|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: NewFrontiers after Terry Virgo
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
"mote work"?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
On finance and transparency - don't have a clue. In all the NF churches I've been involved it, all financial issues were completely open to scrutiny. I did see some discussion about Brighton and the Clarendon trust, but to be honest I didn't really follow it and can't comment.
I think you've hit the nail on the head.
I have little doubt local churches are generally up-front on finances. But I heard someone very close to Terry saying that if you asked him about finances he would get all upset and mumble things about lack of trust.
I don't think anyone is making ludicrous sums of private money out of all this, but that simply isn't a good approach to financial governance, and worse still, it was defended on quasi-spiritual grounds.
I think the real challenge is for the company, New Frontiers International Limited, to be more transparent about its finances and composition. I wonder if Terry has resigned from its board?
quote:
Not really sure what Terry will be up to. I'm sure these regional leaders will be keen to see him one to one.
There's the real rub. Do these one-to-one meetings still carry the weight of apostolic authority, or not? If they do, the whole thing has just become even less transparent.
quote:
On safeguards, the new dynamic is that regional leaders are all parts of regional teams. So if you have an issue with one leader, you can in theory have a word with his peers.
You mean with another regional leader? If there's nothing wrong with that, then why not have it in writing?
quote:
Would we ever look to external arbitration? Can't see it personally. We are quite fussy about doing our own washing.
Yes, where that really really becomes a problem is when you combine it with the teaching on apostolic authority which has underpinned the movement so far. It's the reason I think the charge of exclusivism sticks despite all those inter-church gestures. NF would rather trust its own judgement, and hierarchy, than any independent arbitrator. That's a recipe for abuse.
quote:
What have I missed?
That will do quite nicely for now ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) . Your comments about calling the movement into question from within are brave ones and I hope they translate into constructive action for everyone's sake. But don't expect them to go down well with everyone in positions of power.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Matthias
Apprentice
# 14948
|
Posted
Eutycus, silence from me ony our questions is for two reasons.
1) I want to discuss them with the person in nf you have given them to
2) I want to discuss them with the trustee of newfrontiers that I know
The fact I want to do both suggests that I see much validity in both of them, and also want to check some of the underlying assumptions about what does and doesn't happen already.
And the fact we are now talking about real people and real situations and real conversations means I take it seriously, but will probably not comment too much more publically on that score.
Posts: 29 | From: Shrewsbury | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Thanks for this welcome news... the same caveat I wrote to Ramarius applies.
[ 03. August 2011, 05:53: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
Ramarius wrote:
quote:
On finance and transparency - don't have a clue. In all the NF churches I've been involved it, all financial issues were completely open to scrutiny. I did see some discussion about Brighton and the Clarendon trust, but to be honest I didn't really follow it and can't comment.
TBF, it’s the same in most churches. Eyes glaze over when the church meeting moves onto finances. Most people understand that so much of their giving goes towards the running costs of the church they attend and so much goes to central funds – Didcot, Home Mission etc - in our case.
quote:
On safeguards, the new dynamic is that regional leaders are all parts of regional teams. So if you have an issue with one leader, you can in theory have a word with his peers. How well this would ever work in practice would depend on the dynamic in the team. Would we ever look to external arbitration? Can't see it personally. We are quite fussy about doing our own washing.
If I’ve understood correctly, what’s being proposed is a kind of souped up Trustee / Non-Executive Director who comes from completely outside the church. As well as ensuring that the church fulfils its legal obligations, they would act as a combination of ACAS, Union Rep, and Employment Tribunal etc. I’m not sure that any church group has that, but if anyone knows different … [Having been through a mediation process, the level of success depends on the quality of the mediator and whether everyone involved is committed to the process. And there are numerous examples of how successful non-executives are at making companies behave properly ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif) ].
I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be systems / checks and balances … There must be some as they help prevent wrong-doing. But whatever is in place, it will only prevent some incidents, not all.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
Oh yippee another NFI are a dodgy outfit thread ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I've been slow to join in mainly because this thread seems to reappear on a yearly basis with the same voices expressing the same points (some valid and some not IMHO).
Eutychus - don't you get bored doing the same thing? You and I have a very similar background in our time within NFI, yours ending in negatively and mine positively.
I think we have already stated in previous threads that what happened to you, although is very sad and I make no excuse for it, similar things happen to others who have been in other streams (Orthodox, C of E, Baptist, Methodist)
If such people continued to post their frustrations on this board then they would be dealt with very sharply.
For everyone else's info I was part of NFI for 20 years and am now starting my first pastorate as a Baptist pastor.
I don't agree fully with Baptist theology concerning a number of issues just like I didn't agree with some of NFI theology.
My experience is that I have found arrogance concerning theology and belief in both church families. It exists in all church streams.
quote:
irish_lord99 posted
I too am very annoyed by the marketing scheme that announces all other churches to be dead and that the way for all to experience Christ is through Charismatic or NFI worship
Marketing scheme is the wrong word. I know what you mean though but disagree that it is a policy within NFI. This thing happens in reverse from non charismatic churches directed towards NFI and like (have heard it from Orthodox and C of E as well as Baptists). Where as I agree it is wrong there is a certain amount of people on this thread who need to remove the plank from their own eye...!
quote:
Gamaliel posted
However, I don't know many Methodists, for instance, who would put their Methodist identity before their Christian identity ...
I've never, ever, ever in my whole life (and I've been around the block plenty of times) come across a Methodist who'd self-identify as a Methodist over and above being a Christian.
Seriously??!! Maybe Methodists are so much better than everyone else as I have seen such attitudes in every church stream.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
Eutychus - don't you get bored doing the same thing?
I think that the approach that responds to legitimate objections by hoping they'll simply shut up and go away, rather than interacting with them, with a hint of nastiness thrown in, pretty much typefies the worst aspects of NF culture.
(And if you think nothing's changed for me since the last long NF thread, you're not paying attention - this link is in the OP).
