 |
Taking Every Thought Captive |
 Got Life? Our Ministry Our Beliefs Our Staff Articles Contact Us Resources Bookstore Search Links
|
"Click on the endnote
numbers to read endnotes; click on "back" on your web browser to
return to your place in the article." CHAPTER 4 CURRENT CHALLENGES TO THE CHURCH The combination of postmodern
thought raging against truth and the church relinquishing her responsibility
for polemics to guard truth requires an intentional and diligent effort on the
part of the church to reclaim a polemical stand for truth. Without a soon
recovered love for the truth by the church, Christianity faces a severe crisis;
a crisis of losing biblical truth and ministry by following the influence of an
ungodly culture. Indeed, this crisis is already in progress and has been
addressed in many recent books.[1]
The following is just a few examples of the church’s crisis over truth. Consumerism. In an article which appeared in Christianity
Today in November 1992, Charles Colson cataloged some of the attitudes that
are prevailing in the postmodern church.[2]
In the article, titled “Welcome to McChurch,” Colson noted the shift among
church goers from seeking God to seeking self. Colson wrote, Even secular observers have noted how this demand for “feel better”
religion is affecting church life and practice. A 1990 Newsweek cover
story heralded the dramatic religious resurgence among the nation’s baby
boomers. But “unlike earlier religious revivals,” the study noted, “the aim
this time (apart from born-again traditionalists of all faiths) is support, not
salvation, help rather than holiness, a circle of spiritual equals rather than
an authoritative church or guide. A group affirmation of self is at the top of
the agenda, which is why some of the least demanding churches are now in the
greatest demand.”[3] People now approach the church as consumers, just
like everything else in life. Consumerism is one of the results of pragmatism
which, along with existentialism, is the philosophy driving postmodern thought.
William James, one of the philosophers of pragmatism, said, “Truth’s
verification is its cash value in experiential terms.”[4]
Religious content is losing relevance as people more and more desire to have
their “felt needs” met. People now want a religion that “works,” or that they
can use to make them happy. So in order to get people into the church, church
leaders are willing to give them what they want. The name for this movement in Christianity is the
Church Growth Movement. The new model for the church is the marketplace;[5]
the church is established along the lines of a business, the pastor functions
as the CEO, and the target group is the customer base. The church is less
theocentric and more anthropocentric. John D. Hannah has noted, “To parrot
David Wells’s judgement of the church at large, and I have in mind the
evangelical one, theology is fast becoming ‘an embarrassing encumbrance.’ The
doctrine of the utter otherness, or holiness, of God has been replaced by the
idol of the moral self. God is slick and slack, happiness is the opposite of
righteousness, sin is self-defeating behavior, morality is a trade-off of
private interests, worship is entertainment, and the ‘church is a mall in which
the religious, their pockets filled with the coinage of need, do their
business.’”[6] Consumerism is most prominent in American
megachurches which provide a string of ministries designed to meet the
felt-needs of various special interest groups. Bruce Shelley and Marshall
Shelley have written, “These churches are able to pack large numbers of people
into an auditorium to participate in a single service of worship, but the
audience is no longer united by the shared beliefs summarized in a
denominational covenant. Many are attracted by some specific ministry of the
church: care for mothers of preschoolers, support for single parents, financial
counseling and others. The denominational or generic name over the door seems
to be irrelevant. Under the shelter of the congregation’s umbrella, deeper
commitments are expressed in the diverse special interest groups sponsored by
the congregation.”[7] Consumerism is also dangerous to the church because
of its effect on theology. Millard J Erickson has expressed well this sentiment
as it relates to the disappearance of evangelical theology: This disappearance of theology can be seen in two realms: the actual
life of evangelicals and evangelical ministry. Evangelical piety has become
