Home > Faith, Thoughts > The Masturbating Church

The Masturbating Church

Masturbation is the epitome of selfishness and represents the degradation and perversion of something selfless and beautiful.  Unfortunately the church (especially in America) can, and often does, display this same behavior.

However you look at it, masturbation is completely self-pleasing.  There is no consideration of others; all actions are based on selfish desires that are fulfilled in the easiest way possible.  It is often based in fantasies that are degrading and show fictive dominance.  It replaces relationships with internal transactions.  What is most troubling is that masturbation is based on something that is sacred and special: the sexual relationship between two people who love each other.  Sex provides intimate depth to relationships and has the potential to be an amazing example of self-less mutual pleasure.  Masturbation short-circuits all of this.

megachurch

I have been in too many situations where local churches also short-circuit a beautiful design and replace it with something self-seeking.  The church is called to be the bride of Christ, the very hands and feet of an incarnate God.  The church is God’s agent of reconciliation in this hurting world.  The church is called to see a a better world and to partner with God to bring that about.  The church should be an outpost of hope by being a collection of broken people who find hope and direction in the promise of something more.  Yet all of this can get traded for a structure that is self-pleasing, lacks consideration for others, seeks easy fulfillment for selfish desires, can be degrading and dominant, and replaces relationships with internal transactions.  The existence of many churches is nothing more than a source of masturbatory fulfillment for its members.

This critique is most evident when one explores the finances of most churches.  Members “tithe” and “give their money to God” yet if you follow the paper trail, most of that money comes back to the members.  It is like a pay-as-you-can country club.    Consider this:

  • In the United States roughly 1/3 of all tax-deductible donations went to houses of worship.
  • That amounts to over 103 BILLION dollars ($130,000,000,000.00)
  • Of that, “85 percent of all church activity and funds are directed toward the internal operations of the congregation”
  • That means “Christians” spend over 87 BILLION dollars, money that was supposedly “given to God,” to benefit themselves.

According to a recent Christianity Today article:

The money given by the people in the pews, it turns out, is largely spent on the people in the pews. Only about 3 percent of money donated to churches and ministries went to aiding or ministering to non-Christians.

Talk about self-pleasuring!

It is troubling enough to see how selfish church budgets actually are. But, what is most devastating and deceptive is the fact that we do this in the name of God and think we are fulfilling his will.  We take the image of being faithful and stroke our own desires and needs with it.  We convince ourselves we are being self-sacrificing, but at the end of the day we are only meeting our own needs (not only within the church, but our need to feel we have contributed).

Lifeway Research presents similar findings.
Lifeway Research presents similar findings.

It goes beyond just money.  Think about volunteer work within the church.  In your congregation what percent of opportunities to serve are simply tasks that are necessary to perpetuate the current structure.  Are these things actually furthering the Kingdom of God, or are they simply making sure we can enjoy the worship services and opportunities we have come to expect.

This self-seeking understanding of church and Christianity is deeply ingrained in how we think:

  • We choose churches where the worship matches our preferences and the pastors are entertaining.
  • We expect churches to provide programs that meet our needs.
  • Welcome gifts are the norm – we are literally spending money on people so that they are more likely to join our selfish structure.  Tell me this, if someone comes in church with real hurt and needs redemption, is a coffee cup going to heal them?
  • We market our churches (intentionally and unintentionally) so that we can appeal to the aesthetic needs of people and not the spiritual needs of people.
  • Our sermons tend to focus on feel-good motivation and “practical application” and often avoids the difficult reality of who we are and we are called to be.  There is no expectation of real sacrifice.
  • Very few churches reflect the diverse tapestry of the communities they serve.  How often do prostitutes and CEOs find themselves in the same Sunday School class?

We expect churches to meet our needs.  And by participating we not only personally reap the benefits, but we feel like we are fulfilling our spiritual obligations.  Instead of spiritual masturbating in private, we flaunt it in public, which makes it all the more disgusting.

Church Staff and Porn

If we are going to explore the nature of the church, we have to be willing to examine how church staffs operate.  The typical church budget pays out 50% for staff salaries.  A full half of our giving goes to pay professional spiritual people.  If churches themselves are examples of auto-erotic hedonism, then I believe the way we view church staff is not much different than the way individuals use pornography.

  • Porn employs professionals to “do the dirty work” so actual relationships are not needed.
  • Porn stimulates you so feel like you are in the experience when actually you have no real connection to what is going on.
  • Porn is on demand you can call on it when you need to.  They work to fulfill your needs.
  • Porn stars fake it so you get a better show.

Having worked at a church for several years, I know first hand that these are true of how staff are utilized as well.

  • Parishioners feel like they are connected to “God’s Work” because they pay the salaries of people to actually do the things.  There is little need connect with actual people.  We expect the pastor to visit the sick, study the word, pray with the dying, help the needy.  As long as someone is doing those things we feel fulfilled.
  • We expect church staff to not only do our spiritual dirty work, but also to meet our needs.  As long as our kids have good programming, the sermon is not boring and worship is engaging, we are happy.  We are more likely to criticize a pastor for not providing us with what we expect than we are to criticize the work they do beyond the walls of the church.
  • Church staff members know they have to make things look good.  “Spiritual” words are sown into conversations to make things appear to be more important than they are.  We call mundane upkeep “ministry” so that people don’t realize we are still just reinforcing a selfish structure.

