Presbyterian Shepherds and Wolves Meet in Atlanta to Discuss Longstanding Struggle With Wolves Eating Sheep
This past Monday/Tuesday, the upstart “Gospel Reformation Network” met in Atlanta, Georgia to discuss the Gospel Sanctification/Sonship Theology/New Calvinism problem that has been plaguing the Presbyterian church since the mid 80’s. And it will continue to do so while leaders on one side of the fence feel like they’re doing something about it while keeping their friends—with the other side walking away with a Munich Pact in their pocket.
I say that because shockingly, this is a forum of discussion about,
The discussion between the various groups has been framed in terms of opposite poles, the place of God’s law and God’s grace, legalism and antinomianism. The consultation recognized that the issues in this discussion are as old as church history, with just about every generation of the church wrestling with them, and is now a present reality in this generation.
Boloney. This is neo-evangelicalism on steroids: “Golly gee, we just have to sort out our semantics. Christians have always struggled with this issue.” Look, I am really busy this morning so I am not going to write a treatise, but the biblical prescription to prevent the eating of sheep by wolves in lambs clothing is SEPERATION. What we have here is sheep paying the shepherds to negotiate with wolves. It’s cowardly and pathetic, and sends a clear message to the church that the issue is not that serious because both sides can get together and discuss it: “The abrogation of the law, yes, that’s an interesting subject, please pass the fish. Say Bob, can I try one of your onion rings?” As Charles Woodbridge decried in “The New Evangelicalism,” it would be like Moses calling for a forum with the Egyptian magicians or Elijah doing the same with the pagan priests he contended against. Likewise, if Noah held any forums before he boarded the ark, the Holy Spirit forgot to mention it.
And per the usual, the sheep who are footing the bill are not represented. These conferences are exclusively endowed with the usual book-selling compromisers of the “Christian” academia that is propagating 95% of the error present in today’s church. One of the invited speakers was antinomian and heretic extraordinaire Ligon Duncan. Duncan is presently in cahoots with Mark Devers and Al Mohler to revamp the image of serial sheep abuser CJ Mahaney. Even though Mahaney is the subject of four expose websites, he will still be one of the featured speakers at this year’s T4G conference. Duncan is one of the “core four” of this conference with Mohler, Devers, and Mahaney. These four men have shown complete indifference to the outcry against Mahaney by the sheep. They have also shown complete indifference to the biblical standard of an elder being above reproach. In fact, documentation that can be found on SGM Survivors .com concerning happenings under Mahaney’s watch are extremely troubling. If anybody believes that these men fearfully regard God’s word, I have a machine that will turn dirt into gold dust, and I would like to sell it to you.
The meeting in Atlanta could have put Sonship Theology on life support in two days. It should have been for opponents only. It should have been a call for proponents to repent, or face exclusion from fellowship, ie, this fifty will refuse to fellowship with the other fifty. That sends the right message to the sheep; it says this is a serious issue. It tells the sheep who have suffered loss of friends, loss of eldership, loss of name, loss of church family, loss of sleep, and the embracing of disillusionment, that they did not suffer for a trivial issue that has been a “discussion” throughout “every generation” of church history.
When these crookless shepherds met with these wolves in Atlanta, I don’t know what was served for delicacies of fellowship, but it should have been lamb. How fitting that would have been.
paul
Biblical Counseling as Cover-up: Professional Courtesy Among Reformed Pastors is Epidemic
“Why do sharks refuse to eat attorneys? ‘I don’t know, tell me.’ Professional courtesy.”
Doctors, lawyers, and especially policeman (the blue wall of silence) are often known to stick together. Such professional courtesy should not be known among God’s chosen men, but the New Calvinist movement threatens to take such courtesy to new heights not even known among professional pagans. Such professional courtesy enabled Jack Hyles to remain in the pulpit until his death despite behavior that gangsters would even find intolerable. Never before in church history has cowardliness and cronyism seen a greater day among those who call themselves pastors.
The Biblical Counseling Dichotomy
Let there be no doubt about it: biblical counseling for the sheep is different than counseling for the shepherds. Reformed churches, especially New Calvinist churches, have completely integrated a Matthew 18 discipline model into counseling, and without full disclosure. After all, if the sheep knew, they wouldn’t come—this almost obligates them to accept whatever they hear in counseling as gospel (no pun intended). No matter how bad a situation is for a Christian, they are never to turn off their discernment lest they find themselves in worse shape than counseling found them.