Besides, this is not "the same thing". NF is clearly in a phase of change and I think that's worth discussion. This thread runs to six pages and you can see for yourself that I'm far from being the only contributor. (Actually, I'm surprised myself at its longevity but I note it's being widely read).
I was specifically asked on this thread by an NF member, Twangist, what safeguards I would put in place in NF. I agree with Tubbs that such safeguards wouldn't be a perfect solution, but I think they would be a whole lot better than nothing.
If my experience, plus my reflection, plus the interaction here with people still in NF, can serve to see some truly constructive changes put in place, then I'd quite happily file that under "God intended it for good".
quote:
If such people continued to post their frustrations on this board then they would be dealt with very sharply.
Are you suggesting I'm getting special treatment? I think I'll leave the hosts to make a call on that one.
quote:
My experience is that I have found arrogance concerning theology and belief in both church families. It exists in all church streams.
Agreed, but not many make the high claims NF does. They set a very high standard for themselves. I don't think that places them beyond dispute - quite the opposite.
Are you afraid NF can't take the heat, or do you think all criticism should be stifled because it's "a bad witness?" The NF contributors on this thread don't seem to think so, and all credit to them. I genuinely think they're very courageous, and I'm enjoying my interaction with them.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
Marketing scheme is the wrong word.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I'm not gonna call it a chicken to make them feel better.
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
I know what you mean though but disagree that it is a policy within NFI.
Is there such a thing as a "policy" within NFI? The local NF pastors preach it often enough, I heard it from the pulpit at least once a month (three times on the month I decided to walk away for good), more if I went to small group. They teach it because it's what they learned from their 'apostle' who learned it from TV. It's taught often enough to make it as close a thing to a 'policy' as they've got.
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
This thing happens in reverse from non charismatic churches directed towards NFI and like (have heard it from Orthodox and C of E as well as Baptists).
This. This is the argument that drives me crazy when I have had this discussion with other NF'ers: "other churches behave exactly like us! You won't find John Piper's books in a Southern Baptist Church, Anglican's won't listen to CCM, etc. They are all just as exclusive and marginalizing of others as we are!" I'm sorry, but it's bullshit. I have attended Lutheran, non-denominational, Presbyterian, Orthodox, Southern Baptist, and others: and with the exception of one little "Reformed Southern Baptist" church in South Carolina I have never felt the pressure to conform that I have felt at an NFI church; not since I left the AoG at age 14. Yeah, those other churches aren't perfect, but they simply do not compare to the level of Purple Kool-aid drinking fanaticism regarding even the simplest and most tertiary of doctrines that is to be found in NFI churches (at least in this country!).
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
Where as I agree it is wrong there is a certain amount of people on this thread who need to remove the plank from their own eye...!
Everybody on here realizes that they've got problems and that their church of choice has problems. Your post history indicates that you show up only when you feel the need to defend NFI. Who do you really think is more devoted to the appearance of righteousness here?
Yeah, I've got a chip on my shoulder, sorry about that...
--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
Some posts on this thread are focusing on other poster's motivations more than substantive arguments. Please don't..
--Tom Clune, Purgatory Host
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
This thread has introduced me to at least one new term.
If one speaks of a branch, or branches, of the church, one invites sighs and as the concept is apparently dismissed as antiquated and discredited.
Maybe if I just learn to say "church streams" instead, I'll suddenly be ![[Cool]](cool.gif) ?
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Some posts on this thread are focusing on other poster's motivations more than substantive arguments. Please don't..
--Tom Clune, Purgatory Host
Sorry about that.
--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
Evening Polly,
I'm glad your time in NF had a happy ending. To be fair to our mutual friend E, he kicked the thread off asking about the future of NF which is highly topical given TV's announcement of change of role.
I also followed the link to E's blog. I am shaking my head in disbelief. The patterns of behaviour he describes are exactly ones I have seen first hand. This is still a live issue.
Having said that, in some NF churches (including four I am personally involved with at the moment) they would be unimaginable.
Any church needs to eradicate bad practice, and ensure that good practice is universal best practice.
Genuinely wishing you every success in your current role.....
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'll meet you half-way, Polly.
The last time I visited an NFI church I was a member of a Baptist church in another city. When an earnest young member of the congregation found out that I went to a Baptist church he began to lecture me on how the 'traditional Baptists' were 'dead' and how NFI was the place to be yadda yadda yadda ...
When I told him that I went to a lively and very untraditional Baptist church he modified his tune a bit. But I was lenient with him. He deserved my knee in his nuts.
Ok - I've found Orthodox converts to come out with some very dismissive comments about other churches and other Christians and I would agree that to some extent or other all churches have a tendency to think of themselves as a cut above the others ...
But with NFI it's different, I submit, insofar as it's part of their spiritual DNA and how they self-define over against everyone else - but the mileage will vary, of course. There are 'Big Baptists' who are complete pains in the neck too, and they make a big deal about being Baptist over and above everything else.
Some of my friends within other restorationist set-ups are quite pleased with the current developments within NFI as they feel it might lose the very 'corporate' and 'branded' aspect which does come across as marketing patter, I'm afraid.
Time will tell.
I'd be interested, though, Polly as to what you see the theological differences are between the Baptist Union Baptists in the UK and NFI? I'd have thought the differences were more a question of ecclesiology and emphasis rather than any genuine theological differences ... other than with, perhaps, the less or non-charismatic Baptists.
My own experience of the Baptists has been that they are way, way, way, way, a million light-years way more balanced, eirenic and indeed theologically savvy than most NFI-ers I've met. There are exceptions of course, and I'm sure that some, in not a considerable number, of NFI churches aren't that dissimilar to the charismatic end of the Baptist spectrum.
In my experience, the charismatic Baptists admire aspects of NFI and warm to its 'reformed' heritage but in practice are more influenced by the wider charismatic scene represented in the UK by the Vineyard and the New Wine Anglicans at the moment.
The Baptists are also open to movements like the Northumbria Community and contemplative prayer etc which probably wouldn't even get a look in over in New Frontiers land.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Some of my friends within other restorationist set-ups are quite pleased with the current developments within NFI as they feel it might lose the very 'corporate' and 'branded' aspect which does come across as marketing patter, I'm afraid.
