Why Home Fellowships Can Help Abused Women and the Institutional Church Cannot
Originally published March 31, 2015
In our vision for a return to the way Judeo-Christian assemblies were done for about the first 300 years, let’s look at why home fellowships can help abused women and the institutional church cannot.
I would like to use this article as a catalyst for argumentation. The article was posted (author is not clearly stated) by Anna Wood who co-authored a book with Jeff Crippen, a Reformed pastor. The book can be found here.
The post is titled, What domestic abuse victims need from the church. My contention is that abused women cannot get what they need from “the church” as demonstrated over and over and over again. In fact, clearly, as also demonstrated over and over and over again as well, the institutional church adds to the abuse and becomes a co-abuser.
Why is this? The article offers a perspective from which to answer. This issue also speaks to the differences between home fellowships and the institutional church, hereafter “the church.” In an institution, it is easy to sign on the dotted line, give at the office, and pretend. Pastors can bark from Calvin’s Geneva pulpit all they want to; all folks have to say is, “Hey, I am a member in good standing, and as often heard, humble and incompetent—it’s not my gift and I am not qualified.” Likewise, in said article, the author’s call to “get involved” is going nowhere in the church in case anyone hasn’t noticed.
To the contrary, home fellowships are comprised of people who are sick of playing church, are weary of being mere spectators, and are not looking to walk into an arena with hungry lions, but know it could lead to that. They are also confident in the Spirit-filled laity and recognize where 500 years of academic popeism has brought us. In addition, they have a literal view of reality versus the functional dualism that drives orthodoxy. What am I saying? I am saying that home fellowships have a radically different worldview than orthodoxy and this will lead to aggressive participation in all kinds of needs.
Let me further this point by using the article at hand:
Statistics say that one out of four women in the United States experience domestic abuse of some form in their lifetime. Men can also be victims of domestic abuse. When those who have suffered are members of the Lord’s church, the faithful among them have an obligation to help them. And, if we know of someone in the community who is being abused, I also believe we have an obligation to help if we can. When, for whatever reason, we shy away from this obligation, either through ignorance or willful refusal to get involved, we lay waste to the Gospel we claim to believe. Christians are called to defend the oppressed yet when it comes to domestic violence, so few do.
What abuse victims need from their fellow Christians is pretty simple and straightforward. We need you to be Jesus to us. Do what He would do, say what He would say, were He the One ministering to us. Isn’t that what we all need from each other, anyway? Christians are called to stand in the place of Christ here on the earth and be His representative and do the works He would do. To fail in this is to fail in serving Christ.
Whoa, what a minute here! This is entirely unrealistic because of the message constantly drilled into the heads of Protestants. We are “all just sinners saved by grace.” We are, according to one prominent evangelical, “enemies of God.” According to yet another, “we hate God.” On the one hand, it is constantly drilled into the heads of those in the church that “when you are dead, you can do nothing,” but on the other hand we really think that parishioners shouldn’t think twice about getting involved in a domestic abuse situation?
First of all, getting involved in domestic violence is not “pretty simple.” Actually, it can get you killed by someone who doesn’t much appreciate your intervention. Moreover, getting the facts and evaluating the situation biblically is far from simple. Now couple that with the constant total depravity of the saints mantra heard in the church and it is little wonder that few will get involved in domestic abuse needs. The completely upside down worldview of the church makes laity involvement in domestic abuse nothing more than a pipe dream.
And, “Christians are called to defend the oppressed yet when it comes to domestic violence, so few do.” This complaint is not only a mere symptom, but is not even a symptom of the real problem. Congregants not only fail to defend the oppressed, they either turn a blind eye or defend the defender of the abusers—the church. Ever heard of SGM? Ever heard of ABWE? Ever heard of the SBC? In case you haven’t noticed, they are not only still in business, but business is booming! Why? Because regardless of what happens in the church, it is the only ticket to heaven. “What? so billions of people should go to hell because some bad things happen in the church that is made up of sinners? Well, get a grip—where there are people, there is sin!” That is in quotations because this is exactly what we hear in response to a “cry for justice.”
