Posted on 12/31/2006 8:41:18 AM PST by Gamecock
The facade is beginning to peel back from the so-called ministry of Southern California Pastor Rick Warren, author of "The Purpose Driven Church" and "The Purpose Driven Life." Unfortunately, many among his ample flock have far too much invested in him, both emotionally and otherwise, to admit their mistakes and cut their losses.
Moreover, he certainly faces no possibility of in-depth scrutiny from the "mainstream media," as his brand of "Christianity" poses little or no threat to their liberal social agenda. Yet to the degree that anyone at all questions Warren as anything less than authentic, his response is thoroughly telling as to his true character, as well as the nature of his "ministry."
Joseph Farah, editor-in-chief of the Internet news site, "World Net Daily," opened a can of worms by calling Warren to account over his fawning praise of the terrorist stronghold of Syria. While there, Warren lauded the brutish dictatorship as "peaceful," claiming that the Islamist government does not officially sanction "extremism of any kind."
When confronted by Farah, an American of Middle Eastern decent who knows too well the history of horror and tragedy faced by persecuted Christians in that region of the world, Warren immediately denied ever making such statements.
Subsequently, Farah offered as evidence a "YouTube" video from Saddleback Church, where Warren is pastor, inarguably proving Farah's statement. So Warren's church simply pulled the video from circulation and continued the denial, being unaware that a copy of the video file had been downloaded and is still in circulation. Warren's follow-up to this inconvenient circumstance is perhaps most telling of all.
In a concurrent set of moves, Warren sent a seemingly conciliatory e-mail to Farah while distributing another to his "flock," in which he characterized Farah's pursuit of the incident as nothing less than "doing Satan's job for him." Throughout this sorry episode, Farah's only error has been to suggest that Warren's disturbing behavior represents some new departure from consistency.
In fact, Warren is actually being entirely consistent. Whether his audience might be Farah himself, Syrian despot Bashar Assad or the Saddleback congregation, Warren tells each exactly what he believes they want to hear.
This pattern is the essence of what Warren is and what has made him so "successful" from a worldly perspective.
For those among his congregation who sincerely want to know the truth, the evidence is ample. Unfortunately, it always has been available, and any present "confusion" merely results from past decisions to ignore that evidence.
For example, his letter to the congregation decrying the "attack" and making his defense by invoking Scripture is barely four paragraphs long. Yet in those four paragraphs, he employs three different "translations" of the Bible. Why, it must be asked, does he not trust any single translation to convey God's message to humanity?
Could it be that he has his own message and agenda to advance, and that he has found it very convenient to utilize different wordings of different passages, not because they better convey God's purpose, but rather his own?
It would be better to ask, could his motivation possibly be anything else?
As Farah has refused to let this indefensible situation simply drop, Warren has responded by taking it to another realm, making personal attacks against Farah in an interview with the magazine, "Christianity Today." But once again, by so doing, Warren succeeds in revealing much more about himself than about his adversary.
Warren, who has not to date been known as any sort of standard bearer for Christian principle in the political arena, decries Farah (whose societal and moral views fall unambiguously on the right) and his ideological allies as part of a wrongful "political" encroachment on the faith.
In contrast, Warren's forays into the political realm prove, not surprisingly, to be decidedly leftist. At a recent conference on the African AIDS epidemic, Warren invited the very liberal Senator Barak Obama (D-Ill.) as a keynote speaker. He justified the inclusion of Obama, who avidly supports abortion and same-sex "marriage," on the grounds that Obama offered a worldly solution to ostensibly curb the spread of the disease through condom usage.
The morally ambiguous message conveyed by the advocacy of condoms, along with their inherent unreliability, make them nothing less than iconic to the abortion industry, which fully understands how much new business they generate. In the face of such pragmatism, one has to wonder what will be next. Perhaps Warren's church will sponsor a "designated driver's ministry" at every bar in its locale.
Appalling though Obama's inclusion in the conference may be, it is nonetheless entirely consistent with Warren's behavior from the beginning.
Leading a megachurch in the culturally disintegrating landscape of Southern California, Warren certainly knows that his prospects of maximizing the "flock" will be greatly enhanced as long as he shows proper deference to the real religion of the area, "political correctness."