I suspect this as much a sociological thing as a doctrinal thing. In that the nearer you get to a movement/denominations formation the more exclusivist things tend to be.
I have found this in some Baptists too - but generally in areas in which the churches are full of older people who hearken back to their landmark event - usually MLJ or even the Welsh revival.
That a lot of the NFI is comprised of people who came to faith through the movement probably adds an additional spin, as does the current emphasis of many churches everywhere on marketing.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
quote:
Eutychus posted:
(And if you think nothing's changed for me since the last long NF thread, you're not paying attention - this link is in the OP).
I had read your initial post but that is what provoked me to respond. The topic for discussion is not what I am questioning.
It's just that I am a little surprised again that for someone who got stung badly by NF and has spoken of some of the pain this caused publicly on these boards wanted to begin a discussion again about NF.
To me it would be like going through a painful divorce and then wanting to start a discussion about one's ex some years later.
In regards to the 'safe guards' of NF after TV steps down I'm not entirely sure why it's such a big deal for those outside NF. The level of debate would not be given if it was one of the traditional church streams and possibly not tolerated as much as it is with other board members on this thread.
quote:
Are you suggesting I'm getting special treatment? I think I'll leave the hosts to make a call on that one.
Absolutely not - but as a general observation of the board these threads concerning charismatic wings of the church are treated more leniantly than say with similar threads of other church streams.
quote:
Are you afraid NF can't take the heat, or do you think all criticism should be stifled because it's "a bad witness?"
No is the short answer. I think I have already suggested that I feel threads concerning NF gives people space to bring the same negative criticisms out again and again. For me the debate doesn't have enough balance to it.
For my dissertation at college(a Baptist college- can you guess which one?) I did a critique of NF, got a first, sent it to Nigel Ring and although he didn't agree with everything I said he responded positively.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
Maybe if I just learn to say "church streams" instead, I'll suddenly be ?
Oh we Anglican evangelicals can do much better than that! Those New Churches may have Streams of Renewal and the Rubicon of Restorationism but as well as streams we have Canal, River and Rapids. Get that under your belt, and memorise which churches are R1 and R2, and you will be nicely learned up in Streamology
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
irish_lord99 I don't debate your experiences but after 20 years within NF churches (all in the SE where the movement began), part of x3 NF churches, attending regularly regional celebrations, going to leaders prayer meetings and going to Stoneleigh I can say I encountered such things from the pulpit only a few times. You must have got all the prats at your local NF churches!!
I'm not denying that such attitudes exist within NF but to suggest its as widespread as you or anyone suggests is laughable.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
quote:
Gamaliel posted
I'll meet you half-way, Polly.
Fair enough shall I bring beer or wine?
quote:
When I told him that I went to a lively and very untraditional Baptist church he modified his tune a bit. But I was lenient with him. He deserved my knee in his nuts.
Self control is a gift of the Spirit of which I have had to rely on a number of similar occasions to what you describe as well. Situations in NF and other churches.
quote:
But with NFI it's different, I submit, insofar as it's part of their spiritual DNA and how they self-define over against everyone else - but the mileage will vary, of course
This is probably where we differ. I don't agree NF "self define over against everyone else". In my experience I have never heard it from anyone in leadership but possibly from people in the pews
quote:
I'd be interested, though, Polly as to what you see the theological differences are between the Baptist Union Baptists in the UK and NFI?
Good question. Theologically I simply don't agree with the Baptist theology of the Holy Spirit coming upon a person at the point of water baptism. This is understood as the norm within Baptist theology. For some Baptists the Spirit comes upon a person the once. There's no space for any kind of refreshing/renewing or whatever the terminology is at the moment. Women in leadership is another issue I differ on.
Ecclesiology differences along the lines of church government via the church meeting. It's too ideal, over reliant on a large number of people being committed to come to meetings and spending time beforehand in prayer and seeking God concerning the items on the agenda.
Realistically it doesn't happen this way.
I'm a bit stuffed really as I am about to start my first pastorate as a Baptist pastor!!
quote:
My own experience of the Baptists has been that they are way, way, way, way, a million light-years way more balanced, eirenic and indeed theologically savvy than most NFI-ers
That's very kind of you to say - always hoping that I'm not the exception to the rule!! ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
The topic for discussion is not what I am questioning.
So what are you questioning? My motives? I think that's been ruled off limits. Why won't you engage with the issues?
quote:
In regards to the 'safe guards' of NF after TV steps down I'm not entirely sure why it's such a big deal for those outside NF.
If you read the thread, you'll note it was Twangist, who is a member of an NF church, who asked me directly quote:
Eutychus: What safeguards do you now think should be in place in churches and how do you see them functioning?
One of the aspects of this thread which I have found to be an immense encouragement is that there is now apparently a generation within NF willing to take these suggestions (note: not framed as criticisms) on board and discuss them within NF at a senior level. That suggests that they think it's a big deal and so much the better.
To clarify, I don't see safeguards as an alternative to Terry's rule, but his retirement (or whatever it is) is perhaps an opportunity to implement them - especially given the implications in terms of doctrine regarding authority that his departure throws up. Which was the subject of the OP...
quote:
The level of debate would not be given if it was one of the traditional church streams and possibly not tolerated as much as it is with other board members on this thread. (...)
as a general observation of the board these threads concerning charismatic wings of the church are treated more leniantly than say with similar threads of other church streams.
I honestly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. If you've got an issue with your perception of how the debate is being moderated, I suggest you take it to the Styx. Nobody else is complaining.
quote:
For me the debate doesn't have enough balance to it.
If you don't think it's balanced enough, the best thing to do is contribute! As far as I can see, on this thread you've done nothing more than insist that NF isn't universally the way you perceive others to be portraying it. It seems to me that it's you who is in danger of reducing the debate to "oh, yes it is / oh, no it isn't" whereas for pages now before you came along there has been constructive interaction between people on all sides and none.