So far, if you are keeping notes, we have two reasons the church cannot help abused women: 1. The total depravity of the saints resulting in a few “experts” attempting to minister to a massive throng 2. Salvation is found in the institution, and therefore the institution will be defended at all cost. Better that a few suffer by themselves rather than all of humanity being sent to hell.
Before we move on to the next points, a little more clarification: why does the church defend abusers? It starts with its worldview. Without going into a lot of detail, we must first recognize that Calvin and Luther are the church’s heroes, and then recognize what their “theology of the cross” was all about. This is a philosophy that interprets all reality via the suffering of the cross. As Luther stated, “all wisdom is hidden in suffering.” Luther, as well as Calvin, split reality into two epistemologies: the cross story and the glory story. Only preordained leaders can lead the great unwashed masses in the cross story—only the preordained can save humanity from the story of man, or the glory story. As Al Mohler once said, “pastors are preordained to save God’s people from ignorance.”
However, theologians of the cross and the spiritual peasantry have something in common: we are all just sinners saved by grace. So, everything going on in the material realm is fairly insignificant—it’s just the same old sin and dance anyway. But by the same token, theologians of the cross are preordained of God and invaluable. And besides, many are icons of the institution that keep the money rolling in. Sure, you can reject this theory and opt for another one, but in the process you will drive yourself nuts trying to figure out why ABWE defended and protected Donn Ketcham until the bitter end.
Need another example among myriads? What about Jack Hyles? The guy was a mafia don dressed in Bible verses and is still a spiritual hero among many Baptists. David Hyles, Jack’s son, was also a well-respected pastor in the church who had affairs with at least 19 women and is a suspect in an unsolved murder. Yet, to the best of my knowledge to date, David Hyles is still invited to speak at Baptist conferences/churches and receives robust ovations. Jack Hyles remained in the pulpit until his death in 2001 and was succeeded by his son in law Jack Schaap who is presently in prison for statutory rape. Jack Hyles is notorious for his quip, “If you didn’t see it, it didn’t happen” and is still revered among many Baptists as the best preacher since the apostle Paul.
The article continues with its list of things abuse victims need from “the church.” But the thesis of this article is that the church is not only unable to supply these things, but becomes a co-abuser. In contrast, the original Christian model for fellowship is well able to help and more likely to do just that.
First on the list is “The Pure Gospel.”
The church long ago got away from the pure gospel. We water it down, mix it up and serve it with a side of fun. No wonder it doesn’t save. It can’t save. It’s poison. We need preachers dedicated to the truth of God’s Word who are willing to stand up and preach that truth without changing it one iota. We need Christians who long after righteousness. When we have that–the pure Gospel preached and lived–we’ll see more Christians helping abuse victims and we’ll see less abusers masquerading as Christians.
Uh, ok, not sure how to add to this. It’s a stunning admission while calling on the same church to do something about the problem it has created. We don’t need “preachers” to do anything. Preachers have been preaching long and hard for thousands of years and the results are evident. We need God’s people to stand up and get back to the first works of home fellowship. The laity waiting on the experts is long traveled and worthless. More of what is beginning to happen needs to happen more and more. Ordinary Spirit-filled Christians are meeting together around the word and fellowship, and seeking God’s face in this whole matter about how church is traditionally practiced. And the fact that the church is grounded in a false gospel is something I addressed in another article posted today and Friday.
Without addressing every single point in the article other than those mentioned already, let me move on to this one:
Someone to care for their needs
Do you know what keeps a lot of abused women and children with their abusers? The lack of money to leave. If a woman is trying to get herself and her children to safety, don’t spend time telling her why she’s wrong, what you think about her decision or trying to talk her out of it. She knows what it’s like to live in abuse and you don’t. Even if she stays, chances are great that she and her children need something or maybe a lot of things. Financial abuse often accompanies other types of abuse. Instead of lecturing, get busy serving and help them.
According to the first-century model, a home fellowship network would be several small groups meeting in several homes in the same geographical area. And because of freedom from massive infrastructure cost and “tithing” versus New Testament giving based on NEED only funds and resources to help the abused would be ample. In fact, I could share an example from our very own home fellowship. We have a young lady living with us, and other people connected to our fellowship contribute financially to her needs. She is fully supported independently from anybody who might be a problem in her life. And when people live with you, trust me, you know the facts and you do a lot of listening. She will be completely self-reliant this month after living with us for about two years.
