Earlier this week, a major Evangelical ministry, World Vision, really stuck its proverbial foot into its mouth when its President, Richard Stearns, decided to allow same-sex couples to be "married" and remain in the employ of World Vision. He said it was not about politics, but rather about "unity," although he meant unity at the cost of apostasy. A good part of this story is that a couple of days later, Stearns and the other leaders of World Vision came back to say that "after looking at the Scriptures more closely," they decided to rescind that policy. However the damage was possibly done, much as it was to Exodus International a couple of years ago. Despite the right move to reverse what was a stupid statement on the part of Stearns, some questions still remain:
1. How is it, first of all, that only now are they "discovering what Scripture has said all along?
2. Secondly, being that Stearns had his brainfart spasm a couple of days ago, it begs the question as to what else he's going to make stupid statements about?
3. Thirdly, being that World Vision is a ministry of compassion, isn't it odd that Stearns pulls in a $350K annual salary? This is something I find odd, as World Vision was one of the founding ministries of the Evangelical Council for Accountability (ECFA), and they didn't find that odd?? To me, Stearns is reminiscent in that regard of the professors at Southeastern University these days who make a lot of stink about the "plight of the poor," yet they too have extravagant salaries and $300K homes, drive around in fancy cars, etc.
4. Finally, the fourth question is what really warranted this change of heart - was it the prayerful seeking of the Holy Spirit's direction through Bible study, or was it the potential loss of donor dollars? After all, there were many staunch pro-family Evangelical Christians from a variety of denominational backgrounds who embrace traditional values and would not even consider the possibility of "gay marriage," and many denominational leaders, heads of theological schools, and others (including the president of Dallas Seminary, as well as the heads of both the Assemblies of God and the Southern Baptist Convention) have advocated ceasing support among their members for World Vision.
These questions have provoked questions from others on social media sites such as Facebook, and one woman I saw who posted on a FB discussion about this had a very legitimate question - she wanted to pull her support from World Vision, but she was worried about the child suffering that she was supporting through them and she didn't know what to do. So, I want to offer some bits of advice on dealing with something like this, as it might help give some answers and elimate some confusion:
1. First, if you are supporting a child through World Vision, don't necessarily stop but also start demanding a higher level of accountability from them - this should be a standing rule with any ministry or organization actually. In World Vision's case, they have membership in ECFA, and ECFA requires that its members provide quarterly or annual financial disclosures to their supporters, so take full advantage. If your support, for instance, is giving more towards lavish executive perks rather than helping the children or whoever the ministry is supposed to serve, this is a problem that needs to be addressed. Also, grill these people to explain exactly what "administrative costs" are, because oftentimes these are loopholes that hide unnecessary perks and ridiculous expenses. If you see excessive "administrative costs" that take up more than 5% of an organization's budget, it's time to maybe pull your support.
2. Despite some heart-tugging advertising campaigns some of these organizations use regarding specific children, the fact is one of these children may be the beneficiary of aid from a variety of sources, as it should be - one source often doesn't cut the living expenses of the families of these children. It may take some homework, but if you are dissatisfied with the accountability of an organization like World Vision, it would be wise to research into similar ministries, because you may be able to financially contribute to the same child and their family through another organization that is helping them. If I were a donor, I would research similar organizations such as Compassion International and Food for the Poor, as a chance exists that you may be able to continue sponsorship of the same child you have been donating to through one of the other organizations. If that be the case, shift your support then to them.
3. It must also be remembered that just because an organization claims to be "Christian" does not mean it is necessarily. A perfect example is Christian Children's Fund, whose ads you may recognize by the Miss Piggy-esque mug of a fat Sally Struthers trying her hand at tear-jerking. CCF was founded over 100 years ago, and at its beginning may have been more Christian, but the evolving theological liberalism of the mainline Protestant denominations that supported it have caused it to be about as Christian as the Church of Satan. It appears that World Vision and other "Evangelical" ministries may be headed in a similar direction, given their permeation with the Emerging Church movement which has infected mainstream Evangelicalism sort of like crab lice infect a hooker. Charity is a fundamental Christian conviction, but we also must temper charity with responsible Christian stewardship as well, not throwing money at every cause, campaign, and crusade that rolls down the pike just because it has a "Christian" label on it. God is not the Haines Underwear lady, folks! Therefore, in stewardship as well as anything else we must do as II Timothy 2:15 exhorts us, and be diligent to "study to show ourselves approved." Being (and staying) well-informed is the most exemplary exercise of Christian stewardship, and one much of the American Church lacks today.
I hope this will be of service to those of you who struggle with supporting even supposedly "Christian" ministries that oftentimes see fit to compromise their convictions. With Exodus International, Joel Osteen, and now World Vision doing its thing, there are bound to be others, and we live in a day and age where we need to exercise sharp discernment, because the deception of the enemy is getting more intense. Use these tips I have provided, and may God's blessings be with you as you are encouraged that ultimately HE is still on the throne!
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Great Lent
This is the season of Lent (or the Great Fast, as our Eastern Christian brethren call it). Lent is an important time of the year for us as Catholic Christians as it is a time of prioritizing our relationship with Christ by laying aside those things which distract us from living our Christian lives as individuals. I wanted to do an important teaching on Lent this year because it has a lot of misconceptions from Protestant Evangelical/Fundamentalist brethren who, through the nasty disorder called Romophobia, have weaved an entire mythology around Lent based largely on fallacious information supplied by spurious sources such as Alexander Hislop. However, not only is Lent fully Christian, but I want to show from Scripture that many practices of Lent have support there as well, provided you are not viewing them through Romophobic-tainted Fundamentalist lenses. So, I will begin by first discussing some specific practices - Ash Wednesday, fasting and abstinence, etc. - and then I want to show how Lent is a time for us to make Jesus Christ central in our lives, and how it establishes a pattern for the whole year and not just a season.
I want to begin with a discussion about Ash Wednesday, which marks the start of Western Lent (in the East, it begins on that preceding Monday). According to The Catholic Encyclopedia (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1987) on page 55, Ash Wednesday was instituted by Pope Gregory the Great in the 7th century, but it has roots in a much older practice that goes back to Old Testament times. Throughout Scripture, ashes have always symbolized mourning, penance, and sorrow, and this is evident in such Scripture passages as Jonah 3:6, Job 2:8 and 30:19 in the Old Testament as well as Matthew 11:21 and Luke 10:13 in the New. The Middle Eastern custom was generally to dress oneself in sackcloth, and sit in an ash bed when a penitential season of fasting was called. It is a call to humility reminding us that from the dust of the earth we come, and that we are no greater than God, who created us from that dust. The general practice on Ash Wednesday in the West is to burn the ashes from the palms of the Palm Sunday from the previous year (it forms a continuity with the previous Paschal season), after which the priest mixes them with holy water. As the priest prays over the faithful who humbly kneel at the altar, he paraphrases a passage of Scripture to them from Genesis 3:19, which in the traditional Anglo-Catholic service is read "Remember O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." (see The People's Anglican Missal, p. A60) The reason I wanted to mention this is that contrary to what some Protestant Fundamentalists allege, the distribution of ashes has a strong Scriptural base, and a deep meaning to those who receive this dispensation. I have heard some of the most ridiculous allegations about Ash Wednesday from these people, including this one from a person who is actually a friend - "Wearing ashes on your forehead (“for they disfigure their faces that they may appear unto men to fast”) is for show. And public proclamations of fasting or denying yourself a pleasure that is not sinful such as chocolate is unbiblical. It is for show. It is a man-made tradition. Besides, Christ commands us to fast in secret." To be honest, this is a ridiculous and stupid charge (no offense to my friend intended) and is so ridiculous that it bears no real need to respond to it. This unfortunately stems back to the whole idea of what justification is about - some Fundamentalists think - as Dr. Regis Martin, my theology professor, succinctly pointed out - that sin is like a cowpie and Jesus just covers it with snow and that is that. However, the more correct and Scriptural way of seeing justification is that Jesus, by His incarnation, enters into our sinful beings and transforms us from within, thus the stench of the manure of sin is transformed into the beautiful garden of salvation. In order for that to happen though, it is important to understand that salvation is not just a one-time event, but it is a lifelong thing. Baptism cleanses us from original sin, but we are still subject to propensities to sin, and therefore we have to be careful to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to conquer those propensities (called "the passions" by the Church Fathers) and overcome them by growing in our walk with Christ (Theosis). The Lenten season is one way to remind us that we need to do this, although it shouldn't stop with Lent, but actually should be a practice for the entire year. Which leads us to another aspect of this whole discussion - fasting and abstinence.
Fasting and abstinence can be practiced together, or they can be practiced separately, but they are two different things. Fasting is quantitative in that it has to do with how much we do or don't consume. Fasting takes several forms - it can be skipping a meal and eating smaller portions, or it can go all the way by not consuming anything for a period of time, as Jesus did in the 40-day sojourn He undertook in the Wilderness, which is also what Lent reminds us of in the Church year, as it deals with life events of our Lord. There is not a prescribed regimen for fasting, as the Church has always taught that one should do so as he or she is able - in other words, if you have medical issues that would make fasting difficult, you can do something else instead or fast in a more manageable way that will not endanger your health. Abstinence on the other hand has to do with quality, and what kind of food, etc., we consume. As far as I know, there are no health issues with abstinence, as anything can be abstained from that maybe is considered an indulgent pleasure. Keep in mind too that abstinence is not limited to food - you can also abstain from different types of television (or all TV!), hobbies, movies, favorite types of music, etc. Also, it is important to note that couples are also encouraged to abstain from sexual relations at this time (I Corinthians 7:50). But, Lent is not just about what you give up, but also about what you can do to enrich your spiritual life, which is where we go next.
With the distractions of life's pleasures tempered through the disciplines of fasting and abstinence, we are encouraged by the Church to engage in other spiritual activities and exercises to help us grow in our faith. For instance, you may have had that desire to read through a Biblical book, so this is a good time to do that. Also, that money you save by abstinence can be invested in the work of the Church or toward things that bless and help others - give more to the missions program of your church, or donate to a specific ministry, for example. It is also a prime occasion to channel the time you now have possibly from abstinence from entertainments to do something more constructive - visit a nursing home, assist your pastor with hospital visitations, or even volunteer time at the local animal shelter (abandoned pets are God's creatures too, after all). The reason for all this is a simple one - it is putting Christ back at the center of one's life and focus, and by ministering to others in practical ways you share Christ with them, rather than feeding the flesh and gratifying self. Which now leads me to some concluding observations.
The late Cardinal Henri de Lubac, in his classic 1956 text The Splendor of the Church, made an important point about what mystery is - I define mystery as a truth that you know is true but are unable to explain, but de Lubac takes it one step further. He says that a mystery is that which is "fitfully believed in obscurity." However, aside from the concept of "mystery," de Lubac notes that one particular mystery - the Church herself - is the one mystery that every other mystery (Trinity, the deity of Christ, the role of grace, etc.) revolves around (Henri de Lubac, The Splendor of the Church {New York: Sheed and Ward, 1956} p. 24). However, the Church is not the total end, as she reflects something else - the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Dr. Regis Martin, my Theology professor at Franciscan University of Steubenville, notes that one of the most perfect metaphors used by many to describe the Church over the centuries is the moon - in the moon, we see death and rebirth (those who make up the Church die to original sin through the holy mystery of Baptism, and we are "born again" in Christ), and also the fact that the moon imparts the light of the sun to the earth - the moon does not illuminate itself, in other words. Likewise, the Church imparts the light of the Gospel from the SON, Jesus, and she is the visible presence of Christ to the world. The Church does not exist for herself, but rather for the Savior who is her Spouse. In short, our devotion during Lent and at other times of the Christian year is not about us - the Lenten practices of fasting and abstinence are not a sanctified Atkins program, and as good as the health benefits are, they are not the sole purpose. That being said, it's time to preach a little.