You've claimed that you've made critiques of NF, but you haven't explained what they are. Neither have you brought out any objective arguments in defence of NF. Other contributors have done both. Why don't you put something for actual discussion on the table?
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
quote:
I honestly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
That's a shame because after a number of different threads my argument on this matter has been consistent. If you don;t get it now I'll move on.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Daron
Shipmate
# 16507
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
Maybe if I just learn to say "church streams" instead, I'll suddenly be ?
Oh we Anglican evangelicals can do much better than that! Those New Churches may have Streams of Renewal and the Rubicon of Restorationism but as well as streams we have Canal, River and Rapids. Get that under your belt, and memorise which churches are R1 and R2, and you will be nicely learned up in Streamology
I think that's great article (having read it before) and I'm glad you've given a link to it! Thanks.
--------------------
Each strand of sorrow has a place, within this tapestry of grace
So through the trials I choose to say, Your perfect will in your perfect way
Posts: 427 | From: London | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
That's a shame because after a number of different threads my argument on this matter has been consistent. If you don;t get it now I'll move on.
As I understand your post (and of course I may have misunderstood you), you were claiming that the standard of debate - and by implication the standard I was setting - would not be tolerated on the board if parts of the church other than the charismatic/evo end were being debated.
To me, that is a question about hosting and as such belongs in the Styx.
If you're challenging my motives, I think that the hosting ruling a few posts up rules you out of court. If you do want to complain about my motives, take it to Hell or PM me.
I'm offering those comments as my take on things. If I'm wrong, then I'm sure a host will pull me into line.
If your point is that you think I should just shut up and move on myself (although I really don't read that in what I quoted in the relevant section in my previous post), I think that I've adequately addressed that upthread. I've moved on, so has NF, and now both I, folks in NF and others are all discussing what lies ahead.
[ 03. August 2011, 20:45: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I know this is between Eutychus, the Hosts and yoruself, Polly, but I have to say that your recent posts here have displayed what I take to be a very cavalier attitude to the sort of abuse that people like Eutychus have suffered within NFI.
I've got no axe to grind with NFI but I am a recovering restorationist ( ) and I wouldn't go back into one of those settings for all the tea in China. That said, I have oodles and oodles of time for lots of individuals who're in those settings and, to be frank, lots of time for Terry Virgo himself.
I don't think that NFI or any other charismatic evangelical group gets more than its fair share of stick on these Boards. The RCs seem to get more of a pounding ...
It's true that there have been threads about NFI but that's because they're the largest and arguably the most successful of all the restorationist streams in the UK. And no-one is suggesting that it's all bad.
I would suspect that Irish Lord's experience has been particularly unfortunate in Turkey, but I've heard sufficient for a number of sources to know that the sort of thing that happened to Eutychus is by no means unique. I've heard similar stories from a number of sources.
Just because you've had positive experiences overall doesn't mean that NFI can't be abusive and toxic in some instances. Nor does it imply that other groups are squeaky clean.
Anyway ... I was interested in your account of the differences between NFI and Baptist theology. I was quite surprised that you mentioned that most Baptists believe that the Holy Spirit is received at baptism ... my understanding has been that most Baptists believe that the Holy Spirit is received at conversion.
In fact, I don't believe I've ever met any Baptists who'd say that the Holy Spirit isn't received until baptism. I've come across some Pentecostally people who'd say that, but not Baptists ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
quote:
Gamaliel posted
I know this is between Eutychus, the Hosts and yoruself, Polly, but I have to say that your recent posts here have displayed what I take to be a very cavalier attitude to the sort of abuse that people like Eutychus have suffered within NFI.
Eutychus if this is the case then my apologies.
Gamaliel - On this or any other thread I don't feel I have ever be little anyones experiences. My surprise as previously stated was that for someone who has been so badly hurt by NF would want to continue to start discussion about them. My earlier analogy about a divorced couple is IMHO a good one.
In addition I have never stated that NF are without fault or that situations where individuals have been badly hurt are 'one offs'. I'm very aware that people leave all church streams being badly hurt (some of my closest friends have left NF in this way).
My observations are that there are some who turn up at every NF thread who like to be critical without accepting any sort of balanced opinion.
I mentioned earlier a dissertation I did. FWIW my difficulties with NF include: all male governmental leaderdership, a narrow view of the prophetic gifting, up until recently an unwillingness to engage with 'a-political issues' as part of the churches primary calling.
quote:
I was interested in your account of the differences between NFI and Baptist theology. I was quite surprised that you mentioned that most Baptists believe that the Holy Spirit is received at baptism ... my understanding has been that most Baptists believe that the Holy Spirit is received at conversion.
I don't know any charismatic Christians let alone Baptists who think that the Holy Spirit is received upon conversion.
Baptist colleges teach that this happens upon water Baptism and many of the writers (Baptists and favoured by) quoted state this. It is based upon what happened at Jesus' baptism.
As I said I don't agree with this thinking. It's too formulaic and not great practice or teaching for those wanting to be Jesus' disciples.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well, there are plenty of charismatic Christians (Baptists among them) who would say that we receive the Spirit at conversion (how otherwise could we be 'born again'?) but that the 'fullness' comes at a subsequent 'Baptism in the Spirit' type experience.
Baptists though, in my experience, tend to be cagey about the term 'baptism in the Spirit' as it's a pretty loaded term and implies a Pentecostal and 'second-blessing' type theology - which doesn't go down well if you're in any way 'reformed'.
I don't find many Anglican charismatics talking about 'baptism in the Spirit' so much these days either. They talk about speaking in tongues and receiving the gifts of the Spirit but they tend to shy away from the kind of language that was used in the 1970s and '80s.
I suspect there's a Vineyard influence behind a lot of this - as Wimber and co tended to emphasis repeated fillings or 'anointings' rather than a one-off pneumatology.
To be honest, though, I tend to find much charismatic 'theology' on these issues to be pretty woolly - the proverbial 'spirituality in search of a theology' thing.