In regard to a different kind of abuse, a home fellowship network that I know of in Africa operates in the following way: the network assimilates street orphans from Nairobi into their fellowships. There is a leader from the network, equipped with the latest information about funds and availability that goes into Nairobi searching for orphans, and upon finding some, brings them back to the fellowship network where they will have a home, food, protection, and education. Let’s say that our home fellowships are connected with theirs; many of these children could be brought stateside and assimilated into fellowship here as well.
In addition to being freed from the bondage of infrastructure expense, the authority of the church’s clergy is suffocating. Clergy, more times than not, are control freaks obsessed with keeping the herd calm. They are spiritual cowboys constantly concerned with the herd being spooked. This speaks to the rest of the concerns in the post being considered here. More times than not, the laity are kept in the dark concerning the needs of those abused. There is a wall of confidentiality between the church’s “trained” counselors and the parishioners who fund the whole mess. When red flags are raised in regard to how certain situations are handled, we are told that “we should trust the elders who are closest to the situation and know all of the details.” This continually proves to be a recipe for disaster, and elders are granted NO such authority via the Scriptures.
Small groups in private homes offer intimate support and confidentiality from the other home fellowships. It is a perfect balance of intimate care and financial support if needed. All of the different gifts and experiences of Christ’s body are brought to bear on the situation.
Also, we must remember that the home fellowship movement is comprised of people from all walks of life: policemen, mental health professionals, etc., etc. These people or their areas of expertise are not separated from any situation by the professional clergy for inappropriate reasons.
paul
Why Home Fellowships Can Help Abused Women and the Institutional Church Cannot
In our vision for a return to the way Judeo-Christian assemblies were done for about the first 300 years, let’s look at why home fellowships can help abused women and the institutional church cannot.
I would like to use this article as a catalyst for argumentation. The article was posted (author is not clearly stated) by Anna Wood who co-authored a book with Jeff Crippen, a Reformed pastor. The book can be found here.
The post is titled, What domestic abuse victims need from the church. My contention is that abused women cannot get what they need from “the church” as demonstrated over and over and over again. In fact, clearly, as also demonstrated over and over and over again as well, the institutional church adds to the abuse and becomes a co-abuser.
Why is this? The article offers a perspective from which to answer. This issue also speaks to the differences between home fellowships and the institutional church, hereafter “the church.” In an institution, it is easy to sign on the dotted line, give at the office, and pretend. Pastors can bark from Calvin’s Geneva pulpit all they want to; all folks have to say is, “Hey, I am a member in good standing, and as often heard, humble and incompetent—it’s not my gift and I am not qualified.” Likewise, in said article, the author’s call to “get involved” is going nowhere in the church in case anyone hasn’t noticed.
To the contrary, home fellowships are comprised of people who are sick of playing church, are weary of being mere spectators, and are not looking to walk into an arena with hungry lions, but know it could lead to that. They are also confident in the Spirit-filled laity and recognize where 500 years of academic popeism has brought us. In addition, they have a literal view of reality versus the functional dualism that drives orthodoxy. What am I saying? I am saying that home fellowships have a radically different worldview than orthodoxy and this will lead to aggressive participation in all kinds of needs.
Let me further this point by using the article at hand:
Statistics say that one out of four women in the United States experience domestic abuse of some form in their lifetime. Men can also be victims of domestic abuse. When those who have suffered are members of the Lord’s church, the faithful among them have an obligation to help them. And, if we know of someone in the community who is being abused, I also believe we have an obligation to help if we can. When, for whatever reason, we shy away from this obligation, either through ignorance or willful refusal to get involved, we lay waste to the Gospel we claim to believe. Christians are called to defend the oppressed yet when it comes to domestic violence, so few do.