I have been seeing some very disturbing trends among Evangelical Protestants in recent years that disturb me. In the logic of supposedly "becoming all things to all people," many of these people have discarded some very strong convictions about keeping Christ at the center of our lives in order to serve man - the culture is the new "god" of Evangelicalism, all in the name of "change." Again, this is a loss of focus from Christ to other things - numbers, respectability, etc. Just today as I write this as a matter of fact, a leading Evangelical relief ministry, World Vision, has decided that homosexuals who are "married" are all of a sudden Christians and can work with their "ministry." This is similar to so many others in recent years who have apostatized - Rob "No Hell" Bell, the Exodus International ministry, and not a few of my professors at my former university. I find it interesting, for instance, that many of my former professors put causes and pet projects above their professed call to equip future ministers in their denominations, but the double-standard they display betrays their real motive. I find it curious that these professors at supposedly Christian universities will soapbox about migrant workers, the "plight of the poor," etc., while at the same time they drive their expensive cars, live in their $300K homes, and get ridiculously large salaries from the tuition (which as worthless as some of it is, it is a ripoff to the poor students and their benefactors who supplied the funds to pay for it!). Yet, surprisingly, when one hears these professors soapbox about their pet causes, it is always to lay burdens on others that they themselves fall short bearing. This goes back to something that Primitive Catholic (now Anabaptist) writer David Bercot said in his 1989 book Will The Real Heretics Please Stand Up? (Tyler, TX: Scroll Publishing, 1989) when he notes that Christianity will not improve until the Church returns to simple holiness, genuine love, and the crossbearing attitudes of early Christians (p. 158). Otherwise, this individualistic "Jesus and me and no room for thee" mentality of the majority of American Evangelicals (especially the professors in their theological schools teaching them this crap!) will lead to a secularization of their beings that will say, based on the fallacy of sola Scriptura, that because the individual interprets a situation thus, then it must be "the Lord." That is one reason so many so-called theological academics are quick to canonize Nietzsche and Marx while demonizing the real people in their own churches who believe the truth. And, that is also why people like the administration of World Vision now think it's "OK to be gay as long as you're married." Some writers have pointed out this pragmatism with Evangelicals before - in centuries past, divorce was considered a grave sin unless either adultery or life-endangering violence was the cause, but nowadays I have personally heard "Christians" saying they are divorcing their spouses because they "just don't feel compatible." Bullcockle!!! They need to be reminded of the Scripture perhaps that says "What God has brought together let no man tear asunder" (Matthew 19:6). Divorce opened the floodgates to a lot of crazy stuff among professing Christians in recent years, and it is of no surprise to me that some of these same people are baptizing homosexuality as "acceptable" now. Archbishop Haverland notes that this mindset among Christians will produce the same secularization that has plagued "mainline" churches like the Episcopalians, and it all comes back to too much individualistic, misguided, pseudo-pietist Scripture hermeneutics that de-emphasize the place of the Church in our understanding of our faith. Secularism is a real danger, and Fr. Alexander Schmemann defined it as "the absence of man as a worshipping being" in his book For The Life of the World on page 109. Hence, the need for a true Lenten season of repentance is a message to the whole Church to return devotion to Him whom it properly belongs, Jesus Christ.
In fastings, abstinence, and various spiritual exercises you may undertake this Lenten season, please remember to "do them unto the Lord." Lent is about putting Christ back in the center of our lives and giving our churches that luminous reflection of His love to witness to this world. And, in doing so, we must uphold that which the Church has taught - there is no compromise, "change," or innovation in that regard warranted, as what we have received IS the truth in its fullness; it doesn't need further development, but must be humbly and joyfully received and accepted. Until we do that, we cannot know the fullness of our life in Christ. So, this Lent, I challenge you - make Christ your center, and work to magnify Him in your daily lives. He is not asking you to be perfect, but to strive toward what He called you to be. God bless.
I want to begin with a discussion about Ash Wednesday, which marks the start of Western Lent (in the East, it begins on that preceding Monday). According to The Catholic Encyclopedia (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1987) on page 55, Ash Wednesday was instituted by Pope Gregory the Great in the 7th century, but it has roots in a much older practice that goes back to Old Testament times. Throughout Scripture, ashes have always symbolized mourning, penance, and sorrow, and this is evident in such Scripture passages as Jonah 3:6, Job 2:8 and 30:19 in the Old Testament as well as Matthew 11:21 and Luke 10:13 in the New. The Middle Eastern custom was generally to dress oneself in sackcloth, and sit in an ash bed when a penitential season of fasting was called. It is a call to humility reminding us that from the dust of the earth we come, and that we are no greater than God, who created us from that dust. The general practice on Ash Wednesday in the West is to burn the ashes from the palms of the Palm Sunday from the previous year (it forms a continuity with the previous Paschal season), after which the priest mixes them with holy water. As the priest prays over the faithful who humbly kneel at the altar, he paraphrases a passage of Scripture to them from Genesis 3:19, which in the traditional Anglo-Catholic service is read "Remember O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." (see The People's Anglican Missal, p. A60) The reason I wanted to mention this is that contrary to what some Protestant Fundamentalists allege, the distribution of ashes has a strong Scriptural base, and a deep meaning to those who receive this dispensation. I have heard some of the most ridiculous allegations about Ash Wednesday from these people, including this one from a person who is actually a friend - "Wearing ashes on your forehead (“for they disfigure their faces that they may appear unto men to fast”) is for show. And public proclamations of fasting or denying yourself a pleasure that is not sinful such as chocolate is unbiblical. It is for show. It is a man-made tradition. Besides, Christ commands us to fast in secret." To be honest, this is a ridiculous and stupid charge (no offense to my friend intended) and is so ridiculous that it bears no real need to respond to it. This unfortunately stems back to the whole idea of what justification is about - some Fundamentalists think - as Dr. Regis Martin, my theology professor, succinctly pointed out - that sin is like a cowpie and Jesus just covers it with snow and that is that. However, the more correct and Scriptural way of seeing justification is that Jesus, by His incarnation, enters into our sinful beings and transforms us from within, thus the stench of the manure of sin is transformed into the beautiful garden of salvation. In order for that to happen though, it is important to understand that salvation is not just a one-time event, but it is a lifelong thing. Baptism cleanses us from original sin, but we are still subject to propensities to sin, and therefore we have to be careful to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to conquer those propensities (called "the passions" by the Church Fathers) and overcome them by growing in our walk with Christ (Theosis). The Lenten season is one way to remind us that we need to do this, although it shouldn't stop with Lent, but actually should be a practice for the entire year. Which leads us to another aspect of this whole discussion - fasting and abstinence.
Fasting and abstinence can be practiced together, or they can be practiced separately, but they are two different things. Fasting is quantitative in that it has to do with how much we do or don't consume. Fasting takes several forms - it can be skipping a meal and eating smaller portions, or it can go all the way by not consuming anything for a period of time, as Jesus did in the 40-day sojourn He undertook in the Wilderness, which is also what Lent reminds us of in the Church year, as it deals with life events of our Lord. There is not a prescribed regimen for fasting, as the Church has always taught that one should do so as he or she is able - in other words, if you have medical issues that would make fasting difficult, you can do something else instead or fast in a more manageable way that will not endanger your health. Abstinence on the other hand has to do with quality, and what kind of food, etc., we consume. As far as I know, there are no health issues with abstinence, as anything can be abstained from that maybe is considered an indulgent pleasure. Keep in mind too that abstinence is not limited to food - you can also abstain from different types of television (or all TV!), hobbies, movies, favorite types of music, etc. Also, it is important to note that couples are also encouraged to abstain from sexual relations at this time (I Corinthians 7:50). But, Lent is not just about what you give up, but also about what you can do to enrich your spiritual life, which is where we go next.
With the distractions of life's pleasures tempered through the disciplines of fasting and abstinence, we are encouraged by the Church to engage in other spiritual activities and exercises to help us grow in our faith. For instance, you may have had that desire to read through a Biblical book, so this is a good time to do that. Also, that money you save by abstinence can be invested in the work of the Church or toward things that bless and help others - give more to the missions program of your church, or donate to a specific ministry, for example. It is also a prime occasion to channel the time you now have possibly from abstinence from entertainments to do something more constructive - visit a nursing home, assist your pastor with hospital visitations, or even volunteer time at the local animal shelter (abandoned pets are God's creatures too, after all). The reason for all this is a simple one - it is putting Christ back at the center of one's life and focus, and by ministering to others in practical ways you share Christ with them, rather than feeding the flesh and gratifying self. Which now leads me to some concluding observations.
The late Cardinal Henri de Lubac, in his classic 1956 text The Splendor of the Church, made an important point about what mystery is - I define mystery as a truth that you know is true but are unable to explain, but de Lubac takes it one step further. He says that a mystery is that which is "fitfully believed in obscurity." However, aside from the concept of "mystery," de Lubac notes that one particular mystery - the Church herself - is the one mystery that every other mystery (Trinity, the deity of Christ, the role of grace, etc.) revolves around (Henri de Lubac, The Splendor of the Church {New York: Sheed and Ward, 1956} p. 24). However, the Church is not the total end, as she reflects something else - the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Dr. Regis Martin, my Theology professor at Franciscan University of Steubenville, notes that one of the most perfect metaphors used by many to describe the Church over the centuries is the moon - in the moon, we see death and rebirth (those who make up the Church die to original sin through the holy mystery of Baptism, and we are "born again" in Christ), and also the fact that the moon imparts the light of the sun to the earth - the moon does not illuminate itself, in other words. Likewise, the Church imparts the light of the Gospel from the SON, Jesus, and she is the visible presence of Christ to the world. The Church does not exist for herself, but rather for the Savior who is her Spouse. In short, our devotion during Lent and at other times of the Christian year is not about us - the Lenten practices of fasting and abstinence are not a sanctified Atkins program, and as good as the health benefits are, they are not the sole purpose. That being said, it's time to preach a little.
I have been seeing some very disturbing trends among Evangelical Protestants in recent years that disturb me. In the logic of supposedly "becoming all things to all people," many of these people have discarded some very strong convictions about keeping Christ at the center of our lives in order to serve man - the culture is the new "god" of Evangelicalism, all in the name of "change." Again, this is a loss of focus from Christ to other things - numbers, respectability, etc. Just today as I write this as a matter of fact, a leading Evangelical relief ministry, World Vision, has decided that homosexuals who are "married" are all of a sudden Christians and can work with their "ministry." This is similar to so many others in recent years who have apostatized - Rob "No Hell" Bell, the Exodus International ministry, and not a few of my professors at my former university. I find it interesting, for instance, that many of my former professors put causes and pet projects above their professed call to equip future ministers in their denominations, but the double-standard they display betrays their real motive. I find it curious that these professors at supposedly Christian universities will soapbox about migrant workers, the "plight of the poor," etc., while at the same time they drive their expensive cars, live in their $300K homes, and get ridiculously large salaries from the tuition (which as worthless as some of it is, it is a ripoff to the poor students and their benefactors who supplied the funds to pay for it!). Yet, surprisingly, when one hears these professors soapbox about their pet causes, it is always to lay burdens on others that they themselves fall short bearing. This goes back to something that Primitive Catholic (now Anabaptist) writer David Bercot said in his 1989 book Will The Real Heretics Please Stand Up? (Tyler, TX: Scroll Publishing, 1989) when he notes that Christianity will not improve until the Church returns to simple holiness, genuine love, and the crossbearing attitudes of early Christians (p. 158). Otherwise, this individualistic "Jesus and me and no room for thee" mentality of the majority of American Evangelicals (especially the professors in their theological schools teaching them this crap!) will lead to a secularization of their beings that will say, based on the fallacy of sola Scriptura, that because the individual interprets a situation thus, then it must be "the Lord." That is one reason so many so-called theological academics are quick to canonize Nietzsche and Marx while demonizing the real people in their own churches who believe the truth. And, that is also why people like the administration of World Vision now think it's "OK to be gay as long as you're married." Some writers have pointed out this pragmatism with Evangelicals before - in centuries past, divorce was considered a grave sin unless either adultery or life-endangering violence was the cause, but nowadays I have personally heard "Christians" saying they are divorcing their spouses because they "just don't feel compatible." Bullcockle!!! They need to be reminded of the Scripture perhaps that says "What God has brought together let no man tear asunder" (Matthew 19:6). Divorce opened the floodgates to a lot of crazy stuff among professing Christians in recent years, and it is of no surprise to me that some of these same people are baptizing homosexuality as "acceptable" now. Archbishop Haverland notes that this mindset among Christians will produce the same secularization that has plagued "mainline" churches like the Episcopalians, and it all comes back to too much individualistic, misguided, pseudo-pietist Scripture hermeneutics that de-emphasize the place of the Church in our understanding of our faith. Secularism is a real danger, and Fr. Alexander Schmemann defined it as "the absence of man as a worshipping being" in his book For The Life of the World on page 109. Hence, the need for a true Lenten season of repentance is a message to the whole Church to return devotion to Him whom it properly belongs, Jesus Christ.
In fastings, abstinence, and various spiritual exercises you may undertake this Lenten season, please remember to "do them unto the Lord." Lent is about putting Christ back in the center of our lives and giving our churches that luminous reflection of His love to witness to this world. And, in doing so, we must uphold that which the Church has taught - there is no compromise, "change," or innovation in that regard warranted, as what we have received IS the truth in its fullness; it doesn't need further development, but must be humbly and joyfully received and accepted. Until we do that, we cannot know the fullness of our life in Christ. So, this Lent, I challenge you - make Christ your center, and work to magnify Him in your daily lives. He is not asking you to be perfect, but to strive toward what He called you to be. God bless.
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Fitfully and Wonderfully Made - Where Theology Intersects Philosophy
It is hard to believe that this is the 4th year already of the Sacramental Present Truths blog, and although I laid out an agenda for it at the end of last year, I want to take a different direction with this first 2014 posting. This is somewhat involved, and it is largely based on some material I have been gleaning from my coursework at Franciscan University of Steubenville, as I have been exposed to some very good, sound, and theologically orthodox material that has aided in my getting some good fresh perspective. One of the courses I am taking currently is called "Philosophy of the Human Person," and it is taught by a very astute professor, Dr. John Crosby. Philosophy has never, honestly, been one of my strongest areas although I do realize it has tremendous importance, as well as also having close proximity to Theology. This course, however, is thoroughly grounded in a very Judeo-Christian foundation, and thus its value to Christian growth is actually quite substantial. The focus on what I am about to write will gravitate toward this theme, as it has some significance for our spiritual development as Christians too.
