Posted on 10/19/2013 8:50:26 PM PDT by jodyel
Lighthouse Trails has watched in dismay over the past few years as Charles Stanley’s In Touch magazine has made the decision to promote contemplative/emergent names. When our editors picked up a copy of the August 2013 issue and saw a feature article written by Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove, we decided to call In Touch Ministries to find out who was responsible for the content in the magazine. Sadly, the response we received from the editorial department at In Touch left us with a sinking feeling that the evangelical church has been seduced and there was no turning back.
We’ll talk about the phone call in a minute but first a look at Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove.
In June of 2011, Lighthouse Trails free lance writer Mike Stanwood wrote “Contemplative Spirituality Lands on Charles Stanley’s In Touch Magazine . . . Again.” In this article, it was revealed that in the January 2011 In Touch magazine issue, Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove was featured in an article written by In Touch Managing Editor Cameron Lawrence. That article, titled “The Craft of Stability: Discovering the Ancient Art of Staying Put,” highlighted the “ intentional Christian community” at the Rutba House (Wilson-Hartgrove’s home) and their “daily prayer routine.” The In Touch article stated that Rutba House is an evangelical community rooted in the Protestant tradition and that Wilson-Hartgrove is an ordained Baptist minister, yet it also reported that Rutba’s community principles are borrowed from Benedictine monks and that all of their efforts are based on St. Benedict’s “rule of life.”
In Stanwood’s article, he points out that Wilson-Hartgrove is part of the “New Monasticism” movement within the emerging church. To help you understand just how serious this situation is with Charles Stanley and his ministry, read this following section of Stanwood’s article:
Wilson-Hartgrove is most recently known for co-authoring Common Prayer: A Liturgy for Ordinary Radicals with new monastic activist Shane Claiborne. Other books he has authored may also fall into the emerging/contemplative category. For example, one such book called New Monasticism: What It Has to Say to Today’s Church (1) has been endorsed by mystic proponents Brian McLaren, Phyllis Tickle, Tony Campolo, and Catholic priest and centering prayer advocate Richard Rohr. The mystics resonate with the “new monasticism” – this is plain to see.
On the surface, the new monasticism may look OK with its many good works of helping the poor and the needy. But the underlying belief system does not line up with biblical doctrine; rather it is about establishing an all-inclusive kingdom of God on earth now where individual salvation is replaced with a community salvation for the whole world. Atonement has less emphasis on Jesus Christ as the only atonement for man’s sins and instead becomes an at-one-ment where all of creation is “being” saved by coming together as one (and yes, seeing the divinity of man). This is the kind of “atonement” that McLaren, Tickle, and Rohr would resonate with.
It is important to see that they don’t just resonate with the good works coming out of the new monasticism; born-again Christians have been performing good works by helping the poor and needy for centuries and continue to do so. While this new monasticism supposedly distinguishes itself by its good works, in reality it is mysticism and the foundational beliefs of mysticism (i.e., panentheism, kingdom now, etc) that distinguish it. And it is that element that Tickle, McLaren, and Rohr embrace.
Additional resources on Wilson-Hartgrove’s website include a DVD called Discovering Christian Classics: 5 Sessions in the Ancient Faith of Our Future, a five-week study with contemplative advocate Lauren F. Winner (Girl Meets God) for high school or adult “formation.” A description of this DVD states:
“You will discover the meaning of conversion and prayer from the Desert Fathers and Mothers; how to love from the sermons of St. John Chrysostom; St. Benedict’s Rule of Life and how it became one of the foundations of Western Christian spirituality; how to have an intimate relationship with God according to The Cloud of Unknowing; and what it means to ‘pick up your cross” in the Imitation of Christ by Thomas A. Kempis.’”
Another book Wilson-Hartgrove has authored, called The Wisdom of Stability: Rooting Faith in a Mobile Culture, refers readers to the wisdom of Lao-tzu, the desert monastics, Thomas Merton, Benedictine spirituality, panentheist and interspiritualist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and Benedictine nun Joan Chittister.
