Tag: movement

Social Media, the Reformation, and the Power of Blogging

~ Bob Hayton ~ 8 Comments

As we look back on 2011, the “Arab Spring” stands testament to the power of social media. Facebook and Twitter, and other social media sites helped unite and focus a growing distaste for autocratic state power. The revolutions in Egypt and Libya, Syria and elsewhere were fostered and furthered by means of social media.

The Japanese tsunami and earthquake, also gave evidence to the speed of social media. Some were alerted to the earthquake via speedy social media — spreading faster than the earthquake and its deadly wave.

It seems we are living in a brave new world of social media. But it turns out that the power of social media isn’t really all that new. A recent article in The Economist reminds us that social media and its power to foster social revolutions is no new thing. In a fascinating article, “How Luther went viral: Five centuries before Facebook and the Arab spring, social media helped bring about the Reformation,” we are reminded that the printed pamphlet and the cartoon — both in their infancy as media in the early 1500s — were tools used to unite those discontented with the Roman papal system. Luther would have been silenced like so many other would-be reformers that preceded him, were it not for the rapid-fire spread of printed pamphlets and public sentiment in his favor.

Similarly, in our day, the last five to ten years has seen the internet, and blogging in particular, unite those discontented with the problems of Christian fundamentalism. No longer can pastors mold and shape their congregation’s opinion about anything without fear of having their facts checked by a quick Google search. The internet brings us closer to the world of ideas, and closer to other Christian communities too. No longer is John MacArthur some distant radio personality that our pastor warns us about — we can download his messages online and realize that his ministry isn’t as dangerous as our fundamentalist pastor has warned.

While social media can certainly be used for evil, and while the nature of social media can encourage sinful behaviors (gossip, hateful speech, and lack of discernment among many others), it nevertheless remains a powerful tool to be used for good. Just as Luther seized the opportunity provided him via the “social media” of his day, we Christians should take every opportunity to wield this new tool for the advancement of Christ’s Kingdom.

As I look forward to 2012, I hope to continue to expend some of my energies in this realm for the good of the Church next year and in the years to come. I’m also thankful for the many other exemplary Christian bloggers who have extended their influence into the this arena and are speaking truth to a watching world.

What Can Fundamentalists Learn from Joe Paterno?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 48 Comments

By now, I’m sure most of my readers have heard that Joe Paterno was recently fired after more than 40 years of coaching one of the top College Football programs in the country. Paterno won more games in his coaching career than anyone else in Division-1 Football. Even now his Penn State’s Nittany Lions are poised to win the Big Ten Championship. By all accounts he should be respected and revered. But he was summarily dismissed, and turned out — and this at the end of his golden career.

Paterno is an illustration of a changing reality in the world today. A reality that Fundamentalists and other conservative Church groups must pay attention to, and learn from. Paterno lost the battle of public opinion, because today’s public has an entirely different opinion of child abuse, and potential child abuse, than yesterday’s generation.

In the old days, when the “Good Ol’ Boy” club reinged supreme. An allegation, was just that — an allegation. An alleged incident that may or may not be true. And someone in a position of leadership, would usually be given the benefit of the doubt. In Paterno’s case, his son made the following argument on his behalf:

“Unfortunately,” Scott Paterno said, “once that happened, there was really nothing more Joe felt he could do because he did not witness the event. You can’t call the police and say, ‘Somebody tells me they saw somebody else do something.’ That’s hearsay. Police don’t take reports in that manner. Frankly, from the way he understood the process, he passed the information on to the appropriate university official and they said they were taking care of it. That’s really all he could do. [source]

Thinking this through, I was inclined to give JoePa the benefit of the doubt. He did what he thought was right, and someone else goofed up and didn’t report like they should have. But the more I think about the situation, the more convinced I am that he really does share a blame. It’s convenient to pass a problem off on someone else, especially when the allegation concerns someone you know and trust.

