The Young Restless and Reformed Movement Lurches into Crisis – Guest Post by Todd Wilhelm

“There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right….”

Martin Luther

http://thouarttheman.org/2014/09/08/the-young-restless-and-reformed-movement-lurches-into-crisis/1-carl-trueman/http://thouarttheman.org/2014/09/08/the-young-restless-and-reformed-movement-lurches-into-crisis/1martinluther/

Guest Post by Todd Wilhelm

“Peace if possible, truth at all costs.” -Martin Luther

“There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right….” ―Martin Luther

“We need a critical  theory  that seeks to change the world by challenging the world – including the world of evangelicals – in its market-driven, all, consuming consumerist idolatries.” -Carl R. Trueman

I always tell students that the first question to ask about any historical action is this: who makes money out of the deal?” -Carl R. Trueman

*****************************

Carl Trueman is a man I greatly admire.  He is Professor of Historical Theology and Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. Dr. Trueman wrote his dissertation on Luther’s Legacy.  I find his numerous books and articles never fail to inform and educate me. The man is a talented wordsmith; perhaps that has something to do with his British education or royal blood, whatever the reason,  I derive pleasure in reading his material. Much of his work takes on the form of an outsider looking in on the mess known as American Evangelicalism, pointing out that it is a mess, and then suggesting steps we can take to improve things.

Trueman holds strong, well-reasoned opinions on most all things and I find little that I disagree with him on.

One notable exception was Trueman’s work on the “Preliminary Panel” in the Sovereign Grace Ministries/C.J. Mahaney case. Working together with Kevin DeYoung and Ray Ortlund they concluded, on July 27, 2011,that Mahaney was still fit to be a minister of the gospel and had done nothing to disqualify himself from said role.  That DeYoung and Ortlund would find in favor of Mahaney was no surprise – they were, and remain, loyal, card-carrying members of the good old boys celebrity pastors club.  I, along with many others who either supported the victims of sexual abuse or were actually numbered among those abused while attending Sovereign Grace Ministries churches, had held out hope that Trueman would be a lone voice of dissent, saying Mahaney needed to resign.  We were crushed when we found out Trueman sided with DeYoung and Ortlund.  One can only guess how a thorough reading of the available documentation would allow one to reach a conclusion favorable to Mahaney.  Now, some three years later, it is evident to all that DeYoung, Ortlund and Trueman erred in their judgment.  After all, we now have one of the abusers convicted on five counts and sentenced to 40 years in prison.   Grant Layman, brother in-law of C.J. Mahaney and fellow pastor at Covenant Life Church, has admitted under oath that the pastors knew of the abuse, knew they should report the abusers to authorities and yet, chose not to.  We have the voluminous court documents testifying of abuse and a conspiracy to cover up abuse submitted  on behalf of numerous plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit filed against Sovereign Grace Ministries, C.J. Mahaney, and several other SGM pastors. We have CLC, the flagship church of SGM, withdrawing from the denomination.  We have about 40 other churches withdrawing from the SGM denomination, and we have a national outcry from many Christian leaders against the travesty of the SGM leaders refusing to step down, combined with the ongoing support of Mahaney by many of the top leaders of the Gospel Coalition, Together 4 the Gospel, and IX Marks.

It is my hope that Trueman would come out with a retraction of his statement of 2011.  In light of all the developments in the case it is warranted  and would be welcomed by all except Mahaney and the top leaders of the above mentioned groups.  Not that such an action would be without personal cost to Trueman; these top leaders, all members of the celebrity pastors club, have an evil side that is rarely seen by the public.  I will get to that in a minute, but first I have included the relevant portions of the document signed by DeYoung, Ortlund and Trueman:

Findings From Our Preliminary Panel

“Having said all that, here is our conclusion: We do not believe C.J. Mahaney’s confessed sins have disqualified him from Christian ministry. Or to put it positively, from all that we have seen, heard, and read, we believe C.J. Mahaney is, at this moment in time and based on those sins which he has acknowledged, still fit to be a minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ and a pastor to others….

While we affirm that C.J. Mahaney has not disqualified himself from ministry, we also encourage Sovereign Grace Ministries to address the broader issues to which we alluded at the start as a means of avoiding the current kind of situation in the future.”
=============================================================

As I said, I was crushed when Trueman signed this document; I knew him to be a man of integrity and in the past he had not been shy about calling out the celebrities and their parachurch organizations.

Witness these quotes from “Messiahs Pointing to the Door,” written in 2009:

“The American church reflects the culture: ministries built around individuals, around big shots, churches that focus on god-like guru figures, all of them pointing to one door.  I have lost count of the conversations I have had with church people anxious to tell of who they heard at this conference, of which person they corresponded with, of how this opinion or that opinion would not sit well with this demi-god and is therefore of little value; and, of course, how anyone who disagrees with, or criticizes, this chosen hero must, of necessity be morally depraved and wicked.  People want the gods to do their thinking for them.  All of the Pelagian, Manichean celebrity malarkey of the American political process is alive and well in the church as well.

The question is: when it comes to churches and ministries built around messiahs who are supposed to point not to themselves but to the true door, who is going to have the guts to leave the temple?”
=====================================================

In the Spring of 2011 Trueman  authored an article titled “How Parachurch Ministries Go Off the Rails.”   The article was published on the IX Marks website and, while not specifically mentioned, it seems obvious Trueman was warning The Gospel Coalition and Together For the Gospel, among others, of impending dangers.  Here are a few interesting quotes:

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions, goes the old saying. And, in the evangelical world, one might add that it’s paved with parachurch organizations which started well and then, at some point, went disastrously off the rails. Why is this the case? 

I do believe that parachurch organizations generally suffer from two particular flaws which render them inherently unstable: they are coalition movements, and they typically lack proper structures of accountability.

It does not do what the church does, and it should not supplant the church in the minds and lives of those involved in its work. In other words, a self-conscious and strict circumscription of the parachurch is important. The parachurch exists purely and solely to serve the church in a subordinate and comparatively insignificant way. This is perhaps not such a danger when it comes to publishing houses and seminaries, but it is an ever-present danger for groups that offer services which come close to churchly functions, such as preaching services and the like.

Thus, I find it very disturbing when church leaders start to be known more as leaders of a particular parachurch group than as leaders in their churches. This serves to create a confusing image in the mind of the Christian public, whereby the boundary between church and parachurch is eroded, or, worse still, the parachurch is regarded as the place where the real action and excitement take place. This in turn consigns the church to an apparently less important role, and serves to relegate to the level of secondary or even tertiary importance the doctrinal elaboration and distinctives for which individual churches and denominations stand. The Christian public comes to regard these ecclesial distinctives as hindrances to the real work of the gospel—real work that, by inference, is done by the parachurch better than the church.

Thus, one reason that parachurch ministries go off the rails is the culture such groups create, whereby a non-church body effectively decides which bits of the historic confessions are really important and which can be set to one side. As I noted above, such setting to one side may not be important depending on the organization’s mission, as with an organization focused on producing pro-life material. But when the organization focuses on preaching and teaching more broadly, there is an obvious and inherent weakness.

But I am profoundly hesitant about being closely associated with parachurch groups that wittingly or unwittingly might supplant the church or become more important than the church in the eyes of many. Once a group starts offering contexts for preaching and worship, we have a potential problem; and such outfits are, in the long run, more than likely headed for disaster.”
==========================================================

Then, in the Fall of 2012 Trueman once again appears to have the celebrity preachers in his sites:

9.5 Theses on Martin Luther Against the Self-Indulgences of the Modern Church

Thesis One:  Martin Luther saw church leadership as primarily marked by servanthood. 

For Luther, the servant nature of the ministerial calling was not some abstract principle but was part of his everyday practice, linking his understanding of the God who is revealed primarily in the crucified flesh of Christ to the necessary attitude, outlook and expectation of Christ’s ministers. The minister, like his Saviour, was to serve the poor and despised and the things that are not. This is why, when his barber, Peter, expressed concern over how difficult he found prayer, Luther went home and wrote him a treatise on prayer. Nor did he forget Peter thereafter.  When the tragic barber killed his brother-in-law in a drunken dare and was sentenced to death, Luther intervened to have the sentence commuted to banishment for life. As busy as he was, Luther never forget whom it was he was meant to be serving.

Thesis Eight: Luther saw the problem of a leadership accountable only to itself

Part of the problem Luther faced at the Reformation was the sheer lack of accountability of the Top Men. The Pope and Cardinals policed themselves and voluntarily answered to no-one. The only means therefore whereby Luther could sometimes make himself heard was by using every rhetorical tool in the box, from satire to hard-hitting polemic. He was fortunate, of course: in those days, there was no aesthetic of personal “pain” and “hurt” which allowed contemporary Christians to sidestep criticism and indeed turn the moral tables on those who criticize them.   The problem of unaccountable and influential leadership in evangelicalism is alive and well.  Oh Martin! thou should’st be living at this hour: Evangelicalism hath need of thee.