In this, his Christian populism movement has proven to be far more palatable to the God-hating secularists of the surrounding communities than such stodgy, old-fashioned and "intolerant" notions as "Thou Shalt Not." And the Warren influence has been predictable wherever it can be found.
If other churches that abide in the Warren philosophy, such as Chicago's gargantuan "Willow Creek," were to truly uphold Christian values among their enormous congregations, they would certainly be a constant "thorn in the side" of their surrounding populace, acculturated into the modernism as those communities certainly are. Yet an amazing degree of compatibility and congeniality exists between the Warren Church model and the social structures of Chicago and Southern California.
The tradeoff between true Christian principle and acceptability to the locals is apparently worth the spiritual sacrifice it entails, with expanding parking lots, increasingly lavish facilities and, of course, fuller collection plates bearing witness. Meanwhile, such churches offer ever less of a worthwhile and much-needed alternative to the ailing world around them.
Ultimately, Warren gives conformist Christians, wearied from their ongoing battle with a world that is increasingly hostile to true Christian faith, an apparent "out" by offering a version that the modern world can find more acceptable while remaining in its present spiritual darkness.
Many among Warren's vast following have made the mistake, in light of his "purpose driven" ministering, of presuming, at the heart of the movement, a Christ-driven purpose. Yet as Warren's real character continues to be revealed, it is becoming apparent that members of that following are presuming too much.
(Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer and staff writer for the New Media Alliance. He lives in southeastern Wyoming and has been active in local and state politics for many years.)
Rick Warren endorses the New World Order "UN Millennium Goals"/"ONE Campaign", and wants to make them the center of the Christian Church.
He and Episcopal ultra-heretic Katharine Jefferts-Schori are two sides of the same coin!!!!
We are going to paint some icons and light the incense. We also have to hook up the computers so that the people can access www.sacredspace.com to pray with St. Ignatius and the Pope.
If you come down, please bring the Hindu temple music. We want to be playing that in the prayer room to give a total sensory experience.
Take your shoes off when you come in...We already put down the prayer mats and sit pillows. It is going to be so cleansing!!!
Congrats on the tat and piercing!
I have to be honest. I just don't know if I can be that relevant, yet...just trying to be authentic.
Well until then, I'll wear my hair messy, get highlights, wear a choaker and play the bongo drums in the emergent worship service. PEACE!
Love is what drives most people to refute false teachers and to warn/protect the Church from the wolves.
Like it or not, and despite your nephew's salvation during the PDL, Warren has all the signs of a wolf.
His recent episodes with Syria and Obama are just fruits of his faulty, unbiblical teachings and methods.
It is not unloving to point this out.
Like it or not, my point continues to fly over your head, again, and again and again. Because of this I will not respond to your posts for an indefinite time period.
I seriously doubt you are in a "seeker-sensitive" church if you are dwelling on sin. Sin is a verboten word in seeker-sensitive churches. It implies that a person is "bad".
You laugh but one of the techniques of the SSC is to bring in traditions from other faiths to make seekers more comfortable. Remember, the key is to get them in the door. Then supposedly, they get the Gospel. But they never seem to get that because it might make them leave.
It's bad enough for us to be critical of Lord Warren, but even that might be tolerated (to an extent), IF we were decent and civil enough to couch our words in a reasonbly obsequious tone, demonstrating the trappings of reverence if not outright obeisance toward The Man.
It's really no different, when you get down to it -- other than in degree (at the moment at least) -- from the ubiquitous "taking offense" demonstrated on a daily basis by devout Muslims.
With Islam, it's one thing to disagree with "The Prophet Mohammed" -- but, you WILL refer to him AS "The Prophet Mohammed" (a lesson the mainstream media has already learned) -- and before too long, you'll learn to apply the "(PBUH)" to his name. (I wouldn't worry about "having to" actually type out the entire "Peace Be Unto Him", since even the Muslims aren't required to do that much. Of course, on the other hand, the laws of dhimitude often do place more stringent obligations on the "infidels" than on the dar es islam -- so who knows?)
With Warrenism, the same rule is applied -- and, the media "watchdogs" have learned it, just as they've learned to be obediently reverential to "The Prophet Mohammed".