What abuse victims need from their fellow Christians is pretty simple and straightforward. We need you to be Jesus to us. Do what He would do, say what He would say, were He the One ministering to us. Isn’t that what we all need from each other, anyway? Christians are called to stand in the place of Christ here on the earth and be His representative and do the works He would do. To fail in this is to fail in serving Christ.
Whoa, what a minute here! This is entirely unrealistic because of the message constantly drilled into the heads of Protestants. We are “all just sinners saved by grace.” We are, according to one prominent evangelical, “enemies of God.” According to yet another, “we hate God.” On the one hand, it is constantly drilled into the heads of those in the church that “when you are dead, you can do nothing,” but on the other hand we really think that parishioners shouldn’t think twice about getting involved in a domestic abuse situation?
First of all, getting involved in domestic violence is not “pretty simple.” Actually, it can get you killed by someone who doesn’t much appreciate your intervention. Moreover, getting the facts and evaluating the situation biblically is far from simple. Now couple that with the constant total depravity of the saints mantra heard in the church and it is little wonder that few will get involved in domestic abuse needs. The completely upside down worldview of the church makes laity involvement in domestic abuse nothing more than a pipe dream.
And, “Christians are called to defend the oppressed yet when it comes to domestic violence, so few do.” This complaint is not only a mere symptom, but is not even a symptom of the real problem. Congregants not only fail to defend the oppressed, they either turn a blind eye or defend the defender of the abusers—the church. Ever heard of SGM? Ever heard of ABWE? Ever heard of the SBC? In case you haven’t noticed, they are not only still in business, but business is booming! Why? Because regardless of what happens in the church, it is the only ticket to heaven. “What? so billions of people should go to hell because some bad things happen in the church that is made up of sinners? Well, get a grip—where there are people, there is sin!” That is in quotations because this is exactly what we hear in response to a “cry for justice.”
So far, if you are keeping notes, we have two reasons the church cannot help abused women: 1. The total depravity of the saints resulting in a few “experts” attempting to minister to a massive throng 2. Salvation is found in the institution, and therefore the institution will be defended at all cost. Better that a few suffer by themselves rather than all of humanity being sent to hell.
Before we move on to the next points, a little more clarification: why does the church defend abusers? It starts with its worldview. Without going into a lot of detail, we must first recognize that Calvin and Luther are the church’s heroes, and then recognize what their “theology of the cross” was all about. This is a philosophy that interprets all reality via the suffering of the cross. As Luther stated, “all wisdom is hidden in suffering.” Luther, as well as Calvin, split reality into two epistemologies: the cross story and the glory story. Only preordained leaders can lead the great unwashed masses in the cross story—only the preordained can save humanity from the story of man, or the glory story. As Al Mohler once said, “pastors are preordained to save God’s people from ignorance.”
However, theologians of the cross and the spiritual peasantry have something in common: we are all just sinners saved by grace. So, everything going on in the material realm is fairly insignificant—it’s just the same old sin and dance anyway. But by the same token, theologians of the cross are preordained of God and invaluable. And besides, many are icons of the institution that keep the money rolling in. Sure, you can reject this theory and opt for another one, but in the process you will drive yourself nuts trying to figure out why ABWE defended and protected Donn Ketcham until the bitter end.
Need another example among myriads? What about Jack Hyles? The guy was a mafia don dressed in Bible verses and is still a spiritual hero among many Baptists. David Hyles, Jack’s son, was also a well-respected pastor in the church who had affairs with at least 19 women and is a suspect in an unsolved murder. Yet, to the best of my knowledge to date, David Hyles is still invited to speak at Baptist conferences/churches and receives robust ovations. Jack Hyles remained in the pulpit until his death in 2001 and was succeeded by his son in law Jack Schaap who is presently in prison for statutory rape. Jack Hyles is notorious for his quip, “If you didn’t see it, it didn’t happen” and is still revered among many Baptists as the best preacher since the apostle Paul.
The article continues with its list of things abuse victims need from “the church.” But the thesis of this article is that the church is not only unable to supply these things, but becomes a co-abuser. In contrast, the original Christian model for fellowship is well able to help and more likely to do just that.
First on the list is “The Pure Gospel.”