While occasionally, innocent people do get falsely accused, overall, today’s culture which prizes the innocent victims is really to be praised. Isn’t that what the Bible advocates? Standing up for those who have no voice of their own? Ministering to the helpless and the fatherless? The following Scripture verses comes to mind:

Thus says the LORD: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the resident alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place. (Jeremiah 22:3 ESV)

Thus says the LORD of hosts, Render true judgments, show kindness and mercy to one another, do not oppress the widow, the fatherless, the sojourner, or the poor, and let none of you devise evil against another in your heart. (Zechariah 7:9-10)

Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world. (James 1:27 ESV)

The Church is also to maintain a good reputation with the world, and particularly its leaders, the elders are given this charge: “Moreover [they] must have a good report of them which are without.” (1 Tim. 3:7a KJV) So, this changing opinion of the public in regard to allegations of child abuse is something that fundamentalists need to pay attention to.

Penn State University, when faced with the potential that some of their employees allowed child abuse to happen and didn’t report or ensure that a report was made to the police, quickly acted to remove all doubt about their stance against child abuse and to fire their high ranking, “good ol’ boys” who had come under a cloud of suspicion. But in Fundamentalism, this is not the road that churches and institutions usually take.

In Chuck Phelps’ case, he filed a report, but allowed the victim to flee the state while the police sought her in vain. He had done his duty by reporting, but didn’t go out of his way to help, because after all this was an allegation, one might say. The perpetrator of the abuse maintained his membership in good standing at the church, while the victim was viewed as a troubled teen who needed special care and who wasn’t worthy of being in the church-run school. Phelps wasn’t censured, that I know of, by any church or institution. He did lose a speaking engagement, and stepped down from the presidency of Maranatha Baptist Bible College (but we don’t know if that was related to this allegation), but he is still on the board of Bob Jones University.

In Fairhaven’s case, when CNN investigated allegations of abuse, there was no apology and no sympathy for the victims. They were said to be kids who caused a lot of trouble, or outright liars. Instead of apologizing and investigating the incidents, Fairhaven staff gave the CNN reporter a souvenir paddle in a mockery of the gravity of these allegations.

Thankfully, not all fundamentalist institutions react this way. The American Council of Christian Churches, a fundamentalist group parallel to the National Association of Evangelicals, publicly condemned Fairhaven’s actions – specifically referencing the giving of a souvenir paddle as an over-the-top and unChristian reaction to these serious charges. A fundamentalist mission board, ABWE, when faced with numerous people going forward about specific cases of abuse, launched an independent investigation, publicly apologized and took radical steps toward changing the culture of their organization in this regard.

Joe Paterno presents an example for fundamentalists that I hope they won’t ignore. The watching public won’t let us give the benefit of the doubt to the “good ol’ boys” anymore. We need to be as concerned as God is, over the victims of abuse. A man I respect, when learning of certain systematic abuse at a Fundamentalist institution that he had given years of his life to, reacted by confronting the leader of the church and institution, and then leaving. From what I’ve heard of this incident, he was told something to the effect of “Well, what do you want us to do about that? There’s nothing we can do.” He replied, “I’d dedicate my ministry to helping every last child who was harmed by the abuse that happened.”

Good advice for all of us. Don’t hide behind the fact that these are only “allegations”. Don’t refuse to investigate the matter, or have it investigated by a third party, for fear of what the high-up, protected and revered leaders would think– or what could happen to them. Stand up for the oppressed and the abused, and take a stand. A watching world wonders if we really are as much like Jesus Christ as we say we are.

“The Shooting Salvationist: J. Frank Norris and The Murder Trial that Captivated America” by David R. Stokes

~ Bob Hayton ~ 8 Comments

J. Frank Norris may be the most influential fundamentalist leader that almost no one has heard about. In his day, he was a shoe-in to lead the fundamentalist movement after the passing of the great William Jennings Bryan of Scopes Trial fame. Norris was the fiery, fundamentalist pastor of Fort Worth’s largest church. He boasted the largest Sunday School in the world and had his own newspaper and radio station. His flamboyant preaching style and knack for publicity stunts and marketing, were being emulated by countless fundamentalist pastors around the country.

It was the 1920s and the fundamentalist movement was nearly at its peak. J. Frank Norris was already one of the most influential leaders in Evangelical Christianity as a whole. But then something happened in July, 1926, which would change everything. Norris shot an unarmed man in his church office, and that story rocked the country.