Thesis Nine: Luther thought very little of his own literary contribution to Christianity.

Shortly before he died, Luther declared that only his 1525 response to Erasmus, On Bound Choice, and his catechisms were worthy of preservation. If he were alive today, it is very doubtful that he would be running a website devoted primarily to promoting his own books and pamphlets. He would thus be unlikely to make the grade in the modern American evangelical world. Nor would he indulge in such shameless self-promotion by calling it explicitly ‘shameless self-promotion’, as if the labored attempt at postmodern irony somehow makes the self-serving nature of such venal vanity acceptable. I suspect he would think that it actually makes it worse, adding the sin of ‘insulting the reader’s intelligence’ to the obvious one of ‘shameless self-promotion.’   (That last point is probably only worth half a thesis though.  Hence the 9.5.)

The overall impact of these theses: were Doc Martin with us today, he would find no easy place in the evangelical church. In fact, taxi driving might well have been a much better fit.”

(Editor’s note – Was Trueman, in referring to “shameless self-promotion,” directing his comments to Mahaney’s right hand man, Bob Kauflin, who said this: “So, in an act of shameless self-promotion, here are twelve reasons why I think you (pastor, worship leader, musician, vocalists, songwriter, techie) should come to WorshipGod2013:” See the complete article here.

Or perhaps Trueman was referring to Kevin DeYoung, who, on this blog post, would undoubtedly like to be seen as one who wrestles with the problem of “shameless self-promotion,” states:

“I have a new book coming out April 1. I plan on telling you more about it in the next couple months. I am also speaking at a few  conferences this spring and helping to organize a couple small ones too. They are great conferences, and not because I have anything to do with them. I’d like to tell you about the conferences and encourage you think about attending….

I despise self-promotion in myself and in others. And just to show you how twisted the heart can be, I’m sure that part of the reason I hate to be self-promoting is because I have a dread fear of appearing to be self-promoting….

But here’s my dilemma. How do I do any of this without swimming in the fetid pool of self-promotion? With all the tools of social networking and all the trappings of evangelical celebrity culture (whether in a hall with thousands of people or in your own circle of friends), we must all be vigilant against shameless self-promotion. Especially those of us who have a blog….

So while I try to do both those things, I will continue to have my books displayed on the right hand side of the blog. I will tell you about exciting events, even if I’m apart of them. And I’ll mention my upcoming book because I love the Heidelberg Catechism and the gospel treasured there.”

One more note prior to getting back to the subject matter – read this blog post for a very humorous look at “shameless self-promotion!)
=====================================================

Fast forward to August 27, 2014.

Below is a recording of a segment from the podcast “The Mortification of Spin.”  The full program may be listened to here. Below the audio are quotes of Trueman’s  from the program. These quotes are stunning.  Trueman has obviously been getting some heat from the “top men” because he dares criticize them!  This is exactly what I have suspected happens in the good old boys celebrity pastors club.  You do not, for any reason, criticize a fellow member of the club. To do so risks repercussions.  You will quickly be frozen out of the club as the nasty, hidden side of our celebrity pastors is revealed to you.  Dare criticize and they will do their level best to make sure you never speak at conferences again.  I would also guess that membership in the club entails accepting “suggestions” to speak at other club member’s churches.  I have no proof, but I would guess that Anyabwile’s and DeYoung’s recent preaching at Mahaney’s church was not entirely of their own volition.

Audio Clip from Mortification of Spin (please go to Todd's blog to listen)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“What I’m not going to do is the kind of ostentatious tactics that I see the Mark Driscolls of this world pursuing and, quite frankly, experienced myself from the top men at some of these parachurch organizations, where if you criticize them, they work behind the scenes to shut you down; they are going to try to make sure that you don’t have the avenues of speaking out.

I’m not going to leverage informal means of control and influence in the way that I think the “Young Restless and Reformed” culture has done so, and, which frankly has ultimately led to its invidious corruption.”
===========================================================

The invidious corruption spoken of by Trueman most likely comes from the “top men” of the groups I mentioned above.  Although most of the fan-boys of these celebrity preachers never see the ugly side of those they idolize, we have been given a glimpse behind the curtain, courtesy of Carl Trueman.  This view reminds me of a bunch of power-hungry politicians cutting their corrupt deals in the smoky back rooms of their convention halls.  Frankly it sickens me.  Trueman could do Christianity a huge favor if he would name names. These “Coalitions” could be revealed for what they truly are and then they would implode.  We would all be better off.

If Trueman should decide to name names there undoubtedly would be a huge personal cost to pay.  Frankly I don’t know whether I would be willing to pay the cost were I in Trueman’s shoes.  But I would guess a man like Luther would!

There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right….” ―Martin Luther


We are grateful to our friend Todd Wilhelm for writing this important post and giving us his permission to re-publish it. 

About six months ago Carl Trueman spoke with Janet Mefferd on her radio program.  Given what has occurred of late with Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church, we want to share that interview for your consideration.

Lydia's Corner:  Zechariah 9:1-17   Revelation 17:1-18   Psalm 145:1-21   Proverbs 30:32

Comments

The Young Restless and Reformed Movement Lurches into Crisis – Guest Post by Todd Wilhelm — 113 Comments

  1. I liked the post that Todd did today about RW Glenn and John Piper. I have to ask this one question. Piper helped make Mark Driscoll the man he is today. He stood by, supportted, and invited him to Desiring God conferences. He even issued a tweet in support of Mark Driscoll. So given the great discernment that Pope Piper I has on Mark Drisocll over the years I want to know…

    What does John Piper think of Mark Driscoll calling women “penis homes?” Does John Piper still love Mark Driscoll’s theology?

  2. If Carl Trueman is not going to name names then he does a great disservice to Christianity. If he is going to engage in backroom political dealings I recommend he leave Westminster Theological Seminary and join Chicago or New York city politics. He could be Boss Tweed or Richard Daleys; political heir.!

  3. Interesting post. I think you’d enjoy reading mark strom’s book Reframing Paul: Conversations in Grace and Community if you haven’t read it already.

    In the past fifteen years I have purposely hung around many smart and super smart people who are in leadership in the church abroad, and I have come to realize a lot of what they say and do is not necessarily a result of being in-step with the Spirit, but are very convincing in their thinking and arguments (theologically) that most people believe it is Spirit driven.

    A few of those smart gifted people make decisions that ultimately keep them from being the focus of attention, and I have much respect for them.

  4. Having said all that, here is our conclusion: We do not believe C.J. Mahaney’s confessed sins have disqualified him from Christian ministry.

    Not to nitpick (ok, I am nitpicking) but were the sexual abuse issues tied to the sins C.J. Mahaney had confessed?

  5. A piece of history. I remember well the 70’s and the Jesus Movement, those of s who felt constricted in the denominational church. Wanting to do something and be somewhere where thing were really happening. We took our 4 children and left our denominational church for a “real church”. People were excited. The Holy Spirit was moving. We felt sorry for those stuck in regular churches, this was we’re the action was and where God was working. Great interaction among the believers. All for one and one for all. Then slowly, very slowly things started to change. More preaching on authority and submission. More pressure to give beyond and above the tithe. More teaching that the leadership had more authority than the individual.. Any questions were considered rebellion. Then the Jim Jones debacle erupted. We saw clearly what was happening and left. It has not been an easy road since. In and out of denominational churches. In and out of cult like churches. Most of our children are believers, one has been engulfed by a cult. We have not been regular church attenders for 5 years, church attendance us dangerous to our spiritual health, scripture says “you will knw them by their fruit”. That s what I look for in others and what I look for in my spiritual walk. It is well with my soul.

  6. “While we affirm that C.J. Mahaney has not disqualified himself from ministry, we also encourage Sovereign Grace Ministries to address the broader issues to which we alluded at the start as a means of avoiding the current kind of situation in the future.”

    The wording here strikes me as odd. They affirm CJM as an individual, yet encourage Sovereign Grace Ministries as an organization. Looks like CJ gets a pass while SGM takes the blame.

  7. @ Eagle – “does John Piper still love Mark Driscoll’s theology?” uuuh, well of course. Their views on women still match. The way for Driscoll to be ex-communicated by Pope Piper would be for Driscoll to be supportive and respectful of women and elevate them to their rightful place.

  8. I think it is important for those of us who were in the first generation of parachurches to relay to the younger generations how they were not only dangerous then, but are dangerous now.