The church long ago got away from the pure gospel. We water it down, mix it up and serve it with a side of fun. No wonder it doesn’t save. It can’t save. It’s poison. We need preachers dedicated to the truth of God’s Word who are willing to stand up and preach that truth without changing it one iota. We need Christians who long after righteousness. When we have that–the pure Gospel preached and lived–we’ll see more Christians helping abuse victims and we’ll see less abusers masquerading as Christians.
Uh, ok, not sure how to add to this. It’s a stunning admission while calling on the same church to do something about the problem it has created. We don’t need “preachers” to do anything. Preachers have been preaching long and hard for thousands of years and the results are evident. We need God’s people to stand up and get back to the first works of home fellowship. The laity waiting on the experts is long traveled and worthless. More of what is beginning to happen needs to happen more and more. Ordinary Spirit-filled Christians are meeting together around the word and fellowship, and seeking God’s face in this whole matter about how church is traditionally practiced. And the fact that the church is grounded in a false gospel is something I addressed in another article posted today and Friday.
Without addressing every single point in the article other than those mentioned already, let me move on to this one:
Someone to care for their needs
Do you know what keeps a lot of abused women and children with their abusers? The lack of money to leave. If a woman is trying to get herself and her children to safety, don’t spend time telling her why she’s wrong, what you think about her decision or trying to talk her out of it. She knows what it’s like to live in abuse and you don’t. Even if she stays, chances are great that she and her children need something or maybe a lot of things. Financial abuse often accompanies other types of abuse. Instead of lecturing, get busy serving and help them.
According to the first-century model, a home fellowship network would be several small groups meeting in several homes in the same geographical area. And because of freedom from massive infrastructure cost and “tithing” versus New Testament giving based on NEED only funds and resources to help the abused would be ample. In fact, I could share an example from our very own home fellowship. We have a young lady living with us, and other people connected to our fellowship contribute financially to her needs. She is fully supported independently from anybody who might be a problem in her life. And when people live with you, trust me, you know the facts and you do a lot of listening. She will be completely self-reliant this month after living with us for about two years.
In regard to a different kind of abuse, a home fellowship network that I know of in Africa operates in the following way: the network assimilates street orphans from Nairobi into their fellowships. There is a leader from the network, equipped with the latest information about funds and availability that goes into Nairobi searching for orphans, and upon finding some, brings them back to the fellowship network where they will have a home, food, protection, and education. Let’s say that our home fellowships are connected with theirs; many of these children could be brought stateside and assimilated into fellowship here as well.
In addition to being freed from the bondage of infrastructure expense, the authority of the church’s clergy is suffocating. Clergy, more times than not, are control freaks obsessed with keeping the herd calm. They are spiritual cowboys constantly concerned with the herd being spooked. This speaks to the rest of the concerns in the post being considered here. More times than not, the laity are kept in the dark concerning the needs of those abused. There is a wall of confidentiality between the church’s “trained” counselors and the parishioners who fund the whole mess. When red flags are raised in regard to how certain situations are handled, we are told that “we should trust the elders who are closest to the situation and know all of the details.” This continually proves to be a recipe for disaster, and elders are granted NO such authority via the Scriptures.
Small groups in private homes offer intimate support and confidentiality from the other home fellowships. It is a perfect balance of intimate care and financial support if needed. All of the different gifts and experiences of Christ’s body are brought to bear on the situation.
Also, we must remember that the home fellowship movement is comprised of people from all walks of life: policemen, mental health professionals, etc., etc. These people or their areas of expertise are not separated from any situation by the professional clergy for inappropriate reasons.
paul
The SGM Spiritual Abuse Holocaust: Wade Burleson is Not a Solution; He’s the Problem
“Really? Is that where we are? While our ravaged Christian children languish away in mental hell the big dare from another pastor is to say that I don’t like CJ Mahaney? Is that how pathetic we are?”
I really don’t have time to write this as I am preparing for a conference, but on the other hand I am both fuming and fed-up. “Trigger alert”? Oh this is way past that, hide the children.
