5 Signs you might be a cult like ministry

Here is a very brief summary of this post over at Parchment and Pen.

What I found fascinating is that these elements can (and sadly do) exist in some evangelical churches.  No, not in full bloom that would label the ministry a cult – there are still beliefs founded on the work and person of Christ.   But there are symptoms, I believe, that can create a cult-like ministry.  So here are the five points that were raised in our notes and class discussion that I think make a compelling case for cult-like influences, or even worse, may point to the very existence of a “church” being a cult.

1) Time Factor – teaches new ideas: major cults have developed new ideas about what Christianity is that deviates substantially from the historic understanding of the faith of “what has been believed always, everywhere and by all”.

2)  Doctrine Factor – denies some essential of the faith: with cults, some element of the faith is majorly distorted or eliminated, such as sin, grace or Christ.

3)  Leadership Factor – elevates leadership to the level of authoritative spokesman:Cult movements have risen on the backs of the leaders that have founded them.  There is something special about the leadership that addresses the needs and desires of people.  Typically, they possess a charismatic personality that facilitates persuasion.  People will follow this person unquestioned.

4)  Biblical Authority Factor – there is a need for additional authority outside of the Bible:  usually this has come in the form of direct “revelation” from God that has elevated the leader.  It is what I call the Jesus Plus authority, which requires some performance or obedience to a written or verbal code outside of scripture.

5)  Organization Factor – they are the only dispensers of truth. Cults make the claim that they have an exclusive claim on the truth.  Cults will insist they everyone else has missed it.  This is compatible with the leadership factor whereby the leader has been given some kind of  special divine “revelation”.

Acts: The church discerns leadership and direction together

How do we pick our leaders?  The bible isn’t entirely explicit on the topic.  There are a few examples and indications scattered throughout scripture. 

The first example is Judas’ replacement chosen in Acts 1.  I’m thinking that was a pretty unique circumstance.  Although I’ve heard of some churches using lots to choose elders and it worked out pretty well.  The churches in question discerned who might be qualified for eldership by picking people who had strong character and in particular humble.  They through all their “names in a hat” and picked their next elder.

There are other examples in Acts involving Paul, his appointment to ministry and the appointment of elders in the churches.  Based on these examples I see pattern develop.  The church sought the direction of their ultimate authority and it was discerned mutually.  It was important for people with different strengths and different gifts to come together in the discernment process.  While there is nothing to indicate that the church voted to make decisions people depended on each other in the process.

In Acts 13 Paul is back on the scene.

Act 13:1  Now there were these prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius the Cyrenian, Manaen (a close friend of Herod the tetrarch from childhood ) and Saul.
Act 13:2  While they were serving the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."
Act 13:3  Then, after they had fasted and prayed and placed their hands on them, they sent them off.

There are a couple things I noticed about this passage.

  • Luke starts out by mentioning the people involved in the process were prophets and teachers.  I found that interesting because a) there are no apostles b) prophets and teachers have traditionally been at odds with each other.  I have charismatic/prophetic leanings but I’m often dismayed by the lack of good foundational teaching among the people who have similar leanings.  Similarly I’ve been around teachers who couldn’t express an opinion without footnoting someone else let alone be led by faith.  Could it be that these giftings and strengths need to be properly held together in Christ to accurately discern God’s direction?
  • The people were not seeking an answer from the Lord or asking Him to bless their vision or project they were simply “serving the Lord.” 
  • They make it clear who was doing the appointing: The Holy Spirit
  • The implication is that was a group of peers seeking the Lord together, not the head of a hierarchy
  • Then they were sent.
  • In verse 13:2 “set apart” has been translated “appoint” (CEV) or “dedicate” (NLT)

At the end of Paul’s first journey we see this.

Act 14:21  After they had proclaimed the good news in that city and made many disciples, they returned to Lystra, to Iconium, and to Antioch.
Act 14:22  They strengthened the souls of the disciples and encouraged them to continue in the faith, saying, "We must enter the kingdom of God through many persecutions."
Act 14:23  When they had appointed elders for them in the various churches, with prayer and fasting they entrusted them to the protection of the Lord in whom they had believed.

Those who favour a more hierarchical view of church leadership often point to the Paul’s practice of appointing elders.  He also instructed Titus to do so (Tit 1:5).  I believe the same process that the church used to appoint Paul and Barnabas was being used here.  If they relied on the Holy Spirit to guide them before I imagine they would do it again.