very internalized, very privatized, a development that reflects the broader
psychology of our day. At one time happiness was considered by evangelicals to
be a by-product of right behavior. Now happiness has become the main goal of
concern and activity. This experience of feeling good has increasingly become
the object of much evangelical activity. This has enabled it to be very
successful, for the consumer mentality simply is not hospitable to the habits
of reflection and judgment required to frame and defend orthodox belief. Wells
shows the parallels between the message of Robert Schuller and that of Harry
Emerson Fosdick. He says that the psychologizing of life undercuts historic
Christianity at three points: (1) it assumes the perfectibility of human
nature, contrary to the Christian gospel; (2) it undermines the desire and
capacity to think, thus making theology impossible; (3) it severs interest in
the outside world, sacrificing culture for self. Not only the understanding of
the nature of evangelicalism but the understanding of ministry has been
corrupted by modernization. Two roles that are highly admired in our society
have become the models that ministers now tend to adopt: the psychologist and
the manager. Thus, preaching, even in evangelical pulpits, tends to be
therapeutic, and the pastor is seen as the CEO of a corporation, responsible
for its efficiency and growth. This is in keeping with Well’s contrast between
two types of ministry–one theologically based, the other professional in
orientation. In the latter, one’s occupation has become a career, in which
advancing to larger, more financially rewarding, and more prestigious positions
is the goal. Wells describes in considerable detail the process by which this
has happened, and the present status of ministry and of the church. The new style of ministry is not actually one that enables the laity. In fact, Wells refers to the second type of clergy as the “new disablers.” The result of their ministry is to create what Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon have termed practical atheism: “It is an atheism that reduces the Church to nothing more than the services it offers or the good feelings the minister can generate. In other words, where professionalization is at work, there the ministry will typically be deprived of its transcendence and reduced to little more than a helping profession.” It has produced a kind of sentimentality “that wants to listen without judging, that has opinions but little interest in truth, that is sympathetic but has no passion for that which is right. It is under this guise of piety–indeed, of professionalization–that pastoral unbelief lives out its life.”[8] Consumerism
undermines the gospel and the authority of Scripture by promoting self over the
Lordship of Jesus Christ. To be faithful to the Lord, the church must draw its
message, mandates, and direction from Scripture, not from the culture. God is
at the center of the universe, not man. Counterfeit
Revival. The Counterfeit Revival is
a movement that is prevalent among Charismatic Christians, most notably in
churches like the Toronto Airport Vineyard in Toronto, Canada and the Brownsville
Assembly of God in Pensacola, Florida. Revival is on the lips of Christian
leaders worldwide. However, it is not a revival of biblical truth. It is, in
fact, not really a revival of anything Christian, but a new movement. In the words of
Hank Hanegraaff, president of the Christian Research Institute, it is a new
movement based on the “F-L-E-S-H”.[9]
Hank Hanegraaff has researched this so-called revival in-depth. His book,
Counterfeit Revival, uses the acronym
F-L-E-S-H to make the material in his book memorable and to distinguish
the work of the Spirit from the counterfeit work of the FLESH. Each letter
corresponds to a characteristic of the Counterfeit Revival. The “F” stands for
fabrications, fantasies, and frauds. Hanegraaff documents how the leaders of
the Counterfeit Revival are steeped in deception. Many of their followers have
become disillusioned and unable to trust God or those who claim to represent
him. Genuine revival always rests firmly of the foundation of faith and facts.
The “L” is for lying signs and wonders. However, genuine revival always finds
its genesis in the Living Word. The “E” is for endtime restorationism, the
belief that at the end of the age God will restore supernatural signs, “super
apostles, and prophets.” Genuine revival is predicated on earnest repentance.
