A Wartburg Watch Repost: Appalling Documentation on the Calvinist Use of Church Discipline to Control People
Wartburg Watch does a very good job of reporting on trends in the New Calvinist movement. Hence, I stroll over there from time to time. This post caught my eye because it reinforces what I have witnessed in these churches for a number of years now. Like all cults, these churches strive to gain control of people through indoctrination, fostering dependence through benevolence, and fear. When you go into these churches you can cut the aurora of fear with a knife. While still a member of Clearcreek Chapel in Springboro, Ohio members were afraid to be seen talking to me because I asked questions in Sunday school that the leaders were unable to answer. We presently know of members in some of these churches that are being held hostage through fear. Once you are invested there, they can put a social hurtin’ on you, and maybe even financial ruin. In both cases, I have the T-shirt.
I continue to insist that these church policies are in violation of most state laws. It is illegal to restrict the lawful movements of any person through threats of personal loss; specifically, loss of reputation. TANC has a very long list of future endeavors, but on that list is to contact our local congressman to see if anything can be done about this type of covert kidnapping. Sometime after the conference I will be treating law enforcement officials to lunch in order to get their input on this issue.
And as usual, I would encourage the gang at Wartburg to realize that this behavior isn’t happenstance; it flows from an ideology called “Calvinism.” Their report describes Calvin’s mentality to a “T.” Wartburg continues to associate with those who hold to the ideology without the bad behavior. That’s a bad idea.
paul
What to do if you are being Held Hostage at a New Calvinist Church
Nobody wants to be humiliated publically in a Sunday morning church service in front of hundreds of people. Especially if it is a church where you have been a member for several years, and in many cases, the center of where the majority of your closest friends gather on a regular basis. Not to mention strangers who may be there visiting. Your employer may be a member there, and family members who still trust the leadership may be members there as well.
This is why you are staying put in a church you want to leave. After you informed the elders that you were leaving they placed you under “redemptive church discipline.” This is in-house counseling that deals with “longstanding patterns of sin.” What patterns of sin? Anything that the elders think is such—that’s what. You may have also done something very stupid: entered into formal counseling at said church and revealed intimate details about yourself. Ouch, that is now information that could become public during your excommunication day.
You are now officially a hostage. If you leave you will be excommunicated and humiliated publicly. You are probably in this position because you know something about the leadership that is damaging or you have challenged them doctrinally. You are also not one who is usually excluded from this process: those with power, influence, and money. Your resources are limited. You are in a very bad spot. Walking away could cost you your job, all the friends that you have, and at least some of your family. You are not alone. I contend that thousands of Christians are being held hostage at New Calvinist churches in this way. They are playing along until an opportunity provides itself for a way out. If it ever does.
Let me continue to emphasize that Christians need to wise up and prevent themselves from getting into these situations. If you are the type that is willing to look the other way on everything don’t worry about it, but if you have an inclination to care about the truth, you need to be discerning. Because you are on your own and other churches will not stand with you (if any do, it would be a first), don’t join any church. It’s not necessary. You can be faithful to an assembly and not be a member. If they won’t let you serve in certain areas because you are not a member, so be it. The Scriptures are (I think deliberately) ambiguous regarding formal church membership. Even though many New Calvinist churches think they have authority over you whether you are a member or not—not being a formal member affords some protection. Actually, a lot of protection. In our day, don’t join any church formally—just don’t do it.
And if you do, for crying out loud, do not sign a church covenant. I am going to say this as lovingly as I can: in our day, if you sign a church covenant you are just plain stupid. I love you, but you are stupid. Not only that, in most New Calvinist churches, you are not allowed to leave membership for “unbiblical reasons.” And I will give you three wild guesses as to who determines what is “unbiblical.” If you are a member of a New Calvinist church “in good standing” (i.e., you don’t ask questions) and want to leave for doctrinal reasons, do so carefully. This ministry has, and continues to counsel people who want to leave these churches with as little drama as possible and it’s not easy. If you are in a church that strongly emphasizes formal membership—flee and don’t look back.
Back to those who find themselves in the belly of the beast. You have bitten off the whole enchilada. You are a member. You signed a church covenant. Much of your life is invested in the church. They have counseling records on you, etc.