In this course, we use Crosby's own text, entitled The Selfhood of the Human Person (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1996). Although a somewhat involved text to read (on some things, it takes a couple of times to thoroughly digest what he is saying) it is also quite insightful. Crosby begins the text by stating that there are three primary moral imperatives, and they are as follows:
1. Persons belong to themselves and not to another (persona est sui iuris)
2. Persons are whole in themselves and are not mere parts
3. Persons are ends in themselves and not mere means.
To violate these imperatives, Crosby in so many words argues, constitutes the basis of depersonalization in various ways. For instance, treating a person as property of another (slavery) depersonalizes the individual in such a way that it violates persona est sui iuris. Likewise, seeing a person as a mere commodity to be exploited (a mere means) violates the imperative that each person is an end in themselves) - this is a moral ground for opposing such things as prostitution and bad work ethics. Finally, seeing a person as just a part rather than an entity whole in themselves diminishes the personhood of the individual, thus violating their personhood in varying ways such as racism, abortion, and stereotyping/scapegoating. From that foundation, then, is defining what personhood is, and in essence Crosby does so by noting that a person can be defined as an individual substance (substantia individua) of rational nature - we'll get to the latter momentarily. A "substance" in this case is defined as something not dependent on something else. An Aristotelian term, "rational animal," comes into play here, but as the late Pope John Paul II (as Karol Wojtyla before his papacy began) this reduces human beings (persons) to the level of a mere object, thus robbing said human being of subjectivity (meaning that each individual lives and exists from own center - not to be confused with subjectivism or solipsism, both of which allude the relational aspect of humanity) and thus making human individuals overly cosmological instead of recognizing they are personal as well. Much more can be said on this, but now I want to move onto a theological dimension as it does relate.
Dr. Kip Laxson, the senior pastor at Asbury United Methodist Church in Birmingham, AL, said something profound recently in a crusade he preached at Lake Gibson Nazarene Church here in Lakeland when he noted that Christian faith is personal but not individual. What he was saying was this - a Christian has a relationship with Christ that is personal, but it is not some solipsic experience where the individual's relationship is determined to be correct to the exclusion of others. Crosby too makes similar ideas in his text by talking about communicability vs. incommunicability. When Crosby defines communicability, he does so by saying that it entails attributes which are common to all - those would be defined as universals. To put it on a theological level, a church body is made up of a lot of people who maybe share common stories and experiences, which Kenneth Archer calls Central Narrative Convictions (or CNC's), and the CNC's in turn make up the universals which would constitute the "story" of that church body (Kenneth Archer, A Pentecostal Hermeneutic - Spirit, Scripture, and Community {Cleveland, TN: CPT Press, 2005} pp. 156-161). These CNC's, therefore, are the communicable traits (universals) of the members of the particular church body. However, each person's experience also has a lot of incommunicable aspects that are not necessarily shared by others in the group, and thus these incommunicabilities are things that define the individual as persona est sui iuris. However, again, far from making the person a solipsic entity (meaning that they exist to the exclusion of others), the incommunicable is what foundates human relationships and also nurtures a true love for another individual person. And, it is here that we begin to see a Biblical basis for incommunicability as the way God made us as individual persons.
Scripture tells us, in Psalm 139:14, that we are fearfully and wonderfully made by God, to the very point that he even knows the number of hair follicles on our individual scalps (Matthew 10:30). We are also made in God's image (imago Dei) and he therefore deals with us personally. This is beautifully illustrated by singing evangelist Jeff Steinberg when he notes that when God talks about us being made in his image, it does not mean we are carbon-copy cookie-cutter cutouts - rather, we are made in the image God sees of us, his vision if you will. And, as Jeff titled his autobiographic testimony, we are indeed "Masterpieces in Progress." If we read this in relation to what I talked about regarding Dr. Crosby's material, our incommunicability is to be seen as a gift from God, and just as God as a whole is incommunicable (hence, by his nature there can be no other gods!) we are incommunicable as individuals even while possessing many universal traits by our virtue of being part of the human race. However, our incommunicability was never meant to separate us from others; rather, our very incommunicability forms the basis of our fellowship with others, whether with our parents, our spouse, our church community, etc. Recognizing, respecting, and appreciating the unique traits of incommunicability in other persons is what allows us to freely love them and see them as a person too. This is why so many of the Ten Commandments, and indeed much of Jesus' own teachings, focus on interpersonal relationship - after all, when we recite the Liturgy in our churches on Sunday, does not our priest remind us that "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and prophets." (The Book of Common Prayer, 1928 American Edition {New York: The Church Pension Fund, printed 1945}p. 69). Indeed, as I have noted in my Ephesians study which is being edited for publication, there are two aspects to the Christian life as to what the Gospel summarizes:
1. Our relationship to God (personal but not individual)
2. Our relationship to one another (incommunicability loved and appreciated in others)
In short, we as Christians need one another, as we need relationship in order to grow as individuals. However, that relationship as noted in Romans 12:4-5 has the allegory of a human body, but unlike the literal body the members of the Body of Christ are wholes in themselves, and are members unto one another insofar as each respects the God-given dignity of their fellow members. That is the mystery of the Church - a Body who is a person in herself, yet made up of wholes and not parts. Cults fall into their heresies a number of times by diminishing or even outright dismissing a couple of key factors - first, the person of Christ and His place in the Triune Godhead, and secondly in the way personhood is viewed. Surprisingly, the two are actually interconnected, which warrants a whole ecclesiological study of its own.
More - indeed much more! - could be said on this subject, but as I learn more it requires a more detailed analysis in smaller doses, which from time to time I will share here with you. However, let us remember that philosophy and ethics are close cousins to theology, and instead of seeing them as antagonistic disciplines as some Fundamentalists view them, we should begin to see how ethics and philosophy can actually affirm the infallible truths of Holy Scripture as well as affirming the historic teachings of the Church Catholic. God bless until next time.
In this course, we use Crosby's own text, entitled The Selfhood of the Human Person (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1996). Although a somewhat involved text to read (on some things, it takes a couple of times to thoroughly digest what he is saying) it is also quite insightful. Crosby begins the text by stating that there are three primary moral imperatives, and they are as follows:
1. Persons belong to themselves and not to another (persona est sui iuris)
2. Persons are whole in themselves and are not mere parts
3. Persons are ends in themselves and not mere means.
To violate these imperatives, Crosby in so many words argues, constitutes the basis of depersonalization in various ways. For instance, treating a person as property of another (slavery) depersonalizes the individual in such a way that it violates persona est sui iuris. Likewise, seeing a person as a mere commodity to be exploited (a mere means) violates the imperative that each person is an end in themselves) - this is a moral ground for opposing such things as prostitution and bad work ethics. Finally, seeing a person as just a part rather than an entity whole in themselves diminishes the personhood of the individual, thus violating their personhood in varying ways such as racism, abortion, and stereotyping/scapegoating. From that foundation, then, is defining what personhood is, and in essence Crosby does so by noting that a person can be defined as an individual substance (substantia individua) of rational nature - we'll get to the latter momentarily. A "substance" in this case is defined as something not dependent on something else. An Aristotelian term, "rational animal," comes into play here, but as the late Pope John Paul II (as Karol Wojtyla before his papacy began) this reduces human beings (persons) to the level of a mere object, thus robbing said human being of subjectivity (meaning that each individual lives and exists from own center - not to be confused with subjectivism or solipsism, both of which allude the relational aspect of humanity) and thus making human individuals overly cosmological instead of recognizing they are personal as well. Much more can be said on this, but now I want to move onto a theological dimension as it does relate.
Dr. Kip Laxson, the senior pastor at Asbury United Methodist Church in Birmingham, AL, said something profound recently in a crusade he preached at Lake Gibson Nazarene Church here in Lakeland when he noted that Christian faith is personal but not individual. What he was saying was this - a Christian has a relationship with Christ that is personal, but it is not some solipsic experience where the individual's relationship is determined to be correct to the exclusion of others. Crosby too makes similar ideas in his text by talking about communicability vs. incommunicability. When Crosby defines communicability, he does so by saying that it entails attributes which are common to all - those would be defined as universals. To put it on a theological level, a church body is made up of a lot of people who maybe share common stories and experiences, which Kenneth Archer calls Central Narrative Convictions (or CNC's), and the CNC's in turn make up the universals which would constitute the "story" of that church body (Kenneth Archer, A Pentecostal Hermeneutic - Spirit, Scripture, and Community {Cleveland, TN: CPT Press, 2005} pp. 156-161). These CNC's, therefore, are the communicable traits (universals) of the members of the particular church body. However, each person's experience also has a lot of incommunicable aspects that are not necessarily shared by others in the group, and thus these incommunicabilities are things that define the individual as persona est sui iuris. However, again, far from making the person a solipsic entity (meaning that they exist to the exclusion of others), the incommunicable is what foundates human relationships and also nurtures a true love for another individual person. And, it is here that we begin to see a Biblical basis for incommunicability as the way God made us as individual persons.
Scripture tells us, in Psalm 139:14, that we are fearfully and wonderfully made by God, to the very point that he even knows the number of hair follicles on our individual scalps (Matthew 10:30). We are also made in God's image (imago Dei) and he therefore deals with us personally. This is beautifully illustrated by singing evangelist Jeff Steinberg when he notes that when God talks about us being made in his image, it does not mean we are carbon-copy cookie-cutter cutouts - rather, we are made in the image God sees of us, his vision if you will. And, as Jeff titled his autobiographic testimony, we are indeed "Masterpieces in Progress." If we read this in relation to what I talked about regarding Dr. Crosby's material, our incommunicability is to be seen as a gift from God, and just as God as a whole is incommunicable (hence, by his nature there can be no other gods!) we are incommunicable as individuals even while possessing many universal traits by our virtue of being part of the human race. However, our incommunicability was never meant to separate us from others; rather, our very incommunicability forms the basis of our fellowship with others, whether with our parents, our spouse, our church community, etc. Recognizing, respecting, and appreciating the unique traits of incommunicability in other persons is what allows us to freely love them and see them as a person too. This is why so many of the Ten Commandments, and indeed much of Jesus' own teachings, focus on interpersonal relationship - after all, when we recite the Liturgy in our churches on Sunday, does not our priest remind us that "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and prophets." (The Book of Common Prayer, 1928 American Edition {New York: The Church Pension Fund, printed 1945}p. 69). Indeed, as I have noted in my Ephesians study which is being edited for publication, there are two aspects to the Christian life as to what the Gospel summarizes:
1. Our relationship to God (personal but not individual)
2. Our relationship to one another (incommunicability loved and appreciated in others)
In short, we as Christians need one another, as we need relationship in order to grow as individuals. However, that relationship as noted in Romans 12:4-5 has the allegory of a human body, but unlike the literal body the members of the Body of Christ are wholes in themselves, and are members unto one another insofar as each respects the God-given dignity of their fellow members. That is the mystery of the Church - a Body who is a person in herself, yet made up of wholes and not parts. Cults fall into their heresies a number of times by diminishing or even outright dismissing a couple of key factors - first, the person of Christ and His place in the Triune Godhead, and secondly in the way personhood is viewed. Surprisingly, the two are actually interconnected, which warrants a whole ecclesiological study of its own.
More - indeed much more! - could be said on this subject, but as I learn more it requires a more detailed analysis in smaller doses, which from time to time I will share here with you. However, let us remember that philosophy and ethics are close cousins to theology, and instead of seeing them as antagonistic disciplines as some Fundamentalists view them, we should begin to see how ethics and philosophy can actually affirm the infallible truths of Holy Scripture as well as affirming the historic teachings of the Church Catholic. God bless until next time.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Year-End Perspectives
To begin, 2013 has been an interesting year, one of ups and downs. But, it is also the third year of these articles, and as I get ready to enter a fourth there is a lot to talk about regarding the past year, and as a wrap-up I wanted to do just that.
1. Graduate School
At the end of August, I completed my first year of graduate school at Southeastern University, but the story gets complicated at that point. My experiences over the past year led me to some important decisions, and 2013 was a watershed year in that regard.