In fact, I wouldn't give much of it the courtesy of referring to it as 'theology' at all.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
My surprise as previously stated was that for someone who has been so badly hurt by NF would want to continue to start discussion about them. My earlier analogy about a divorced couple is IMHO a good one.
I didn't think it was a good analogy, actually, but there was too much else to respond to.
I think a better (but far from perfect) analogy is that of a battered wife warning other potential victims that there is another side to that sweet-talking guy who buys you lots of flowers and drinks at first.
(Over the years a steady stream of people have got in touch with me as a result of my having put my story online. A recurring theme in their correspondence is "I'm so glad you wrote that: I thought I was the only one, and it's such a relief to know I'm not").
quote:
My observations are that there are some who turn up at every NF thread who like to be critical without accepting any sort of balanced opinion.
OK, well just to make sure you're not including me in that number, please note the following statement by me from the link in my OP with regard to my own story:
quote:
Over the years I have had various discussions with current and former leaders within NewFrontiers about this situation. These and the 2011 developments have reinforced my conviction that there are good folk within NewFrontiers, and I have been impressed with the courage and integrity of those who have accepted their share of responsibility in events.
At the same time, these developments have also reinforced my conviction that as things stand, despite its claim to integrity and relationship-based workings, there are things which are seriously wrong with the structure of NewFrontiers in terms of governance which means there is a particularly acute risk of this type of spiritual abuse happening. I hope this can change as personnel move on.
In all honesty, given what I've been through, I think that's pretty fair and balanced. As further evidence of this I submit the fact that posters here within NF have been remarkably candid in accepting this assessment:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
The patterns of behaviour [Eutychus] describes are exactly ones I have seen first hand. This is still a live issue.
(...)
Any church needs to eradicate bad practice, and ensure that good practice is universal best practice.
I've constantly maintained that it's quite possible to go through life as part of an NF church and not experience the kind of abuse I did - what I have argued, is that the structure creates the potential for that kind of abuse.
Again: the current changes offer an opportunity for reviewing that structure and examining the theological assumptions that underpin it. I'd say that most of this thread has been about that, and others have been interacting with the actual substance of my arguments - including, very graciously, folks from within NF, in a way which has far exceeded my expectations.
It's you that keeps making this personal. From my perspective, the best apology on your part would be for you to stop doing so, at least in the context of this thread.
(Finally, as an aside, I too have never ever heard it taught in Baptist circles that the Holy Spirit is received on baptism, and I've been a member of more than one in my time. But that's a different thread).
[ 04. August 2011, 07:07: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
I'm not denying that such attitudes exist within NF but to suggest its as widespread as you or anyone suggests is laughable.
You know... laughable it is not, but I'm not going to debate this one for now. We're straying farther and farther from the OP and any semblance of constructive conversation here.
--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I would suspect that Irish Lord's experience has been particularly unfortunate in Turkey
Actually, in the context of this thread, although there is obviously evidence within the UK of the kind of problems I encountered here in France, I have actually wondered whether things aren't potentially worse in NF churches outside the UK, particularly in less protestant-friendly countries.
In the UK, if things go wrong for someone in an NF church, it's much easier to simply move to a church down the road. In many other countries, there isn't one (of anything like the same stripe) for miles! Furthermore, being in a more "mission" setting perhaps raises the stakes and encourages more extreme positions. There may not be the benefit of something like the local "churches together" to dilute the message a bit, and there aren't lots of christian counsellors to help pick up the pieces afterwards. Plus the language barrier.
I mentioned somewhere upthread that Ichthus consciously decided not to extend their network overseas. They have a far looser understanding of apostolic authority anyway, and they felt the geographical and cultural distances involved just made it too complicated, settling for a more informal "link church" status instead. Perhaps that is in reality where NF is heading, too.
[ 04. August 2011, 07:28: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I would suspect that Irish Lord's experience has been particularly unfortunate in Turkey
Actually, in the context of this thread, although there is obviously evidence within the UK of the kind of problems I encountered here in France, I have actually wondered whether things aren't potentially worse in NF churches outside the UK, particularly in less protestant-friendly countries.
In the UK, if things go wrong for someone in an NF church, it's much easier to simply move to a church down the road. In many other countries, there isn't one (of anything like the same stripe) for miles! Furthermore, being in a more "mission" setting perhaps raises the stakes and encourages more extreme positions. There may not be the benefit of something like the local "churches together" to dilute the message a bit, and there aren't lots of christian counsellors to help pick up the pieces afterwards. Plus the language barrier.
I mentioned somewhere upthread that Ichthus consciously decided not to extend their network overseas. They have a far looser understanding of apostolic authority anyway, and they felt the geographical and cultural distances involved just made it too complicated, settling for a more informal "link church" status instead. Perhaps that is in reality where NF is heading, too.
That is certainly a factor: I'd have to travel over an hour and a half to get to another church, and then it would be an Orthodox parish. That's not a problem for me, as I'm heading that direction anyway; but for my other disillusioned friends around town... They're pretty much stuck with either going to the local NF meetings or nothing. Most of them can't afford to make the trip once a week (or even once a month), and they're all convinced that they aren't able to start even a Bible study themselves.
Certainly this isolation also affects the attitude of the newly converted. Since they don't have a wider body to observe, it's very easy to tell them that the rest of the Christian world is "dead" etc. Some of the local converts have become more fanatical about obscure points of NF doctrine than the missionaries. It's a bubble, is what it is.
I wonder about your last sentence: the local leadership here has come because they were sent by their apostle, one wonders where they would be and what they'd be doing if things were less formal. All of their authority in the church is also derived from the authority of their apostolic delegate: a looser understanding of apostolic authority would really affect how they did things and the amount of power they wield. Ultimately, they've rationalized their authority using a very shallow pool of Apostolic succession: from TV on downwards.
The more I think about his retirement (or whatever you want to call it), the more I wonder how they're going to make it as a large group. I think eventually they'll have to have a 'counsel of Brighton' and write a creed, properly canonize a set of approved NF literature, establish a seminary, etc. In short, if they want to survive at the scale they are currently operating at... they'll have to become a real denomination.