First, don’t attempt to plead your case biblically; you’re wasting your time, these people play by their own rules. I should repeat that: don’t attempt to plead your case biblically; you’re wasting your time, these people play by their own rules. Do keep detailed records. Communicate as much as you can by email and ask lots of questions. Tape-record all meetings (check laws in your state, but in all but a handful of states it is legal to record private conversations as long as one party (that would be you) is aware the conversation is being recorded) and ask lots of questions. Here’s why: In most states what they are doing is a criminal act. In most states it is against the law to control somebody’s free will of moral actions with threats of reputation loss or financial loss. In the milieu of the mess, get them on record saying they will do this if you do that. Get them on record saying that you are not free to take your family and leave. Get their response on record regarding your concerns that you will lose your job, your family, your reputation, etc. Get them on record stating that they have the authority to void your salvation. Here is how the law reads in Ohio:
2905.12 Coercion.
(A) No person, with purpose to coerce another into taking or refraining from action concerning which the other person has a legal freedom of choice, shall do any of the following:
(1) Threaten to commit any offense;
(2) Utter or threaten any calumny against any person;
(3) Expose or threaten to expose any matter tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, to damage any person’s personal or business repute, or to impair any person’s credit;
While gathering information, if at all possible, obtain an attorney that will work with you in the situation and contact the elders of said church when you leave post preference. Advise the church that you will be present with your attorney during the excommunication. In most cases the elders will back off and allow you to leave with your family quietly. I have seen this work quite well in lesser degrees of application.
If you can’t afford an attorney, gather good information that violates the coercion laws in your state and then contact the local police. If the church follows through with the excommunication, file criminal charges against the elders.
For further questions regarding this issue, email us at mail@ttanc.com
paul
Dr. Jay E. Adams on Cross Congregational Discipline
Cross Congregational Discipline
Introduction by paul: How much suffering could be avoided in the church if we would get serious about following Scripture? Consider that even independently autonomous churches, for the most part, belong to a fellowship of churches. Therefore, the following as articulated by Dr. Adams could stop abuse dead in its tracks. A church being shunned by several other churches in a fellowship of churches is no small matter. Think of all the church fellowships who have refused to follow this procedure–even for the sake of the sexually abused. Without further ado, read what this gift to the church has to say on this issue:
So far I have been considering discipline within the local church that involves members of the same congregation. Now it is important to tackle the somewhat more complex questions of how to handle the problem of cross congregational discipline.
Within the same denomination the ways and means for pursuing cross congregational discipline are usually formalized in a denominational book of government and discipline. If they are not, you should work for a common Book of Discipline that provides for such measures.
What I wish to address in this chapter is the more difficult problem of how to carry on discipline among churches that are not related denominationally.
Bob and Phil, members of two Bible believing congregations of different persuasions, have broken fellowship over a business deal. Phil, an automobile mechanic, maintains that all the work he did on Bob’s car was necessary and, though he charged Bob five hundred dollars, that was a good price for the labor and parts provided; indeed, below the going rate. Bob disagrees. He thinks that Phil did unnecessary work on the car and has stuck him with a huge bill, which he refuses to pay. Bob claims that he told Phil to let him know if the cost would exceed two hundred dollars; Phil says Bob gave no such instructions. Rather, Phil maintains that Bob said, “Go ahead and do whatever has to be done,” and indicated no reservations about the cost.
The matter cannot be resolved by going to court (1 Corinthians 6 forbids that-God forbids believers to take other believers to court.), But since they cannot work it out between them, the matter must be settled by the church. Bob has told a number of people at his church what a rotten deal he got and how Phil cheated him. As a result, there is evidence that Phil’s business is suffering. Phil has not yet been paid.
Phil goes to his pastor for advice. The pastor says, “It seems to me that since Bob has made the matter public, it can be dealt with on that level. But why don’t you take a couple of mutual friends and try once more to work out matters? If you do not succeed, go to his pastor and seek help.”