  9. @ Ken:

    Ken – Thanks for the tip on Strom’s book. I purchased the Kindle edition and just read the introduction, which I really like:

    “Around the world, more and more evangelicals are giving up on church. They no longer relate to the sermons and services, systems and cultures that shape church life. Two desires stem from this disillusionment. The first is for grace to subvert the expectations and games of church life. The second is for meaningful and grace-full conversation to replace the irrelevance and harm of much theology, preaching and church life.”

  10. While some of the Great Leaders actually seem to believe themselves, much of the drive behind ALL of them, Purpose Driven, Seeker Sensitive, YRR, Neo-Cal, experiential/word faith To-down leadership model “churches” seems to be the almighty $$. These men don’t care to whom they sell, so long as there are lots of em, and they don’t get uppity. (Come to my book signing, parishioner, and THEN I’ll be happy to say hi. Oh, yea. Buy my book/// Perry Noble just did this!!) Love of money and the power it confers, only veiled in piety to assuge the guilty and guilt the sheep. There truly is nothing new under the sun.

  11.   __

    “Obscuring da Demarcation Lines, Perhaps?”

    “…if you criticize them, they work behind the scenes to shut you down; they are going to try to make sure that you don’t have the avenues of speaking out.”

    hmmm…

    He who digs a pit may fall into it…

    huh?

    follow da lit’l Ma’ Hinèy ‘runaway’ ?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHMynl9QX7g

    -snicker-

    *

    —> But Our delight is in the Lord and His word, and that ‘word’ we also meditate on day and night. Scripture teaches us that we will be like trees ‘firmly planted’ by streams of water, which yield their fruit in their season, and who’s leaf does not wither; and in whatever that one does, they prosper…

    Yep.

    The wicked ‘celebrity’ pastoral “voices” are not so, but they are like proverbial wind blown chaff which the blogs faithfully drive away…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CShhcdZBdA

    I see the Lord always before me; because He is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.

    (grin)

    hahahahaha

    Sopy
    __
    Comic relief: Johnny Cash – “I Walk The Line”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xObSJWIWui0

  12. Of all the guys connected to the YRR Trueman was the one I could stomach and enjoy reading from time to time. I too wondered about him letting CJ off scott free, and chalked him up to just being a Neo-Cal with a silver tongue. I hope his is what he claims to be, talk is cheap without action. I guess we would never really know if he was ostracized or not, since I doubt they make those behaviours public.

    Anways, hopefully Trueman can successfully push back on the celebrity worship his fellow YRR friends seem to engage in, both by trying to get worshipped and by worshipping guys like CJ to the point of denial about the seriousness of his crime, in both worldly and spiritual terms.

  13. It’s really sad to compare the experience at these megachurches with that at most mainline Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox churches. At least there you know that the clergy isn’t in it for the money, and despite the ever encroaching praise band instruments at many Protestant and Catholic churches, a discernable air of solemnity still prevails. One can tell one has set foot in sacred space, set apart for the reverent worship of God.

  14. While I’ve never bought into the neo-Cal theology, I too enjoyed listening to Trueman’s lectures and discussions because I learned a lot and, where I disagreed, I was forced to dig deeper and think through the issues from a Biblical perspective rather than dismissing the out of hand. However, his part in the CJ whitewashing has bothered me because one of the things I admired about him was that he seemed to have an the integrity so many of the celebrity preachers lacked. This took a hit when the CJ fiasco happened and I am somewhat ambivalent about him now.

    At any rate, I still have a degree of respect for the man because he is the ONLY high-profile member of the neo-Cal movement making any attempt to try to bring celebrity preachers to account. He continues to criticize the celebrity culture surrounding these guys and their lack of adherence to any creeds or confessions that would put any boundaries at all on their preaching so that they have become a law unto themselves as far as their theology goes.

    It seems obvious that Trueman’s standing among the neo-Cal celebrity crowd has taken a hit and they don’t let Trueman join in any reindeer games anymore. His name rarely seems to show up on their conference speaking lists anymore. Perhaps the CJ business and aftermath has caused him to become more outspoken in his criticism of the celebrity preacher culture. Whatever the cause, I still have some respect for the man and his willingness to take on this celebrity culture even though he only does so in general terms without, for the most part, naming specific individuals. Just going this far seems to have moved hi outside of the neo-Cal in-crowd.

  15. I wasn’t so sure I was agreeing with Trueman until he said it’s a coalition thing. Now that made sense. That’s the problem in a nut shell. Rather than the coalition serving the church, it tries to control the church for the coalitions benefit.

  16. @ Patti:

    Just a thought: Coalition or street gang? I don’t know why that comparison just popped into my mind, but with all the rules and the bullying of not only other pastors but their own congregations, makes me wonder.

  17. TW wrote:

    @ Ken:
    Ken – Thanks for the tip on Strom’s book. I purchased the Kindle edition and just read the introduction, which I really like:
    “Around the world, more and more evangelicals are giving up on church. They no longer relate to the sermons and services, systems and cultures that shape church life. Two desires stem from this disillusionment. The first is for grace to subvert the expectations and games of church life. The second is for meaningful and grace-full conversation to replace the irrelevance and harm of much theology, preaching and church life.”

    Great! Hopefully, you’re not like me (not-so smart, but smart enough to google the s
    Shrinknese like ‘cognitive dissonance’ when the smart people on this forum speak that language 🙂 ) and have difficulty in the first section of the book which was more of the philosophical background of the Graeco-Roman world during Paul’s time (very dense). It was around chapters 4 or 5 and beyond that were easier to digest at my level of understanding.

    Here is an interview back in 2001 of Strom’s book: http://matthiasmedia.com/briefing/2001/09/an-interview-with-mark-strom/

    Much of what he says back then is exactly what is being said by many folks here on this site. In his last thought he says: ” We must draw a line. But we draw too many lines too bold in too many places. My concern is that too often we destroy brothers for whom Christ died in the name of being biblical.”

  18. One other paragraph from that interview worth reading, Strom says: “And if I question you, the preacher, as a congregation member, while many young preachers may love that, there are plenty who are threatened by it. Their sermons sell a packaged gospel of justification and grace that is in fact a new kind of legalism. They tell people how their world has to be. They preach as if their preaching cures all ills. They think to themselves, “I’m just telling them what God says”, but they’re not. They’re imposing their view of what the godly husband or wife or professional has to be. Each sermon comes with a whole system of spoken and unspoken expectations, so that if you don’t measure up, you’re on the scrap heap. If you question, you have trouble with authority. If you seek to widen the conversation, you aren’t biblical enough. A lot of terrible things are done to people who are just as devoted to Jesus and just as keen to evangelize their neighbours but who are pushed out of congregations. Sue and I have spent years listening to such people. It gives me a jaundiced view of life, and I know I must be careful to not simply be negative. But I know and love people on both sides of the ‘Sydney divide’, and I hear each side criticizing the other and it hurts me, and I find myself defending both sides to each other. There are too many conversations that go like, “The Bible says this, you’re unbiblical, end of conversation”.”

  19. srs wrote:

    “Having said all that, here is our conclusion: We do not believe C.J. Mahaney’s confessed sins have disqualified him from Christian ministry.”

    Not to nitpick (ok, I am nitpicking) but were the sexual abuse issues tied to the sins C.J. Mahaney had confessed?

    I got the impression from reading documents on the Detwiler site, that the sins were amorphous, on the order of lacking humility. Nothing behavioral at all.

  20. @ JeffT:

    I concur with your sentiment JeffT: look what happens when one takes even a few small steps away from the cool kid’s table.

    Todd – thought-provoking piece and appreciate the research that went into it.

    That said, question for you (and I admit in asking this that first I should read the entirety of Trueman’s writing to ascertain the context – I really hate linking to anything on the T4G or 9M websites on the whole!):

    Your conclusion was that “it seems obvious Trueman was warning The Gospel Coalition and Together For the Gospel, among others, of impending dangers.”

    IIRC, back in 2011 (and since the early 2000s, really) there was much debate about comps seeking to influence national parachurch organizations to get in line with their secondary doctrines.

    I’m thinking of the hue and cry from comp YRR’s of the Louisville Cru chapter’s demotion of the Missional Team Leader for banning female staff from teaching men, contra Cru’s organizational policy of “men and women leading together.”

    Isn’t it possible Trueman was issuing a warning at that time from the pro-comp/YRR P.O.V. regarding parachurch orgs?

    Summary thoughts gratefully appreciated – or even a gentle admonishment along the lines of “hey Rafiki, just click the link and read the darned thing.”

    I have no stomach for T4G site cookies (cooties?) of any kind, LOL. 🙂

  21.   __

    @ William G.,

    “One can tell one has set foot in ‘sacred space’, set apart for the reverent worship of God…” ~ William G.

    hmmm…

    —> WHERE THE LORD IS…

    (there is liberty!)

    YaHoooooooooo!

    In the kitchen,
    In the bathroom,
    Walk’in da dog, etc…
    Ordinary plazes <—

    huh?