--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
There are those who would say that New Frontiers is already a 'real denomination' and has been for some time. It's also been said (by other, non-NFI restorationists ... those few that are left ) that 'NFI can be more denominational than the denominations.'
I think what Eutychus and irish lord have said about the missionary situation is a pertinent point, and simply a more extreme example of what tends to prevail among Protestant missions in non-Protestant European/Middle Eastern countries. I've heard that evangelicals in Greece, for example, are highly divided along denominational and doctrinal lines and that there is often very little collaboration among tiny Protestant congregations in the same locality - further reinforcing the indigenous Orthodox view that Protestants are inveterate schismatics.
Some years ago, I met a chap who'd spent some time in Gibraltar where a Pentecostal church had been established and was being nurtured by a large Pentecostal assembly in Newport, South Wales. The Gibraltan congregation dressed, spoke and acted more like 1960s/70s South Walian Penties than those in the mother church.
I'm sure things have moved on since, but I suspect that the particular pressures of a missionary context can skew things in all sorts of funny ways.
Which isn't to say that things can't be skewed back on home turf.
I may start another thread about pneumatology ... if Polly is articulating the NFI view then the theology is more skewed than I thought. Back in my restorationist days we were very much into 'baptism in the Spirit' and so on but we'd have never have suggested that people didn't have the Spirit at all until they'd had that experience ...
I also wonder what the heck they're teaching Polly in the Baptist seminary these days. I doesn't sound anything like the Baptists I know (and have been) ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
When Stephen Parsons wrote his book Ungodly Fear on spiritual abuse, the Ship ran a dedicated board. Posters from all parts of the church shared experiences and stories and many found the board helpful and healing for the reasons that Eutychus describes – the idea that you’re not alone; that you didn’t necessarily do anything wrong etc. Spiritual abuse isn’t not an issue that’s unique to NFI. (Sadly). Many of the people who posted on the Ungodly Fear board came from church traditions that do have structures in place to prevent it.
Which, in a round about way brings us back to the OP … Yes, the retirement of TV creates an opportunity for NFI to look at its internal structures and create some additional accountability / transparency within the leadership. It also creates opportunities for them to consider their direction; look at how leaders come up through the system; engage with social issues and some of the debates that exist within the wider church (women!) etc.
I do wonder what has motivated TV to do this now and it would be interesting to get some feedback on this. I wondered if he’d decided that although there is still stuff to do, at 70 he doesn’t have the mental, physical or spiritual energy to build a new team in order to do it so has handed things over to those who do. Many of the original team he gathered are of a similar age and are probably wanting to step away from front line leadership as well.
The problem with any discussion of NFI or the similar churches on the Ship is that charismatic evanglicals are very under-represented here. That means that discussion is often dominated by posters who don’t have first hand experience of those kind of churches OR have left them for whatever reason. Makes for very one-sided debate IMO. If there were more posters from that section of the church, the debate would be more rounded and robust. [And would have probably resulted in some Hell calls by now].
Tubbs
[ 04. August 2011, 09:44: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think what Eutychus and irish lord have said about the missionary situation is a pertinent point, and simply a more extreme example of what tends to prevail among Protestant missions in non-Protestant European/Middle Eastern countries.
I think anywhere with a fairly small Christian presence is prone to this - personal ties can make things easier if people get on, or much harder if they don't.
I'm always mindful that part of my extended family ended up with a local church situation that looked like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/St_Thomas_Christians_divisions.svg
(and yes, they are actually in communion with all those different branches of Christianity).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
I do wonder what has motivated TV to do this now and it would be interesting to get some feedback on this. I wondered if he’d decided that although there is still stuff to do, at 70 he doesn’t have the mental, physical or spiritual energy to build a new team in order to do it so has handed things over to those who do.
As I understand it, that's very much a part of the reasoning.
What I find intruiguing is the extent to which this "official" retirement will actually mark a handing on of authority and, if so, what the rationale for whatever new form of authority established in the future will be.
I don't think the situation is clear, which is in sharp contrast to the way things used to be and makes the subject all the more interesting.
quote:
The problem with any discussion of NFI or the similar churches on the Ship is that charismatic evanglicals are very under-represented here. That means that discussion is often dominated by posters who don’t have first hand experience of those kind of churches OR have left them for whatever reason. Makes for very one-sided debate IMO.
If I'm not mistaken, on this thread there have been multiple posts by contributors who are ex-NF, contributors who are currently in NF, and people who have never been in NF, but had opportunities to observe it at close quarters, all in roughly equal numbers - plus occasional comments and questions from others.
I really don't see how this can be said to be one-sided. If anyone here who's currently a part of NF feels they're not getting a fair hearing, they haven't said so yet.
[ 04. August 2011, 10:12: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I also wonder what the heck they're teaching Polly in the Baptist seminary these days. I doesn't sound anything like the Baptists I know (and have been) ...
My brother teaches at Spurgeon's. I'll ask him when I see him in a couple of weeks' time.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I also wonder what the heck they're teaching Polly in the Baptist seminary these days. I doesn't sound anything like the Baptists I know (and have been) ...
My brother teaches at Spurgeon's. I'll ask him when I see him in a couple of weeks' time.
I've opened another thread to discuss the "Baptists, the Holy Spirit and believers' baptism" issue.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
If what you're saying is true, Tubbs, doesn't it beg a few questions as to why more people from such fellowships aren't posting on these Boards?
Could it be that they couldn't handle the robustness of the debate nor have the theological nuance to cope with the range of views expressed?
Just a suggestion.
Personally, I'd like to see more posters from that constituency. It'd liven things up a bit from time to time and there'd be plenty of Hell Calls and blood on the carpet. It could get gladiatorial.
That said, I do think that there are sufficient NFI posters on this thread to balance things out and, on the whole, the tone has been respectful both towards the 'movement' as a whole and to Terry Virgo as an individual.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomsk
Shipmate
# 15370
|
Posted
Gamaliel said: "Could it be that they couldn't handle the robustness of the debate nor have the theological nuance to cope with the range of views expressed?"