Nevertheless, counselees routinely come to a counseling session and are surprised to see one additional elder or two sitting in the room. Tag, counselee is it:
“Hi Bill, I’m sure you know elder John and elder Joe from our church. They are here because the counseling isn’t going very well. Actually, they are here as witnesses because we are placing you under church discipline.”
Bill: “But shouldn’t you have confronted me first before it came to this?”
Counselor: “Bill, I have confronted you about many things in our appointments.”
Bill: “Yes, but I didn’t know that it was in the context of a first step of church discipline!”
Counselor: “Bill, according to Galatians 6:1 and other passages dealing with church discipline, they are both for the purpose of restoring you, so they are the same.”
Bill: “I see. Well, I agree, I have been stubborn in regard to some issues. No need for the discipline, I will follow your instruction on the major point we disagree on.”
Counselor: “Uh, Bill, that’s not exactly how it works. You will be under church discipline until you are released from counseling.”
Five months later:
Bill: “Look, this counseling is going nowhere. I have decided to leave this church and enter into counseling somewhere else.”
Counselor: “I’m afraid that’s unacceptable Bill. You can’t vacate membership here to avoid church discipline. The elders will not find that acceptable.”
Bill: “What are they going to do about it?”
Counselor: “You will be excommunicated and declared an unbeliever before the congregation Bill.”
Notice that “Bill” was not immediately dismissed from the discipline process upon verbal repentance according to Luke 17:4. Not only is this present-day biblical counseling protocol unbiblical, but in most states it is a first degree felony to control any person in any way under threat of financial loss or loss of reputation. Under most State law, it is called “Coercion” under the “Kidnapping” statutes. This type of counseling/discipline is a criminal act, and also unbiblical. Furthermore, in most of these cases, the counselor is looking for a conversion to Gospel Sanctification; that’s why this process is often referred to as “redemptive church discipline.” The counseling will entail a lot of “showing forth of the gospel” without any instruction which over time confuses the counselee. This leads to a stalemate, further steps of discipline, and in many cases, excommunication.
Once a parishioner is under church discipline or excommunicated in Reformed/Neo-Calvinistic circles, professional courtesy is on steroids. Other pastors will not intervene, no matter how grievous the situation. Here is a snippet of the types of pleas this ministry hears from time to time:
“I don’t know what you can do if anything, however, we are contacting anyone possible in an attempt for help. The governmental system of the Presbyterian church, designed to protect us, is now being used as a weapon.”
But the biblical prescription for sinning, abusive pastors is not even taken seriously:
1 Timothy 5:20
But those elders who are sinning you are to reprove before everyone, so that the others may take warning.
When it comes to the sheep—by the letter, and then some. But regarding elders, professional courtesy kicks into high gear. What better example than the present “counseling” of CJ Mahaney by well-known New Calvinists? Mahaney was finally forced to step down from his position as president of Sovereign Grace Ministries because layman took action by erecting websites exposing his significant shortcomings as a leader. He was not confronted by his New Calvinist pals who often wax eloquent about transparency, humbleness, and confession, but with millions on the line in regard to conference revenues from T4G and Resolved, Mahaney is on a New Calvinist sponsored sabbatical to “reflect on his shortcomings.” It is obviously an image rebuilding project. Mahaney is still officially listed as the president of SGM and will still be a part of the “core four” at this year’s T4G conference.
But on the one hand, these pastors will not overstep their supposed bounds to help distressed parishioners in the local church, while on the other hand, a Presbyterian and two Southern Baptists have come to Mahaney’s (a Charismatic) rescue against people he has sinned against!
To put the icing on this sickening hypocrisy, CCEF, who counsels people for $85.00 per hour, does not invoke church discipline on their counselees because they are paying customers!
Damage Control Organizations
Organizations spawned by the Reformed counseling movement such as Peacekeepers International and G.R.A.C.E are clearly damage control organizations paid for by the laity to protect pastors and church organizations. A point in case is a situation that I have firsthand knowledge of involving Peacekeepers International. A parishioner was brought up on church discipline that was obviously bogus, and Peacekeepers was asked to intervene by a well-known pastor in biblical counseling circles. Peacekeepers declined because according to them, they only enter into mediation between Christians, and since said individual was under church discipline and declared an unbeliever, it was technically not a matter between Christians. Words cannot describe how lame this excuse is as a ploy to avoid mediating the cause of a wronged believer against elders.