    Because 'You' R @ ma right hand,

    Yeah,

    I shall not beeeeeee move'd.

    Ode ta joy!

     I will bless the Lord at all times; His praise shall continually be in my mouth, my soul will make its boast in the Lord, and the faithful of the Lord will hear it, and rejoice…

    ATB

    Sopy
    __
    Inspirational relief: Janis Paulson -" Thy Word"
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jepSJmzxnQ

  22. Sopwith wrote:

    Because ‘You’ R @ ma right hand,
    Yeah,
    I shall not beeeeeee move’d.
    Ode ta joy!

    🙂

    @ Rafiki:

    Just read Trueman’s whole piece “How Parachurch Ministries Go Off the Rails.”

    His emphasis throughout on doctrine and bluntly, the importance of what can be accepted as secondary issues makes me more firm in my opinion that he was not obliquely criticizing/warning those in the reformed camp.

    However, the piece IS rather ironic considering what we’ve seen in the ensuing 3 years since its 2011 publication. Maybe more prophetic than ironic. Et tu, Brutus?

  23. Rafiki wrote:

    the importance of what can be accepted as secondary issues

    Should have said “the elevation of what many accept as ‘secondary’ issues.”

  24. Rafiki wrote:

    Isn’t it possible Trueman was issuing a warning at that time from the pro-comp/YRR P.O.V. regarding parachurch orgs?

    I suppose it is possible Rafiki. We would have to hear from Trueman to know for certain of whom he was referring to. But based on the quote below it would seem more logical that he was referring to the groups such as TGC, T4G, etc., that hold the big conferences comprised of worship music and preaching.

    “Once a group starts offering contexts for preaching and worship, we have a potential problem; and such outfits are, in the long run, more than likely headed for disaster.”

  25. @ TW:

    Thanks for the response, TW, and I think we can both heartily agree: Trueman’s words are quite prophetic, indeed, in the context of TGC, T4G, etc.

    BTW greetings from the other side of the peninsula, as it were, and much encouragement in your blog and other writing endeavours.

  26. I’d like to put in a word of support for para church organizations. IV helped me grow considerably as a Christian when I was in college. Because it was a para church organization, we were a bit shielded from a lot of these controversies (neocalvanism vs not, egalitarianism vs complementarianism, etc). This helped us to get a bit more focus on what was central/core to Christianity and what were differences between various believers that were secondary. It also encouraged us to actively own our faith instead of relying on some special class of clergy.

    (Admittedly we were less involved in local churches than we might otherwise have been. However we were very much encouraged to be a part of a local church.)

    (Admittedly, there was a bias towards egalitarianism given that there was a pretty even split gender-wise in terms of who gave the message.)

    (Admittedly, I like to use the word “Admittedly”)

  27. Lisa, Leslie, I resonate with your posts. Our experience has led us to a more Wesleyan Holiness approach to the faith, tempered with some strong radical reformation (Quaker, Anabaptist) leanings.

    We find answering to God directly, not to a church or leader, far more strenuous.

    We’ve been challenged by some Brethren in Christ friends to focus on building the Body of Christ rather than seeking to tear it down. It is so much easier to point out the flaws of others than to strive to fix our own.

    It is far easier to just let “leadership” guide than to seek the truth on our own. It is far easier to complain when we disagree with leadership than it is to live by the “red letters.” For that matter, look where grumbling got the Israelites.

    Our prayer is that where there are sick theologies and sick leaders, we won’t give ground to the enemy of our souls by either supporting or opposing them, but will silence them totally by shunning them.

    If nobody attends their churches, buys their books, their cd’s, or even talks about them publicly, they will disappear.

  28. JeffT wrote:

    Whatever the cause, I still have some respect for the man and his willingness to take on this celebrity culture even though he only does so in general terms without, for the most part, naming specific individuals. Just going this far seems to have moved hi outside of the neo-Cal in-crowd.

    But he’s going to have to get more specific than “big brother is ungood”. As long as he stays in general terms, he sounds like a cultist who though disgruntled cannot really say anything against his Cult without the internal thoughtstoppers kicking in.

  29. I hadn’t heard of or read anything by Carl Trueman until a few weeks ago when I was looking into some of the things that were going on in a church I briefly belonged to. He had some quite strong words to say about the apparent manipulation of a situation arising in the denomination by a particular group (later identified as Neo-Cals). Basically he took their arguments apart and showed how they were at odds with Biblical teaching and principles. And I think he’s done the same in his assessment of parachurch organisations, celebrity pastors and their lack of accountability. Certainly the control they seek to exert has no Scriptural basis. He resigned from TGC in 2011(?) on a point of principle and he himself has acknowledged that he’s been made to sit on the naughty boys’ seat. So I’m sure he’ll continue to speak out when and where necessary. He doesn’t need to leave WTS and go into politics as some have suggested.

  30. There’s a relatively new “Young, Restless and Reformed” church nears us; about 4 years old drawing about 5,000 a Sunday; 3 services. I wouldn’t peal the bell just yet on the Evangelical Church.

  31. linda wrote:

    If nobody attends their churches, buys their books, their cd’s, or even talks about them publicly, they will disappear.

    But how likely is that to happen? I would love Todd Wilhelm to be correct – that the YRR movement is on the decline – but I just can’t see that happening. Here in the UK it is still gathering momentum. I see my own church pastor be more and more influenced (he has a very Neo-Reformed mentor who has been in the thick of the movement for many years, with direct links to the most conservative branch of it).

    I have seen the effects of this movement on fellow brothers and sisters in Christ and it saddens me. But they themselves think they’ve never been stronger in the faith. Others remain blissfully ignorant of it while the church culture changes for the worse (in my view) and they are slowly and subtly indoctrinated into it. What I’m trying to say is I WISH Todd Wilhelm was right. But I can’t see it.

  32. The movement as a whole may be in crisis, but I doubt it. Driscoll is so far out there that the Big Names can claim they had nothing to do with him, and, in fact they can be trusted because they have sound polity and they don’t talk about women in such shocking terms. And their fanboys are not going to question them. I’ve tried to make some acknowledge facts. And failed. And been shocked at the response that come from the fanbase. These Big Names are regarded as prophets for this age or Davids standing up to the Goliath of Culture.

    I hope that many wake up after Driscoll and Mahaney, but it seems that it that were going to occur, we would have seen something from the Big Names by now. That is why I think Keller’s statement was very telling. It took no responsibility for Driscoll, but a statement was made, so it is now illegitimate to raise the issue with any of the Big Names. That’s how the PR game is played.

    Absent a substantive statement of repentance from the Big Names, I don’t think the fanbase is going to abandon the Movement to Save the Earth and Redeem Culture for Jesus’ Fame and God’s Glory. I have nearly endless faith in the desire of human beings to believe in our own importance and to affirm those who validate our vanity. I see the YRR movement as self-reinforcing, at least for the current generation caught up in it.

    However, the crisis for YRR may come in the next generation when *their* kids, who have seen the movement from the inside, decide “No, thanks.” Or it may come when today’s young women wake up along with their husbands when the kids leave the nest and they realize that order and authority doesn’t seem nearly as important as mutual love, respect, and unity in marriage.

    It may just take a little maturing and earning some wisdom the old-fashioned way and not via the short-cut of a conference or book or Big Name Idol’s pontifications.

  33. May–I agree the movement won’t just up and go away. But it will when enough people walk away.

    My personal opinion–and it is just that–is that the best thing you can do for your pastor is to let him know you won’t be back until he walks away from this false teaching. Of course, he will probably be insulted and get angry and even vindictive. But he has no power over your soul unless you give it to him.

    Sounds like you must decide whether remaining in your church and with your friends there in idolatry–which this is–is something you want to do, eyes wide open.

    It helped me tremendously to realize this false picture of God and false worship of men is rank idolatry, even as if we were kneeling to Baal and sacrificing our kids to Molech. Put in those terms, it was very easy to walk away.

    And surprisingly easy to find small pockets of like minded believers, although we were prepared as a family to go it alone if need be.

    Who knows what the tipping point would be? All I know is that when enough people shun false teachers, they close shop. Not enough butts and bucks and large buildings, I guess. We could have chosen to stay and fight, but would have had to completely ignore the clear teaching of Jesus in the Sermons on the Mount and Plain to do so. We probably would have endured years of pain and stress.

    Instead we chose peace, with each other, with God, and with our enemies.

  34. I seriously wonder what Christ would say about this American form of Christian-capitalism?
    I’m sure he would not be happy….

  35. __

    Slow Burn: “Problematic Processing Of Proverbial Pernicious Pastoral Pistols?”

    hmmm…

    come on all you kind people!!!

    “No, Thanks…” – does just fine.