Being at SEU for graduate studies was nothing new - I got my BA from there back in 1996. However, much has changed about the campus since I got my undergraduate degree, and it was like landing on a different planet upon returning. Back when I was an undergrad, Southeastern was called simply Southeastern College, and at that time it was the second-largest educational institution affilliated with the Assemblies of God denomination. Also, back then it was still solidly Pentecostal and fairly conservative, although even then some things began to change. However, upon returning there for graduate studies last year, I was in a continual state of culture-shock at what had transpired in less than 16 years after I had gotten my Bachelor's. A few years back Southeastern gained the status of university and renamed itself accordingly, but with that change came a change in leadership, faculty, etc. Many of the newer faculty in the Religion Department there, I am shocked to say, are advancing an agenda that is out of whack with the spiritual heritage of the school itself, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by other alumni and even some current students. There is more social activism, and also a tendency among the current faculty to Pentecostalize some outright heretical people (Jurgen Moltmann, James Cone, and other modern "theologians," for instance), although what they are really accomplishing is secularizing themselves. The mentality of many of these professors is personified in the theologies of people such as Jurgen Moltmann, who interpret Christianity as a sort of "breaking in of the kingdom" into the physical (Moltmann terms this "Theology of Hope") and therefore the danger exists of turning Christianity into a panentheistic system of "God being in all." Therefore, all of a sudden, the mentality of Christian ministry changes to that of an an "agent of uplift" who embraces the secular to see the sacred rather than transforming the souls of men through the message of salvation of Christ as embodied in the Cross. So, now, all other religions, and indeed secularism, become "good" because all theology has become relative to the whims of changing culture - note that word change, as it denotes a "good thing" to such people. Although such mentalities are lofty and noble, they are in the end exercises in futility because they are not in accord with Scripture nor with the teachings of the Church throughout the ages. The eminent late Orthodox theologian Fr. Alexander Schmemann addresses this when he notes that these futile attempts to overcome secularism by embracing it (al a Moltmann) are in reality a surrender to secularism (Alexander Schmemann, For the Life of the World {Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, 2004} p. 109). And, the way Schmemann defines secularism is thus - a negation of worship (p. 118). Southeastern University is a picture of this as it currently stands - in the past, when there was more of an emphasis on worship (by that, I don't mean a singing of happy-clappy songs to a bad rock band, but rather true devotion to God in all areas of life), the spiritual climate was more vibrant. Indeed, in Southeastern's past there were many life-transforming revivals on that campus that touched the hearts of students and faculty alike; many older alumni testify quite fondly of that. In recent years though, a spiritual revival has evaded that campus, as the once-anticipated campus-wide revival meetings every year have been replaced by these droning, boring "Leadership Forums" that consist of well-known businessmen and politicians (and the occasional Emergent Church guru) spending a week reciting mission statements and telling people how to sequence all the bells and whistles to "attract" people to their churches, etc. Altar services have now been replaced with Six Signa certificates, in other words. Seeing all of this happen made me face a hard reality that I needed to leave this campus, and thanks to godly counsel from my Archbishop, I withdrew at the end of August and now will be continuing my education elsewhere, which I will briefly address.
A couple of weeks ago, I received some joyful news that I was accepted into the Master of Theological Studies program at Franciscan University of Steubenville, and my financial aid was awarded so that I can begin studies in January by Distance Education. Looking at the curricula of Franciscan, it is quite refreshing to see that there is still a school out there still faithful to the teachings of the the Church and the Holy Scriptures, and is truly spiritually vibrant. I anticipate graduating from the program in the summer of 2015, provided all goes smoothly, and the good news is that I can do almost all of it from the comfort of my own office, save six credits I have to do in-residence at Steubenville in the coming year. I will be on occasion posting my progress, as it will be keeping me busy for some time.
2. ACC Diocesan Synod 2013
Another major event in our lives this year came when this past January our parish chose me to be the voting delegate to our Synod in Athens, GA. It was an honor I gladly accepted, and indeed, the Synod was life-changing for me. We were up there from May 1-3 of this year, and the Synod itself was held at St. Stephen Pro-Cathedral in Athens, a beautiful church just south of town. I will talk some about the experience, as well as share some observations.
1. Graduate School
At the end of August, I completed my first year of graduate school at Southeastern University, but the story gets complicated at that point. My experiences over the past year led me to some important decisions, and 2013 was a watershed year in that regard.
Being at SEU for graduate studies was nothing new - I got my BA from there back in 1996. However, much has changed about the campus since I got my undergraduate degree, and it was like landing on a different planet upon returning. Back when I was an undergrad, Southeastern was called simply Southeastern College, and at that time it was the second-largest educational institution affilliated with the Assemblies of God denomination. Also, back then it was still solidly Pentecostal and fairly conservative, although even then some things began to change. However, upon returning there for graduate studies last year, I was in a continual state of culture-shock at what had transpired in less than 16 years after I had gotten my Bachelor's. A few years back Southeastern gained the status of university and renamed itself accordingly, but with that change came a change in leadership, faculty, etc. Many of the newer faculty in the Religion Department there, I am shocked to say, are advancing an agenda that is out of whack with the spiritual heritage of the school itself, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by other alumni and even some current students. There is more social activism, and also a tendency among the current faculty to Pentecostalize some outright heretical people (Jurgen Moltmann, James Cone, and other modern "theologians," for instance), although what they are really accomplishing is secularizing themselves. The mentality of many of these professors is personified in the theologies of people such as Jurgen Moltmann, who interpret Christianity as a sort of "breaking in of the kingdom" into the physical (Moltmann terms this "Theology of Hope") and therefore the danger exists of turning Christianity into a panentheistic system of "God being in all." Therefore, all of a sudden, the mentality of Christian ministry changes to that of an an "agent of uplift" who embraces the secular to see the sacred rather than transforming the souls of men through the message of salvation of Christ as embodied in the Cross. So, now, all other religions, and indeed secularism, become "good" because all theology has become relative to the whims of changing culture - note that word change, as it denotes a "good thing" to such people. Although such mentalities are lofty and noble, they are in the end exercises in futility because they are not in accord with Scripture nor with the teachings of the Church throughout the ages. The eminent late Orthodox theologian Fr. Alexander Schmemann addresses this when he notes that these futile attempts to overcome secularism by embracing it (al a Moltmann) are in reality a surrender to secularism (Alexander Schmemann, For the Life of the World {Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, 2004} p. 109). And, the way Schmemann defines secularism is thus - a negation of worship (p. 118). Southeastern University is a picture of this as it currently stands - in the past, when there was more of an emphasis on worship (by that, I don't mean a singing of happy-clappy songs to a bad rock band, but rather true devotion to God in all areas of life), the spiritual climate was more vibrant. Indeed, in Southeastern's past there were many life-transforming revivals on that campus that touched the hearts of students and faculty alike; many older alumni testify quite fondly of that. In recent years though, a spiritual revival has evaded that campus, as the once-anticipated campus-wide revival meetings every year have been replaced by these droning, boring "Leadership Forums" that consist of well-known businessmen and politicians (and the occasional Emergent Church guru) spending a week reciting mission statements and telling people how to sequence all the bells and whistles to "attract" people to their churches, etc. Altar services have now been replaced with Six Signa certificates, in other words. Seeing all of this happen made me face a hard reality that I needed to leave this campus, and thanks to godly counsel from my Archbishop, I withdrew at the end of August and now will be continuing my education elsewhere, which I will briefly address.
A couple of weeks ago, I received some joyful news that I was accepted into the Master of Theological Studies program at Franciscan University of Steubenville, and my financial aid was awarded so that I can begin studies in January by Distance Education. Looking at the curricula of Franciscan, it is quite refreshing to see that there is still a school out there still faithful to the teachings of the the Church and the Holy Scriptures, and is truly spiritually vibrant. I anticipate graduating from the program in the summer of 2015, provided all goes smoothly, and the good news is that I can do almost all of it from the comfort of my own office, save six credits I have to do in-residence at Steubenville in the coming year. I will be on occasion posting my progress, as it will be keeping me busy for some time.
2. ACC Diocesan Synod 2013
Another major event in our lives this year came when this past January our parish chose me to be the voting delegate to our Synod in Athens, GA. It was an honor I gladly accepted, and indeed, the Synod was life-changing for me. We were up there from May 1-3 of this year, and the Synod itself was held at St. Stephen Pro-Cathedral in Athens, a beautiful church just south of town. I will talk some about the experience, as well as share some observations.
St. Stephen Pro-Cathedral, Athens, GA
The magnificent pipe organ at St. Stephens
The altar
The Synod started off with a very beautiful sung High Mass at the church itself that morning we arrived, and the worship was beautiful with the magnificent pipe organ. Later, as a delegate of the House of Laity, I was also required to give a short report for our parish, which I was able to do without any problem. One interesting aspect of the Synod was the visiting bishop from the Diocese of New Granada (in Columbia and all South America), Bishop German. Although the Bishop could not speak a word of English, he nonetheless was a pleasure to meet, as he is a man of sincere humility and godliness, and as a spiritual leader he is not afraid to get his hands dirty by doing construction, etc., when the need arises for it. According to some other delegates to Synod, he also was having a well-deserved vacation and was having a blast visiting much of the US. I look forward to seeing more of him in subsequent Synods.
Bishop German (left) of the New Granada Diocese, and Archbishop Haverland (right), Primate of the ACC.
The Synod had a good attendance, with many delegates from all of the 26 or so parishes, and it was actually neat to get to meet and know a lot of the clergy and laity of our Diocese. Another surprise came later though - it turns out that a former professor at the Baptist college in Graceville, FL, where Barb and I met has become part of the ACC too! Dr. Patrick Malone used to teach music years ago, and if memory serves me, Barb actually sang in one of his campus choirs. In recent years, Dr. Malone began serving as organist at St. Andrews in Tallahassee, and soon felt led of God to become part of the ACC. At present, he is pursuing studies at Nashotah House Seminary in order to prepare for Holy Orders, as he feels led to be a priest. Somehow, although he was at Synod, I missed crossing paths with him, but now I know to look out for him at the next one.
There was a serious note at the Synod as the Archbishop addressed some concerns and challenges we as the ACC face now and in the future. The good news is that the ACC is pretty stable, both financially and membership-wise as well, and many new people are infusing the ACC with new life as they are coming in from other church traditions - many former Roman Catholics for instance, as well as former Evangelicals and Pentecostals like myself. Up until fairly recently, as a matter of fact, the ACC was made up of a core membership of aging dissidents who had left the Episcopal Church in the 1970's over theological liberalism creeping into the Church, and up until 2005 or so the ACC was rather stagnant spiritually. Archbishop Haverland has been a huge blessing to the ACC, and he does truly have vision for the Church, but like a good shepherd and father over his people, he also has concerns, and valid ones too. Two major challenges to the ACC's growth have happened in the past several years that have impacted directly. The first occurred a few years ago, when a number of conservative bishops pulled out of the Episcopal Church after the latter consecrated an openly gay (and non-celibate) "bishop" by the name of Gene Robinson. Many of these disaffected Episcopalians sought out (and received) the covering of several Anglican bishops in what is called the "Southern Cone" (mainly African nations such as Nigeria and Rwanda, but also India and Latin America as well). These new Anglican fellowships eventually consolidated into what is now called the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and are often called as a movement the "Anglican Realignment." Although for the most part theologically conservative, the Realignment bishops still by and large will ordain women to the clerical orders and also use the 1979 BCP, both points of contention with the ACC and our sister groups, which resulted from a 1977 split with the Episcopal Church over similar issues and are known as the "Anglican Continuum." Archbishop Haverland, upon addressing the Synod, noted that the presence now of the ACNA may draw away potential membership from the ACC, and he has appropriated addressed it in a joint statement with two other Continuing prelates, Archbishop Grundorf of the Anglican Province of America (APA) and Archbishop Marsh of the Anglican Church in America (ACA). The statement by these and other Continuing Church bishops can be found on our ACC webpage at http://www.anglicancatholic.org/speeches-and-correspondence?class=greenlink.
The second issue of note was of fairly recent origin and involved a measure by the Roman Catholic Church called Anglicanorum Coetibus, which essentially provides for clergy of various Anglican communions to be fully received into the Roman Catholic Church. The impetus for this actually started around 2008 or so, and many Continuing Churchmen opted to "swim the Tiber," which in turn had a very adverse effect on many Anglican jurisdictions. This has borne some good fruit, however, in that the once-fragmented Continuum is now working more closely together - there are talks now about intercommunion among the ACC, APA, and ACA, which would be welcomed by many of us. Not much about this was addressed at Synod, but Archbishop Haverland does have a published statement if you wish to read it at http://www.anglicancatholic.org/a-response-to-anglicanorum-coetibus?class=greenlink.
All-in-all, the Synod was a good experience for us, and it affirmed that the ACC is now my permanent church home. I would not have it any other way either, as the ACC has great people, both clergy and laity, and we also have a godly Archbishop who is sensitive both to the voice of the Holy Spirit and to the needs of those he shepherds. Thanks be to God for Archbishop Mark Haverland, and may he have a long and fruitful tenure as our Prelate.
3. Writing Projects
In the past year, I have gotten a lot of updated information regarding several previous articles I have written, in particular my "Highways and Hedges" series I began work on in 2012. In particular there are some liturgical/sacramental Churches I have updated information on, and I will share here.