The “S” is for slain in the spirit, or falling backwards onto the floor as an
alleged manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Genuine revival is focused on
salvation and sanctification of the Spirit. The “H” is for hypnotism. Whether
they are referred to as Hindu gurus or Holy Ghost bartenders, the methods they
employ have much in common. They all work subjects into altered states of
consciousness, use peer pressure to conform them to predictable patterns,
depend heavily on arousing people’s expectations, and abuse the power of
suggestion to make subjects willing to accept virtually anything that enters
their minds. Leaders of genuine revival enlighten disciples through Holy
Scripture. While multitudes clamor for a massive revival, what the body
of Christ desperately needs is a mighty reformation. A sampling of the
Counterfeit Revival leaders includes the names of Jack Deere, John Arnott, John
Wimber, Rick Joiner, John Kilpatrick, Rodney Howard Browne, Wes Campbell, Paul
Cain, Randy Clark, Kenneth Copeland, Paul Crouch, and Benny Hinn. The Counterfeit
Revival undermines the gospel and the authority of Scripture by deceiving its
followers through socio-psychological manipulation that emphasizes feelings,
fantasy, and esoteric revelation over faith, fact, and reason. Room does not
permit in-depth discussion of the Counterfeit Revival here, but the reader is
encouraged to examine Hanegraaff’s book and other sources.[10] Spiritual
Abuse. Ken Blue explained spiritual
abuse as what “happens when a leader with spiritual authority uses that
authority to coerce, control, or exploit a follower, thus causing spiritual wounds.”[11]
Spiritual abuse is something of a secret sin of the church. It happens often
but is not very often talked about. However, the damage it causes is severe.
Ron Enroth has written: Unlike physical abuse that often results in bruised bodies,
spiritual and pastoral abuse leaves scars on the psyche and soul. It is
inflicted by persons who are accorded respect and honor in our society by
virtue of their role as religious leaders and models of spiritual authority.
They base that authority on the Bible, the Word of God, and see themselves as
shepherds with a sacred trust. But when they violate that trust, when they
abuse their authority, and when they misuse ecclesiastical power to control and
manipulate the flock, the results can be catastrophic. The perversion of power
that we see in abusive churches disrupts and divides families, fosters an
unhealthy dependence of members on the leadership, and creates, ultimately,
spiritual confusion in the lives of victims.[12] Characteristics
of spiritual abuse are legalism, authoritarian leadership, manipulation,
excessive discipline, and spiritual intimidation. One good example of a
spiritually abusive group is the International Churches of Christ (formerly
known as the “Boston Movement”)[13].
The ICC’s ten percent-plus annual growth rate places it among the
fastest-growing religious groups in North America. Nearly 12,000 attend regular
Sunday services at the L.A. Sports Arena. The ICC claims to be the only true
church and that discipleship is a “necessary part of the process of salvation.”[14]
People who have left the group claim that excessive control is exercised over
members. According to one researcher, “it is common for some leaders to exert a
strong influence on their disciples’ choices for everything from which college
courses to take to the right marriage partner. ‘They advised me on every aspect
of my life–when to go to bed, where to work, whom to date, whether to go on
vacation,’ former member Kim says.”[15]
The group is very active on university campuses and practices “love bombing.”
They will be very cordial and pleasant when recruiting, but once in the group
leaving is hard to do. Another former member said, “They teach that if you
leave the church, you’re leaving God.”[16]
Spiritual abuse undermines the gospel and the authority of Scripture through
legalism rather than grace in spiritual life and oppressing people while
supposedly representing Christ. Evangelicals and Catholics Together. Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT) is a movement led by Chuck
Colson, representing Evangelicals, and Richard John Neuhaus, representing Roman
Catholics, to form “common convictions about Christian faith and mission.”[17]
The first document, entitled “Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The
Christian Mission in the Third Millennium,” was published in 1994. The document
states that “Evangelicals and Catholics are brothers and sisters in Christ.”[18]
On this foundation the ECT drafters and signatories desire to unify
Evangelicals and Catholics to witness for the gospel together and fight the
culture war together. The drafters included Charles Colson, Kent Hill, Richard
Land, Larry Lewis, Jesse Miranda, Brian O’Connell, and John White among the
Evangelicals. After controversy, Southern Baptists Richard Land and Larry Lewis
removed their names from the list of signatories which included Bill Bright, Os
Guiness, William Frey, Richard Mouw, Mark Knoll, Thomas Oden, J.I. Packer, Pat
Robertson, and John Rodgers among the Evangelicals. A
second document has since been published, along with a commentary article by
Timothy George, entitled “Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Gift of
Salvation.”[19] The
signatories of this document include the same as the previous but also added to
the list were Gerald Bray, Harold O.J. Brown, Timothy George, Max Lucado, T.M.