    -snicker-

    (Christ’s love walks, N’ hard earned money talks…)

    ZaaaaaZip!

    i feeeeel da neeeeed 4 speed…

    (grin)

    hahahahaha

    Sopy
    __
    Inspirational relief: “Christ ‘s Love Hath Come Ta Town?”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT3rXNPGFOM

    Bonus: Kim Wilde – “You Keep Me Hanging On ”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6fZC8hlG2s

    Just because: Ingrid Michaelson –  “Everybody”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlFCfkyuQM0

    🙂

  36. I am not a consistent reader of Trueman and have only read a few articles of his since he served on the Mahaney panel. Does anyone know if he has spoken publicly about his part in exonerating Mahaney?

  37. senecagriggs yahoo wrote:

    There’s a relatively new “Young, Restless and Reformed” church nears us; about 4 years old drawing about 5,000 a Sunday; 3 services. I wouldn’t peal the bell just yet on the Evangelical Church.

    Evangelical is not synonymous with Reformed. The Assembly of God denomination, for example, is Evangelical but not reformed.

  38. Gram3 wrote:

    However, the crisis for YRR may come in the next generation when *their* kids, who have seen the movement from the inside, decide “No, thanks.”

    Hee Hee. Oh yes.

    I have a theory based on viewing the typical YRR seminary grad from ground zero: It reached a high altitude with the kids (now the 20-30 somethings) growing up inside the seeker movement.

  39. @ Lydia:

    We’ll see if they react the way some of the Gothardite and Phillips homeschoolers are reacting now that they are adults. I don’t have stats for that, but they would be interesting. I wonder what their retention rate is?

  40. Lydia wrote:

    I am not a consistent reader of Trueman and have only read a few articles of his since he served on the Mahaney panel. Does anyone know if he has spoken publicly about his part in exonerating Mahaney?

    Yes he has Lydia – at United Christian Church of Dubai (UCCD). The date was Thursday, October 11, 2012. As is customary at UCCD, on the evening prior to conferences beginning the church holds a dinner for the speaker and those in church leadership. After the meal the featured speaker generally give a brief talk and then there is an informal time of questions. Pastor John Folmar usually moderates these Q & A sessions.

    At this point in time I had been continually urging Folmar to cease promoting Mahaney’s books and I had forwarded the pastoral staff numerous emails on the blackmail and conspiracy to cover up sexual abuse by C.J. Mahaney. In light of this Folmar led off the Q & A session by asking Trueman to comment on his role in the panel of 3 (Kevin DeYoung and Ray Ortlund being the other two men) which basically declared Mahaney fit to continue his pastoral role. (I covered this in the post.)

    Trueman’s reply seemed a bit awkward. He stated he didn’t know Mahaney very well and was a bit reluctant to take part in the panel as he felt it should be a denominational matter. He stated that his denomination, the OPC has prescribed methods to deal with such matters, but Sovereign Grace had no such methods in place. He said he read through some documents and from what he read he came to his conclusion that Mahaney had done nothing deserving of disqualification from ministry.

    Folmar then looked directly at me with a smug smile. Perhaps I should have asked some follow-up questions, but I didn’t feel it was the time or place. Later, in talking with Folmar I simply told him that there is no way an intelligent man could have read all the documentation available, including the stories of those sexually abused forced to forgive their abuser in closed door meetings, and a transcript of the phone conversation where Mahaney blackmailed Tomzcak, and, in good conscience, signed that statement.

    Five months later I quit the church.

    Two years later UCCD is still selling Mahaney’s books.

    http://thouarttheman.org/2014/09/08/the-young-restless-and-reformed-movement-lurches-into-crisis/trueman-at-uccd-con-card_0001/

  41. TW wrote:

    Folmar then looked directly at me with a smug smile. Perhaps I should have asked some follow-up questions, but I didn’t feel it was the time or place.

    Todd, Thanks for that illuminating story. The above quote sounded very familiar to me. Funny how that works for those of us who have dared to disagree.

    ” He said he read through some documents and from what he read he came to his conclusion that Mahaney had done nothing deserving of disqualification from ministry. ”

    It would be interesting to know what Trueman read. I doubt very seriously if many of those men had read sgmwikileaks. But even if they had it could very well be they admired Mahaney’s method of interaction. The man is as slippery as an eel. That is considered an admirable trait in some of the power structures of evangelicalism.

    I am afraid Trueman will carry the warning label, “Don’t trust” where I am concerned. Not that it matters to him what I think. :o)

  42. @ Gram3:

    This is purely anecdotal from ground zero but the pew sitter variety are trending toward dropping out. They seem to be experiencing the same sort of dilemma the seeker mega’s do as recruiting becomes the number one need. Being a YRR pew sitter Christian is exhausting after a while. In fact, in some circles here, people you would never expect are rotating churches. I have never seen anything like it before and find it a fascinating trend.

    Those making a living in YRR ministry…not so much… except for at least one blogging exception that was startling to many who became a rabid atheist. But also keep in mind, many YRR pastors have tended to start at higher salaries and more perks than their forebear baby boom pastors at the same age. There is not the “trench” experience so much in the YRR model. They start at the top. I just don’t see that as sustainable and it could become a problem in the near future. But they are very mum about church plant fails so no one can get a good handle on what is going on.

    I get requests for donations all the time for Acts 29/SBC church plants. They probably got my name off some old SBC list somewhere but it is not kosher at all. The typical SBC pew sitter sees their CP dollars as funding such things cooperatively.

    Glad I am out.

  43. Marsha wrote:

    Evangelical is not synonymous with Reformed. The Assembly of God denomination, for example, is Evangelical but not reformed.

    In addition, not everyone who considers themselves Reformed is a follower of John Calvin. Modern usage of the term “Reformed” has, for some reason, become associated with Calvinism even though there were other church reformers such as Martin Luther and Thomas Cranmer.

  44. TW wrote:

    the blackmail and conspiracy to cover up sexual abuse by C.J. Mahaney.

    Just to be clear, no one has blackmailed CJ and no one has conspired to cover up sexual abuse perpetrated by CJ personally. AFAIK he’s not been accused of any. Most readers will have understood, I know, that TW meant that CJ perpetrated the blackmail and the conspiracy to cover up. I only point this out because there are some biblescriptures which can be similarly misunderstood, and over which Christians of good will have argued and separated over the centuries. 🙁
    Speaking of the blackmail and the coverup, we can perhaps give Trueman a pass on the coverup part. IIRC, in July of ’11, the blackmail had been extensively documented by Detwiler, and Trueman was without excuse. The conspiracy to cover up sexual abuse was still in the process of being documented on SGM Survivors and Refuge, which Trueman would have been unlikely to have skimmed through.

  45. Dave A A wrote:

    Speaking of the blackmail and the coverup, we can perhaps give Trueman a pass on the coverup part.

    I wonder if Tomzak was considered expendable, and not thinking necessarily of Trueman here, because Tomzak was not onboard with the switch to “reformed” theology and so needed to be under-bussed for the greater good of propagating the correct doctrine. Somewhat like people who question the YRR’s are invited to move to another church or marginalized until they leave, even if they are not actually kicked out.

    It’s hard to get where Trueman is coming from. He speaks out against celebrity christianity, but then goes to T4g. So now the T4g crowd can say they addressed the problem of celebrity christianity. Or the T4g invite was an outright attempt to co-opt him into silence.

    The other thing that is hard to square is that Trueman and the other Big Names are all about being prophetic voices, but when it comes to speaking out in the church, their voices become very vague and oblique to the point of being meaningless, really. I wish that Trueman would just name names and let’s start being frank about what we mean. Otherwise, just stop pretending it is an issue.

    I wonder if one of the things contributing to the wall of silence is “There but for the grace of God go I” so best not to say anything.

  46. Lydia wrote:

    I get requests for donations all the time for Acts 29/SBC church plants. They probably got my name off some old SBC list somewhere but it is not kosher at all. The typical SBC pew sitter sees their CP dollars as funding such things cooperatively.

    I can tell you how to get off the mailing list–rip up the letter into small pieces, tuck it into their postage paid envelope, send it back to them. Usually they get the hint. 🙂

  47. Trueman has been a nobler voice at times. He also appears complicit in the fundamentalist doubling down at Westminster Philadelphia that has squeezed out fine, peace-loving, tenured faculty. And WTS itself is a para-church organization.

    I can’t help but think that the 16th century Geneva city council would have tried some of these self proclaimed neo-Cals with more thoroughness, and burned ’em at the stake.

  48. Darcyjo wrote:

    I can tell you how to get off the mailing list–rip up the letter into small pieces, tuck it into their postage paid envelope, send it back to them. Usually they get the hint.

    Unfortunately, the unwanted solicitations I receive typically come with an envelope that requires postage.