One more visit is made. Phil and those with him get nowhere. Bob says he will not pay a cent more than two hundred dollars, and he refuses to discuss the issue further. Phil makes an appointment with Bob’s pastor, asking him to bring the matter officially before the church. The pastor in turn suggests that all four talk about it; he sets a date for the conference. But nothing comes of their meeting. Both men state and steadfastly maintain their positions. Bob tries to hand Phil a check for two hundred dollars and declares that the matter is over. He wants to hear no more about it. Phil shows the pastor receipts for parts that, apart from extensive labor costs, amount to nearly two hundred dollars in themselves. He refuses to take the check, declaring that to do so is to forfeit his right to a larger sum.
Where does the matter go from here? Regardless of how the issue turns out—which is not our concern at the moment—what steps should Phil take from here on?
Phil has two options. First, in accordance with 1 Corinthians 6:7 he can determine to accept the loss and drop the whole matter. If he does so, he must be sure he bears no resentment against Bob. In particular he must not speak disparagingly about Bob to others. If Phil drops it, it must be dropped entirely (Incidentally, Phil had this option at earlier stages as well.)
But it would seem from his refusal to accept the check that Phil will want to pursue the matter further. Given his rejection of the first option, what is Phil’s second? He may pursue the matter officially before Bob’s church. He should inform the pastor that he is not satisfied to let the matter drop and settle for two hundred dollars, especially since he has lost five customers from Bob’s church because of what he can only call slanderous gossip on Bob’s part. His concern is that the church deal with his charges of theft and slander against Bob.
Before making charges of slander or gossiping, Phil must have evidence to substantiate them. This will consist not only of presenting the bills and receipts that he brought to the first conference, but also being able to call on witnesses to the slanderous statements made to others. If he can produce such evidence, he will be in a position to establish his case. Apart from evidence and witnesses, he should not proceed further (cf. 2 Corinthians 13:1).
WHAT IF THE CHURCH DEFAULTS?
All of the foregoing is rather simple and straightforward. But what if Bob’s church refuses to hear Phil? What if the pastor says, “Well, Phil, I’ve done all I can to reconcile the two of you. In our church we don’t do anything more; no, we will not discipline Bob.” This possibility is not at all unlikely today.
There is no direct biblical instruction about this matter because there was no denominational problem in the first century (although there were interchurch dealings such as the council described in Acts 15). But using the approach stipulated by the words of Christ in Matthew 18, it would seem that the following procedure should be followed:
1. Phil (perhaps with the guidance of his own pastor) should gently read Matthew 18:15ff. to Bob’s pastor and urge him and his church to follow the Scriptures in this matter. He should not simply go along with weakness on the part of Bob’s church. Rather, in a kind but firm manner, he should insist that, since they call themselves a Bible?believing church, they are bound to do what the Bible requires. Often this sort of kind but strong pressure will prevail.
2. If that action proves to be fruitless, then (on the basis of Matthew 18) he should take someone with him (preferably his own pastor) to confront Bob’s pastor. Frequently the matter will be settled at this level.
3. But suppose Bob’s pastor refuses to hear them. Then, on the analogy of Matthew 18, he should “tell it to the church.” That would probably mean having Phil’s elders request a meeting with the elders of Bob’s church. If this meeting occurs, Phil’s elders may be able to persuade Bob’s that this is the biblical thing to do and may be able to help them in conducting a fair trial. The issue in points 2 and 3, please note, is not Phil’s losses, but the question of whether Bob’s church will follow Matthew 18. The two issues should not be confused.
4. Let us suppose, as too often is true, that Bob’s elders refuse to meet or, after meeting, refuse to carry the case further. Then, short of Phil’s willingness at this point to drop the whole matter, his church would seem to have but one recourse: again, on the analogy of Matthew 18, Phil’s church should declare Bob’s church to be “as heathen and publicans.” That is to say, they should declare them to be “no church” since they will not draw a line between the world and the church by exercising discipline. (Even if Phil should wish to drop his matter against Bob. the other issue—the dealings between the two churches—should be pursued to its end. A church. declared to be no church. may be restored upon repentance.)
This decision should never be taken unless the most careful and kind attempts have been made to try to effect proper discipline in the other church. But there must come a point at which the matter is set to rest. God will have no loose ends dangling in His church.
5. If Bob’s church is declared to be no church by Phil’s church, then and only then may Phil treat Bob “as a heathen and a tax collector.” If he wishes to do so, Phil may now take Bob to civil court. At times this may be an unwise move, a poor testimony in a community that doesn’t understand, and in some cases, even an unloving act if done in bitterness. But the practical possibility now exists. Sometimes it is wiser to drop the matter here (or earlier), and Phil always has that option.