Moore, Timothy Phillips, and John Woodbridge for the Evangelicals. “The Gift of
Salvation” was written to address “two important topics of perceived ambiguity
in ECT: the doctrine of justification by faith alone and the biblical mandate
for world missions and world evangelization.”[20]
Again the signers of ECT have stated that they express “a common faith in
Christ and so to acknowledge one another as brothers and sisters in Christ.”[21]
By simply claiming belief in justification by faith the Catholic signers, along
with the Evangelicals, have stated that “what we here affirm is in agreement
with what the Reformation traditions have meant by justification by faith alone
(sola fide).”[22]
And still the Catholics signers can state that they are, “...Catholics who are
conscientiously faithful to the teaching of the Catholic Church...”[23]
The teaching of the Reformation and that of the Catholic Church are in great
disagreement about justification. This type of inconsistency and intellectual
dishonesty demands a polemical response from both Evangelicals who believe the
Bible and Catholics who believe the teaching of their Church. ECT undermines
the gospel and the authority of Scripture by compromising truth and destroying
a true gospel witness to millions of lost Catholics for the sake of ecumenical
unity. Consumerism,
the Counterfeit Revival, spiritual abuse, and Evangelicals and Catholics
Together are but four challenges that require a strong polemical voice to
reprove their error and warn other believers of the danger to their spiritual
health and testimony. The Apostle Paul wrote in Ephesians 5:11, “And have no
fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose [or
reprove] them” (NKJV). Just how to do that is the focus of the next chapter. [1] See the bibliography for a
sampling of books dealing with the crisis facing the Evangelical Church. [2] Charles Colson, “Welcome to
McChurch,” Christianity Today, 9 November 1992, 33-35. [3] Ibid. [4] Michael Horton, Polemics, audiotape of interview by Don
Matzat on the radio broadcast Issues, Etc. 5/4/97. Available from Issues,
Etc. 1-800-737-0172. [5] Gene Edward Veith, Postmodernism,
audiotape of interview by Don Matzat on the radio broadcast Issues, Etc.
10/12/97. Available from Issues, Etc. 1-800-737-0172. [6] John D. Hannah, The Coming
Evangelical Crisis: Current Challenges to the Authority of Scripture and the
Gospel, ed. John H. Armstrong (Chicago: Moody Press, 1996), 156. [7] Bruce Shelley and Marshall
Shelley, The Consumer Church: Can Evangelicals Win the World Without Losing
Their Souls? (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 64. [8] Millard J. Erickson, Postmodernizing
the Faith: Evangelical Responses to the Challenge of Postmodernism (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998), 34-35. [9] Hank Hanegraaff, Counterfeit
Revival: Looking for God In All the Wrong Places (Dallas: Word Publishing,
1997), 13. [10] Michael G. Moriarity, The New
Charismatics: A Concerned Voice Responds to Dangerous New Trends (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992); John F. MacArthur Jr., Charismatic
Chaos (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992); on the Internet
see www.discernment.org and www.equip.org. [11] Ken Blue, Healing Spiritual
Abuse: How to Break Free from Bad Church Experiences (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1993), 12. [12] Ronald M. Enroth, Churches that
Abuse: Help for Those Hurt by Legalism, Authoritarian Leadership, Manipulation,
Excessive Discipline, and Spiritual Intimidation (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 29. [13] Richard N. Ostling, “Keepers of
the Flock,” Time, 18 May 1992, 62. [14] Randy Frame, “The Cost of Discipleship?”
Christianity Today, 1 September 1997, 66. [15] Ibid. [16] Ibid., 88. [17] Charles Colson and Richard John
Neuhaus, eds., Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission
(Dallas: Word Publishing, 1995), xv. [18] Ibid., xviii. [19] Timothy George, “Evangelicals and
Catholics Together: A New Initiative,” Christianity Today 8 December
1997, 34-36, 38. [20] Ibid., 34-35. [21] Ibid., 35. [22] Ibid., 36. [23] Ibid., 38. Next chapter |