  49. I’d like to put in a word of support for para church organizations. IV helped me grow considerably as a Christian when I was in college. Because it was a para church organization, we were a bit shielded from a lot of these controversies (neocalvanism vs not, egalitarianism vs complementarianism, etc).

    InterVarsity was also instrumental in my growth as a young Christian. So too was a young PCA pastor named Skip Ryan who, at the time, led Trinity Presbyterian, a new congregation in Charlottesville, VA. Looking back on those days, I never dreamed that the PCA denomination would be so caught up in controversy all these years later. Or that the Shepherding Movement, one of the big theological controversies at the time, would eventually move from charismatic circles to Reformed churches.

  50. JMB wrote:

    I can’t help but think that the 16th century Geneva city council would have tried some of these self proclaimed neo-Cals with more thoroughness, and burned ‘em at the stake.

    Which is why I bless Providence that our Nation was not founded on the Bible, church councils, or the views of Calvin and Luther, but rather on The Rights of Man as embodied in the Enlightenment.

  51. JMB wrote:

    I can’t help but think that the 16th century Geneva city council would have tried some of these self proclaimed neo-Cals with more thoroughness, and burned ‘em at the stake.

    Problem is they see themselves as Calvin in Geneva, God’s Predestined Elect lighting the pyres.

  52. Muff Potter wrote:

    Which is why I bless Providence that our Nation was not founded on the Bible, church councils, or the views of Calvin and Luther, but rather on The Rights of Man as embodied in the Enlightenment.

    With institutional memories of the Reformation Wars, English Civil War, and the whole schmeer of “God Wills It!” religious wars that went down less than 200 years before. And many of their member colonies/states founded by refugees from those religious wars.

  53. This isn’t totally related to our discussion, but I went to my church this a.m., which I usually like, but because of my past experiences, I probably will never be “all in” to another church ever again. So I go and generally enjoy the sermons and have some light fellowship and then go home. And I feel encouraged and have more energy to deal with my relationship with God and the week ahead.

    However, this a.m. was one of 2 times when I’ve had difficulty with the sermon. I almost walked out, but I wanted to go to lunch with my friend afterwards so I stayed. Supposedly the sermon was about power, and I looked forward to hearing something about how to appropriate God’s power, or “when I am weak I am strong” kind of thing. They played an excellent video before the sermon which was a guy talking about how American Christians have a skewed view of power and Jesus came to basically give power to the weak and disenfranchised. So far so good. Then the pastor starts his sermon piggy backing on the video, and ends up talking about the church’s campaign to raise money to build their children’s ministry area, and also an expanded campaign to memorize scripture, pray, and do other things. It just brought back flashbacks of CLC. I kind of ended up zoning out and deep breathing to stave off anxiety. My friend actually mentioned at lunch that she felt accosted or something like that, and another friend of hers had walked out and stayed in the lobby. Dang, too bad I didn’t think of that. Like I said, I do like my church and this is a rare occurrence. But one of my boundaries I set in my mind is that I will not be participating in the campaigns they are running. Anything I do will be done because I WANT to do it and not because they want me to join in something with the whole church. I’m not doing that any more.

  54. singleman wrote:

    I’d like to put in a word of support for para church organizations. IV helped me grow considerably as a Christian when I was in college. Because it was a para church organization, we were a bit shielded from a lot of these controversies (neocalvanism vs not, egalitarianism vs complementarianism, etc).
    InterVarsity was also instrumental in my growth as a young Christian. So too was a young PCA pastor named Skip Ryan who, at the time, led Trinity Presbyterian, a new congregation in Charlottesville, VA. Looking back on those days, I never dreamed that the PCA denomination would be so caught up in controversy all these years later. Or that the Shepherding Movement, one of the big theological controversies at the time, would eventually move from charismatic circles to Reformed churches.

    Small world….when were you in cville? I worshipped at trinity a few times in grad school, and thought highly of it. At the time, tuck bartholemew was preaching there (he subsequently went up to redeemer NYC).

  55. singleman wrote:

    Unfortunately, the unwanted solicitations I receive typically come with an envelope that requires postage.

    Bummer. You sure getting off their list might not be worth a stamp? 😉

  56. TW wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    Folmar then looked directly at me with a smug smile. Perhaps I should have asked some follow-up questions, but I didn’t feel it was the time or place. Later, in talking with Folmar I simply told him that there is no way an intelligent man could have read all the documentation available, including the stories of those sexually abused forced to forgive their abuser in closed door meetings, and a transcript of the phone conversation where Mahaney blackmailed Tomzcak, and, in good conscience, signed that statement.

    So is John Folmar starting the process of going through puberty? Is he starting junior high school? Inquiring minds want to know! Geezz…and to think a senior pastor acts like that, with the “see I told you so” attitude. How arrogant.

  57. I’ve only listened to a couple of vids with Trueman as member of panel. He struck me as a man caught and determined not to upset the apple cart. It is sad because he has a sense of humor and is obviously brighter than the rest of the bunch.

    I entertained the idea that he thought he could do more inside than outside, but that stance always means compromise, and if not short-lived, the compromise comes to be believed. He has stayed far inside beyond integrity. If his supposed “royal blood” has any meaning at all, it might be a propensity for persistent vagueness in the face of political distress, lol.

    I’ve listened to three “Mortification of Spin” (great name!) and became disgusted with how they subtly treat Aimee as second-class. Their frequent corrections of her make her giggle, poor dear, and I wish with all my heart that she’d wise up and get out of there.

  58. Muff Potter wrote:

    Which is why I bless Providence that our Nation was not founded on the Bible, church councils, or the views of Calvin and Luther, but rather on The Rights of Man as embodied in the Enlightenment.

    Yes, yes, yes!

  59. @ Bridget:
    Hah! Westminster’s version of political correctness: “Yes, we are firm complementarians but we’ll show you how we think women are valuable and smart like us men.”

    And they certainly do show us how they think that. Oy.

  60. I, too, would like to add a few words in broad support of “para-church” groups.

    Point 1 of 3:
    I haven’t corresponded with Carl Trueman, nor read much of his material, but I assume what he means by “church” is a group of believers that tick the five boxes determined during the reformation – a group of Christians, calling itself a church, with qualified leaders, where the sacraments are rightly administered and the gospel rightly preached. Certainly this is a fairly normal view.

    Point 2 of 3:
    I have several issues with this “church” / “para-church” distinction, though.

    Firstly, I can’t help thinking it sits uneasily alongside scribsher. Paul met a small group of believers in Ephesus. His first question wasn’t about whether they’d appointed a board, elders, a pastor, etc etc etc, but whether they’d received the Holy Spirit. And Jesus declared that he would build his church. The only hallmark of an authentic part of The church I can accept is the presence of the Holy Spirit, showing that Jesus planned it and is building it.

    And secondly, nothing in the reformation church check-list indicates any kind of relationship with the rest of the church. It’s a recipe, in other words, for a kind of collective “none” or lone-ranger Christian. Whatever structures a group of believers needs to evolve and put in place over time, it cannot exist in isolation from other groups of believers.

    Point 3 of 3:
    Where I agree with Trueman is – I think – regarding the particular kind of “para-church organisation” he is critiquing here. Namely, coalitions of “churches” like Acts 29 or Nine MarxMarks, where the coalition is all about the leaders. Moreover, the leaders significantly neglect their real jobs – local pastoring – to go on conference jollies and extend their reach far beyond their sphere of relationship. Meanwhile, they are far too free to “submit” only to a cartel of their own friends whilst deceiving themselves and others with Boards of “Accountability”.

    Point 4 of 3:
    To be frank, any group of believers that separates itself of from other believers in the same locality or of the same functional focus, is a para-church organisation. I believe local “churches” are para-church organisations and historical, multi-national denominations are also para-church organisations. I don’t believe this is bad in itself; there are too many Christians nowadays for it to be realistic for us all to assemble under one roof.

    Point 5 of 3:
    The “distinctives” Trueman appears to believe are important in separating denominations are actually, to my mind, their greatest weakness. They are divisions, not distinctions, and are a major reason why the local church is invariably split into isolated “churches” that have so little to do with one another.

  61. Actually from the MoS podcast. Dr Trueman is factually wrong on one point. TeamPyro never criticised Driscoll or SGM on the particular issues that lead to their downfall, their critique was almost solely focused on the issue of charismatic-ism.

  62. @ Dave A A:
    Thank you for mentioning this. The blackmail was allegedly perpetrated by CJ against Larry T who has written about this as well. T

    he allegations against CJ Mahaney in the lawsuit state that CJ knew of child sex abuse in the church and did not report it to the police and, instead, made it a church matter. When his brother in law, and buddy, Grant Laymen confessed, under oath, that he did indeed know about the child sex abuse in regards to Nate Morales and that he indeed did NOT report it to the police, then the gig was up.