It is also interesting to note the word translated “appointed” is cheirotoneo?. 

Thayer’s Lexicon has the following

1) to vote by stretching out the hand
2) to create or appoint by vote: one to have charge of some office or duty
3) to elect, create, appoint

Vine’s has the following

primarily used of voting in the Athenian legislative assembly and meaning "to stretch forth the hands" (cheir, "the hand," teino, "to stretch"), is not to be taken in its literal sense; it could not be so taken in its compound procheirotoneo, "to choose before," since it is said of God, Act_10:41. Cheirotoneo is said of "the appointment" of elders by apostolic missionaries in the various churches which they revisited, Act_14:23, RV, "had appointed," i.e., by the recognition of those who had been manifesting themselves as gifted of God to discharge the functions of elders (see No. 2). It is also said of those who were "appointed" (not by voting, but with general approbation) by the churches in Greece to accompany the apostle in conveying their gifts to the poor saints in Judea,

There is nothing in the meaning of cheirotoneo? that conflicts with the kind of Spirit led discernment we observed with Paul and Barnabas in Antioch.  The assumption here is that Paul would have discerned with the church who had already emerged as elders in the church and confirmed it. 

This word is also used in 2Cor 8:19 to indicate a communal or community discernment.  The churches (plural) had chosen this particular brother as a travelling companion.

2Co 8:16  But thanks be to God who put in the heart of Titus the same devotion I have for you,
2Co 8:17  because he not only accepted our request, but since he was very eager, he is coming to you of his own accord.
2Co 8:18  And we are sending along with him the brother who is praised by all the churches for his work in spreading the gospel.
2Co 8:19  In addition, this brother has also been chosen by the churches as our traveling companion as we administer this generous gift to the glory of the Lord himself and to show our readiness to help.

We also see the church discerning together in Acts 15.  People had come up from Judea and were introducing some destructive teaching.  The issue was so important that the church appointed a delegation to go to Jerusalem to settle the matter.

Act 15:1  Now some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."
Act 15:2  When Paul and Barnabas had a major argument and debate with them, the church appointed Paul and Barnabas and some others from among them to go up to meet with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem about this point of disagreement.

At this point Paul is clearly an Apostle but it was the church in Antioch that appointed him to go to Jerusalem.  The pattern seems to indicate that God leads and directs through the whole church.  It is clear from Paul’s epistles that he had a lot of authority to establish proper teaching but even he could be appointed by a church to carry out a task.  The pattern I see is that ultimately the Holy Spirit is the authority but different people have different gifts and different roles to play in discerning God’s direction.  They all need to be working together to accurately hear God.  If someone appoints themselves as the one through whom all direction flows they are cutting out many necessary people from the discernment process. 

I updated the Page on Paul’s authority

I added the following to the top this page to flesh things out.


To understand Paul’s view of the church we have to understand how he came to have the authority of an apostle.  He wasn’t appointed by anyone or any organization.  He was appointed by God.

Gal 1:1  From Paul, an apostle (not from men, nor by human agency, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised him from the dead)

As an appointed messenger of God he felt that he had the authority to build people up (2Cor 10:8) and he could speak authoritatively about what God’s will might be in a certain situation (1cor 7:10).

Even though Paul could speak authoritatively to a situation he chose not to.

1Th 2:7   although we could have imposed our weight as apostles of Christ; instead we became little children among you. Like a nursing mother caring for her own children,

1Th 2:8  with such affection for you we were happy to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives, because you had become dear to us.

It is abundantly clear that in Paul’s concept of ministry that the real authority in the church is the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit’s ministry is expressed through spiritual gifts in the entire body (1Cor 12) but is best expressed through genuine love (1cor 13).  Authority, even Paul’s authority was nothing without love.

Church Exiters : Dedicated to issues of spiritual abuse and recovery

ChurchExiters.com is for those that have experienced spiritual abuse.  Here is a blurb from the front page.

This website explores the issues of people who have experienced spiritual abuse in their local churches and how they have recovered.
_____________________________________________________

Every year dedicated Christian people leave churches because of spiritual abuse. What factors contribute to dedicated and active believers leaving their church and becoming exiting statistics? The stories of people who left their home church because of a negative and hurtful experience paint a picture of a widespread occurrence, which beckons consideration by church leaders and church congregants alike.