In a Beliefnet interview one year ago, Wilson-Hartgrove shared how “we need the wisdom of those who’ve gone before us.” This wisdom he is referring to comes not from the Bible, but from the contemplative “Benedictines (who) taught us to start the day with common prayer.”1
After seeing what is at the core of Wilson-Hartgrove’s spiritual wisdom, it is not surprising to learn that he recently made an appearance at the [very emergent] Wild Goose Festival .2 According to an article in the Christian Post, the Wild Goose Festival was a “four-day revival camp in North Carolina featuring music, yoga, liberal talk and embracing of gays and lesbians.”
The fact is, anyone who is drawn to Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, as Wilson-Hartgrove is, has got to be following a different spirit and another gospel or at the very least greatly deceived. Chardin, who is attributed to the term “cosmic Christ,” did not hide the fact in his writings that he believed, not in the Christ of the Bible, but a christ consciousness in every human being.
While we do not challenge Wilson-Hartgrove’s sincerity or concern for the poor and needy, we must challenge his consistent promotion of contemplative mystics and emergent leaders, and he certainly does not seem like a proper fit with In Touch Ministries, that is unless In Touch is going emerging. The reason we say this about Wilson-Hartgrove’s sincerity has to do with the phone call we had with two editors of the editorial staff of In Touch magazine on July 24, 2013. One of the editors we spoke with was Cameron Lawrence, the Editor in Chief (and also the one who wrote the 2011 In Touch article featuring Wilson-Hartgrove). Lawrence asked us if we had ever spoken with Wilson-Hartgrove personally, suggesting that he was a sincere man who lived out the Gospel by helping the needy. We answered him by stating that the issue at hand was not a private matter but rather a public issue because Wilson-Hartgrove is a public figure (books, conferences, articles, etc). We said that it did not matter what he might say in a private conversation, but it did matter what he was teaching others. And it mattered greatly that In Touch was promoting him.
When we spoke with Cameron Lawrence, we told him we wanted to know who was responsible for putting the article by Wilson-Hartgrove in the magazine to which he told us “the entire editorial staff” made the decision. We asked him if he would be interested in seeing some of our documentation to which he answered, “I have been on the Lighthouse Trails website, and I didn’t find it helpful.” The other editor we spoke with, who wished to remain anonymous, said it sounded like we were on a “witch hunt” to which we responded, “No, we are part of a Gospel-protection effort.”
At times like this, it is difficult not to become discouraged by the lack of interest in Christian intelligentsia and leadership regarding the contemplative/emerging issue. What more can we say to show them what seems so obvious to ourselves and many other Bible believing contenders of the faith? A number of years ago, when the Be Still DVD (a contemplative infomercial) came out and we saw Charles Stanley’s name in the credits as someone who supported the DVD, we contacted his ministry and spoke with a personal assistant. He accepted our offer for a free copy of A Time of Departing but said that Charles Stanley would be too busy to read it.
If the mystics whom Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove gravitates to are right, then Jesus’ words that He is the only Way to the Father are wrong. You can’t have it both ways. The opposite view – the contemplative – is that God is in all things, including all people. This is what all mystics believe, across the board. And if that were true, then the need for a Savior would vanish, and there wouldn’t be any need for ”one way” to God because man is already indwelled with God and a part of God.
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. John 14:6
Endnotes: 1. New Monasticism & The Emergent Church: FS Talks with Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove: http://blog.beliefnet.com/flunkingsainthood/2010/06/new-monasticism-the-emergent-church-fs-talks-with-jonathan-wilson-hartgrove.html.
2. Learn more about the Wild Goose Festival here: Left-Leaning ‘Wild Goose’ Festival Draws Ire of Evangelicals
“You all need to convert to the Catholic Church that Christ founded if you are indeed as interested in the Holy Person of Christ as you say you are, without distinction.”