    We now know that there was coverup at SGM. The only thing left to discover is how widespread it was and who gave his (only males are in charge at SGM) blessing to do so.

    I wonder-as SBTS has backed away from their sweetheart deal with SGM, have other “opinions” changed as well?

  63. Former CLC’er wrote:

    Then the pastor starts his sermon piggy backing on the video, and ends up talking about the church’s campaign to raise money to build their children’s ministry area, and also an expanded campaign to memorize scripture, pray, and do other things

    You reaction is normal and had been experienced by everyone who has had a bad experience with a church.

    As for raising money to tell people to memorize Scripture and part, I have a simple solution. The pastor gets up one Sunday and says “Hey all, you should pray and memorize Scripture.” No money needed!

  64. TW wrote:

    Folmar then looked directly at me with a smug smile. Perhaps I should have asked some follow-up questions, but I didn’t feel it was the time or place. Later, in talking with Folmar I simply told him that there is no way an intelligent man could have read all the documentation available, including the stories of those sexually abused forced to forgive their abuser in closed door meetings, and a transcript of the phone conversation where Mahaney blackmailed Tomzcak, and, in good conscience, signed that statement.
    Five months later I quit the church.
    Two years later UCCD is still selling Mahaney’s books.

    Folmar is either deceived or he needs to keep up the party line so he is invited to conferences and gets his books pushed. Either alternative is negative.

  65. senecagriggs yahoo wrote:

    I wouldn’t peal the bell just yet on the Evangelical Church.

    You read this blog. So, did the church just suddenly start up and find 5,000 new Christians. The vast majority at that church came from other churches who have now lost members. The evangelical church is still in trouble but we can deceive ourselves by pointing at megachurches.

  66. Muff Potter wrote:

    ather on The Rights of Man as embodied in the Enlightenment.

    You know, Muff, I agree with you. Can you imagine the country if men like Driscoll, Mahaney and others got to impose their warped view of God and the Bible on the entire country. Even the Puritans kicked out men like Roger Williams, etc who didn’t dance to their tune.

    The last thing this country needed was a man who was convinced he was speaking for God when he introduced legislations to put to death those who believed in adult baptism.

    Some of the Founders were pretty smart cookies.

  67. @ Chris E:
    You are correct about SGM, but in more recent years, teampyro has criticized Mark’s humblebragging, obsession with fame/cool, ignoring questions put to him, language, lying about Strange Fire.

    And it is telling that, of the bunches of people that have been criticizing MD over the years, Trueman only acknowledges someone from his group.

  68. I chose to be SBC back in the 60’s because the group adhered strongly to “soul competency.” Part of what that meant was that we were most definitely NOT under the spiritual authority of anyone save Jesus Christ.

    I left when it morphed where I live into this authoritarian regime.

    Yes, it hurt leaving behind close friends and family. But guess what? It allowed me to return to a stronger relationship with Jesus Christ.

    Now, having no Anabaptist church (yet) in our area, we attend an SBC Sunday School and then leave on Sunday mornings, and a Wesleyan type adult Bible study on Sunday nights. We have those close friends, deep and trusted, with people in both. And no sitting through a sermon that is little more than verbal abuse, or an inane rock concert extolling what “we” will do for God.

    We’ve also reached the point we recognize there will always be good pastors, and some who are just power hungry sadists. When you encounter the latter, if you choose to stay, count yourself as a masochist and admit you either enjoy the abuse or enjoy complaining and making yourself look like a victim.

    I said “look like a victim” on purpose. I do believe there are truly those these pastors make victims–initially. But if you don’t beat feet and leave, but stay, you are complicit in the abuse and not a victim at all.

    I sound like a broken record, I know, but if enough people cowboy up and ride away from the sick ministries, refuse to buy the books and cd’s and attend the conferences or even speak or write about these sickos, they lose their power really quickly.

  69. Muff Potter wrote:

    JMB wrote:

    I can’t help but think that the 16th century Geneva city council would have tried some of these self proclaimed neo-Cals with more thoroughness, and burned ‘em at the stake.

    Which is why I bless Providence that our Nation was not founded on the Bible, church councils, or the views of Calvin and Luther, but rather on The Rights of Man as embodied in the Enlightenment.

    And it was not only the “rights of man” but the belief that men of sound mind/body had the ability to govern themselves. A radical concept for that time even by their defintion ,of course, excluded women and slaves. Thankfully over time we rectified that.

    But now a lot of churches are teaching people “the old paths” that adult humans cannot govern themselves. They need “special people” called by God with “special knowledge” to show them the way and tell them what to believe about themselves and God. Right back to state/church mentality.

  70. dee wrote:

    The last thing this country needed was a man who was convinced he was speaking for God when he introduced legislations to put to death those who believed in adult baptism.

    My writing partner (the burned-out preacher-man) told me once the absolutely SCARIEST Reconstructionist website he ever came across was titled “GOD HATH SAID!”

    “Nothing’s worse than a monster who thinks he’s right with God.”
    — Captain Mal Reynolds, Free Trader “Serenity”

  71. dee wrote:

    You read this blog. So, did the church just suddenly start up and find 5,000 new Christians. The vast majority at that church came from other churches who have now lost members.

    It’s called “Sheep Rustling”.

  72. Bridget wrote:

    @ Patrice:
    It sounds like she is the “politically correct woman on board.” (Shaking head.)

    The Smurfette — the One Token Female in the otherwise Boyz Klub.

  73. Muff Potter wrote:

    Which is why I bless Providence that our Nation was not founded on the Bible, church councils, or the views of Calvin and Luther, but rather on The Rights of Man as embodied in the Enlightenment.

    And 20 years later, the French took those same “Rights of Man as embodied in the Enlightenment” and tried to see how far they could run with it, turning Paris and the Vendee into an Enlightenment Calvin’s Geneva. “What could possibly go wrong?”

  74. Gram3 wrote:

    Tomzak was not onboard with the switch to “reformed” theology and so needed to be under-bussed for the greater good of propagating the correct doctrine. Somewhat like people who question the YRR’s are invited to move to another church or marginalized until they leave, even if they are not actually kicked out.

    The word is “Purged”, Comrade.

  75. dee wrote:

    Some of the Founders were pretty smart cookies.

    Indeed they were. They were students of human nature, all its glory and all its hypocrisy. They ensured that freedom of conscience was extended to all and not just to men like Luther who had no qualms whatsoever about enforcing his version of ‘conscience’ on the populace with all the King’s horses and all the King’s men.
    As HUG pointed out up thread, the Founders lived within somewhat recent memory of the human suffering and misery caused by religious strife in the Old World and their consensus was unanimous–Not on these shores.

  76. Thanks Dee. I went on with my day yesterday and had a good one, but I woke up mad today. I think I have a bit of PTSD church-wise. CLC was SO over the top with their fund raising and making a big hoopla out of it all – committing your life to the cause, etc. There ain’t no church cause I”m going to commit myself to 100% any more. I might commit myself to serving children with special needs and identifying with the underdogs wholeheartedly, but no church cause. No thank you!

  77. dee wrote:

    senecagriggs yahoo wrote:

    I wouldn’t peal the bell just yet on the Evangelical Church.

    You read this blog. So, did the church just suddenly start up and find 5,000 new Christians. The vast majority at that church came from other churches who have now lost members. The evangelical church is still in trouble but we can deceive ourselves by pointing at megachurches.

    Seneca said “5000 NEW Christians”. How does he know that? I have had tons of experience with mega churches and it is a constant job of recruitment to get folks in because it is a revolving door. My guess, based upon experience, is they had 5000 (I always doubt the numbers) ATTENDING. That does not mean members who have joined and come every week. The way megas do the numbers is a lesson in and of itself. The variations are endless. A mega I am very familiar with is still publishing its numbers from 20 years ago and no way that dog will hunt. It is less than half that now.

  78. Gram3 wrote:

    Dave A A wrote:

    I wonder if Tomzak was considered expendable, and not thinking necessarily of Trueman here, because Tomzak was not onboard with the switch to “reformed” theology and so needed to be under-bussed for the greater good of propagating the correct doctrine.

    “Underbussed” – A new term that I find quite “winsome!”

  79. @ linda:

    linda, I have often said it takes money for the charlatans to operate and build empires. When it dries up, they have to find another gig. You think Driscoll will eventually team up with the Crouch’s? :o)

  80. Todd Wilhelm wrote:

    Underbussed” – A new term that I find quite “winsome!”

    Well, I’ll take “winsome” as an upvote. I accept it with great humility, and only for the sake of the gospel. I expect it will last only for a season-perhaps as long as winter in Dubai–since vexatious and rebellious is my normal state.

    Thanks for the courageous stand you have taken against the machine.

  81. Lydia wrote:

    A mega I am very familiar with is still publishing its numbers from 20 years ago and no way that dog will hunt.

