The Church as a Community of Dissatisfaction?

From my perspective, I don't see so much dissatisfaction within local CRC congregations about their congregations, nor so much (although perhaps more) about their Classes.  But I do see a lot of disatisfaction within local CRC congregations as to their denomination.  And it takes two forms: (1) apathy about what the denomination is or is doing; out of sight and out of mind; (2) a bit of horror and disbelief about what the denomination is in fact doing, especially when the denomination seems to be incessantly pushing the envelope on its own standards and decides to increasingly become a political actor.

Between 1 and 2, I'm not sure which is worse.  My experience is with local churches on the northwest/west coast and in the midwest (Iowa/Minnesota), but not Michigan or other areas.  I claim much less understanding about Michigan churches, although I do get this sense: the closer individuals or local churches are to Grand Rapids, the more the individual or church seems to think that the denomination is required to a relfection of sorts of them, and the more the denomination seems to regard their opinion as to what the denomination should be.

Between the denomination and classis, it is obvious that the denomination gets the most in terms of ministry shares.  And while money isn't everything, it's a lot.  Certainly, I think the denominational structure believes that.  So if more attention would be focused on middle management (classis), wouldn't it have to be the case that this change of focus would be reflected in revenue flow?

If one had to say what denominational agency was the most popular with local churches, I would think it would be CRWRC (now World Renew).  But the funny thing about that is this: in a very real way, CRWRC is not so much a denominational agency.  It receives no ministry shares and it is its own corporation.  Sometimes, I find when people first learn that CRWRC receives no ministry shares, they wonder out loud where all those ministry shares dollars go.

I hope those who will be involved in studying the restructure of the denomination will consider whether too many minds at the denominational, whether consciously or not, consider it the point of the local churches to serve the denomination, instead of the other way around.  From everything I can see, I think too many denominational minds do think that way, and would argue in defense of the proposition (well if you want do big things, well if you want to impact Congress on the question of climate change, well if you want to persuade the federal government to give more money to the poor, etc). 

I think there is much more "connect" between local congregations and their respectiv classes than between local congregations and the denomination.  Indeed, I think the disconnect between local congregations and the denomination is getting dangerously acute.  I can't count the number of times, to illustrate, I've heard the the following:  "I don't even want to read the Banner anymore -- I have no idea where they are coming from sometimes." 

I don't know -- maybe the dominant perspective is different the closer one gets to GR.  I do think GR has its own culture and thus perspective.  And it would stand to reason that if the denomination focuses only, or even more, on its own local/regional culture, it could find itself at odds with the rest of the country.  I know many Canadians feel estranged from the denomination.  It may not be a Canadian/US division, but a GR area division from everything not GR area.  I'm not sure, but that seems like at least a plausible theory.  It's reflected with the facts on the ground that I see at least.

Whatever the case, I think I would be all for classes playing a greater role in the lives of local churches.  But mind you, one of the first issues that will have to be on the table if that happens, may have to be revenue.  The consequence of that wouldn't be underestimated by the denominational powers that now be.