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.)
Oh, my goodness.
God isn't performing according to prescription and script?
And neither is RW?
Oh, Dear. What shall we do?
Oh, I know, rant, rant, rant and more rant.
How lovely.
It funds foundations that works with businesses, governments, Muslims, non-Christians and etc. to slay the five global giants.
There was no wholesale distortion in what I said...You may just not understand what some of his "reverse-tithe" funds.
I understand that his funds don't march to folks prescriptions and scripts hereon and in other Jr A hot spots.
Good for him.
I understand that there's not a snowball's chance in hot places that even if he brought back from Heaven a physcal tablet of 100% purest Heavenly Gold inscribed by God's own finger as to what he should do with his money--folks hereon would not be satisfied and would still crucify him.
You came in on the tail end of that exchange.
I understand that there's not a snowball's chance in hot places that even if he brought back from Heaven a physcal tablet of 100% purest Heavenly Gold inscribed by God's own finger as to what he should do with his money--there's not a snowball's chance in hot places that folks would applaud his obedience to God's orders.
--folks hereon would not be satisfied and would still crucify him.
?
I think I'll go do something more fruitful for The Kingdom . . .
like sucking rocks for relaxation or
playing Spider.
So you believe that it is okay for Warren, and the Church, to partner with business, governments, other faiths, Muslims and non-Christians in order to slay the five global giants?
Do you agree with Warren that the Church cannot succeed without the government?
Can you show me a New Testament example of the Church partnering with business, governments, other faiths, non-Christians and Muslims to take on the social ills of the day?
I wouldn't need a golden tablet...just examples and direction from Scripture would do.
Your knee-jerk reaction to John 6:37 and Acts 13:48 are making alot more sense in light of your last few posts.
Did you find post# 1106, free_life?
Sounds 180 degrees twisted from the RW quote I read--that government could not do it without the church.
I realize it's customary to twist, distort, mangle, shred, turn inside out and upside down what RW says before rocking it to dust . . . but sheesh.
I think
before God,
that folks on these threads should be very cautious about breaking their arms patting themselves on the back about how much they understand me.
Are you saying he's not a Christian?
The quote I was referencing was Warren's statement as a panelist at the Pew Forum on Religion, in Key West, on May 23, 2005.
Have you read that transcript?
The quote is there as I paraphrased/referenced in my post.
You had a wild, knee-jerk reaction to Scripture and then a crazy post about using Muslims, non-Christians, governments and businesses as global partners was nothing but "off script".
For a minute there, I thought that you were talking about Warren's use of Scripture.
Hey...Why let Islam flush itself when you can use it as a global partner to slay the five global giants?
I can only compare what he says/writes/does with Scripture (Acts 17:11).
I can hear Paul now: "If y'all started usi'n some of that Temple of Diana music and some of their hot (I mean hot) worship practices and fergit some of yer boring readings and stuff...You'd draw more Jews.
Is that what Paul did?
How did Paul build a bridge with the Jews in their synagogues?
By failing to mention Christ (never!)
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.