The events leading up to this incident, and the incredible murder trial which followed, are the focus of a new book by David R. Stokes, published by Steerforth Press and distributed by Random House. Stokes tells the J. Frank Norris story of his upbringing in a small Texas town, his education and early ministry. He tells the story of Norris’ time as pastor of First Baptist Church of Fort Worth, and his separation from the Southern Baptist denomination.

Stokes tells more than just Norris’ story, he tells the story of early Fort Worth and its leading citizens: mayor H.C. Meacham, newspaper mogul Amon G. Carter, and the unfortunate Dexter Chipps, who perished in Norris’ office that summer day in 1926. He describes the waning influence of the Ku Klux Klan, whose local leader was an influential member in Norris’ church. Stokes also surveys Texas Politics of the 1920s and the big influence J. Frank Norris held through his radio station and newspaper. The story of fundamentalism and the Scopes Trial is also explored, as he sets the table for the fast-paced and moving account of the murder trial of J. Frank Norris.

Stokes tells this story in the words of the newspapers, and personal remembrances of the day. One can tell he spent countless hours pouring over microfiche and personal correspondence in preparation for this book. The tale reads like a legal thriller, yet everything is true to life. Sometimes, it seems, life is stranger than fiction.

Ultimately acquitted, Norris lost the battle of public opinion. And his influence in Christianity and fundamentalism, began to decline. Norris’ years after the murder trial are only briefly recounted, as the book focuses more on the murder trial itself.

I found Stokes’ treatment of this charged story to be evenhanded and fair. Stokes, a minister himself, shows no favoritism for Norris’ side of the story, nor does he partake in fundamentalist-bashing, although this story would certainly afford the perfect opportunity to cast stones. He doesn’t step up and comment on what he thinks really happened or opine on how horrid Norris’ pastoral example was. Instead he captures the spirit of the man J. Frank Norris, and presents us with the facts as revealed in the trial.

What exactly happened in Norris’ office that day in 1926? We may never know. But the story of J. Frank Norris’ murder trial has had far-reaching impact. His acquittal allowed him to continue to influence the next generation of fundamentalist leaders, and yet the trial certainly tarnished the image of fundamentalist Christianity.

As one who was raised a fundamentalist of Norris’ ilk, who has been in churches founded by Temple Baptist Church of Detroit, which Norris pastored for a time (while at the same time still pastoring in Fort Worth), the tale of Norris is cautionary. His ideals were very man-centered and the emphasis in his ministry was on self-promotion and effort. Norris achieved the notoriety he desired, and even influenced many to follow Jesus Christ. But one has to wonder if the methods he used, while perhaps not murderous, have nevertheless afflicted fundamentalism with a deadly case of man-centered mania. Men like Jack Hyles and even Bob Jones, Sr. took pages from Norris’ book as they lead their ministries in an egotistical fashion prizing loyalty from their followers, and advancing the cause through self-promotion and human-centered means.

Norris offers an example of how not to lead a church. And for fundamentalists today who are in a season of reformation and renewal, this book will prove to be a text-book example of where fundamentalism went wrong. I hope this book achieves a wide circulation, as the sad story it tells may serve to spur on further reformation and reflection by evangelical and fundamentalist Christians everywhere.

Pick up a copy of The Shooting Salvationist: J. Frank Norris and The Murder Trial that Captivated America. You won’t find a more fascinating and captivating true story anywhere.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

You can purchase a copy of this book from Amazon.com, or Random House or SteerForth Press.

How Do You Define Fundamentalism?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 16 Comments

So how do you define Fundamentalism?

Which of the following definitions seems correct to you? Which one raises your eyebrows?

1) Fundamentalism is a movement of likeminded people and churches who “still cling to the great fundamentals and who mean to do battle royal” against theological liberalism. (quote from Curtis Lee Laws in 1920)

2) Fundamentalism is strict adherence to specific, fundamental, theological doctrines typically in reaction against Modernist theology.