Don’t get me wrong, I know a good number of pastors and staff members who are embodying and expanding the incarnational love of Christ.  We can’t blame staff for the problems of the church — we are all in this together.  That being said, we must all acknowledge that paying pastors 6 figures while ignoring the plight of the poor and marginalize can be described as nothing short of sin.

Conclusion

In a world where 30,000 children die every day of preventable diseases, malnutrition and unclean water, and where the poorest 40 percent of the world’s population accounts for only 5 percent of global income, it is unacceptable for the church to sit around pleasuring itself.  We can no longer be content with a view of Christianity that encourages selfishness while feeding the illusion of spiritual depth and community impact.  If the result of our involvement in church is that we feel better about ourselves, but do not understand how we can participate in the larger redemptive work of a loving God, then we are done nothing more than masturbated our needs and egos in the name of Christ.

  1. December 7th, 2009 at 13:55 | #1

    I think you are painting with way too broad a brush here. I agree with you that paying pastors 6 figures is ridiculous, but some of your insinuations are as well. You write, “# Porn is on demand you can call on it when you need to. They work to fulfill your needs.# Porn stars fake it so you get a better show.” neither one of these are fair. The fact that you preface your list with your own experience on a church staff is also difficult for me. Your equating church staff with porn actors and then arguing that porn people fake it makes me assume that you are saying church staff fake it. Certainly there are questionable church staff, but this is out of line.

    I think your “masturbatory” image is good, and worthy of reflection – but be careful that you don’t “overshoot” your evidence.

  2. December 7th, 2009 at 14:16 | #2

    @Jason
    My main point regarding staff and porn is the first one: We are paying people to do the dirty work for us.

    I think paid ministerial staff positions often hider parishioners from ministering themselves. Parents expect children and youth ministers to provide theological grounding for their kids rather than engage them themselves. I know you see that every day.

    We look to pastors to organize and meet community needs and to meet our personal spiritual needs. How many times have you heard someone complain that a certain church “just isn’t feeding them.” Think about that imagery for a minute. People expect pastors to digest spiritual truth and then regurgitate it for them. Just like porn, that short-circuits the relationship because it relies on professionals to “do the dirty work.”

    How many parishioners have prayed with a mother dying of cancer, or helped meet the needs of a local homeless person whom they have a relationship with, or taken the time to do primary research on what a scripture passage means. I can’t help but think the number is pretty low and part of the reason is because people look to pastors to do this for them.

    As for the “faking it” comment; I am not implying that staff members are faking their spirituality. In porn the sex is real, but it is often played up for the audience. In ministry this is not always the case, but pastors are notorious for masking their struggles and using language that is over-spiritualized.

    You mention the fact that I preface this with the fact that I was once a church staff member. There is a reason that is in the past tense.

    I would certainly place you in the group of “pastors and staff members who are embodying and expanding the incarnational love of Christ.” At the same time I don’t think that lessens the truth of the situation.

  3. December 7th, 2009 at 14:23 | #3

    I very much appreciate that characterization. I don’t disagree with you – as I do deal with it every day. I just think you are running the risk of over-generalization. I think we fundamentally agree on the desired role of pastors and I think there is a necessary correction to be done.

  4. December 7th, 2009 at 20:05 | #4

    In no way do I think every church is like this. However, I am bothered by the degree to which “Christians” use church to meet their own needs.

    I think when people complain about “Sunday Christians” issues like this are at the heart of the problem. People feel like they fulfill their spiritual obligations 1 day a week and the church caters to that by putting 90% of their resources (time, money, volunteers) towards pulling off a successful day. Its like one giant circle jerk.

  5. Sarah
    December 8th, 2009 at 15:31 | #5

    On using over spiritual words for mundane tasks, my favorite one came in NewsFirst a few weeks ago-

    In the name of “hospitality and outreach” (literally-line item budget under hospitality and outreach), FUMC just spent $10,000 on redoing the playground (making it less accessible to children) and installing a new fence….that is now broken.

    I honestly cannot think of how hospitality and outreach go hand in hand with a new fence around the playground and parsonage.

    Joel Allen used to talk about over-spiritualizing things. Just tell it like it is! We wanted a new fence, someone gave us some money, so we spent a whole bunch of money on something that doesn’t really line up with our ultimate goals, but looks very pretty (debatable).

  6. December 9th, 2009 at 14:59 | #6

    If you had taught me a new word, its meaning, how to use it, and I had blogged about it, I would totally have given you credit.

    I’m just saying…

  7. December 14th, 2009 at 08:29 | #7

    @JDR

    I will gladly give credit where credit is due. I apologize for not giving John David credit for providing me with insight into the concept of masturbation. To you sir, I tip my hat. 🙂

  8. January 6th, 2010 at 14:14 | #8

    That wasn’t the reply I expected. But, I heartily accept it.

    Haha…

  1. No trackbacks yet.