mom who is having the baby in less than nine months after the wedding?

 

[rbell]

Nodak, you are jumping to conclusions to assume that the issue isn't addressed just because a shower is given.

If sin is not addressed...then we have a problem. But as I said...don't assume that just because a shower is held, that it necessarily means nothing was said or done about the behavior.

 

[donnA]

Here's how one church we were part of handled the baby shower issue:

Showers were given if the mom was married and a member of the church, or if her immediate family were members and she lived in the community but had no church home of her own.

If mom had a church home, they held it and we attended.

If mom was unmarried, the announcement was made that our church (if she was a member) had need of baby supplies for a mom to be. If she was a community member instead, the announcement was that the community was in need of those supplies.

EVERY baby got gifts of clothing, diapers, etc. whether or not mom was married.

Only married moms got the fun of the nice party with grandma's and aunties in attendance. In reality, the baby couldn't care less about the party. That is all about mom, or more likely, grandma having their day in the sun.

Our church decided to reserve those "days in the sun" for those who first married, then procreated. That need not entail being nasty, shunning, or any of the usual complaints about doing that.

It was just one of those consequences folks knew going in to the situation--some things were accepted, others were not. Some behavior is rewarded, other behavior isn't.

Now, that said, the ladies in the church would really reach out to the unwed moms to be with lots of love and support. Public celebration? No. Loving aid and outreach? Absolutely!!

But we do live in a society where any negative consequences for choosing immoral behavior are seen as judgemental and mean spirited. I cannot do a thing about that, but choose not to be controlled by it.

sounds like a good way to handle it, it does not celebrate and approve sin. how can anyone have a problem with this, no celebration of sin, and yet the baby is provided for.

 

[4His_glory]

Here's how one church we were part of handled the baby shower issue:

Showers were given if the mom was married and a member of the church, or if her immediate family were members and she lived in the community but had no church home of her own.

If mom had a church home, they held it and we attended.

If mom was unmarried, the announcement was made that our church (if she was a member) had need of baby supplies for a mom to be. If she was a community member instead, the announcement was that the community was in need of those supplies.

EVERY baby got gifts of clothing, diapers, etc. whether or not mom was married.

Only married moms got the fun of the nice party with grandma's and aunties in attendance. In reality, the baby couldn't care less about the party. That is all about mom, or more likely, grandma having their day in the sun.

Our church decided to reserve those "days in the sun" for those who first married, then procreated. That need not entail being nasty, shunning, or any of the usual complaints about doing that.

It was just one of those consequences folks knew going in to the situation--some things were accepted, others were not. Some behavior is rewarded, other behavior isn't.

Now, that said, the ladies in the church would really reach out to the unwed moms to be with lots of love and support. Public celebration? No. Loving aid and outreach? Absolutely!!

But we do live in a society where any negative consequences for choosing immoral behavior are seen as judgemental and mean spirited. I cannot do a thing about that, but choose not to be controlled by it.

Sounds like a reasonable solution to a difficult situation. I like it.

 

[4His_glory]

Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

For the life of me, I can not see how on earth having a shower is showing love. Are there not other ways to show the love of Christ without the festivities of a shower?

BTW, baby showers are really a cultural thing. There are many parts of the world that do not have showers. Why should a church feel obligated to have one just because a woman is expecting?

 

[Gup20]

For the life of me, I can not see how on earth having a shower is showing love. Are there not other ways to show the love of Christ without the festivities of a shower?

BTW, baby showers are really a cultural thing. There are many parts of the world that do not have showers. Why should a church feel obligated to have one just because a woman is expecting?

Mat 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw [it], they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
12 But when Jesus heard [that], he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
13 But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Do you think it is the church's responsibility to judge sinners for their sin or is that God's job? Do you think that sinners need to know the love of God more than those who are saved and already walking in God's love?

Really this heinous policy says to the sinner - you have to be perfect before you can be part of our body. But in reality, they can't defeat sin without Jesus. Requiring them to defeat sin before they are welcomed is backwards. One must become part of the body before they will have any victory over sin. And do you think the unmarried mother will be more likely to continue in sin when she is rejected by the body and accepted only by those who will encourage her to continue in sin?

Furthermore, what happens when if she gets saved or stoppes sinnnig? Doesn't Jesus' forgiveness extend eternally backwards in time and forwards in time to forgive every sin she has committed or will ever commit? Wouldn't that mean that you - as the body of Christ - would be excercising a punishment on a person for a sin they have (or will have been) forgiven of?

The correct way is to extend the love of Jesus to her right where she is. If she is welcomed by the body this will encourage her to become part of the body which will eventually give her the capability of defeating the sin in her life.

This policy is like having a wound in your hand, and cutting off your hand until it heals... then once it's healed, you'll welcome your hand back to your body. This is rediculous. Everyone knows a hand severed from the body withers and dies, not heals.

 

[nodak]

4hisglory--I cannot find one verse in the scripture that commands a church to have a shower for any baby, let alone every baby.