The first is the now-extant Catholic Apostolic Church at Davis (CA), which at one time was served by the late Australian-born Mor Elijah Coady (1928-2010). Mor Elijah was hard to research until I found his birth name, Ronald Coady, and when I searched that out I received a wealth of information about his legacy and ministry. It turns out that there is a website (http://www.harvestfieldsministries.com/bishop-ron-coady---bish.php) that commemorates his memory, and included on it are a number of his recorded sermons which can be freely downloaded. I plan on doing just that and saving them to audio discs later in the coming year. The story of his Davis, CA-based church can be found at the original "Highways and Hedges" article I authored in 2012.
Mor Elijah (Bishop Ronald Coady) (1928-2010)
Along the same lines, and dealing with content in the same earlier article, I was also able to find a picture of Bishop Stephen Kochones' church, the American Orthodox Catholic Church, at 801 Walnut Street in Pasadena, CA. Here it is:
The American Orthodox Catholic Church, Pasadena, CA (Bishop Stephen Kochones)
Perhaps the richest discovery though, as well as the most recent, was some valuable information I finally was able to access concerning Archbishop John Marion Stanley's Orthodox Church of the East. A few weeks previous, I managed to find the phone number in Washington for Archbishop Stanley, and had a very lengthy but enjoyable conversation with his wife, Miss Sara. Miss Sara is a very sweet lady, articulate and sharp for 86 years, and she provided a lot of good information for me regarding her husband's ministry. Archbishop Stanley is still very much alive, at age 91, and resides at a veterans home on Vashon Island, WA. Miss Sara informed me that recently a new bishop was consecrated, Bishop Stan Smith in Daly City, CA, to succeed Archbishop Stanley, and I was able to access a phone number and website for Bishop Stan and also had an informative conversation with him the following day. Both Bishop Stan and Miss Sara Stanley shared in rich detail the remarkable spiritual legacy of Archbishop Stanley - for instance, as I already knew, Archbishop Stanley was a charismatic some years before the official Charismatic Renewal movement took off, and he was a close friend and associate of the late Demos Shakarian, who founded the Full Gospel Businessmen's Fellowship (of which Archbishop Stanley was also one of the earliest participants). The Archbishop was also briefly the only married Roman Catholic bishop in modern times for a brief period, as well as being an active member of the Hospitalier Knights. So much more could be said about this great man of God's legacy, but I will wait until some printed material about his life and ministry becomes available, a project his wife and daughter are embarking on now.
Archbishop John Marion Stanley today
Miss Sara Stanley, Archbishop Stanley's wife
Bishop Stan Smith, current prelate of the OCE
All-in-all, getting to talk to and know these great individuals has been a blessing in itself, and if you wish to find out more about the Orthodox Church of the East, Bishop Stan does have a good website which contains contact information - it is at http://
As for other writing projects, many of them were school-related, although I did finish my Ephesians study and am getting ready to scan and edit it before sending it off to the publisher. I also have an upcoming article in a theological journal, Watchman Theological Journal, on a Christian response to this resurgent Transhumanist agenda that is out there. The Watchman Theological Journal is edited by Fr. Jack Ashcraft, a traditionalist Byzantine Catholic priest and a good friend who, interesting enough, is one of the few Catholic or Orthodox writers (besides myself, of course!) to tackle subjects such as the Genesis 6 reality of the Nephilim. He likewise has some great programs and broadcasts available on his webpage, http://
4. Wrapping It Up
In retrospect, 2013 has been a busy and eventful year, not only for myself but for the religious world in general. A new Pope, Francis, was elected this year, and I have some serious concerns that I won't divulge here but probably will address in another article in the future. Also, Paul Crouch, the founder of the Trinity Broadcasting Network, as well as gospel music legend George Beverly Shea, passed away (Shea was 104!). The Emerging Church movement continues to be an issue, and John MacArthur's rants against Pentecostals (much of it being ill-informed and badly-reasoned) were also subjects of personal interest. Also, persecution of all Christians of true faith seems to be a major thing, from subtle legal attacks against Christian business owners in the US who refuse to make wedding cakes for gay couples to violent and deadly massacres of Assyrian and Coptic Christians in Egypt and Syria by Islamic militants. Making that list is also a humble 23-year-old Pentecostal pastor in Tennessee, Andrew Hamblin, who was recently threatened with jail over his beliefs (he takes up serpents at his church as part of the worship) - despite one's attitude about serpent-handling, Hamblin's case is one we all as people of faith should be paying attention to, because the freedom to practice one's religious convictions is at stake. Andrew was featured on a Discovery Channel series, Snake Salvation, this past year, and I found the series actually good. I also got to know Andrew personally via Facebook, and consider him a friend and brother in Christ.
23-year-old Pastor Andrew Hamblin, of LaFollette, TN.
Even high-profile Christian celebrities, such as Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson and actor Kirk Cameron, have been attacked for their convictions. Robertson was almost censored by the network his show airs on, A&E, because the family says grace over their dinner at the end of each program and Phil prays "In Christ Jesus" at the conclusion. The powers-that-be at the network tried to make Phil stop praying because it might "offend Muslim viewers" and other such BS, but Phil stood his ground and asked them point-blank how many Muslims actually watch Duck Dynasty - of course, the show doesn't have a huge Muslim fanbase to begin with, and if some do watch and are offended, they can change the channel (which Phil also suggested - go Phil!). A&E is in no position to dispute this either, because Duck Dynasty is earning them the highest ratings they have ever had, and they don't dare lose an audience! Any rate, I too have felt some pressure from Facebook "trolls" and others who have attacked my stance on traditional marriage, and oftentimes these uninformed people will say "love is love -don't deny the gays love!" and other such crap. However, with that logic, the pedophiles, bestialists, and other perverts could use the same argument - heck, even a rapist could use that logic! I read recently of a Muslim trying to molest a horse and getting his face kicked in - I suppose that was "love" too?? Some of this logic these days - it brings to mind Romans 1:22; "professing to be wise they became fools." Perversion is never to be equated with love, people - behaviors and lifestyle choices are also not to receive status as "minority groups" either. Not politically-correct, I am aware, but I don't care - the Church has always defined marriage as between ONE man and One woman, and the state has no jurisdiction to say otherwise. Marriage is a sacramental union, not a legal entitlement. Therefore, government has no place dictating what defines a marriage - the Church does.
Now, back on course, what is ahead for Sacramental Present Truths? This year, it is time to start formulating my six-fold ecclesiology that will eventually be the substance of my MTS thesis, and I will be embarking on a series of articles to do just that. Also, Appalachian theology - is there such a thing, and how can it be formulated? I will be exploring that as well. We are entering four years of this page, and as I do so I want to also focus less on apologetics and polemics and more on teaching, and in doing so I hope to enrich all who read these articles. And, that being said, I hope you continue to stay tuned and check in from time to time. The links to each new article are posted as well on my Facebook and other social media as they are published, so if you happen to be on Facebook, feel free to take a look.
And, on that note, I want to close by wishing each one a blessed holiday season, a Merry Christmas, and God's blessings on you for a good 2014 year coming up.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
John MacArthur's Blowing Smoke About "Strange Fire" - A Response
In recent weeks, a fundamentalist Reformed/Calvinist megachurch pastor in California by the name of John MacArthur has created a bit of controversy with a conference he hosted at his church, Grace Community Church, called the Strange Fire Conference. Essentially, what this conference entailed was a series of talks which sought to establish that the spiritual gifts it speaks of in such places as Acts and I Corinthians are not for today, but only for the Apostles' times (a view known as cessationism) and the concluding premise of this position is that the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements must be false, of the devil, etc. This is a whipping-post MacArthur has wailed on before, as evidenced for one by his earlier book Charismatic Chaos. Although he does make some legitimate points regarding some extremes in the Charismatic movement, overall MacArthur's position is extremely problematic in that in one sweeping assertion he has condemned half a billion Christians in the world to eternal damnation based on their belief in the spiritual gifts, etc. I have been following this for some time, and now wanted to just provide some of my own perspective on this issue.
Not all MacArthur has said or done over the years is necessarily bad, and I am less inclined to totally dismiss everything he has preached on the basis of the stupidity displayed by this conference. On many basic things, MacArthur is actually theologically orthodox, and he has also made a commendable stand against the growing apostasy promoted by the Emerging Church movement, and I share much of his convictions on that. Therefore, in writing this, we must remember to not have a blanket condemnation of the man, but rather to stand against some of the false accusations he has made in regard to other Christian traditions.
The main issue with MacArthur in regard to Pentecostals is that he is theologically a cessationist, meaning that many of the supernatural manifestations of the past, and the spiritual gifts that make them possible, are things limited to the Apostolic era and do not exist in the Body of Christ today. Therefore, the only logical conclusion someone like MacArthur could come to is this - if genuine manifestations of the Holy Spirit are limited to the Apostolic dispensation (yes, MacArthur is also a premillenial dispensationalist doctrinally as well - more on that aspect of his theology later), then anyone claiming to possess them today must be either charlatans or of the devil. However, this presents an issue for MacArthur, who claims also to be a proponent of Biblical inerrancy. If the gifts were for one age and not for another, does that mean God is not immutable then? What would someone like MacArthur do then with a Scripture like Hebrews 13:8, which affirms that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever? Or John 1:1 - in the beginning Jesus was (or, being the phrase for "in the beginning" in Greek is dative, it can also be translated "from the beginning" and be placed at any position in that verse without altering its meaning). So, if Jesus was from the beginning and is immutable (unchanging), by MacArthur denying spiritual gifts, is he not guilty then of "adding to and taking from the Word of God," (Proverbs 30:6 and Revelation 22:19) which in term would bring damnation upon him? It also makes God unsure of himself too - after all, if you are a new Christian and someone like MacArthur stands up in a pulpit and says "well, God did that then but now he changed his mind," what would that do for your faith? These are some interesting questions, but unfortunately this is something that is common in much of Reformed/Calvinistic Fundamentalist thinking. To clarify that, let me just say that not all Reformed/Calvinists (or even Fundamentalists for that matter) think like this; even among Charismatics, brilliant Reformed theologians such as J. Rodman Williams have provided a great service to the Church, and others like D. James Kennedy and Francis Schaeffer have written a tremendous wealth of material that has also enriched the Body of Christ tremendously. However, it also must be conceded that not all Reformed Calvinists are cessationists either, although the overwhelming majority of cessationists are Reformed Calvinists. It is important for these cessationists to take heed to what Catholic apologist Karl Keating wrote when he said "They too (fundamentalists - my add) believe things that are not found in the face of Scripture. There are peculiarly fundamentalist doctrines that find no warrant in Scripture that should, by the fundamentalists' own rationale, be thrown out." (Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism {San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988}p. 67). This is an interesting observation, because being raised fairly conservative myself, I have noticed over the years a sort of pragmatism even among the strictest Fundamentalists that means God can all of a sudden change his mind at whim, based on man's changes in societal norms (think, for instance, of how many Emergent Church people and Rick Warren disciples once described - and some still do! - themselves as "Bible-believing Fundamentalists." Hmm....). And, this is something author David Bercot addresses when he talks about the Western Christian tendency towards legalism - reducing the truth of God's word to formulaic legalisms (David Bercot, Common Sense {Tyler, TX: Scroll Publishing, 1992} p. 96). Unfortunately, when that happens, the risk is that some things in Scripture become relativistic based on legalese, and the Calvinist tradition has unfortunately produced a whole spectrum of heresies, ranging from the cessationism of John MacArthur to the "Christian Universalism" of Rob "No Hell" Bell, that have plagued American Evangelicalism for generations. In time, this idea that God can all of a sudden change his mind has catastrophic consequences, as churches change positions on things much like Madonna changes husbands. Archbishop Haverland correctly notes this mentality when he writes that this individualistic view of Scripture and theology on the part of American Evangelicals will in time cause secularization, and indeed we are seeing that today (Mark Haverland, Anglican Catholic Faith and Practice {Athens, GA: Anglican Parishes Association, 2011} p. 63). In short, Fundamentalist ideas about Scriptural inerrancy may ultimately lead to their own crisis, and the Calvinistic idea of eternal security (which is a misappropriation of Augustine's theology of justification on Calvin's part) will not do them much good when the apostasy foretold in Scripture hits them too. Given time, John MacArthur (or some of his disciples) may follow in the path of the Emergent Church crowd, as both their positions share a common root. And, all this because MacArthur thinks God can change his mind about his own Word.