Personally speaking, it's 'cos I can only keep up with slow threads. Also, my (positive) experience of this sort of thing is at a local level over a relatively short period of time. You and some of the others have been involved for much longer, have a different perspective for various reasons and perhaps consequently more to say.
FWIW, TV's gifting as an apostle (whatever you make of that) must surely mean that once he's gone, even as an eminence grise, the whole shebang must surely go its own way.
Posts: 372 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Which, of course brings us to the moot point of what is an apostle?
I would suggest its simply a bishop with a fancy title and without the funny hat and curly stick.
Terry's a good preacher and probably a thoroughly decent bloke. End of.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomsk
Shipmate
# 15370
|
Posted
A bishop or pope or patriarch is an institutional figure. If apostleship is something conferred by a church on demand, I guess that's when the church takes on the trappings of other institutional churches. It'll be interesting to see which way NF goes.
Just to confuse things further, a friend of mine says that in the future church leaders will be apostles (in the sense of spreading the faith) rather than pastors of the flock.
Posts: 372 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
The debate about what contemporary apostles are supposed to be is a big one. It should be noted that NF usually shys away from using the term "apostle" of anyone contemporary - I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone in the movement actually referred to officially as an apostle - and much prefers to go with the adjective "apostolic", which provides rather more wiggle room (heralding someones's "apostolic gifting" rather than acclaiming them as "an apostle").
I think the key point at issue with regard to NF is apostolic authority. In the historic scheme of things, within NF members of apostolic teams have authority to welcome in adopted churches, appoint elders, and so on. This top-down approach was explicitly promoted over and against any other form of authority or accountability. The whole thing 'related' upwards to an apostolic team which in turn was led by TV.
On a day-to-day level, authority was exercised and decisions made without them all being referred back to the 'lead apostle', but as I now understand it, ultimately this pyramid structure was what held NF together.
At least up until very recently, nobody could presume to speak for NF as a whole apart from Terry or with his permission. I think there's now a degree of uncertainty as to whether anybody can or not, which creates something of a vacuum.
It seems to me that the options are limited: either a single new apostolic leader must emerge sooner rather than later; or the movement really will separate into lots of separate ones, each led by a single new apostolic leader (which raises questions about the future of the NFI Limited Trust and its assets); or the entire rationale of authority on which the movement rests is revisited to include some form of corporate decision-making. Or perhaps a combination of the last two.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
Since as a movement in NF we want to express tha best of the foundational principles of NT Christianity, the office of apostle must, logically, play a part in that. I've quite recently heard the role of the NF apostle described as follows. First, they are responsible for ensuring that churches don't slide into heresy. Second, they provide accountability for the leadership of local churches, providing a check and balance against local elders become like chiefs in a village. And I can't for the life of me remember what the third one was, but part of it is about giving local leaders a reference point outside the church - a sort if external consultant if you like.
In a regional leaders meeting last year one of the speakers provocatively asked what the difference was between an 'apostolic' leader and someone who is respected as a peer because they have been around the houses for longer than others. The curious point in all this is that Paul talked about the 'signs of an apostle' - signs wonders and miracles - and whislt we do see that in NF (along with other churches) we don't see too much if it connected with our 'apostolic' figures. This is in contrast to other missionary church planting movements (say Heidi Baker's which has seen over 8,000 churches planted, 10x as many as NF).
So what's my point? Well if we look at what our apostolic figures actually do, and compare them to roles in other churches we have some choices. We could either decide that we've probably used the term somewhat freely to describe what we do, or could be more generous in the way we speak about other churches. So the Anglican bishops who have overseen the rapid evangelical growth of missionary diocese in Nigeia, for example, have in functional terms been doing the kind of work we would describe as 'apostolic'.
Personally, particularly when talking to people from non NF churches, I don't get too hung up about the title and describe what people actually do.
Which I'm sure has opened up some other questions (I can think of a few) but in the spirit of collaborative exploration I'll stop hogging the space and allow some others to set the course of this thread.....
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
If what you're saying is true, Tubbs, doesn't it beg a few questions as to why more people from such fellowships aren't posting on these Boards?
Could it be that they couldn't handle the robustness of the debate nor have the theological nuance to cope with the range of views expressed?
Just a suggestion.
There's an automatic assumption here I'd like to challenge and that is just because more posters from NF/charismatic streams aren't present doesn't mean that they are unable to present a robust point of view.
Reading your posts I'd say that I find you are fair and do listen to others but the assumption you've made is an exception.
Hopefully without getting a smack from Mrs Tubbs or getting her in trouble there have been comments behind the scenes (and not I'm not going to explain any further) that others prefer not to enter into debate on such threads as this because of the assumptions that are made about them. I have already pointed out my concerns with what has been yet another NF thread which has included rather a lot of unbalanced and negative comments. The originally question a valid one but these are often used as a vehicle to swipe at NF.
It is possible that people don't contribute because they have other things to do or a whole host of other reasons. To suggest they are unable to put forward a robust opinion is an unfair assumption.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ok, that's a fair call, Polly. In fairness, I was in a bit of a snarky mood when I posted that and I've been loosing off in all directions recently, as some Shipmates may have noticed. I've been having a go at Calvinists, at Arminians, at charismatics at ...
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
The instance you've cited was a cheap shot though and I withdraw it unequivocably.
Ramarius:
On the role of apostles, you posted -
'First, they are responsible for ensuring that churches don't slide into heresy. Second, they provide accountability for the leadership of local churches, providing a check and balance against local elders become like chiefs in a village. And I can't for the life of me remember what the third one was, but part of it is about giving local leaders a reference point outside the church - a sort if external consultant if you like.'
Well, the last time I looked that was the remit of bishops in the historic Churches. If you speak to the Orthodox you'd find that these are the sort of roles they expect from their Bishops. Whether they all properly fulfil that is a moot point - but then it's a moot point with 'apostles' in the new church set-ups too.
