Matt Wireman has a post up today, "Evangelical Confession Booths," that points to an article written about men's accountability groups and why they sometimes don't work (I think that makes this blog entry a referral to a referral).

Let me be very honest here. Is it just me or does what often passes for accountability in the church leave you feeling squemish as well?

In the past through various church settings, I've been partenered by a third party with a small group other men (usually two to three) with whom I'm supposed to meet regularly and be accountable, especially about our struggles and failures. But such pairings tend to almost always feel artificial to me. Maybe it's my personality, but I'm just not going to open up and spill my guts to someone whom I don't already consider a close friend. And by a close friend, I mean someone whom I've known for years and has a track record of being faithful and when need be, confidential. But even if I was grouped with very close friends with whom I have trust, would it still be necessary to talk about everything? I've heard of men's accountability groups that have the men ask each other about the state of their sex lives with their spouses. Pardon me, but is that anyone else's business besides the husband and wife in question?

I remember another setting a few years back in which a friend confided something to me from his past. He said he needed an accountability partner. On the surface, that would be fine, but there was no immediate context for his confession. This was something in his past that he had dealt with. It wasn't a current struggle. It wasn't something I really needed to know. So why did he tell me? Well, I was slow at the time, but later I realized that he made this confession, not because he wanted my help, but because he thought I was engaged in some kind of equivalent sin (which I was not--he had misread some circumstances he observed without asking me about it). He assumed that by "opening up" to me about his struggles, I would just naturally confess my sin to him. Of course, I couldn't confess what he wanted me to, simply because it wasn't true. But the artificiality of the whole "meeting for accountabilty" made me feel compelled to confess something. So I told some "lesser" sin from my past which wasn't all that damaging, but later I just felt stupid over the whole situation. And I've never bothered to correct my friend's suspicions about me. I guess he can think what he wants.

That doesn't mean that I'm not open to talking with people about serious problems and acting in a helping and supportive capacity. There's also a very needed role that something like a support group can play in times of crisis or struggle; and in those situations, the lack of personal history with others in the group can be of benefit. And it's one thing if I'm in a pastoral or counseling type role. I've been on church staffs, I've been a chaplain, and I'm often a listening ear for those in need. I can take that position seriously and try to help someone get past his or her sin or time of crisis. And I don't mind opening up to someone else when I have a problem if that person is someone with whom a certain amount of trust has been established. But I just don't get anything out of the "You tell me your sin and I'll tell you mine" mentality that often passes for accountability groups.

We all remember that Jimmy Carter said that he had "lusted in his heart" after other women. Well, we've all done that, but do we need our president making himself accountable to the whole nation over something that personal? (Maybe, in hindsight, another president should have made himself more accountable on this type of issue.) But regardless, no one listened to Carter's confession with a sense of deep concern. We raised our eyebrows and many chuckled within themselves. Carter's statement became the butt of jokes on late night television. I feel like we need discretion regarding what we confess to others, especially in a public forum.

Confession: good for the soul, but bad for the reputation.

Regarding the article Matt linked to... I too cringe at the idea of having someone put $10 in a jar because he or she sinned again in a particular area. Forget that--it screams of legalism; plus, who has enough money? I'm glad the writer of the article (I don't even feel comfortable mentioning his name in light of what's coming) has a group to which he can admit lusting after another woman right before his wife gave birth to their most recent child. But he didn't just confess it just to them (and his wife); he had to go and tell all of us as well. I don't know him--but I don't need or want to know such private things about him. He's shared this with the world--and his church. If I ever meet him--which I doubt I will--I might be thinking about his confession. And I know that pastors are supposed to have a certain level of transparency to relate to people, but is it good for him to tell his whole congregation (which he did by writing the article) that he was lusting after another woman as his wife was about to give birth? I want to take him aside and say, "Hey, buddy--keep that to yourself."

None of us can throw stones when it comes to sin. I realize that. But is it a good idea to be so open about our sin?

Somehow there just seems to be a lack of discretion and a lack of prudence in our motivation to confess stuff to each other these days. I have no doubt that the medieval church's confessional was quite therapeutic for a lot of folks. Go in and talk to a person who can't look you in the eyes and get all the nasty stuff you did off your chest and get offered some kind of penance for it. Done! Past is past--bygones. Yes, I know that confession was abused, but it probably started with good intentions and purer motives. And no doubt, Protestants and the modern world at large have replaced the confessor-priest with the psychiatrist or counselor, probably not always for the better. But "Average Joe" in my church is neither priest nor professional counselor, and I don't feel compelled to have to tell him on a regular basis where I messed up in the last few days.

I realize that James 5:16 says "Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, so that you may be healed" (HCSB). However, I don't care for what I perceive as artificiality in the requirement for regular meetings of accountability which usually revert to, "Well, tell me your sins from the past week and then I'll tell you mine." No, I don't think so. And then you know what happens. Your name is mentioned in the next prayer group that your accountability partner attends. "We need to pray for Rick. I can't tell you why, but we really need to pray for him." And then someone concerned pulls him aside later and asks "What's going on with Rick?" The response is then, "Well I really shouldn't tell you this, but... ." Forget it.

Don't think I'm an island. Besides my wife Kathy, who is my best friend, I do have a few of close friends with whom I could confide just about anything--and have--in the case of a major struggle. In fact, I meet with them on a regular basis, but not with an agenda to confess our sins (though sometimes we do). We meet because we are friends and brothers in Christ and we talk about everything--the public, private, spiritual, and earthly. But our ability to confide in each other comes from years of friendship and trust.

When it comes to confession, in addition to James 5:16, I also want to take 1 John 1:9 seriously--"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (HCSB). But that confession remains between me and God. And for the large majority of what I need to confess, that's where it will stay.

Tags: Church life