    How about John Wesley’s famous “I look upon all the world as my parish”? Now, obviously, Wesley was not claiming all the world as his personal membership. But I’m surprised the idea has escaped the marketing men…

  82. Eagle, I realize that you’ve reached sainthood status on this site, but I’m going to take Martin Luther’s advice and write something that won’t be popular here. I believe theere’s an old saying about using a rifle instead of a shotgun. Since we’re speaking of Luther, one of the tragedies of the early reformation was when some believed Luther hadn’t gone far enough and those misguided souls took to destroying churches, often killing Catholics and non-Catholics in the process.
    Eagle, I’ve read your posts for years and so I’m not surprised to see another, over the top, post from you. I’ve often found it most ironic that you display the very tendencies that you claim to despise in the celebrity guys. My bottom line is this: regarding your post from 9/12 @ 6:08 PM, you’re wrong. You’d be wise to discern who the “bad guys” really are, and to refrain from using a shotgun and aiming at all who you think to be the “bad guys.” Yes, we’d all agree that Trueman erred in his initial support of CJM. Are you perfect? So he messed up there. He’s also called out more shenanigans from the celebrity guys than just about anyone else. I for one am tired of seeing him lumped in with the true “bad guys” and appreciate much of what he’s done.

  83. Alan wrote:

    Yes, we’d all agree that Trueman erred in his initial support of CJM

    Has he stopped supporting Mahaney since his initial support? What were his subsequent walk backs? Has he withdrawn his support in a public way? Or even a private way? Did he apologize to the victims? Could you direct me to this information? I was under the impression that he never backed away. If he made an apology to the victims, it would go a long way to help Eagle cope with his concerns on the matter.

  84. roebuck wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    since vexatious and rebellious is my normal state.
    So long as your not bitter…

    No, but Gramp3 is very bitter, because he thought Dustin, a young buck, was calling me “vixenatious” and he was pretty excited about that until he put on his reading glasses. That robbed him of his joy, and he’s been bitter ever since.

  85. Gram3 wrote:

    he thought Dustin, a young buck, was calling me “vixenatious” and he was pretty excited about that until he put on his reading glasses. That robbed him of his joy, and he’s been bitter ever since.

    Thank you for the best laugh of the day, you vixen you!

  86. @ Alan:

    Hey-I have been Googling my little heart out. I cannot find any statement from Trueman which negates this statement from 2011

    “C.J. knows of my complete love and respect for him. ”

    Not a word about the victims either. Nada on the Grant Layman testimony. So, you mention that he was only initially supportive of CJ. Are you sure he has walked away from his initial assessment?

  87. linda wrote:

    I do believe there are truly those these pastors make victims–initially. But if you don’t beat feet and leave, but stay, you are complicit in the abuse and not a victim at all.

    During my involvement in the UK shepherding/discipleship scene, an elder said that the ‘apostolic team’ and church elders only had as much authority over the members as the members gave them, that is, allowed them to have. At the time I thought this was nonsense (I was unsympathetic to shepherding by that time), you cannot pass authority upward, and this was precious little defence against being manipulated and controlled under an authoritarian structure. Whilst I still think this does have an element of truth, since then I have come to think the elder actually had a point.

    To the extent elders have no actual power to enforce their authority, that believers who know their bibles should be clear on the safeguards against the misuse of authority by leaders, there is surely an element of co-responsibility by members who allow themselves to get into slavery to human leadership.

    This is not just theory, I have been there with this one, and have allowed others to exercise control and influence over my thinking and actions despite knowing inside this was if not outright wrong, not a biblical obligation. There is no real excuse for passing personal responsibility up the chain of command, tempting as it is as it initially makes life easier. Getting free of it once you have allowed yourself to become enmeshed in it is easier said than done.

  88. Alan wrote:

    You’d be wise to discern who the “bad guys” really are, and to refrain from using a shotgun and aiming at all who you think to be the “bad guys.” Yes, we’d all agree that Trueman erred in his initial support of CJM. Are you perfect? So he messed up there. He’s also called out more shenanigans from the celebrity guys than just about anyone else. I for one am tired of seeing him lumped in with the true “bad guys” and appreciate much of what he’s done.

    This is why I asked Todd if Trueman has spoken out publicly about his part in exonerating Mahaney on the panel. I had not seen anything even though he was writing articles about celebrity Christianity that were being promoted on twitter. It sort of surprised me because the content of that particular article seemed to be chiding the exact sort of behavior he exhibited when it came to Mahaney. So it is a bit confusing.

    It would even be instructive to hear who approached him and how it came to be he served on that panel and exactly what preparation work they did to make their decision. Was there decision based soley on legal grounds? Does Trueman agree with shepherding cult polity? If not, why serve on the panel?

    If you recall the times there was quite a bit going on to give anyone not bent on protecting the movement pause about exonerating Mahaney and his behavior as leader of that shepherding cult.

    I am with Eagle on this one. And I will add that if Trueman wants to be taken seriously by those outside the celebrity Reformed bubble movement, he needs to come clean concerning his involvement in that facade that was organized as a PR move for Mahaney. Trueman went along with it.

  89. Ken wrote:

    During my involvement in the UK shepherding/discipleship scene, an elder said that the ‘apostolic team’ and church elders only had as much authority over the members as the members gave them, that is, allowed them to have. At the time I thought this was nonsense…[but] since then I have come to think the elder actually had a point.

    Firstly, Ken, I hope my truncation of the above quote hasn’t put words in your mouth – I think I’ve kept the basic sense.

    I’m interested to hear of an elder (within the same system?) saying that, because it would have been a breath of fresh air for us to hear such a thing when we were involved with shepherding-style churches. Maybe too fresh, and we’d have refused to listen, because the emphasis always was that apostles et al were appointed by God and you could not question them without questioning him. But I can’t disagree with you that we allowed leaders to say things to, over, and about us that we knew to be inappropriate or untrue. And God didn’t force us to do this.

    I can’t speak for anybody else; there are many kinds of abuse, and they’re not all equal. But perhaps the single biggest reason I stayed within those circles, long past the point where our submission to church authority began to poison our relationship with God himself, was my own prideful ambition.

    We were the best church in the city, because we were “building something unique” – winners joined us, and losers bombed out and left. I mean, hey – while I was in the music team, we put on a huge event on a big stage in front of 1500 worshippers alongside Darlene Zschech. For the UK, that’s Big_Church. Darlene Zschech herself, incidentally, was as down-to-earth a person as you could hope to meet, and I won’t say a word against her; I simply mean that she was famous like I wanted to be. So obviously I didn’t want to lost my stake in the_advance_of_the_Kingdom by getting stuck in a second-rate church.

  90. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    You’ve kept the sense!

    I was involved with New Frontiers, perhaps not quite so authoritarian as the more northern varieties of house church. I think the leadership there (with ever bigger churches) had to some extent got out of touch with the ‘laity’, and thought they could teach authority and submission without much risk of it going wrong, and the sheep getting tied up in knots over it in the sense of abandonning personal responsibility and meekly doing what the leaders said they should.

    Hence they thought they were not ‘heavy’ and that the sheep knew they were not expected to put up with abuses of power. In fairness I do have to say I never heard anyone equate obedience to a modern so-called apostle with obedience to God – such an idea is a recipe for disaster, but they never spelt out the checks and balances either.

    Another problem obviously was found in leaders of less maturity who ran off with the whole leading concept and started to lord it over the flock, meddling where they had no business.

    I can so identify with the ‘we’re the best church in town’ thinking. Actually I still think God was doing something good amongst these new churches, but pride started to raise its ugly head and the we know how to do it (and the old denominations don’t) thinking crept in, method and structure replacing faith and the Spirit.

    I heard both Roger Price and Hobart Freeman do talks on authority and submission (the latter did an excellent total demolition job on it as practiced by the Ft Lauderdale 5), so I have absolutely no excuse for being a willing participant in this kind of church structure. It even briefly did some good until it became a dependency culture from which I needed liberating. And that can take years.

  91. Ken–agree, much easier said than done. But still and all, to stay in an abusive church once you realize it is would be to collaborate in the abuse.

    All this is why I urge people to read Hershel Hobbes, E Y Mullins, Walter Shurden, James Dunn, Weaver, etc.

  92. Lydia–wouldn’t surprise me.

    As to it taking money to spread the gospel, just how much does it cost to walk across the street 🙂

  93. Eagle wrote:

    So is John Folmar starting the process of going through puberty? Is he starting junior high school? Inquiring minds want to know! Geezz…and to think a senior pastor acts like that, with the “see I told you so” attitude. How arrogant.

    No.
    He has never left Puberty.
    He has never left Junior High School.
    And he will NEVER, EVER, let you or anyone else leave Junior High School.
    EVER.