The Purpose of this doctoral research was to understand how Christians had gone from the devastating experience of spiritual abuse at their local church to a condition of spiritual restoration.  It aimed to demonstrate how people, who had experienced grief and loss in their Christian lives at the hands of church leaders, had over time regained spiritual equilibrium.

The original dissertation is available at A.C.T.S. Seminaries on the Trinity Western University campus in Langley, B.C.

I’ve already ordered her book!  Hopefully I’ll find the time to review it in the next few weeks.

Toxic Faith : Foundations for Religious Addiction

In their book Toxic Faith Stephen Arterburn and Jack Felton make the case that authoritarian parents and church leaders are often addicts of religion. 

A person with toxic faith can worship a false god just as easily as an alcoholic can worship a bottle of booze.  The person with toxic faith is just as likely to be willing to die out of devotion to that false god as the drug addict is willing to die out of devotion to drugs.  The toxic faithful adhere to a toxic religion in order to dodge the emotional turmoil that comes with facing the reality of their circumstances.  Their lives focus on the religion  and not on God.  The religion engulfs them and they lose themselves to its practice. (pg 92)

What aspects of the religious life offer the same compelling experience as drugs or alcohol.  The admiration, attention and power are an alluring cocktail to those who aspire to be church leaders.  Combine this with guilt, performance anxiety and a narcissistic  desire to be a recognized spiritual leader and you have a potent mixture that is just as compelling than alcohol to the alcoholic.

On page 106 Arterburn and Felton compiled a list of Foundations for Religions Addiction

  • Abusive parent, often the father.  Abuse is physical, emotional or sexual.
  • Child deprived of nurturing.  Neither parent meets the basic emotional needs of the child
  • Feelings of alienation.  Child feels detached from the family and what is perceived as a perfect world for others.
  • Attitudes of perfectionism from imperfect parents.  Demanding parents inflict the child with an irrational desire to be perfect and make no mistakes.
  • High expectations.  The parents are relentless in demanding the child be what they were not and attain what they did not.
  • Low affirmation.  Although the child exerts tremendous effort, the parents are never satisfied and rare provide positive feedback.
  • Parents’ addiction problems.  Frequently, one or both parents will be alcoholics or sex addicts, or they will exhibit some other obvious compulsive behavior.
  • Absent father.  A child of divorce may have little male influence.
  • Feelings of being dirty.  Abuse and negative attention leave a child feeling guilty and dirty.
  • Poor peer relationships.  Afraid to share personal reality with others, the child feels cut off emotionally from friends and often seeks destructive relationships.
  • Vivid fantasy world.  Reality becomes so difficult that the child creates a fantasy world and retreats to it frequently.
  • Feelings not shared.  The home has provided little freedom to express emotions, and the child never learns how this is done or why it is helpful.

The more I researched authoritarianism in the church the more I understood that even the most abusive leader still a flawed human like the rest of us.  There are factors that lead people to adopt authoritarian religious systems both as leaders and followers.  These issues go much deeper than just flawed teaching or flawed theology.  I’m going to be blogging more from Toxic Faith and other helpful books.

10 Rules of a Toxic-Faith System

1. The leader must be in control of every aspect at all times.

2. When problems arise, immediately find a guilty party to blame.

3. Don’t make mistakes.

4. Never point out the reality of a situation.

5. Never express your feelings unless they are positive.

6. Don’t ask questions, especially if they are tough ones.

7. Don’t do anything outside your role.

8. Don’t trust anyone.

9. Nothing is more important than giving money to the organization

10. At all costs, keep up the image of the organization or family.

Taken from Toxic Faith page 223.

I rewrote the Why it is false page and other notes

I’m going over the site and doing some editing.  I focused the content by paring things down to a handful of main points. That page was sloppy.

I’ve been in dialogue with someone else who is doing their own research on Covering Theology.  I hope to link to his findings as soon as he posts them.  It has been fun connecting with others who feel addressing this issue is of huge importance.

There is an interesting facebook that has popped up.  It is called Pentellectuals, for all you charismatics who feel Jesus came to take away your sins and not your mind you might want to check it out.

I’m thinking of expanding the website with more content and publishing it as an e-book.