You may keep it, annalex, as I have already got Christ and have no need of organized religion of any stripe...no isms for me. But thanks for the offer...I’ll pass.
Perhaps but it was not as crystal clear as it should have been from a believer...and Mr. Schuller jumped on it...did you notice?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozjLaoPrcQ0
This is a Larry King excerpt.
Problem is when you start preaching the true Gospel, people label you a kook and then your TV spots and interviews and other stuff start drying up. I’ve yet to see anyone take an unequivocal stand for Christ on national TV. Can you imagine someone saying Muslims, Jews, Hindus, etc. are all going to hell because they are not born again in Christ? But that is exactly what will happen and they need to know it.
Oh, my, jodyel. I had no idea it was THAT bad. Thanks for sharing and enlightening.
Yes, it seems he has jumped on the ecumenical bandwagon too.
I am very saddened by it.
No, I did not set the bar. God set the bar, in His Scripture, and the oft repitition magnifies the force. That constraint was set in the Garden, and has never been relaxed.
You can either take the standards as they were given, and have not changed, or you can refuse.
You choice will be seen by all at the judgment seat of Christ, if that is to be where your works will be evaluated and rewards determined.
For me, I was separated in 1971, and divorced in 1972, against my will. However, choosing against being remarried is entirely within my purview. It would have been very easy to slip away from God's standard in a couple of instances, but He kept me from making a big mistake. And I do like girls. A lot. I spent from 1972 tom 1979 exclusively focusing on high-level technical career as well as gaining and exercising custody of my four children. In 1980-84 I let my attention slip, but the Lord pretty seriously disciplined me for that. But since, there has been not even a casual meeting with infatuation potential since 1984. And God has blessed again and again in every sphere.
I realize that I can now not ever Scripturally qualify as a pastor, elder, or deacon, but I am not banned from evangelism, teaching, or discipling. Neither would Stanley be, the way I understand it, should he conform to clear Biblical standards, by recognizing that God has dismissed him from the pastoral, elder, or deacon roles, accepting this state, and continuing on in celibacy.
Until then, IMHO he is not fit to teach or disciple anyone, either, until he becomes obedient to the determined will God has shown to us in His Word.
Do not think for one minute that Dr. Stanley is not setting an extremely poor example to those expecting a godly response from him to the circumstances unilaterally imposed on him by his wife. The longer he delays this decision, the worse the effect it will have on his admirers looking to him to do the right thing so they can copy.
What would you have him do?
"Therefore, we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. . . ." (Heb. 2:1)
Agreed. It is a tall order of developing the nine-faceted qualities of the fruit of the Spirit--the character of Christ--especially that of self-control, for both members of the marital union serving the local assembly as elders and counselors. As you can see, the children of such a couple must be trained from the womb to prepare them for the support of and integration into their parents' ministry, and for their own.
In fact, this is the order for imitation by all believer-disciples. In fact, it is in this area that the paradigm of celibate priesthood and paedobaptism regeneration produces individuals so spiritually stunted through lack of application to ones own family that they cannot display the qualities necessary for carrying out the Great Commission by first discipling one's own children successfully into spiritual rebirth and personal maturity.
I encourage you to go and meditate on this conundrum for a while. Take your Authorised Version English translation with you, and start by memorizing and pondering on Psalm 128, especially verse 1.
With respect --
Not at all: while St. Peter was singled out for the leadership in the Catholic Church and named after the Rock, his authority , like the papal authority today, is shared with the Holy Apostles and the Bishops their successors, and the authority of the Pope rests on the Rock of Christ, and the firmness of the Holy Catholic faith that moves mountains.
LOL, good luck with your absence of a need.
The verb here, misehoh, is "to love less"; where its opposite, agapahoh, is "to prefer above"; more precisely: "to sovereignly prefer one over self and others." That is, choosing to be in the Presence of Jesus, obeying His commands, and following His Ways is to be preferred above one's worldly family and even one's old, natural, carnal spirit; else one has no ability to become His disciple.