Regarding the recent revision of the Catholicesque class action lawsuit against the New Calvinist organization Sovereign Grace Ministries, “holocaust” is not terminology that is out of line. If you have read the revision, I am sure you agree that the number of fatalities pale, but the shear degree of evil, even if half of the accusations are true, is comparable.
During WWII, a lone German pastor left the protection and comfort of his American mission and returned to the belly of the beast to cry out against the Holocaust. For his outcry, he was hung naked with piano wire. The New Calvinist beasts among us criticize Bonheoffer for being “unorthodox” and plotting against the German government while extolling Christopher Love as a godly martyr. Love was a Puritan who meddled in petty European power struggles between kings and was executed for it. Genocide was hardly the issue.
Like the vast majority of clergy during WWII, the American clergy rants ambiguously against the sin, but stands silent against the sinner. The apostle Paul rebuked Peter publically for eating sandwiches in hypocrisy, and commanded that elders who sin should be rebuked publically so that others would fear. Such rebukes in the midst of sin that the heathen will not even tolerate are nowhere to be found on the contemporary evangelical landscape. American pastors are the epitome of coldhearted indifference, hypocrisy, and lust for acceptance in the good ole boys club. They dream of invitations to the big conferences and the approval of those who best teach how to drink orthodox Kool-Aid intravenously. There are no words for the degree of contempt and disgust that I have for these pathetic cowards. Where is the outrage?
Though what I experienced pales in comparison to the SGM victims, I can speak to why victims wait so long to come forward. When things that don’t make any sense happen in an environment of trust, confusion waits for clarity before action. The confused rarely act, and the brainwashed rarely react at all. My responses are now in full gear—seven years later. Seven years. And in relative terms, I “only” lost all of my “friends,” my name, and half of my family.
But back to the hypocrites. Steve Camp, who once wrote a song about feeling the pain of others, even to the degree of tasting the salt in their tears, tweeted to me that the SGM scandal was a “local church” issue and shouldn’t be public. This also apes SGM’s defense; it’s not the world’s business. That was followed up by, “Do you not like him [CJ Mahaney]? I do.” Really? Is that where we are? While our ravaged Christian children languish away in mental hell the big dare from another pastor is to say that I don’t like CJ Mahaney? Is that how pathetic we are? And one of the most popular Christian musicians of our time boasts that he likes a friend of pedophiles? “But Paul, there is no verdict yet.” Yes there is. If Steve Camp likes CJ, he obviously believes CJ and has totally disregarded the claims of eleven people against an elder when only two are needed. Otherwise, he would wait to see if he still likes CJ. But he does, like all the other members of the New Calvinist coven.
And the likes of Pastor Wade Burleson only make the situation worse with his half- pregnant overtures. He becomes a cushion between the beasts and the ravaged. Burleson is a New Calvinist, that is bad enough, but he is passing on the opportunity to use his influence to call out these people by name—probably because he is a New Calvinist that sympathizes with those suing New Calvinists.
From time to time, groups of notable evangelicals come together and sign declarations. It’s always big news. I am still waiting for a declaration of zero tolerance for child-rapists in the evangelical church. It could be stopped. Yes indeed, no doubt. How? A declaration by notable pastors declaring that they will not tolerate it. A group of notable pastors walking down an isle on a Sunday morning and demanding that a man get out of the pulpit until certain situations are resolved. Why not? That’s what the apostle Paul did! And we are talking about child rape, not who we avoid at the diner. THIS IS A LEADERSHIP ISSUE.
Pastors are called on by God to strike fear in the hearts of sinning elders. Instead, they cover for them. One notable Southern Baptist pastor once said to a victim demanding justice, “What do you want me to do, shoot him?” Well, in my book, that would be a start, and certainly better than what is presently taking place. But all the victim really wanted is for this pastor to use his influence to protect others from her same fate. Is that too much to ask from these hirelings? Yes. Absolutely.
Wade Burleson has significant influence in evangelical circles, that’s why the Wartburg Watch slobbers all over him continually. He is a hero among spiritual abuse bloggers because he, get this, shows compassion for the spiritually abused. That’s where we are as well: any notable pastor that even shows compassion towards the spiritually abused is a hero! But we don’t need another polished evangelical celebrity in our day full of soothing words; these are times that call for the likes of Dietrich Bonheoffer.