I noted the above to address MacArthur's allegations from the viewpoint of historic Church teaching on the issue. The Church has first of all never advocated the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Do we believe the Bible is the infallible Word of God, divinely authored and enshrining His true revelation of salvation to man? You bet we do! However, the Church is the custodian of God's Word, and our understanding of that truth must be grounded in what the Church historically has taught concerning those truths. Many things we have some liberty, as the Church presents a number of positions on minutiae, but on the major, essential doctrines there are no compromises. For one thing, the Holy Spirit is seen as God, or as the Creed presents him, "The Lord, the Giver of Life." As such, the Holy Spirit indwells every believer. And, over the centuries, the Church has affirmed, documented, and testified that God, through the Holy Spirit, can and does work in miraculous, supernatural ways in the lives of individual believers. The Biblical conduit for that, naturally, is the provision of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, although there are also "diverse works" of the Holy Spirit that the Church affirms Scripture doesn't specify but bear witness of the Lord's presence. People have been healed, raised from the dead, and have often been given visions, prophetic insights, and other such things for the edification of the Body. MacArthur, therefore, speaks a heresy against the Holy Spirit when he says these things have ceased, and it is the Pentecostals who are correct in that regard. Although I have not agreed with Dr. George Wood, the current General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God, in recent years over some other issues, I do believe he summed up classic Pentecostal understanding well in his statement regarding MacArthur's allegations when he noted, based on Acts 2:39, that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to us and our children (meaning future generations) as a promise of the New Covenant - well spoken, Dr. Wood! (accessed 11/19/2013 at http://georgeowood.com/statement-regarding-strange-fire-conference/) A more conservative Pentecostal pastor and overseer of the Bible Holiness Fellowship Association, Dr. Joseph Chambers, who responded that MacArthur's position is even unique among Calvinists he knows, and is an utterly hopeless view that gives the believer little hope. This is what Dr. Chambers said:
We could study lives of the great leaders of church history from the disciples, Apostle Paul, and thousands of the Greats. John MacArthur is the first one I have ever heard say that said that God no longer speaks to men. Something is seriously missing in His theology. He is the first and only Calvinist that I have ever heard state this kind of theology. This may not be believed by most ministers in their ranks. I also confess that I have no interest in a system of theology that must depend on flesh and mind without Holy Ghost inspiration in the present. This view of "Total Depravity" is the reason that this theology is a hopeless theology. Not only do they believe in "Total Depravity," but also that the Holy Spirit has ended His supernatural work in human lives. If we are totally depraved to the degree that God cannot give us His anointing, and if the Holy Ghost is done with us, then our theology is going to be dead and empty as is most evident in this message by John MacArthur. We can only know truth by the power of His supernatural Spirit working in us for Christ’s glory. (accessed from http://www.pawcreek.org/end-times/john-macarthur)
I agree with Dr. Chambers on this, in that MacArthur has chosen to rely on his own fleshly wisdom and reason rather than the clear testimony of both Scriptures and Church history. The verse I would have for Dr. MacArthur at this point is a harsh one, but may be a dose of medicine he needs to shock him back to reality - professing wisdom, he has become a fool (Romans 1:22). God's ways, we must always have the humility to remember, are not man's ways, and sometimes what God does goes against the way we think (I Corinthians 1:25). Tongues-talking looks foolish to our Enlightenment-minded Western thinking, but God has given it as a gift. The idea that one can be healed without the aid of some professional doctor that will just give you a huge bill you can't afford anyway is unconscionable to the rational mind, but think of millions God has touched - many people don't have the means of being healed in a hospital, so God comes to them, especially in Third World countries where medical care is sloppy at best. Critics of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements like MacArthur often use the justification that "frauds" and "fake shows" can occur, based on the outlandish excesses of some TV preachers. But, here is the problem with that - there are people out there trying to scam others with religion all the time, and if there wasn't a real, they wouldn't be faking it; think about it! At the same time MacArthur's Charismatic Chaos was published around 1993 or so, another Evangelical author by the name of Hank Hanegraaff published Christianity in Crisis which documented the false teachings of many TV preachers, in particular the "Prosperity Gospel." The main difference between Hanegraaff's and MacArthur's books is fundamental and can be found in the opening pages of Christianity in Crisis - Hanegraaff specifically stated that his book was not a book targeting Pentecostals or Charismatics, nor did it have anything to do with positions on spiritual gifts. As a matter of fact, Hanegraaff actually maintained that the "Prosperity Gospel" was cultic and didn't represent Charismatic spirituality as well. MacArthur made no such distinction in his writing, but rather chose to paint every Pentecostal and Charismatic with a sweeping allegation that they were "abhorrent," and in that blanket accusation MacArthur also condemned Hanegraaff even, who is a member of Calvary Chapel, a Pentecostal denomination. Yet, I also find it curious that MacArthur may actually hold to a few heresies himself, including dispensationalism. Mind you, I am a premillenialist, but as a premillenialist I maintain that there will be only one resurrection, and only one Second Coming of Christ - a dispensationalist has Christ coming back more times than Shirley McClain's reincarnation cycles she brags about! As a classic dispensationalist, MacArthur has essentially given consent to a non-Biblical heresy, namely that there may be as many as four "Second Comings" in the scheme his theology is constructed around. This is worth mentioning because despite supposedly being "biblical inerrancy" advocates, people like MacArthur are really writing their own versions of Scripture, which in many cases are more infallible to them than the real thing. Yet, they condemn us Catholics for our stand on Holy Tradition - even we would not go that far!
More could be said on all this, but I wanted to make a few concluding observations. One, the same mentality that MacArthur espouses - essentially, the cessationist view that God is all of a sudden fickle in what he promised - is also the same mentality his biggest opponents, the equally-wrong Emergent Church crowd, have. Both of these schools of thought have their roots in Reformed Calvinism, although they take the same premises to different extremes. MacArthur would say that God doesn't give spiritual gifts for modern times, while Brian McLaren and Rob Bell would use the same reasoning to throw the organs out of churches, reject doctrines of sin and hell, and also slowly come to accept some bad behaviors such as homosexuality and abortion as "relevant for the age" (these are guys who think Sodom and Gomorrah's sin was inhospitality, and that prohibitions against homosexuality are not relevant today as a result - they are sort of cessationists as well). Both extremes - MacArthur and McLaren - are wrong; the Church has an established doctrine and position that has not changed since the time of the Apostles, and on issues such as spiritual gifts and morality, the Church has had a consistent response and witness. It is too bad that MacArthur, who is often bound up in the inerrancy of his own reading of Scripture rather than the way the Church has historically taught it, misses the whole point. I am not ready to write him off yet, and do not believe he is un-Christian, but will say that if he doesn't learn to discern better his position, he will regret that choice later. It is really too bad, because MacArthur has done some amazing things for the Kingdom in other areas. If he can just get past his own biases now, he'd do well. Any rate, that is my perspective on the issue, although much more could be said. God bless.
John MacArthur, author and popular Fundamentalist megachurch pastor
Not all MacArthur has said or done over the years is necessarily bad, and I am less inclined to totally dismiss everything he has preached on the basis of the stupidity displayed by this conference. On many basic things, MacArthur is actually theologically orthodox, and he has also made a commendable stand against the growing apostasy promoted by the Emerging Church movement, and I share much of his convictions on that. Therefore, in writing this, we must remember to not have a blanket condemnation of the man, but rather to stand against some of the false accusations he has made in regard to other Christian traditions.
The main issue with MacArthur in regard to Pentecostals is that he is theologically a cessationist, meaning that many of the supernatural manifestations of the past, and the spiritual gifts that make them possible, are things limited to the Apostolic era and do not exist in the Body of Christ today. Therefore, the only logical conclusion someone like MacArthur could come to is this - if genuine manifestations of the Holy Spirit are limited to the Apostolic dispensation (yes, MacArthur is also a premillenial dispensationalist doctrinally as well - more on that aspect of his theology later), then anyone claiming to possess them today must be either charlatans or of the devil. However, this presents an issue for MacArthur, who claims also to be a proponent of Biblical inerrancy. If the gifts were for one age and not for another, does that mean God is not immutable then? What would someone like MacArthur do then with a Scripture like Hebrews 13:8, which affirms that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever? Or John 1:1 - in the beginning Jesus was (or, being the phrase for "in the beginning" in Greek is dative, it can also be translated "from the beginning" and be placed at any position in that verse without altering its meaning). So, if Jesus was from the beginning and is immutable (unchanging), by MacArthur denying spiritual gifts, is he not guilty then of "adding to and taking from the Word of God," (Proverbs 30:6 and Revelation 22:19) which in term would bring damnation upon him? It also makes God unsure of himself too - after all, if you are a new Christian and someone like MacArthur stands up in a pulpit and says "well, God did that then but now he changed his mind," what would that do for your faith? These are some interesting questions, but unfortunately this is something that is common in much of Reformed/Calvinistic Fundamentalist thinking. To clarify that, let me just say that not all Reformed/Calvinists (or even Fundamentalists for that matter) think like this; even among Charismatics, brilliant Reformed theologians such as J. Rodman Williams have provided a great service to the Church, and others like D. James Kennedy and Francis Schaeffer have written a tremendous wealth of material that has also enriched the Body of Christ tremendously. However, it also must be conceded that not all Reformed Calvinists are cessationists either, although the overwhelming majority of cessationists are Reformed Calvinists. It is important for these cessationists to take heed to what Catholic apologist Karl Keating wrote when he said "They too (fundamentalists - my add) believe things that are not found in the face of Scripture. There are peculiarly fundamentalist doctrines that find no warrant in Scripture that should, by the fundamentalists' own rationale, be thrown out." (Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism {San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988}p. 67). This is an interesting observation, because being raised fairly conservative myself, I have noticed over the years a sort of pragmatism even among the strictest Fundamentalists that means God can all of a sudden change his mind at whim, based on man's changes in societal norms (think, for instance, of how many Emergent Church people and Rick Warren disciples once described - and some still do! - themselves as "Bible-believing Fundamentalists." Hmm....). And, this is something author David Bercot addresses when he talks about the Western Christian tendency towards legalism - reducing the truth of God's word to formulaic legalisms (David Bercot, Common Sense {Tyler, TX: Scroll Publishing, 1992} p. 96). Unfortunately, when that happens, the risk is that some things in Scripture become relativistic based on legalese, and the Calvinist tradition has unfortunately produced a whole spectrum of heresies, ranging from the cessationism of John MacArthur to the "Christian Universalism" of Rob "No Hell" Bell, that have plagued American Evangelicalism for generations. In time, this idea that God can all of a sudden change his mind has catastrophic consequences, as churches change positions on things much like Madonna changes husbands. Archbishop Haverland correctly notes this mentality when he writes that this individualistic view of Scripture and theology on the part of American Evangelicals will in time cause secularization, and indeed we are seeing that today (Mark Haverland, Anglican Catholic Faith and Practice {Athens, GA: Anglican Parishes Association, 2011} p. 63). In short, Fundamentalist ideas about Scriptural inerrancy may ultimately lead to their own crisis, and the Calvinistic idea of eternal security (which is a misappropriation of Augustine's theology of justification on Calvin's part) will not do them much good when the apostasy foretold in Scripture hits them too. Given time, John MacArthur (or some of his disciples) may follow in the path of the Emergent Church crowd, as both their positions share a common root. And, all this because MacArthur thinks God can change his mind about his own Word.