I never saw the 'signs associated with an apostle' when I was involved with a church that was 'under' apostolic ministry - and I was in it for 18 years.
I notice too, that you've very eirenically extended the possibility of Anglican bishops acting 'apostolically' in Nigeria. Of course, Anglicanism in Nigeria is very charismatic and evangelical. Would you not extend the same courtesy, say, to Anglican bishops who were not evangelical or charismatic but who operated within a different paradigm?
And how about Orthodox Bishops in the Middle-East and other countries? They aren't particularly evangelical or charismatic in the 'Western' sense but many of them are doing good work with theological training, the development of schools and orphanages etc. Others among them aren't ... but then that's true of clergy in any tradition.
I have heard the Orthodox apply the term 'apostle' to significant missionary figures - such as St Hermann of Alaska or St Nicholas of Japan - and even, in a whisper, to some contemporary missioners.
Within the evangelical tradition there seems no qualms about referring to Hudson Taylor, say, as 'Apostle to China' and the RCs would do the same for Francis Xavier and other missionary figures from their history.
I can't speak for NFI but within Covenant Ministries there were no such qualms about referring to contemporary ministers as 'apostles'. I suspect they took things further than Terry Virgo ever did, though. For all the gripes that have been expressed here, I've always found, and still think, that, by and large, NFI was always more balanced than Covenant Ministries.
That said, the Covenant Ministries guys could cite things that Terry said or did that went that bit further than even they were prepared to go. I suspect it was a case of swings and roundabouts.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
To suggest they are unable to put forward a robust opinion is an unfair assumption.
But they are unwilling, for whatever reason.
It's a discussion board. It's even anonymous. If you don't join in, no one can hear you. *shrugs*
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
there have been comments behind the scenes (and not I'm not going to explain any further) that others prefer not to enter into debate on such threads as this because of the assumptions that are made about them.
quote:
It is possible that people don't contribute because they have other things to do or a whole host of other reasons. To suggest they are unable to put forward a robust opinion is an unfair assumption.
Putting these two statements together seems to mean that we should accept your speculation as to why un-named others don't contribute, and reject Gamaliel's. Have I made a mistake somewhere?
quote:
I have already pointed out my concerns with what has been yet another NF thread which has included rather a lot of unbalanced and negative comments.
As far as I can see, in your vocabulary on this thread "unbalanced" equals "negative with regard to NF". Your position appears to be that one is not allowed to voice criticism of NF and let the reader be the judge.
I repeat my advice: if you've got an issue with how the debate is being moderated, take it to the Styx. If you don't like what you perceive as negative comments, engage with the issues constructively. End of story. The rest of us appear to be getting on fine here.
[x-posted with Gamaliel and Doc Tor]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
No, it's a fair point, Doc Tor. The same could apply to other traditions. Elsewhere, Mousethief has noted that ultra-traditionalist Orthodox people don't post on these Boards and if they did they'd be chuntering and ranting about 'pseudo-Christians' and the wicked, evil West and so on and so forth ...
I made a bit of a cheap shot and I stand by my withdrawal of it.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Since as a movement in NF we want to express tha best of the foundational principles of NT Christianity, the office of apostle must, logically, play a part in that. I've quite recently heard the role of the NF apostle described as follows. First, they are responsible for ensuring that churches don't slide into heresy. Second, they provide accountability for the leadership of local churches, providing a check and balance against local elders become like chiefs in a village. And I can't for the life of me remember what the third one was, but part of it is about giving local leaders a reference point outside the church - a sort if external consultant if you like.
Yes, that all sounds familiar. I think the practical thing which is missing from your list - and correct me if I'm wrong - is that NF apostles or their delegates, to the exclusion of anyone else, appoint elders, who then oversee the church with no formal method of challenging their decisions other than leaving.
If I'm correct about this, it means that at the end of the day, whoever is in charge of NF (or any subset thereof) basically has the power over everyone "under" them, even if their role is cast as a consultative one.
Once again, I concur that this top-down structure is not prominent on a day-to-day basis, anything but (as evidenced by you not mentioning it!) but when you look at it more closely, that's the way it is.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I cross-posted with Eutychus too ... without prolonging any agony, I would like to say that whilst I withdraw my knee-jerk comment that many from the charismatic evangelical constituency wouldn't be able to hack the level of robust debate aboard Ship ... I agree with Eutychus (contra Polly) that this thread hasn't been 'unabalanced' at all in respect of NFI.
I myself have posted a number of positive comments about Terry Virgo and also of how, personally, my own experiences of NFI has been benign to an overwhelming extent. I have plenty of friends in NFI churches and I respect them highly.
On the whole, I'd say that the level of debate on this thread has been very civilised indeed with insightful comments from both those within and without NFI. I really don't see any need for a gripe about the way the debate has been conducted. If anything, I'd say it's been conducted in a more exemplary way than similar debates in the past.
I'll shut up now. Other people have more important contributions to make.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
No, it's a fair point, Doc Tor. The same could apply to other traditions. Elsewhere, Mousethief has noted that ultra-traditionalist Orthodox people don't post on these Boards and if they did they'd be chuntering and ranting about 'pseudo-Christians' and the wicked, evil West and so on and so forth ...
I made a bit of a cheap shot and I stand by my withdrawal of it.
I don't have a dog in this fight (except I like Euty and the way he was treated both sucks and blows), but this is Christian unrest, and we have a duty to stick it to the Man (and it usually is a man, let's face it), whichever Man it is.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707
|
Posted
There's a false association being made if one equates the robustness of a debate with the depth of knowledge or understanding of the participants. I have never noticed in the ship of fools or life generally all that strong a correlation between how forcefully people express themselves and how much they know what they are talking about.
Some people like the tone of discussion on ship of fools, some people don't. But the tone also comes across differently to those in groups who are mostly being critical and those in groups who are mostly being criticised. It's not that surprising if fewer people in the latter groups enjoy participating, regardless of how well they've thought out their ideas.
--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai
Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