Yet another case is the involvement of G.R.A.C.E in the Bangladesh Missionary Kids affair. Here is what I wrote concerning that situation in another post:
If the ABWE Former Missionary Children (Hereafter FMC, not “MKs”) put some stock in GRACE, the parachurch organization that “teaches” the Christian community how to deal with child abuse in a “Godly” way, then so will I, but not totally. I have some concerns…. That brings me to the latest “investigation update” by GRACE concerning the ABWE horror story. It begins as follows:
First phase? How many phases are there going to be? Why is more than one phase needed? The document, throughout, invokes all kinds of questions of this sort. And, “GRACE plans to schedule additional interviews….” Why do they have to “plan” to schedule? Is it really that complicated? Once again, the FMC are waiting for somebody “important” to do something. My grandmother had a word for it and often scolded us with it: “lollygagging.”
The report continued….
Huh? GRACE “hoped” to gather information? The document is full of tentative, overcautious language. The interviews succeeded in “beginning” to “help” “build” (how big is the building going to be and how long is it going to take to build it?) an understanding? For crying out loud, the FMC have already built the case with all kinds of documentation! The job is more than half done! And GRACE’s proclamation that God put his stamp of approval on it all regarding their interviews is just classic, and arrogant. But I will again mention that where GRACE will hopefully have some value is in their final ”thorough,” “balanced,” “independent” report; if it gets completed before the second coming. And we certainly don’t want any victims muddying up the waters with their own assessment of getting molested by the ABWE icon, Donn Ketcham—that just wouldn’t be “independent” and “balanced.”
Then, GRACE concluded the snail race report with the news that they are expanding the investigation to “non-MKs” in addition to the FMC they presently don’t have time to interview. Good grief! In addition, they are going to spend time singing Pat a Cake, Pat a Cake, with a “new” ABWE “liaison” regarding ABWE’s lack of cooperation with full disclosure—unlike Penn State which has committed to full disclosure—day one.
In my estimation, G.R.AC.E is simply going to counsel this situation to death until it goes away. This is nothing more than damage control. It reminds me of a big-name church leader who responded to a molestation victim regarding her insistence that her attacker be removed from the ministry in his denomination: “ What do you want me to do, shoot him?”
I would say, “No, we want you to practice 1Timothy 5:20. We want you to take some of your book royalties, buy a ticket, get on a jet Saturday night, go to his church the next morning, wait till he is into his sermon for about ten minutes, then get up, walk down the aisle, and rebuke him in front of the congregation. Somehow, that is more radical than molestation.
paul
New Calvinism and Hotel California
Last thing I remember, I was
Running for the door
I had to find the passage back
To the place I was before
“Relax,” said the night man,
“We are programmed to receive.
You can check-out any time you like,
But you can never leave.”
Eagles: “Hotel California”
The stories of Christians having trouble leaving New Calvinist churches are commonplace now. I continue to implore people to educate themselves and stay clear of New Calvinist churches. “Yes, but we are just visiting while we check things out.” That’s even a problem—New Calvinists believe they have authority over anybody that enters their neck of the woods. In one case, the husband of a member, who made it a point not to join, was threatened with church discipline. When I met with him, he shared how his family couldn’t believe the elders of that church would attempt such a thing, and then said he doubted that I would believe him as well. I assured him that I was fully confident that it happened.
In most New Calvinist churches, vacating church membership is not at will. In other words, you are required to have a “biblical reason” for moving your membership. Because New Calvinists think they have the only true gospel, they are compelled to have a say in what church you join; ie, is it “gospel-centered,” “gospel-driven”? At times, I find myself counseling people on how to leave a New Calvinist church without turmoil. Leaving a New Calvinist church because of doctrinal reasons will almost always be extremely stressful on your family.
One family I counseled had a very legitimate reason for leaving a New Calvinist church; to help start another church, but the timing was a coincidence, they were on their way out of there for doctrinal reasons anyway. I implored them to only use the positive reason for their departure and they listened to me. But even with that, things got really creepy. The church elders made much ado with a going away party and so forth while claiming that the work the family was leaving for was one of their church plants! I then implored this family to let it go and not make an issue over it. On that, they didn’t listen, and demanded that the elders remove information on the churches website that stated the work as being one of their church plants.