I noted the above to address MacArthur's allegations from the viewpoint of historic Church teaching on the issue. The Church has first of all never advocated the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Do we believe the Bible is the infallible Word of God, divinely authored and enshrining His true revelation of salvation to man? You bet we do! However, the Church is the custodian of God's Word, and our understanding of that truth must be grounded in what the Church historically has taught concerning those truths. Many things we have some liberty, as the Church presents a number of positions on minutiae, but on the major, essential doctrines there are no compromises. For one thing, the Holy Spirit is seen as God, or as the Creed presents him, "The Lord, the Giver of Life." As such, the Holy Spirit indwells every believer. And, over the centuries, the Church has affirmed, documented, and testified that God, through the Holy Spirit, can and does work in miraculous, supernatural ways in the lives of individual believers. The Biblical conduit for that, naturally, is the provision of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, although there are also "diverse works" of the Holy Spirit that the Church affirms Scripture doesn't specify but bear witness of the Lord's presence. People have been healed, raised from the dead, and have often been given visions, prophetic insights, and other such things for the edification of the Body. MacArthur, therefore, speaks a heresy against the Holy Spirit when he says these things have ceased, and it is the Pentecostals who are correct in that regard. Although I have not agreed with Dr. George Wood, the current General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God, in recent years over some other issues, I do believe he summed up classic Pentecostal understanding well in his statement regarding MacArthur's allegations when he noted, based on Acts 2:39, that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to us and our children (meaning future generations) as a promise of the New Covenant - well spoken, Dr. Wood! (accessed 11/19/2013 at http://georgeowood.com/statement-regarding-strange-fire-conference/) A more conservative Pentecostal pastor and overseer of the Bible Holiness Fellowship Association, Dr. Joseph Chambers, who responded that MacArthur's position is even unique among Calvinists he knows, and is an utterly hopeless view that gives the believer little hope. This is what Dr. Chambers said:
We could study lives of the great leaders of church history from the disciples, Apostle Paul, and thousands of the Greats. John MacArthur is the first one I have ever heard say that said that God no longer speaks to men. Something is seriously missing in His theology. He is the first and only Calvinist that I have ever heard state this kind of theology. This may not be believed by most ministers in their ranks. I also confess that I have no interest in a system of theology that must depend on flesh and mind without Holy Ghost inspiration in the present. This view of "Total Depravity" is the reason that this theology is a hopeless theology. Not only do they believe in "Total Depravity," but also that the Holy Spirit has ended His supernatural work in human lives. If we are totally depraved to the degree that God cannot give us His anointing, and if the Holy Ghost is done with us, then our theology is going to be dead and empty as is most evident in this message by John MacArthur. We can only know truth by the power of His supernatural Spirit working in us for Christ’s glory. (accessed from http://www.pawcreek.org/end-times/john-macarthur)
I agree with Dr. Chambers on this, in that MacArthur has chosen to rely on his own fleshly wisdom and reason rather than the clear testimony of both Scriptures and Church history. The verse I would have for Dr. MacArthur at this point is a harsh one, but may be a dose of medicine he needs to shock him back to reality - professing wisdom, he has become a fool (Romans 1:22). God's ways, we must always have the humility to remember, are not man's ways, and sometimes what God does goes against the way we think (I Corinthians 1:25). Tongues-talking looks foolish to our Enlightenment-minded Western thinking, but God has given it as a gift. The idea that one can be healed without the aid of some professional doctor that will just give you a huge bill you can't afford anyway is unconscionable to the rational mind, but think of millions God has touched - many people don't have the means of being healed in a hospital, so God comes to them, especially in Third World countries where medical care is sloppy at best. Critics of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements like MacArthur often use the justification that "frauds" and "fake shows" can occur, based on the outlandish excesses of some TV preachers. But, here is the problem with that - there are people out there trying to scam others with religion all the time, and if there wasn't a real, they wouldn't be faking it; think about it! At the same time MacArthur's Charismatic Chaos was published around 1993 or so, another Evangelical author by the name of Hank Hanegraaff published Christianity in Crisis which documented the false teachings of many TV preachers, in particular the "Prosperity Gospel." The main difference between Hanegraaff's and MacArthur's books is fundamental and can be found in the opening pages of Christianity in Crisis - Hanegraaff specifically stated that his book was not a book targeting Pentecostals or Charismatics, nor did it have anything to do with positions on spiritual gifts. As a matter of fact, Hanegraaff actually maintained that the "Prosperity Gospel" was cultic and didn't represent Charismatic spirituality as well. MacArthur made no such distinction in his writing, but rather chose to paint every Pentecostal and Charismatic with a sweeping allegation that they were "abhorrent," and in that blanket accusation MacArthur also condemned Hanegraaff even, who is a member of Calvary Chapel, a Pentecostal denomination. Yet, I also find it curious that MacArthur may actually hold to a few heresies himself, including dispensationalism. Mind you, I am a premillenialist, but as a premillenialist I maintain that there will be only one resurrection, and only one Second Coming of Christ - a dispensationalist has Christ coming back more times than Shirley McClain's reincarnation cycles she brags about! As a classic dispensationalist, MacArthur has essentially given consent to a non-Biblical heresy, namely that there may be as many as four "Second Comings" in the scheme his theology is constructed around. This is worth mentioning because despite supposedly being "biblical inerrancy" advocates, people like MacArthur are really writing their own versions of Scripture, which in many cases are more infallible to them than the real thing. Yet, they condemn us Catholics for our stand on Holy Tradition - even we would not go that far!
More could be said on all this, but I wanted to make a few concluding observations. One, the same mentality that MacArthur espouses - essentially, the cessationist view that God is all of a sudden fickle in what he promised - is also the same mentality his biggest opponents, the equally-wrong Emergent Church crowd, have. Both of these schools of thought have their roots in Reformed Calvinism, although they take the same premises to different extremes. MacArthur would say that God doesn't give spiritual gifts for modern times, while Brian McLaren and Rob Bell would use the same reasoning to throw the organs out of churches, reject doctrines of sin and hell, and also slowly come to accept some bad behaviors such as homosexuality and abortion as "relevant for the age" (these are guys who think Sodom and Gomorrah's sin was inhospitality, and that prohibitions against homosexuality are not relevant today as a result - they are sort of cessationists as well). Both extremes - MacArthur and McLaren - are wrong; the Church has an established doctrine and position that has not changed since the time of the Apostles, and on issues such as spiritual gifts and morality, the Church has had a consistent response and witness. It is too bad that MacArthur, who is often bound up in the inerrancy of his own reading of Scripture rather than the way the Church has historically taught it, misses the whole point. I am not ready to write him off yet, and do not believe he is un-Christian, but will say that if he doesn't learn to discern better his position, he will regret that choice later. It is really too bad, because MacArthur has done some amazing things for the Kingdom in other areas. If he can just get past his own biases now, he'd do well. Any rate, that is my perspective on the issue, although much more could be said. God bless.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Highways and Hedges Part 6 - The Fundamental and Free Holiness Movements
Introduction
I was actually not planning on doing a sixth article in the series, but so much information necessitated its creation. The groups in this article - with the exception of the first - are all interrelated; they all have fellowship with each other, have similar histories and convictions, and the one thing that really binds most of them together is an Oklahoma-based periodical that is published bi-monthly entitled The Holiness Messenger. First, I want to give some introductory material, and then I want to get into these groups themselves.
As the 1970's dawned, many of the larger Pentecostal denominations began to strive for more respectability in the wider Christian spectrum, and when churches start to do that it usually means a shedding and eschewal of many aspects of their early heritage. Therefore, many people who were members of congregations affiliated with the Assemblies of God, Church of God (Cleveland) and other such groups began to take on the more worldly trappings of society around them, and in doing so they sought to be indistinguishable from the wider world by supposedly "becoming those to whom they minister." Not only Pentecostals, but many groups considered as historically conservative Evangelical had similar transformations. This naturally led to concerns among many more conservative members of these churches, concerns that grew to such a magnitude that in time many congregations of more conservative Pentecostals began withdrawing from fellowship with the large denominations. Such things as the growing popularity of "Contemporary Christian" music, worldly dress, and even the acceptance of social drinking and the use of tobacco products were incomprehensible to many old-time Pentecostal folks, and it was often seen by them in an eschatological context as a "falling away" or a "deception of the elect." Seeking to preserve what they believed were their core convictions as Spirit-filled Pentecostal Christians, the dissenting churches began to fellowship with one another, and a number of small new groups emerged that embodied old-time Pentecostalism as it once was. Many of these groups were informal fellowships, but some in time did develop structural mechanisms for ordaining clergy, promoting missions, and also Bible schools came into existence. With this new developing of a conservative Pentecostal/Holiness identity naturally gelling into a movement, it is estimated that close to 20% of all Assemblies of God, Church of God, and other larger Pentecostal denominations experienced an exodus of membership to these new fellowships.
I write much of this material because I in many ways sympathize with people who are part of these fellowships because in many ways I share their convictions, although not with 100% agreement necessarily. Oftentimes, you have to wade through some legalism, anti-Catholicism, and other things to see the real assets of such fellowships, but they are there. I have, for instance, been subscribed to The Holiness Messenger since sometime around 2003. And, I am also interested in seeing much of the Pentecostalism I knew in my childhood preserved at its best, and these groups are doing that in an exemplary way.
I am going to focus on first a group out of Palatka, FL, called the Pentecostal Revival Center Association, and then I will devote much more space to those groups and fellowships which in some way are associated with The Holiness Messenger, as there are many of them.
The Pentecostal Revival Center Association
A Christmas tree vision birthed a church in early 1966. A lady minister by the name of Dolly Harrell had a vision in the early 1960's of a large cedar tree that she really took to heart, and from the vision a church emerged in Palatka, FL, called the Pentecostal Revival Center. First, I want to tell a little of Dolly's story, and then we will discuss the PRCA.
Dolly Baer was born in 1920 in Charlotte, NC, and at an early age her folks moved the family to the town of Branford, FL, where young Dolly grew up. She married her husband of 54 years, James Harrell, at the age of 14 and the young couple moved to Palatka where James worked in a paper mill. After their move, Dolly worked as a Sunday School teacher in a local Methodist church until 1958, when she became involved with a local Assembly of God doing evangelistic work. In time, she would be educated at Southeastern College (the same school I got my degree from) and she held credentials with the Assemblies of God beginning in the mid-1950's. In December 1965, she established the Pentecostal Revival Center, later moving it to its present location in 1976 after confirmation of the tree vision she had. At close to the same time, she began a radio ministry which later culminated into a TV ministry in the early 1980's, known today as GospelVision TV. She continued in active ministry until her passing on April 13, 2009.
I was actually not planning on doing a sixth article in the series, but so much information necessitated its creation. The groups in this article - with the exception of the first - are all interrelated; they all have fellowship with each other, have similar histories and convictions, and the one thing that really binds most of them together is an Oklahoma-based periodical that is published bi-monthly entitled The Holiness Messenger. First, I want to give some introductory material, and then I want to get into these groups themselves.
As the 1970's dawned, many of the larger Pentecostal denominations began to strive for more respectability in the wider Christian spectrum, and when churches start to do that it usually means a shedding and eschewal of many aspects of their early heritage. Therefore, many people who were members of congregations affiliated with the Assemblies of God, Church of God (Cleveland) and other such groups began to take on the more worldly trappings of society around them, and in doing so they sought to be indistinguishable from the wider world by supposedly "becoming those to whom they minister." Not only Pentecostals, but many groups considered as historically conservative Evangelical had similar transformations. This naturally led to concerns among many more conservative members of these churches, concerns that grew to such a magnitude that in time many congregations of more conservative Pentecostals began withdrawing from fellowship with the large denominations. Such things as the growing popularity of "Contemporary Christian" music, worldly dress, and even the acceptance of social drinking and the use of tobacco products were incomprehensible to many old-time Pentecostal folks, and it was often seen by them in an eschatological context as a "falling away" or a "deception of the elect." Seeking to preserve what they believed were their core convictions as Spirit-filled Pentecostal Christians, the dissenting churches began to fellowship with one another, and a number of small new groups emerged that embodied old-time Pentecostalism as it once was. Many of these groups were informal fellowships, but some in time did develop structural mechanisms for ordaining clergy, promoting missions, and also Bible schools came into existence. With this new developing of a conservative Pentecostal/Holiness identity naturally gelling into a movement, it is estimated that close to 20% of all Assemblies of God, Church of God, and other larger Pentecostal denominations experienced an exodus of membership to these new fellowships.
I write much of this material because I in many ways sympathize with people who are part of these fellowships because in many ways I share their convictions, although not with 100% agreement necessarily. Oftentimes, you have to wade through some legalism, anti-Catholicism, and other things to see the real assets of such fellowships, but they are there. I have, for instance, been subscribed to The Holiness Messenger since sometime around 2003. And, I am also interested in seeing much of the Pentecostalism I knew in my childhood preserved at its best, and these groups are doing that in an exemplary way.
I am going to focus on first a group out of Palatka, FL, called the Pentecostal Revival Center Association, and then I will devote much more space to those groups and fellowships which in some way are associated with The Holiness Messenger, as there are many of them.
The Pentecostal Revival Center Association
A Christmas tree vision birthed a church in early 1966. A lady minister by the name of Dolly Harrell had a vision in the early 1960's of a large cedar tree that she really took to heart, and from the vision a church emerged in Palatka, FL, called the Pentecostal Revival Center. First, I want to tell a little of Dolly's story, and then we will discuss the PRCA.
Dolly Baer was born in 1920 in Charlotte, NC, and at an early age her folks moved the family to the town of Branford, FL, where young Dolly grew up. She married her husband of 54 years, James Harrell, at the age of 14 and the young couple moved to Palatka where James worked in a paper mill. After their move, Dolly worked as a Sunday School teacher in a local Methodist church until 1958, when she became involved with a local Assembly of God doing evangelistic work. In time, she would be educated at Southeastern College (the same school I got my degree from) and she held credentials with the Assemblies of God beginning in the mid-1950's. In December 1965, she established the Pentecostal Revival Center, later moving it to its present location in 1976 after confirmation of the tree vision she had. At close to the same time, she began a radio ministry which later culminated into a TV ministry in the early 1980's, known today as GospelVision TV. She continued in active ministry until her passing on April 13, 2009.
Pastor Dolly Harrell (1920-2009) - founder of the Pentecostal Revival Center
The official establishment of the Pentecostal Revival Center Association dates back to 1978, when it was formally incorporated with the State of Florida. The church operates the TV station, a school, and other enterprises, as well as credentialing ministers. I am not sure where other congregations of this fellowship exist, although there seems to be alluding of the fact that at least a couple of daughter churches exist in northeast Florida. The original church in Palatka now has about a couple of hundred members, and hosts numerous revivals, concerts, and other events which are aired over its TV station.
The present Pentecostal Revival Center in Palatka, FL.
Fundamental Holiness/Pentecostal Fellowships Associated With The Holiness Messenger
The origins of many of these groups go back to 1953, when a group of conservative Holiness/Pentecostal pastors came to a consensus that the printed page would be a greater vehicle for fellowship among them. Many of this group of ministers, coming primarily from Oklahoma, used the terms "Free Holiness," "Free Pentecostal Holiness," and similar terms to describe themselves, and many of them were originally affiliated with the Assemblies of God or Church of God. With one of their own, Rev. Ira Roberts, chosen to edit the new periodical, the Holiness Messenger was launched on June 16, 1953. 70 years later, it is still published.