Burleson needs to use his bogus influence to make a difference. He needs to start calling people out by name and calling other pastors to join him. He needs to stop playing both sides of the fence with compassion on one side and silence on the other. It’s not enough to call out the crime; the criminals need to be called out as well. We know he can name names in his own church when the offender is an average Joe, but will he call out the big-name pedophile collaborators? The victims of SGM are suing people and naming names, not just their crimes. As victims, they are courageously facing their abusers in court because pastors wouldn’t step up. Though Burleson is a “hero” for saying they can sue, they wouldn’t need to if he and others would fully exploit their God-given positions for the sake of victims.
If Burleson is going to play the role, he needs to leave it all on the court and stop separating the sin from the sinner. Victims don’t have that convenience if they get justice. And justice is a big part of healing. Stop playing Dietrich Bonheoffer and be Dietrich Bonheoffer who was a real advocate for victims. Victims were the real cause, not the preservation of social status.
paul
Don’t Miss This Control Technique Among New Calvinists: “Diagnosing” Subjects as Mentally Ill
“….we must remember that Luther’s theology of the cross doctrine was primarily a metaphysical endeavor. Luther and Calvin believed that ALL of reality is interpreted through the gospel meta-narrative. So, and please don’t miss this: if you don’t interpret reality through the “gospel-driven” life, you are in fact incapable of properly interpreting reality and a diagnosis of mental illness is not far behind.”
“Check out the new sports blog CJ Mahaney has and the playful dialogue that goes on there while his empire is publically submerged in sewage. This is actually seen as astounding spiritual maturity in the midst of a trial. In this case, a civil one.”
“Therefore, New Calvinists are going to feel completely justified in labeling anyone they choose as mentally ill. In fact, one of their heroes, Geerhardus Vos, bemoaned what he thought was a lost opportunity to have dispensationalists psychologically evaluated over the years to determine the lack of a ‘normally-constituted mind.’”
I’m surprised that I haven’t heard much discussion (actually none) on how New Calvinist churches control people who ask too many questions by calling their mental stability into question. This is particularly effective and a favorite among totalitarian regimes worldwide. During the Cold War era, it was the staple method in the Soviet Union.
Unhelpful in falling victim to this ploy is the whole idea of, “mental illness” propagated by various fields of Psychology. This is the idea that we can become “mentally ill” in the same way that we catch a cold. The truth is much more hopeful than that, but when you have a bunch of educated elders and their psychiatrist lackeys telling you that’s the case—it’s very powerful. If you’re “mentally ill,” you wouldn’t necessarily be able to recognize that yourself, right? Then, this idea about you is also suggested through ambiguous prayer requests at mid-week flock groups. Game over. You have to admit, these guys are good at what they do.
This may also take an unfortunate turn in which the parishioner buys into the idea and agrees to taking psychotropic drugs in order to prevent church discipline. By the way, many New Calvinist churches are disciplining people who are genuinely depressed. I have written on this in the past. “Redemptive” church discipline is not to correct a wayward life, it is an attempt to reveal the “cross-driven life.” Hence, disciplining the depressed is seen as an act of love to open the person’s eyes to their “only hope.” If they won’t see the cross story, they are better off dead anyway. And yes, suicides in regard to this reality are not even on the radar screen in the anti-spiritual abuse offensive. Hear me well: counseling based on progressive justification is Russian roulette. Read Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation, and then imagine a depressed person being counseled based on that construct. Add cold chills up back.
Luther himself argued in the Disputation (which embodies all the major New Calvinist tenets) that depression would not be the result because of the continual deaths and rebirths produced by gospel contemplationism. This is the Reformed definition of the new birth, a series of deaths and rebirths until we reach final justification. Luther believed that the law (biblical imperatives) drives us (Christians and unbelievers alike) to despair—making a joyful rebirth possible (John Piper’s Christian Hedonism is a supplement to the Reformation idea of new birth). So, the Bible is not for encouragement, instruction, etc., it is for ascertaining how evil we are as Christians leading to “humbleness” and a new birth experience. This is the “cross-driven” or “gospel-driven” life. It could be surmised that the depths of despair get shallower as we “grow” in our Christian walk because a deep realization of our sinful state is circumvented by joy. Happy antinomians that rejoice in evil are the inevitable result. Do you doubt that? Check out the new sports blog CJ Mahaney has and the playful dialogue that goes on there while his empire is publically submerged in sewage. This is actually seen as astounding spiritual maturity in the midst of a trial. In this case, a civil one.
