He criticised the congregation for reading Scripture passages
that were too long. Also, they should abandon hymn books because a lot of
people can't follow along in them and don't know how they work. They should
suspend the Sunday evening service because the lack of numbers was depressing
and it was wasting people's time. They should turn the Sunday School room into
a 'welcome center'.
And the day he was visiting for the final time, the day he
gave his presentation after the luncheon, we happened to sing a hymn that
mentioned 'propitiation'. He fixated on this and mentioned it more than once.
Hymns shouldn't use 'big words' like that, words that visitors won't
understand.
Of course a fundamental error of the proponents of Church
Growth is that they tailor their meetings to the unbeliever. This has been
happening since the 1970's and has played a major role in undermining
Evangelicalism. Already a rotten movement since its post-WWII inception, the
fact that congregations have been filled with unbelievers (who influence the
Church with their worldly philosophies) has proven devastating.
Nowhere does the New Testament present Church Growth as
something that takes place on Sunday morning. There's a connection to the
revivalist tradition here and an understanding of salvation as some kind of
dramatic experience. It's more or less an unspoken assumption within this
theology that in order to have this work properly you have to get the
unbeliever into the Church meeting so they can have the experience and the
conversion moment.
On the contrary, evangelism takes place outside the walls (so
to speak) of the church or more properly outside the meeting in everyday life.
In 1 Corinthians Paul leaves open the possibility that someone might wander in
or visit but nowhere is it assumed that the meeting will be filled with
unbelievers present to be evangelised. Unbelievers cannot worship God, apart
from Christ they cannot approach the Divine Throne and unless they come broken
and in repentance God does not 'hear' their prayers. He hears them of course in
that He is omniscient but he doesn't hear them covenantally as mediated by the
Holy Spirit. Their songs of praise are not only rejected but they are
abomination and an affront to His Glory.
Additionally one of the central aspects of New Testament
worship is the Lord's Supper, something that should be happening every time we
meet. That's the pattern recorded in the New Testament but one that has been
lost due to centuries of misguided Catholic and Protestant thought. Such
meetings would never be geared toward the unbeliever and the Early Church
record indicates this. Visitors could certainly come but then they had to leave
when it was time for the Eucharist. Wouldn't that send Church Growth people
into fits! Can you imagine anything more 'unwelcoming' then saying, "Sorry,
it's time for you go. This part of the meeting isn't for you."
To craft the church meeting in terms favourable to the world,
to treat the Church and the Gospel as products to be marketed is not just
folly, it is grievous sin.
The consultant (if a saved man at all) is certainly one
disqualified from teaching not knowing the basic principles of Christianity let
alone ecclesiology. His advice echoed the counsels of the enemy and unwittingly
he has become his agent sowing discord and labouring not to build the church,
but to destroy it.
I was dismayed to discover some in that meeting found solace
and hope in his words but I was heartened to learn the elders (deacons in the
Baptist polity) were cautious and sceptical. But best of all, the new pastor (though
something of a New Calvinist) was openly hostile to his suggestions.
Thankfully the consultant moved on and yet I tremble to think
of all those congregations and individuals he will continue to affect. He's got
quite the racket going.
Our congregation survived what I consider to be a dangerous
infiltration and one foolishly invited and yet the lessons stay with me. The
man had come from a conservative Baptist school, one well known to the
Fundamentalists of the Mid-Atlantic region and yet in recent years this school
has taken a decidedly Neo-Evangelical turn. The fact that the institution would
even employ this man who apparently now 'consults' on an independent basis is
truly disturbing and marks a real watershed in the Fundamentalist movement.
Though my wife and I grew up on opposite ends of the country
we both grew up in the same kind of hybrid-Fundamentalist circles. I say hybrid
because we were not overly familiar with the extreme forms of legalism and some
of the other distinctives often associated with the real hard-line
Fundamentalist groups. The King James Only movement wasn't really around when
we were young but it was certainly on the horizon and noise was being made.*
We grew up in circles that were conservative and
Fundamentalist with certain Evangelical elements. These were congregations that
were being affected by Evangelicalism but hadn't fully embraced it... yet.