The flagship issue masthead
Rev. Ira Roberts
Rev. Roberts unfortunately passed on in 1950, and Rev. Ralph Cox succeeded him and as far as I can ascertain he still edits the paper today. From that small group of ministers, The Holiness Messenger today has a circulation in the thousands, and on its website (www.holinessmessenger.com, where much of the historical information was obtained) a Church Directory lists over 428 congregations which associate with the periodical. Many of these congregations are either independent Pentecostal churches, or they are organized into at least 15 small fellowships, some of which we will be discussing momentarily. Also included in the list are a number of conservative congregations who are affiliated with the Assemblies of God, Church of God (Cleveland) and other denominations. As mentioned, I have been receiving The Holiness Messenger myself for several years, and although informative, it has also piqued my interest regarding the roots of many of the churches that subscribe to it. The paper itself is still published out of Sapulpa, OK, and Ralph Cox, although advanced in age, still edits and oversees its operation.
Rev. Ralph Cox, current editor of The Holiness Messenger, and his wife Doreen.
The Messenger has also proven to be a valuable resource of various services - missionary agencies, evangelistic ministries, Bible schools, camps, music artists, and other such - and also publishes in each issue a listing of upcoming revivals, campmeetings, and crusades conducted by its subscribing churches and fellowships. Occasionally, it also includes reviews and contact information for books, CD's and other material its subscribers produce.
As mentioned, there are 428 churches listed that have some association with this paper, and many of them are loosely organized into fellowships. Some fellowships - such as the Wesleyan Pentecostals, Holiness Baptists, and Calvary Holiness Association - we have already discussed in detail in other segments. Others are congregations, as mentioned, which are part of the Assemblies or Church of God. Still others are independent congregations. However, from what I could gather from research, there are about 11 other groups outside the listed ones above represented in the readership, and I want to deal specifically with some of those in the next section.
The Fellowships
1. Free Pentecostal Church of God Fellowship - This particular fellowship is based out of Cincinatti, OH, and has a number of affiliated churches in Ohio, Kentucky, and other surrounding states. They have a website (www.freepentecostalchurchofgod.com) as well as a vibrant youth organization, the Free Pentecostal Holiness Youth. They also have a spring campmeeting and credential ministers.
The mother church of this fellowship, the Pentecostal Holiness Tabernacle in Cincinatti, was founded in 1922 in the downtown area, but erected its current church building in the 1970's. At present, according to the Free Pentecostal Holiness Youth website (http://www.fphy.org/home.html) there are
9 affiliated churches, with the majority being in southwestern Ohio.
The Pentecostal Holiness Tabernacle in Cincinnati,HQ church of the Free Pentecostal Church of God Fellowship
2. Free Holiness Churches - Richard Crayne, pastor of the Pentecostal Assembly in Morristown, TN, noted in his book Pentecostal Handbook (Morristown, TN: self-published, 1989) that there are six groups bearing the name "Free Holiness," and they vary according to faith and practice - four of them are conservative Holiness-Pentecostal, one embraces Oneness teachings, and one is not quite as strict on Holiness standards as the others. Crayne also notes that some do practice serpent-handling, although this isn't a widespread thing among any of these groups. A couple of the groups have a large concentration of members in the Midwest and Middle South regions (Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, etc.) and played an instrumental role in the creation of The Holiness Messenger. One group is well-established in southern Appalachia - centered in the Sand Mountain, AL, area - and also has a web presence at www.freeholiness.net. Crayne counts this latter group as having about 40 churches, but their website documents 69 congregations ranging from Kentucky to Lake Wales, FL, although the majority are concentrated in Alabama and Tennessee. This group is of interest due to extensive documentation, and they predate the arrival of Pentecostalism in the mountains by several years, as many of their churches were already established by 1908. This fellowship was largely the work of two early evangelists from those days, Sam Bates and Tom Perry, the latter who according to Crayne had heard the Holiness message from a Tom Austin in Chattanooga (Crayne, p. 650). Of the other Free Holiness groups, one can be traced back to the ministry of a Ruben Wayne Dillard (1890-1989) in Arkansas who came from a Freewill Baptist background but embraced the Holiness message in 1913 (Crayne, p. 68). A second group claims the founder of The Holiness Messenger, Rev. Ira Roberts, among its membership. A third group, Crayne documents, owes its origins to an "Uncle Mack" O'Neal (1850-1952) from North Carolina.
Statistics are not available as to membership records of these various groups, but sufficive to say there may be a combined total of 3000 or more members in all of them, just by my estimate. Richard Crayne's research on this has proven invaluable for finding out as much as I have, honestly!
Free Holiness Church, Higdon, AL
3. The Holy Church of God - The origins of this particular fellowship go back to the 1950's in Savannah, GA, when it was established by some dissident members of the Church of God (Cleveland, TN). The mother church of the movement - also the largest with a 700-seat sanctuary - is still located in Savannah, although they do have congregations in the Deep South in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida.
Having a very loose fellowship, each congregation has almost total autonomy. Like many of the other groups discussed, the Holy Church of God is very conservative in doctrine, following a strict Holiness code. Crayne notes however that the Savannah church tends to be more strict than the Alabama churches though (p. 130). Their website is at www.holychurchofgod.org/#/home.
The Holy Church of God, Savannah, GA.
4. The Bible Holiness Ministerial Fellowship - Recently, I obtained some good DVD teachings by a Pentecostal pastor in North Carolina by the name of Joseph Chambers (born 1936), and come to find out he is the overseer of the Bible Holiness Fellowship, which he organized in 1998 after withdrawing from the Church of God over modernism which he saw as a threat. Several congregations of this fellowship - in particular in Elkton, VA - have a good relationship with The Holiness Messenger. Pastor Chambers is the founder and overseer of this fellowship, and he also pastors Paw Creek Church in Charlotte, NC, as well as having an active parachurch ministry of his own in which he addresses things such as false revivalism, rock music, etc.
Rev. Joseph Chambers, overseer of the Bible Holiness Fellowship and pastor of Paw Creek Ministries in Charlotte, NC.
This group is not to be confused with the non-Pentecostal Wesleyan Bible Holiness Church, which is headquartered in the Midwest, as the Chambers group is very much Pentecostal! Rev. Chambers' website is at www.pawcreek.org, and the Bible Holiness Fellowship's page can be found at www.bibleholiness.org. A second group with a similar name and emphasis is also found in Arkansas, and can be accessed at www.bhfyc.org. Dr. Chambers also has several books and messages available. The Elkton church, which pre-dates the Paw Creek one by several years, is listed by Crayne as a "Free Pentecostal Church."
5. Free Gospel Church - This is a group I have some familiarity with, due to their well-known Bible Institute located at their fellowship headquarters in Export, PA. Their history goes back to 1916, when brothers Frank and William Casley left the Christian and Missionary Alliance after receiving the Pentecostal experience in 1907. According to 1988 statistics in The Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988) the Free Gospel Church consisted of about a dozen American churches and around one thousand members (p. 315). Much of this fellowship is centered around the Free Gospel Bible Institute, which has an influence that goes far beyond its membership - many Assemblies of God ministers back in West Virginia where I grew up graduated from there actually, which also led to many of them in the Potomac District of the Assemblies being somewhat more conservative than the rest of the denomination. Although at one time the Free Gospel Church engaged in extensive fellowship with the wider Pentecostal community (it was a member of the Pentecostal Fellowship of North America up until it was reorganized as the Pentecostal Charismatic Churches of North America in 1994, which the Free Gospel Church declined to join), in recent years it has engaged in fellowship with more conservative Holiness/Pentecostal groups like those represented by the Messenger. As a body, the Free Gospel Church is fairly conservative, strictly Holiness and fundamental, and it hearkens back to an earlier era of the Assemblies of God interestingly enough, as it is much what the Assemblies used to be. The Bible Institute still has a vibrant presence, although in recent years class size has decreased, but many ministers in these more conservative fellowships count FGBI as their alma mater.
Free Gospel Bible Institute, Export, PA
6. South Florida Holiness Fellowship - This particular group sparked my interest as one of their congregations, God's Miracle Center, is located in nearby Plant City, FL. The genesis of this group goes back to a group of Holiness Methodists who formed it in 1855, although it didn't become Pentecostal until the early 20th century (see http://fch.ju.edu/FCH-2005/Michel-The%20Importance%20of%20Florida%20for%20the%20Early%20Pentecostal%20Movement.htm#_edn50 for more on that). Many of its current churches though were of more recent origin - God's Miracle Center, for instance, was founded in 1963. The overseer of the six churches that are currently part of this fellowship is Rev. Rufus Caraway, pastor of the Upper Room Church of God in Arcadia, FL.
God's Miracle Center, Dover, FL (established 1963), a congregation of the South Florida Holiness Fellowship
7. Pentecostal Christian Assemblies - This little fellowship was organized in 1983 by Rev. Marvin R. Howell (1931-2008) a former Church of God minister in Goldsboro, NC. Howell remained the superintendent of the Assemblies until his passing in 2009. The stats of this group are not known, although they do have several congregations it appears in the Carolinas. (referenced from www.newsargus.com/obituaries/archives/2008/08/25/rev_marvin_r_howell/)
Marvin Howell (1931-2008), founder and General Overseer of the Pentecostal Christian Assemblies
Pentecostal Christian Assemblies headquarters, Goldsboro, NC.
8. North Georgia Holiness Fellowship - The North Georgia Fellowship is headquartered in Nicholson, GA, where it also holds its youth camps, and consists of six churches. They have a website at sites.google.com/site/northgeorgiaholinessfellowship/home that gives more information about them, although little of their history is mentioned.
9. Calvary Evangelistic Center Fellowship - This Independence, IA, based fellowship has its roots in the ministry of Rev. William F. Hill, who began evangelistic work in the area in 1965. The Fellowship was incorporated in 1971, and now has an extensive missionary enterprise as well as a Christian school established in 1975. More about them is available at their website - http://www.calvary-center.com/calvarycenter_english/About/aboutus01.htm.
10. Shady Springs Holiness Fellowship - This southern Indiana-based Pentecostal/Holiness fellowship has its roots in a series of campmeetings that go back to 1958, initiated by evangelistic work of Rev. James Ray. Today it encompasses a fellowship of 16 churches, primarily in Indiana but also in Kentucky as well. Their website is http://shadysprings.org/history.html.
11. Sunset Hill Campmeeting Fellowship - This Illinois-based fellowship originates back to 1915, when a local Pentecostal evangelist by the name of Ralph Cook (born 1888) first received the Pentecostal baptism and began a preaching ministry in 1917. Bethel Chapel was later established in 1924, and became the "mother church" for the fellowship.
Rev. Ralph Cook, his wife Lena, and daughter Eula in 1919.
A campground is maintained near Bethel Church in Granite City, IL. Although it is hard to determine how many churches are part of this fellowship, as no statistics are available, it seems to be fairly localized to Illinois and adjacent areas in Kentucky. More about this group is available at their website, http://bethelchapelchurch.org/history.
Concluding Observations
Documenting these small fellowships is a bit of a chore, but it is fun work as well. You learn much, but it can also be frustrating as some stats are not readily available. Among some other churches that could have been mentioned here but were not due to the fact many are single congregations are the Martinsville Church of Truth in Martinsville, VA, pastored by Rev. Bill Preskitt. This congregation dates back many years, and is in regular fellowship with other local conservative Pentecostal/Holiness groups in the vicinity. For many years, they also made their services available on CD, although I am not sure if they still do so or not. There are many such independent churches like this that merit a separate study of their own.
Again, many of these fellowships resulted from a split within larger Pentecostal denominations when the latter sought to modernize themselves more, although several also predate the larger groups by years. The purpose of the Highways and Hedges project is to attempt to document as accurately and thoroughly as possible the legacy of these fascinating groups, for in many of them one can find a living portrait of what early Pentecostals used to be like. It is only too unfortunate that many scholars of the larger Pentecostal movements cannot appreciate them - perhaps it is because they present an atavistic image of Pentecostalism that maybe some scholars want to divorce themselves from.
At any rate, if any errors in information are documented, please forgive those, as this whole project is still a work in progress and will be subject to revision as new information becomes available. Due to scanty history records of some fellowships - some of them believe sincerely that their primary duty is the Lord's work, and therefore they have an eschatological drive that dictates historical documentation take a backseat to evangelism. They may have a point, but on the other hand they may deprive themselves of their greatest witness - a historical record of their testimony - by ignoring and refusing to write things down and keep records. Therefore, it is up to those like me who can see the significance of their movements to preserve them.
Thanks again for reading, and continue to check in for new insights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Now that we have examined the story of Noah in-depth, what we begin to see as we launch into Genesis 10 is that the population begins to inc... -
Introduction I was actually not planning on doing a sixth article in the series, but so much information necessitated its creation. The g... -
For many years I have followed the ministry of Perry Stone, who at one time was an up-and-coming televangelist who in recent years has m...