6. If the act of declaring another church to be no church (because it will not define itself by church discipline) is to be carried out, it is important to keep accurate records, testimony, etc., of all that transpired. Moreover, before doing so, the other church should be warned of the possibility of this action.
Let me suggest two variations on this theme. Where a congregation is part of a denomination, the matter should be taken through the procedures prescribed by the denominational standards before taking the step of declaring it no church. In the case of a nondenominational congregation or one in which the denomination does not function in cases of church discipline, it might be advisable to call in one or two other congregations in the community to intercede; if nothing results from this, have those congregations agree also to declare the contumacious congregation to be no church .
Handbook of Church Discipline
Dr. Jay E. Adams: excerpt from chapter 10
Matthew 18 and Family Harmony
As I have said before and will say again: Matthew 18 is not about so-called “church discipline.” Matthew 18 is about reconciliation and keeping the peace in ALL relationships. These are principles set forth by Christ that make us successful in our Christian endeavor for peace and harmony at work, home, and church. The only instruction regarding the church performing THE actual discipline on a believer is when an elder sins. The church is to rebuke him before all so that the other elders will fear. Other than that, there is self-discipline, and the Lord’s discipline which takes place within the church; and when a congregation breaks fellowship with a professing believer that is committing blatant public sin and is obstinate about it—outside of the church where Satan is used to destroy the flesh so the soul can be saved on the day of redemption.
This letter is posted with permission because I think it can be helpful to others. It is a letter to a son by a (step) father who is using the wisdom of Matthew 18 to resolve family conflict. Other spiritual issues that often occur in mixed families are addressed as well. This is from an actual real-life situation, and I suspect, not all that unfamiliar to many.
Son,
Though you profess to be a Christian, you continue to display an utter indifference to godly counsel. This is at the root of many problems in your life right now, and affects the lives of others as well. The Scriptures not only distinguish believers and unbelievers by what they profess/believe, but also by what they do. James challenges Christians to show their faith by what they do, and I would like to follow James’ example and challenge you in the same way.
Not only do you show an indifference to the finer details of biblical counsel, you become agitated when confronted, and make the imperfections of the messenger the issue—complete with a long list of how your fragile sensitivities have been violated. Your problem is with God. He tells you many things that you do not want to hear or follow. We all struggle with this at times, but you continually throw the gauntlet down at God’s feet as a lifestyle.
The latest episode is no exception, and we must now address it accordingly. You sat at more than one family devotion here where Matthew 18 was taught. You know the procedure and God’s wisdom behind it. Yet, when you had a problem with your mother and me, you did not come to us “alone,” you went to your brother who was in no wise involved. The Bible calls this, “gossip.” Furthermore, you later went to your mother without me present when you clearly had ought with both of us. This propagated further sin, as your mother entertained the conversation without me present. Again, your problem was with both of us.
Your assumption is that God winks at such things. I assure you that he doesn’t, and the results of not doing things God’s way continues to wreak havoc in your own life coupled with a refusal to recognize how it affects others. In regard to others, you are astonished that they protest this reality; apparently, because you are worth the trouble in your own eyes. Though the mother of your child has issues to say the least, this is even the case in regard to her at times, and I implore you to consider that in her case—God has a purpose for her being involved in your life. We all need to remember this. She is NOT the enemy! I say this to my own indictment: she is a ministry. Where has the gospel been shown to her in all of this?
Moreover, after doing everything in this latest situation your way, and not God’s way, what you did do at the end was also anti-biblical. Unbelievable. If I didn’t know better, I would say that you actually make an effort to do things the wrong way. But I do not think this is the case; I believe you unwittingly think that you know better than God. Though you would say that is ridiculous, your life states a contrary claim.
So what did you do wrong when you finally got done with your wrong procedure? Four things, lest it only be one more. First, you failed to remove the log from your own eye before you removed the splinter from your mother’s eye. The events surrounding this situation alone, starting back at the hospital when your son was born, supply ample data alone without mentioning the rest of your life.
