A few weeks ago, a friend wrote to ask me why I write only about issues in the evangelical church related to male headship and those who turn all things related to family life into some kind of new, holy sacrament. They pointed out that as an evangelical Christian, I should be equally concerned about Rick Warren and Joel Osteen, implying that those who speak out against patriocentricity should give these other problem areas in the church more attention.
I have one very primary reason for focusing on the patriocentrics and those who share their ideals. I do so because I’ve experienced and witnessed these abuses first hand, and these very things became a very real part of my world. My friends and I still wrestle with these problems in our churches and our lives. When I found healing and saw that there were ways that I could help those who have been deceived by these subtle things as I once was, I responded by helping others who now stand where I once stood. I communicate information to them that I desperately needed at the time but found few people who could address my pains and journey. I know how these particular groups code their language, am familiar with how they practice, so I bring more relevant and practical insight into the discussion. I certainly could read Rick Warren’s books and comment on what others have written about them, but I never went to church with Warren or Driscoll and only know of them from what others have told me about them.
To those who have not been around the patriocentrics, I suppose that if you would read some of my recent blog posts, you might think that my comments are a bit over-reactive. If I had no other knowledge of these groups, never had been exposed to the submission teachings of the groups that preceded the patriocentrists myself, never having heard the lingo, I might think the same thing. So I had to chuckle when I saw Pastor Kevin Johnson’s latest post today. He is all too familiar with the CREC and Doug Wilson’s unique language (specific to that little subgroup). He took in that system’s vague implications and unstated assumptions while also experiencing the social mentoring and the whole package of how the language was used. You learn rather quickly when the nebulous sounding ideal of “P” has been violated and is followed by nebulous sounding charge of “Q,” all resulting in things like heavy discipline or excommunication of the guilty party. Within the group, “P” and “Q” take on all new meaning and significance, even though the language itself sounds benign if not virtuous. This process describes one of many ways groups convey and employ loaded language, serving as an excellent exemplar of this phenomenon.
In Living the Lie, Pastor Johnson cites some recent statements offered by Doug Wilson and translates them for us. I do hope the reader here will go read his entire post because it is so instructive, and perhaps I should have just asked permission to post the entire article. But, I’ve not only pulled out his translations, I also pulled out comments that are usually always elements of all other cultic systems. Primarily, this post discusses the sacerdotalism that is now so prevalent in many churches and denominations today.
I’m going to take the time to translate this out of Reformed speak and into something more akin to normal English. . . . Still, as usual, his words provide us with an opportunity to learn more about these subjects if only to learn what not to do and what not to believe.
These are the sorts of words that sound good to the ear of any man rightly concerned with doctrine, church leadership, and ministry. But, the best lies are normally the ones that sound the most like the truth–properly phrased and gently suggested to us with the sort of whispering doubt Satan must have used in tempting Eve in the Garden....
Believe it or not, this sort of understanding and practice of ministry in the local church can use your own conscience against you in reinforcing the cultic designs of those in power....
Normally, I’d have no problem with this statement but this is Douglas Wilson. So, we have to take even this statement and focus here on two words–”diligent” and “dutiful”...
Translated out of normal CREC speak, this again means that an elder candidate or elder in the churches where Douglas Wilson and those like him minister must be willing to change their opinion and their lives because other men think differently than he does. Gone is your conscience and freedom if you are an elder in one of these churches. Gone is your ability to judge for yourself, your family, or your children. Think I’m wrong? Put your child in a Catholic or public school and see how the other elders respond. Or, have your wife constantly speak her mind in the public meetings of the church. The reaction by the other elders won’t be good, I promise, and to stay in that church–to say nothing of remaining in leadership–will be an extremely difficult endeavor for anyone to accomplish....
No, again, translated this means if you’re an elder in our church you’re only going to support the causes we deem important. You can’t be parading around other causes or advocacy on other issues unless the all-powerful session gives its divine imprimatur and you’ve been given the all clear. Power, my friends, this is about power...
This also is very easy to translate. At Wilson’s church, there is one person and pastor in charge. Period. Likewise in the other churches. Don’t kid yourself to think that these types of “Reformed” churches are churches where a session really leads....
And, now we come to perhaps the clearest statement in this whole post about what Douglas Wilson is advocating for elders in a local church. Here’s the translation: No area of your life as an elder candidate or elder is off limits. The elders have every right not only to examine you and your behavior but also to control it. It’s not just a matter of retaining Christian orthodoxy and general confessional fidelity but this extends all the way down to how your wife dresses, what your children may say in their presence, how disagreement with the pastor or session must only be in private, where your children may go to school if they may go at all, what sort of music you ought to be listening to, how you should be dressing for church, what your prayers should contain in public and privately, whether or not you should be drinking alcoholic beverages, and all manner of other things. As he said, “You name it”. You really think he’s kidding here?
The real problem here, however, is not disagreement or diversity. In truth, Christians are going to naturally be diverse in their views and practices and this is a good thing. Wilson is mistaken to think that conformity, power, and control are the rightful means by which effective ministry happens in the local church. In a church, the very God-given unity and diversity among the people and its ministers is what makes the local assembly the gloriously multi-faceted diamond like wonder that it is (1 Corinthians 12). Wilson lives and advocates the lie of a wayward ecclesiastical establishment and that wretched institution is as old as the people of God, sadly, and heartily condemned by the prophets in virtually every generation since the Fall.
Please read the very instructive blog post in its entirety HERE at Prophezei.com.