Thankfully, the elders complied and it turned out well. However, some months later, the departing family posted a comment on their Facebook account that offended one of the elders of the former church. The elder then contacted the family and wanted to meet with them. I straightaway warned the family to not host such a meeting as in these situations, New Calvinist elders think they still have authority to bring former members up on church discipline. They listened, and refused to meet with “him”—it is my contention that more than one elder would have shown up. This family saved themselves much grief and turmoil in how they dealt with their departure, but some kind of drama always arises when leaving a New Calvinist church. It is also telling in regard to what one of the elders said to this family when they initially told them they were leaving to start another work: “We would never prevent you from leaving for that reason.” Oh really? How graceful of them!
In yet another situation, a parishioner who was meeting an elder for breakfast every Monday morning informed the elders that he was leaving. Their response was, “You can’t leave right now, you are meeting with an elder about sin issues.” Actually, they were meeting primarily in regard to doctrinal differences. But you must understand—to New Calvinist elders—to disagree with them is a sin issue. The parishioner told them to go fly a kite and the elders then proceeded with church discipline. When the parishioner told them he would be at the worship service with bells on to confront them in front of the congregation—they backed down.
Many more outrageous stories could be told here, but what drives this cultish behavior? It is the whole Reformation/Gospel recovery motif that New Calvinists are rabid about. Worse yet, the movement draws a lot of impressionable young men who are given to arrogance and visions of grandeur to begin with. New Calvinism is endowed with fundamental elements that tend to breed cultism. The following excerpts can be found between pages 131 and 134 in The Truth About New Calvinism:
This whole Reformation motif was started by the Forum which taught that all doctrines either fall into the objective gospel or subjective experience. Subjective spirituality was supposedly spawned by Rome and resulted in a reversal of justification and sanctification. Therefore, the Reformers rediscovered the objective gospel which ignited the Reformation, and also taught that the job wasn’t done (semper reformanda), and you can imagine who contemporary New Calvinists think that duty has fallen to. This is all covered in chapter four along with documentation concerning the fact that John Piper, one of the “elder statesmen” of the New Calvinist movement agrees with that scenario. This us against them mentality was passed down from the Forum and blossoms in the movement to this very day. They are the children of the Reformers—we are Rome.
And this arrogance translates into a predominant characteristic of New Calvinism: heavy-handed leadership style. As far as New Calvinists are concerned, evangelicals have been leading people into hell for the past 100 years (their estimation of when semper reformanda was lost) and any interference with the “unadjusted gospel” will be dealt with—no holds barred…..
Due to the fact that their gospel is “unadjusted,” “underestimated,” and “scandalous,” the attitude is that parishioners need to be spoon-fed the elements of this doctrine until they are “ready” for the full truth. This makes detection very difficult because most of the theological terms are the same by name, but mean different things to the New Calvinists. Couple that with the fact that most of Christianity is unaware of New Calvinism’s doctrine because the movement has had no single focal point in which all of its elements could be identified as one until 2008. That’s when the “New Calvinism” nomenclature began to emerge. Therefore, the pattern is the same: new pastors assume leadership in a church that doesn’t know what New Calvinism is, and the church takes it for granted that their theology is orthodox. Then once in, they replace present leadership with those of like mind, and begin to make vast and rapid changes because they see that church as a bastion of falsehood that has sent many to hell. Then, dissenters are mercilessly mowed down and muzzled, usually via church discipline. In most cases, the dissenters don’t have a full understanding of what they are dealing with, they just know something isn’t right.
All this leads to many New Calvinist churches taking on cult-like tendencies. Exclusiveness (new Reformation), an attitude that some higher knowledge is a part of the movement that many are not “ready” for (the scandalous gospel), and a subjective view of Scripture (a gospel narrative, not instruction) is a mixture that will have bad results, and is the perfect formula for a cult-like church.
Mirrors on the ceiling,
The pink champagne on ice
And she said “We are all just prisoners here, of our own device”
And in the master’s chambers,
They gathered for the feast
They stab it with their steely knives,
But they just can’t kill the beast
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
leave a comment