3) The word fundamental means, one who holds to the original faith and practice of a movement…. A fundamental Baptist church is a church whose faith and practice goes back to 31 A.D. to Jesus. You can be a fundamental Methodist and go back to Wesley. You can be a fundamental Presbyterian and go back to Calvin or Zwingli. You can be a fundamental Lutheran and go back to Luther. You can be a fundamental Catholic and go back to Constantine, but you cannot be a real Bible fundamentalist unless you go back to Jesus. (quote from Jack Hyles taken from his book The Church)

4) Fundamentalism is “a combination of psuedo-religious legalism with endless man-made rules given Ten Commandment-status, religious hypocrisy, extreme sectarianism, religious pride, and pervasive intellectual, ecclesiastic, ethical corruption and dishonesty all ruled over by a few men who embodied the worst qualities of the original Pharisees and whose teachings and actions cannot be questioned.” (quote from this anti-fundamentalist blog)

The fundamentalism I identify with is #1 or #2 above. I abhor the #4 type. In my experience, however, the #4 type is most pervasive and most common. The #3 mentality is also common among fundamental Baptists. They have an exclusive hold on the truth, or so they think. Check out this website for another example of this thinking. I am suspicious of this #3 mentality, but many good people are caught up in that kind of thinking.

Alright, what about you? What is your take on these four definitions of fundamentalism? Do you have a better definition? Join the discussion below.

Can the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Movement Reform?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 39 Comments


A blogging friend of mine, Will Dudding, recently shared some thoughts on his journey of the last five years or so, since he started blogging. His blog name is The Reforming Baptist, and he is a co-blogger with me on Re:Fundamentals and KJVOnlyDebate.com. After taking a break from blogging the past few months, Will came back to share some of his thoughts on where he’s at in a recent post. I want to excerpt some of his comments and discuss them here, below.

Since I have put blogging on the shelf for the last seven months, I have been learning some things that I needed to be quiet and learn. So, I’ll share them with those of you who have waited to see if I’d ever come back.

Originally, this blog was born out of my increased exposure to theology and ministry philosophy that was more God-centered than what I was accustomed to. So, I wanted to express what I was learning and kind of think through some issues in a public way in order to interact with others out there about it. However, I was very much a frustrated young man who was still struggling in my cocoon. As most of you know, I grew up in the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) environment. After being exposed to life outside of that group, I felt as though I had been hoodwinked all my life and I used my blog to express my frustrations and address all the myths, errors, falsehoods, etc.. that I had bought into. Inadvertently, I learned that I had a porcupine effect on some people. Eventually, I began to sense that very same spirit of dissent in a few members in my congregation. It was then, that I realized that my spirit had probably negatively effected some people whom I was supposed to be leading. We ended up losing one family shortly after I stopped blogging. It was really painful to see them go, but I had to wonder after the fact how much of their dis-satisfied disposition was caused by mine? It took a rebuke from someone close to me that got me thinking about this, and so I knew it was time to quit blogging. I needed to shut up and listen to what God needed to teach me.

Another lesson I learned these past months is that the IFB or Fundamentalist movement, network, culture (whatever you want to call it) is not going to be revived or reformed. Those loyal to it cannot and will not recognize the inherent and fundamental defects of the movement. It will continue to decline from relevance and influence on its own. God doesn’t revive or reform such things. He does so to individuals. There is no use trying to correct the course of Fundamentalism by reasoning with the Scripture because for the most part, Sola Scriptura is not really valued by the movers and shakers in the movement. So, I have learned that it is best to just leave it alone and get my head out of the clouds – I am not going to make a dent in reforming fundamentalism. All I will ever be is a burr in their saddle, an irritation to be put up with should I continue identifying myself with them – not my idea of purposeful existence. I don’t need to be identified with the Fundamental Baptists, the Reformed Baptists, the Southern Baptists or any other group. We can exist in happy obedience to God’s Word and in fellowship with anyone else who is striving to do the same That is truly independence!