Secondly, disregarding all of the time and money that your mother has invested in your son, and for that matter, you as well, you harshly disregarded all of it and judged her on one event. The Apostle Paul angrily addresses this kind of judgment towards others in the second chapter of Romans.
Thirdly, you have always expected a full investment of emotional capital into your son regardless of the uncertain future that you have created in this situation that would prevent such investment from ending in heartbreak. I have watched from afar as your mother has poured her heart into this child, while your indifference to the possible discontinuance of that and her subsequent heartbreak looms on the horizon like an ugly beast.
Fourthly, because you know more about raising children than God, your son throws temper tantrums and screams/cries/yells at will, and at the behest of every environmental change that he is able to detect. Regarding your son’s mother, it’s not all her fault—own your part. In this case, your mother and I driving away to make an appointment prompted such response, and you used that to accuse your mother and I of heartlessly driving away from your son after supposedly refusing to say goodbye to him while he cried in the street. In light of what your mother has done for that child, I find this accusation disgusting, deplorable, and evil. Let there be no doubt in your mind—I will not tolerate your heartless/ evil manipulation in our household.
The Scriptures make it clear; we will all have a propensity to not honor our parents. Even at my age, I confess that I struggle with this in my relationship with my own mother. Though I love her, I often make other things a higher priority that shouldn’t be. With the exception of your younger brother of late, you and your older brother do not recognize this biblical warning in the least. Your older brother I understand, his honestly in regard to rejecting God’s counsel is worrisome, but more honorable than your profession of Christ and subsequent disregard for His lordship in your life—further rejecting His name of “Savior AND LORD.”
Your mother has endured this dishonor in many ways, and for many years for fear that she would lose the closeness she so longs for with her sons. She loves you so much, that your dishonor is a small price to pay for the privilege of relating to you which you hold over her head as a ransom for getting your own way with her. She is not stupid, she knows this is the case, but again, sees it as a small price. But the price is much larger than she realizes. People who love to the degree that your mother does— have difficulty assessing such cost. Let me be brutally honest; I do not have her gift of love to that degree, and as her lover and protector, the cost to her is easy for me to assess.
Your mother has laid her very life on the alter for you boys, and it is high time that all of us contribute to a blessed, peaceful, happy, environment for her in these latter years that should be a retirement from the 20+ year (brutal) war she has fought to hold this family together.
But no, in your book, all bets are off because she was less than perfect in her utter emptying of herself for you. How dare her not serve your “needs” perfectly! While right now I am fairly disgusted with you, I see your gargantuan selfism as an opportunity for God to be abundantly glorified. I see a hope for a time when you and I are closer than true brothers in the unity of Christ. But unless you awaken to reality, this will not be possible, and I refuse to let your mother continue to pay the price.
Lastly, this is where we are at. You have been confronted, and we are not obligated to grant forgiveness if it hasn’t been requested along with a commitment to change. You are unreconciled to your family. This by no means states that you will be ostracized, for our intentions towards you have always been, and always will be love, but it does mean that this unresolved issue may come up in every conversation that we have with you in the future if we do not choose to cover your offence with love.
Nevertheless, let me clarify what is expected beyond a case where you fail to see the need to ask our forgiveness resulting in reconciliation. As an emancipated “adult,” you will honor our commitment (though at times lame) to do things God’s way in this household, and you will not hinder those efforts via your disregard for God’s ways of doing things. You will not display your unwillingness to honor your mother in this household or by other means of communication outside of this household. If you will not at least respect the direction that this family has chosen, recognizing in the very least that we have a right to do so, separation may indeed be necessary.
Life is a gift from God. Christians are called to peace. Though we have allowed your poor choices to constitute emergencies on our part, even emergencies that were predicted, your disregard for us choosing to accept that with little confrontation, and your expectation for more of the same, with no remembrance of the former or thankfulness thereof, will no longer take place.
Make an appointment for purposes of reconciliation, or duly note the last two paragraphs. Your response or non-response will be applicable. I have received word that you are “sorry” for what happened, and I don’t doubt that, but the past 20 years are fraught with “I’m sorry” with little result or change of behavior. Why is that? Again, go figure, God has the answer: mere “I’m sorry” without repentance is what the bible calls “worldly sorrow.” Repentance shown forth by a determination to change for the sake of the gospel is what pleases God and yields results. This requires a renovation of how we think, as well as what we do.