The real change came in the 1990's and other people I've
spoken with agree with this narrative. Fundamentalist numbers began to plummet
in the 1990's and early 2000's. For this area the economy and demographic
shifts played a part to be sure but there was more. People were leaving. Some
were leaving the faith but many others went 'seeking' the Willow Creek and
Saddleback type congregations with all the entertainment, programmes and
therapeutic approach to Christianity. American culture was undergoing some
pretty profound changes in the 1990's and decadent ones at that. It shaped
mindsets and recast values. Evangelicals upped the ante in the cultural war but
at the same time were flooded by new types of people and new church models
which brought in the numbers but changed the nature of the Church.
A lot of these older Fundamentalist and 'hybrid' congregations faced a choice. They
either hopped onto the Neo-Evangelical train and embraced the thinking
represented by the consultant or they tried to hang on to the older model. All
in this area have faced numerical loss but some congregations like the one we
presently attend have survived and are now doing a bit better. The Calvinistic pastor
has actually generated interest and the old hostility (toward anything hinting
of Calvinism) from Fundamentalist days seems to have waned if not disappeared.
It could also be that most of the people in the congregation don't yet fully
grasp where he's coming from. Time will tell.
Other congregations are frankly in a death spiral. Should
they have compromised? No. At some point they'll close their doors and those
left will find somewhere else to go. Numbers do not determine orthodoxy or even
the presence of the Holy Spirit.
Many other congregations did compromise and while their bongo
drums, light shows, skits and PowerPoint presentations have kept the numbers
up, the wide pond they've created is only an inch deep and when the withering
sun's rays fall upon it, it will dry up and disappear.
The consultant represents the ecclesiastical fads of this
generation. It was a little bit surprising as he is an older man but clearly
his years have not granted him much in the way of wisdom. He has sold out and
has become dangerous.
He has missed the most essential of issues.... that of
authority. He affirms Sola Scriptura but does so with a yawn. It has no bearing
on his thinking. In order to save 'Evangelicalism' he and others like him have
abandoned what it means to be Evangelical... at least what the term one meant
long ago. While he formally affirms Scripture Alone he also demonstrates (once
again) that without the corollary principle of Sufficiency the doctrine becomes
empty and all but meaningless. It creates an empty box that ends up being
filled with whatever cultural and philosophical model fits the bill or is the
fad of the moment.
Rick Warren sought to create a 'Purpose' driven Church but in
reality these 'seeker' models lead only to a 'Market' driven Church, which is
no Church at all but the world playing at Church. Looking at the consultant's
website and the 'report' he left for the congregation that is what is most striking.
His is a Madison Avenue or Wall Street approach. He's even got all the charts,
acronyms and results based lingo associated with a business consultation or a
sales pitch.
These men are building a brand and creating franchises. Their
spirit-filled worship is a sham for they know nothing of the Holy Spirit and
this evidenced by the fact that they don't believe in His power. He doesn't
build the Church, they do so by means of all their gimmicks and sleight-of-hand
trickery. If these aren't enemies of Christ I don't know who is.
It's all rather brilliant from the standpoint of a satanic
strategy. While the congregants focus on guns and patriotism, kneeling at
football games, political theatre and threats to their retirement funds, the
wolves are devouring the flock from within and transforming the Church into a
franchise of the world and making it an agent of the Beast system.
*Incidentally the KJO movement led to a split in the
Pennsylvania congregation I've been talking about. They broke off in the 1980's
and still have a congregation across town. There's only about 10 people left in
that group. There was another one at some point that I remember seeing but it
folded and is gone.
They're nice people but what was kind of sad was that they
couldn't really elaborate on why they had separated. It really comes down to
the King James Bible being the inspired autograph and for some there are some
dress and grooming standards which seem to concern them. The heretical Ruckmanite
KJO position makes your acceptance of the 1611 as the autograph a gospel issue.
It's one thing to favour the Textus Receptus and use the King James like I do.
I refuse to use the NIV, ESV, NASB and all translations using the Critical Text
and also texts translated on the basis of dynamic equivalence. My position
viewed as extreme by some is not good enough for them. You must believe the 1611 was a new act of inspiration. As the new
autograph it replaces the Hebrew and Greek texts. Some even believe the chapter
and verse divisions are inspired. For them this is the gospel, the mark of a
church. If you don't hold to it, your congregation is Ichabod, your lampstand
is taken away.