I encourage you to read the whole post, as he has some more to say. But I wondered what my readers thought of his judgement of the IFB movement. In my blog’s subtitle for the last several years, I’ve had the phrase “Reforming Fundamentalism (IFB) through Reformed Theology”. Will hasn’t been a full-fledged proponent of Reformed Theology, but he has been a reforming fundamentalist. I maintain a Reforming Fundamentalists Blog Network, which I need to update, but still includes a list of like-minded IFBs & former-IFBs intent on working toward positive change. That was the idea behind Re:Fundamentals, which also needs updating. One could also argue that the large fundamentalist forums and blog, Sharper Iron, has as one of its aims, the reformation of the IFB movement.

Will brings up the question though, is all this worth it? Will the IFB movement change? Does it want to change? He says it doesn’t. But I think that depends on where you are in the IFB spectrum. Still the recent brouhaha over Chuck Phelps and ABC’s 20/20 show, and the revelation of what many (myself included) consider to be a misuse of pastoral authority, teaches us something. That even in the “sane” wing of fundamentalism, a top-down leadership style, and certain views on authority and sanctification, continue to have drastic consequences. Pastor Bob Bixby, who like Greg Locke, has also walked away from the IFB movement and the Baptist label, recently shared some of his thoughts about continuing problems in the highest ranks of BJU-style fundamentalism. Will and I could give you some stories of other fundamentalist groups that would raise the hair on the back of your neck. I don’t know if I’ve recounted horror stories, but the personal stories and testimonies I’ve shared will give you an eyeful. Here are four accounts for you: a distraught mother, Becca’s story, Greg’s story, and another reader’s story. For a wild ride through the heart of the most extreme version of fundamentalism, you should pick up James Spurgeon’s book The Texas Baptist Crucible: Tales from the Temple.

Over my nearly six years of blogging, I’ve received on average one or two emails a week, it seems, from people appreciating my blog or sharing their own story of journeying through fundamentalism. Hundreds have shared their thoughts in the comments on my blog, but many more in private conversation to me. Many of these have found a new church, some are IFB churches which are much better than where they were before, but many walk away from the movement altogether.

Is the movement really changing? Are such stories decreasing in frequency? Maybe. I know this happened in other generations. Two of my uncles walked away from the IFB movement in the early 80s. Perhaps the internet is helping to escalate the problem. More and more have walked away or have awakened to the issues.

Does this mean we can write ICHABOD in bold across the moniker IFB? I don’t actually think so. Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran, represent glimmers of hope. This conversation between them and Mark Minnick, reveals the heart of these new fundamentalist leaders. Sharper Iron is a place where many IFB pastors and thinkers are discussing issues and seeking positive growth. The Preserving the Truth Conference, even though I don’t agree with some of it’s central values, nevertheless represents a positive movement in fundamentalism. As does Calvary Baptist’s Advancing the Church conference. Standpoint Conference is a mix of those still holding the IFB name and those who are past it, but it is working for a positive expression of fundamentalism for the new century.

Historic fundamentalism is still needed. Independence can be a good thing, as long as healthy interdependence with other like-minded churches is sought out. And Baptist doctrine and practice has hundreds of years behind it, and has proven to be a faith that aims to be as Biblical as possible. So Independent Fundamental Baptists are not a bad thing. What needs to be improved upon, and ejected from the movement, is the man-centered, pragmatic trappings and the baggage from the last 80 years of the movement. One-upmanship, strong-arming, political maneuvering, grand-standing, arrogance and an abrupt dismissal of any church group besides your own — these are all too common in the IFB world. Along with these problems is a fear of education, a resulting ignorance of doctrine, and a love of piety over theology — these problems have conspired to spawn eccentric doctrines and shallow Christians completely cut off from the rest of Christianity (as Will describes). Finally, and most importantly, a legalism silently pervades the movement. Often good intentions mask this legalism: we want to please God and obey His Law, but this is not our means to being accepted by God (either for our salvation or our sanctification). A recovery of the Biblical concept of grace and of the Gospel as being the A-Z of the Christian life (not just the entrance exam) is desperately needed.

There remain many faithful IFB churches who stand on the Word of God and love people. May their tribe increase. To try to reform those who bristle at the mention of the problems I stated above, however, is pointless. I trust, however, that more and more IFB pastors and leaders are willing to admit the problems of their movement. May they be encouraged to reform and renew fundamentalism for the 21st Century and beyond.