Incredibly, Luther’s theology of the cross construct (the foundation of the Reformation) causes Christians to be depressed if they are not aspiring antinomians, and then guess where they go to get help? Right. Of course, it will affect people in different ways—the decline in spiritual maturity will take many different forms.
Now, we must remember that Luther’s theology of the cross doctrine was primarily a metaphysical endeavor. Luther and Calvin believed that ALL of reality is interpreted through the gospel meta-narrative. So, and please don’t miss this: if you don’t interpret reality through the “gospel-driven” life, you are in fact incapable of properly interpreting reality and a diagnosis of mental illness is not far behind. One example is New Covenant Theology which was spawned from Reformed ideology. The first tenet of NCT reads as follows:
New Covenant Theology insists on the priority of Jesus Christ over all things, including history, revelation, and redemption. New Covenant Theology presumes a Christocentricity to the understanding and meaning of all reality.
Therefore, New Calvinists are going to feel completely justified in labeling anyone they choose as mentally ill. In fact, one of their heroes, Geerhardus Vos, bemoaned what he thought was a lost opportunity to have dispensationalists psychologically evaluated over the years to determine the lack of a “normally-constituted mind.” In regard to this statement by Vos, the father of contemporary Reformed hermeneutics, Barry E. Horner stated the following:
It is difficult for me to recall a more graceless, indeed intellectually arrogant denunciation of an opposing Christian perspective than this. While Richard Gaffin commended the gentle, retiring, pious manner of Vos, such virtue is quite absent here (Future Israel: p. 174).
It is also difficult to find anything in Reformed theology that accomplishes any good. Other than the positing of facts that are complicit in first-degree theological felonies, there is nothing but delusional arrogance and the muffled screams of those buried alive under mythological topsoil. Tyrants like CJ Mahaney were looking for an ideology to fulfill their filthy lust, and they found it in Calvinism.
paul
A 4-Point Evaluation of Ligon Duncan’s Defense of SGM
I would then encourage you to ignore the assaults of wounded people on attack websites and blogs, and that you discount the opinings of those who have no real knowledge of these matters or relation to SGM or authority to comment upon them, and that you refrain from assuming that you (or they) are in a position to render judgment on these things.
1. I would then encourage you to ignore the assaults of wounded people on attack websites and blogs,: He admits they are wounded, but that’s not the point. The totally depraved don’t deserve justice. Furthermore, getting raped isn’t the point, how that event glorifies God in the predestined scheme of the gospel meta-narrative is the point. By not accepting the event and seeking justice, the “wounded” are not “entering into the plot” of showing forth the gospel.
2. and that you discount the opinings of those who have no real knowledge of these matters or relation to SGM: The knowledge of the philosopher kings is so much higher than yours, that even when it seems obvious that abuse occurred and it was covered up, that’s not really what’s going on. Please trust the higher knowledge of your local Reformed pastor king.
3. or authority to comment upon them,: Only the pastor kings have authority to speak to these matters. Anybody who speaks out is messing with God’s anointed who have been given all authority on earth.
4. and that you refrain from assuming that you (or they) are in a position to render judgment on these things.: Only the philosopher kings can render judgement. The producers have no role in judging, they are the church’s producers. In America, Reformed elders have to fill the role of both philosopher king and soldier. And much to their frustration, there are laws that protect the producers. They must improvise because they are deprived of the stake and the gallows. Instead, they offer formal counseling where they can earn your trust and get documentation on your secret sins that can be used to blackmail you into silence or control if needed. This is one of many alternative controls they have contrived. It’s the exact one that CJ Mahaney used on the co-founder of SGM who attempted to leave SGM for doctrinal reasons.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
4 comments