Dad.
Unreconciled? What Now?
As I recently stated in the post, Is Love and Forgiveness Always the Same Thing? http://wp.me/pmd7S-1wk, we cannot always avoid having enemies. As much as it depends on us, and if possible, we should be at peace with all people (Romans 12:18). I wrote of the necessity for repentance before forgiveness is granted. What is forgiveness? If God is our model, forgiveness does not “remember” the sin any longer (Isaiah 43:25 Heb. 8:12; 10:17. Antithesis: Ps.109:14). That doesn’t necessarily mean the event will be vanquished from our mind, and of course, God doesn’t forget things. It means that we will not bring the matter up again to ourselves (dwelling, Phil. 4:8), the other person (revenge), or others (gossip). Furthermore, the forgiveness must also be like God’s forgiveness in that fellowship/relationship follows. In one instance that I know of where reconciliation took place between two Christians, one recommended that they should make it a point to seek each other out as a first priority on every Sunday morning for the purpose of greeting each other. That’s impressive, and according to biblical wisdom.
Unfortunately, many are taught in our day that they must, “forgive and forget” in every circumstance. If they do that, they are “doing it for themselves” and it will lead to a peaceful life. Hence, many live in misery under the burden of unresolved conflict and the forced acceptance of watching the behavior continually propagated on others. To expose or confront is not “forgiving and forgetting.” In addition, the neglect of holding people accountable is not exactly a loving act in and of itself. Supposedly, not forgiving will only lead to bitterness, perpetual anger, and joylessness.
Not so. Those that we are not reconciled to in the Bible are referred to as “enemies,” and we are to love them. You can love someone that you are angry with. We are to be angry without sin (Eph. 4:26); sinful anger is revenge (Rom. 12:19). Anger itself is not sin; God is often angry:
Psalm 2:12
Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.
Psalm 4:4
Be angry, and do not sin; ponder in your own hearts on your beds, and be silent.
Psalm 18:7
Then the earth reeled and rocked; the foundations also of the mountains trembled and quaked, because he was angry.
Psalm 79:5
How long, O LORD? Will you be angry forever? Will your jealousy burn like fire?
Psalm 80:4
O LORD God of hosts, how long will you be angry with your people’s prayers?
Psalm 85:5
Will you be angry with us forever? Will you prolong your anger to all generations?
First, our focus and goal should always be reconciliation. As mentioned in the other post, doing good to our enemies lends opportunity for reconciliation. We should also continue to hold them accountable whether the church does what it is supposed to do or not, but without vengeful acts. By the way, revenge in our mind must be excluded also. Vengeful thinking is what leads to bitterness when forgiveness cannot be granted, not the lack of forgiveness itself. Can we promise a rapist or a sexual abuser that we will never bring up their unrepentant behavior in the future? Hardly!
Secondly, Matthew 18 cuts both ways. If a pastor or elders refuse to repent when you go to them according to the Matthew 18 process, and the congregation or other leaders refusing to hold them accountable notwithstanding (“For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them”), keep in mind that they may be treated like unbelievers in such cases. By all means, when the opportunity arises, preach the gospel to them. Who excluded them from the Matthew 18 process?
Thirdly, Make sure you have asked for forgiveness where you were unbiblical in the situation. That puts the ball in their court as far as your responsibility in the matter. Don’t apologize, ask for forgiveness. And exclude all “….but….” If they bring up issues where you have no biblical fault, DO NOT seek forgiveness on that issue because that is not repentance according to the truth. God will not honor it. If you are not sure their issue is valid—postpone your response and seek counsel from the word and others who have wisdom in this area.
Fourthly, pray for your enemies specifically (Matthew 5:44). How would you like to see the situation resolved? What do you really want for that person’s life? James said we do not have because we do not ask.
Fifthly, in your duty to expose, warn, confront, love, learn (remember, God has allowed this in your life for a reason), and reconcile if possible, pick your thinking and conversation carefully. “Dwelling” (a kissing cousin to revengeful thinking or murdering people in our heart) is not constructive towards a solution or cause. Read Philippians, chapter four in regard to what kind of thinking leads to peace.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
2 comments