I do know that Nazarene church I spoke of was very loving to all the moms.

I do know more than one mom, both married and unmarried, said no thanks to the shower if they had enough "stuff" for the baby.

But it sounds to me like you are suggesting that NO MATTER WHAT the behavior, we owe everyone a party. Sort of like grade school nowadays, where every kid that shows up gets some kind of award at the end of the school year--no matter how they behaved.

I do know of one couple that got a wedding shower when they married. She was pg and they decided to take the responsibility together. THAT was celebrated--she got household stuff and he got tools, etc. When the baby came they did not have a shower but did receive tons of baby gifts.

But think of it like this: suppose a church had a policy of giving all young men a tool shower when they acquired a nice roll around craftsman toolbox.

Using your logic, that church would "owe" a tool shower regardless of whether or not the young man was given the toolbox, bought the toolbox, or up and stole the thing. Otherwise, they would be judging the thief, or would be unloving to the thief, and what happens if he later repents and goes and pays for the toolbox? Every toolbox should be celebrated, you know, no matter how it was acquired.

Hmm--now THAT doesn't sound like a sound plan for a church, does it.

I think we both agree that the baby and the mom to be need to be loved and held closely by the church. We just disagree as to whether or not that requires a party.

 

[historyb]

I hope I can make a reply and make it sound contingent here. Now first I will say the Church owes no one a party, now if they do it for other members of their body then they should for all members.

Think of what message that sends to the girl who made a mistake, she will think she is not important and the child isn't which can lead to very bad things. We imo should always celebrate a new life coming into this world, yes if a girl has one out of wedlock she should understand it's a sin but we should not punish her like the world does.

There is tremendous pressure to have abortions these days, we should be happy that the girl decided to have the baby. Yes it was a sin but she should not be made to feel rotten because of it, that is God's job to convict her not ours.

I can see a disturbing trend taking place in the Church of starting to circle the wagons, which with the climate lately I can understand and I think in time we will have to completely circle the wagons. But we also need to couple that with reaching out, we need to ask if God forgives a repented person who are we not to forgive them.

 

[annsni]

My question is this:

A couple lives together before they marry.

Do they marry in your church?

Say the couple realizes their sin and moves out.

Do they have their reception in your church?

 

[historyb]

My question is this:

A couple lives together before they marry.

Do they marry in your church?

I would assume so, all should be married in Church. My question would be why not?

Say the couple realizes their sin and moves out.

Do they have their reception in your church?

I assume so, I haven't investigated the new Church I go to. In my last one we did

 

[4His_glory]

4hisglory--I cannot find one verse in the scripture that commands a church to have a shower for any baby, let alone every baby.

Dude. I agreed with you. I think you meant to address some one else.

 

[annsni]

I would assume so, all should be married in Church. My question would be why not?

They can be married outside the church. What kind of message would that show to the young people? That it was acceptable for them to live together?

 

[4His_glory]

Mat 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw [it], they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
12 But when Jesus heard [that], he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
13 But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Ahh... Ok once again I fail to see how that has anything to do with a baby shower. Christ is simply telling us that He will save those who recognize that they are sinners not self righteous pharisees.

Do you think it is the church's responsibility to judge sinners for their sin or is that God's job?

Its the church's responsibility to clearly declare the gospel. That involves telling people they are sinners.

Do you think that sinners need to know the love of God more than those who are saved and already walking in God's love?

Again why do you have to have a shower or party to show love. Are their not other ways to show love?

Really this heinous policy says to the sinner - you have to be perfect before you can be part of our body. But in reality, they can't defeat sin without Jesus. Requiring them to defeat sin before they are welcomed is backwards.

Why would she think that. The policy that was stated sounded like they would help the unmarried mother, but they did not throw the party for her.
Secondly since when do we have to make sinners "feel welcome" in church whether it be through a shower or some other gimmick. Just give them the gospel and let the Holy Spirit draw them to Christ.

 

[StefanM]

They can be married outside the church. What kind of message would that show to the young people? That it was acceptable for them to live together?

The message that the church honors "doing the right thing" by getting married?

 

[historyb]

They can be married outside the church. What kind of message would that show to the young people? That it was acceptable for them to live together?

I am glad I don't go to a church like yours where they hate even their own

 

[annsni]

I am glad I don't go to a church like yours where they hate even their own

LOL - Nice jump to conclusions - especially since I am making a point and not at all speaking of my church.

 

[historyb]

Your point, you require all to be perfect before they can do anything in your "church", Christ does not.

 

[matt wade]

Your point, you require all to be perfect before they can do anything in your "church", Christ does not.

The point is that the church needs to hold people to a moral standard. If the church doesn't hold itself, and others to a moral standard, then the moral standard will be ignored by all.

Please answer these yes or no questions for me.

Should a church marry a homosexual couple?

Should a church marry a "swinging couple"?

Should a church allow an open and unrepentant homosexual to join as a member?

Should a church allow a open and unrepentant drunk to join as a member?