And as a proof of that sad reality, consider this: Even though it is inevitable that ol' Mo is termed "The Prophet Mohammed" by the talking heads, have you EVER heard them refer to "The Messiah Christ", or "The Savior Jesus"? (I mean, when referring to Him, NOT when making a direct quote in a story. They DO casually refer to you-know-who as "The Prophet", but they don't apply the same "respect" to Christianity. But then, Christians don't pose the same risk, when one offends them.)
The practitioners of the Gospel of Creative Destruction have clearly drawn a line in the cement. They WILL be "respected" -- they will be lavished with the trappings of "honor", no matter how much one might actually disagree with them.
They have established the basic ground rule -- they will be afforded the rank of de facto "royalty", just as the representatives of the Holy See enjoyed during its reign over the land.
Men -- strong men, soldiers and such, men who would be feared in their own right -- trembled before Cardinals and Bishops, lest they offend those who held the real power in the land.
And if one thing is obvious, it's that Warrenism is rapidly becoming THE Official State Religion of the land.
Welcome to the New! Improved! Exciting! "Holy Empire"!
(New, Improved, Etc. -- and every bit as terrifying and ominous as the OLD model upon which it's framed.)
Lord Scripter pinged lest he whine that one as lowly as I -- disrespectful toward Lord Warren as I might be -- dared to reference him in a comment without pinging him. So, I now brace for the possible "if I do/if I don't" alternative, i.e., getting chewed out FOR pinging him to something he does not enjoy reading.
BTW, the key to his Royal Indignation is found in post # 1028, where it becomes crystal clear that us "resistors" (to coin a phrase) are only to be tolerated if we bow and scrape before Lord Warren. How dare we fail to show Respect to the Cardinal of Saddle?
Matthew, Chapter 7:
Like it or not, and despite your nephew's salvation during the PDL, Warren has all the signs of a wolf.
22: Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23: And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
I'm going to say something that I hope you really hear, not just read. Here is my response to your above comment: "Gee, I've never heard that before."
Of course that's sarcasm. I have friends who have said the same thing. They've told me all kinds of things about my church that I didn't know. They were wrong, of course, and after hearing some sermon messages on CD they decided to come visit my seeker-sensitive church. Boy, were they surprised to hear the gospel message. They continually asked us how we could claim to be seeker-sensitive. I couldn't help smile.
Just because a church identifies as seeker-sensitive does't mean the Sunday worship services ignore the gospel message. I'm sure that's true for some churches, seeker-sensitive or not.
Thanks for taking some netiquette into consideration as I really appreciate it. But let me be clear: I don't want you pinging me. Please demonstrate some character and honor this request.
I understand the methodologies.
Unfortunately, the humorous postings were, in reality, very close to the goings on in the SSC/emergent churches.
No Gospel..."just your reservation in heaven".
Let's not forget Saddam Insane. Why look at the out pouring of love for this man! Yes, if we look hard enough evil will be good and good will be evil.
I can't wait till the Rickster goes to North Korea and comes back saying how they're such nice people and we've got it all wrong.
And how have I not addressed your specific posts?
Is virtual ignore a loving act?
And what will be the real nature of his visit to North Korea?
This should be quite clear: please don't ping me again.
As I predicted, damned if I don't, damned if I do.
Very well, Your Majesty -- I shall strive my utmost to avoid troubling you with any more evidence of my existence. However, I make NO promises, as I do NOT always scrutinize "who said what" before dashing off a casual comment.
So, should your humble servant inadvertently fail to honor your demand, I beg your mercy, etc.
Until then, so long, and Have A Nice Day!
(PS: your tone, unless I'm mistaken, is that of one who is bone-weary of having made the request repeatedly -- however, I do not recall any prior time at which you demanded that I write you out of my universe. So, please demonstrate some character of your own, and get off your high horse. And while we're at it, let's invoke the Sauce for the Goose doctrine, and have YOU honor MY request to not comment to ME anymore. TUVM/etc.)
Ah, whatever you want him to be is what he'll be. I doubt that he's fussy about that.
I realize those things can happen and if they do you'll be given mercy. You have my word on that. I ask the same of you.
And no, I haven't made this request of you before. But yes, I am bone-weary of something, and that is the lack of the fruits of the Spirit in this thread.
May God bless you in ways only He can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.