In this summary, Christ did not direct that one must detest and abandon concern for one's own rational, immortal soul, nor that for one's own biotic mechanical mobility and chemical function, nor does it mean the rejection of a natural emotional beneficial yearning toward one's own spouse, children, parents, and siblings--which is given by and ordered by The Father.
What it does mean is that Christ will not play the role of second fiddle to others, and He must be preeminent in the existence of a true regenerated believer-disciple.
It might be that Mr. Stanley may have persistently allowed his occupational priorities to surmount the preeminence of both his first love (as did the angel/messenger/preacher of the Ephesus church; see Rev. 2:1-5), and of his next-in-eminence love, that for his wife/helpmate (which Adam did not; see Genesis 2:23-24, 3:6 and 1 Timothy 2:14). That certainly would put him at odds with both God, wife, and the rest of mankind, except for spiritual infants wrongly mimicking him.
Spiritual adults will not do so, but will put Christ's concerns (not their own religious works) first, as Paul recommends to his fellow Hebrews (see Heb. 6:9-12)--not those of their favorite pastor, if he has fallen out of grace and obedience and is no longer in The Way.
Eh?
I don’t have a need...it has been fulfilled and resides in my heart.
I am a born-again, Spirit-filled believer who has seen the Lord work in mighty ways in my life. And He is the only reason I am here taking abuse from others who disagree with biblical salvation.
If I did not know Him and love Him and want to do His will, not mine....I’d be off lying on a beach somewhere drinking pina coladas and watching the world go by, not giving a flip whether myself or anyone else ever came to know Him.
Instead I get to come here and debate peeps like you who’d rather jump thru every hoop imaginable instead of just surrendering to Jesus. Oh joy!
Tell me I don’t know Him....as if!
(respectfully)
Since you are not Catholic I do not think your knowledge of Jesus is true nor complete, although I appreciate your earnestness.
:)
No, you would not...but fortunately salvation is so simple a small child can understand it and also complete at the time it is given.
Thank God!
No, I have not been baptized with water nor do I attend any church...but this is due to ill health. I am essentially house bound and do not leave for much except food.
But I also do not expect that to last forever either.
I am presently healing and waiting for whatever the Lord has for me to do next.
Must sound crazy to those that think doing and keeping busy, busy, busy is the only valuable service to the Lord but there are those of us that never do more than type on a keyboard and are still of great service to Him.
I did not post for several years after I found this site because I really was too unwell. And while my health has improved, it is still not up for great theological debates or much flinging of Scripture. I am pretty simple in my belief for the present, but as I said I don’t expect that to last forever. God has given me a length of time to heal and when I have, He will move me on.
http://banneroftruth.org/us/resources/articles/2007/god-chooses-and-god-uses-each-one-of-his-people/
I care a lot!!...in our parish, we certainly have members who are housebound, some temporarily, some permanently....they are all in contact with the parish, they are all visited, at least weekly, with the Eucharist by volunteer Eucharistic ministers. Disabled does not necessarily mean dosowned....see what assistance your local congregation has to offer...the priest also visits these people on a regular basis...
where on Earth did you come up with all those errant Popes.....oh, that's right....from the Catholic Church....we do tend to correct our own errors.
Well, I am not Catholic and have no intention of ever becoming one one since I am already saved and born again, so I won’t be doing that. But thanks anyway.
My point is that one doesn’t have to be involved in a church building or religion to be a born again Christian. But some think you must. I am here to say it ain’t so.
http://banneroftruth.org/us/resources/articles/2007/god-chooses-and-god-uses-each-one-of-his-people/
let's see now....Jesus is God and He gave the knowledge of God directly to the Catholic Church IN PERSON...He was there, the Catholics were there...the prottys, on the other hand, picked up their knowledge of God from Knox, Luther, Wesley brothers, Calvin, Henry VIII, storefront churches of what's happening now....and from the bible, which was given to them by the Catholic Church... :)
very sadly, you are wrong...Christ said so.
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.