“Matthew Henry: His Life and Influence” by Allan Harman

Book Details:
  • Author: Allan Harman
  • Category: Biography
  • Publisher: Christian Focus (2012)
  • Format: softcover
  • Page Count: 208
  • ISBN#: 1845507835
  • List Price: $14.99
  • Rating: Must Read

Review:
For nearly three hundred  years, the most widely used and respected whole Bible commentary has been Matthew Henry’s Exposition of the Old and New Testaments. Matthew Henry teaches the Bible in simple, memorable phrases, aiming to both inform the reader and promote deeper devotion to Christ. His Christ-centered approach, clarity of thought and pastoral emphasis on applying the text have kept his work in demand these many years. Yet compared to the authors of other comparable Christian classics, we remember very little of Matthew Henry the man.

The commentaries of Martin Luther and John Calvin, the sermons of George Whitfield and Charles Spurgeon, and the writings of John Bunyan and Jonathan Edwards remain as popular among Christians as ever–and these men are remembered, with numerous biographies available for each. For Matthew Henry, only one or two reprints of old biographies are available, as any search of Amazon.com or Google Books can verify. So it was with a mixture of curiosity and interest that I picked up Matthew Henry: His Life and Influence by Allan Harman (Christian Focus, 2012).

I wasn’t sure what to expect, as I thought this book was just a brief overview of Henry’s life and a discussion of his legacy. I was pleased instead to find a thoroughly researched, well-written biography of Matthew Henry. Harman details the life of Philip Henry, Matthew’s father, and the difficulties facing nonconformist Puritan ministers in late seventeenth century England. He goes on to detail Matthew Henry’s life and ministry before focusing on his writings and lasting influence. Along the way he provides excerpts of Henry’s sermons, diary and letters, to fill out the portrait of his life.

Matthew Henry’s life and ministry

Matthew Henry was born in 1662 to a Puritan minister’s family. His father, an Oxford-trained minister, lost his church due to the Act of Uniformity, ultimately never returning to a pulpit ministry. Instead he trained his children, and conducted services for his own house and servants and took many a preacher boy under his wing. Nearly all of Matthew Henry’s schooling, which included training in Greek, Latin and Hebrew, came at his father’s hand. Matthew Henry took the pastorate of a Presbyterian church in Chester, where he ministered for 26 years, before moving near London. Henry was sickly most of his life, and endured many personal trials. He lost his first wife and several children to illness. His oldest son rejected Christianity, even taking his mother’s maiden name as his own. Henry died in 1714, just 2 years after moving to London for greater ministry opportunities. Yet in the midst of a busy ministry, which saw Henry give numerous sermons or lessons each week, he found time to write what would become the most loved commentary on Scripture in the English language.

Matthew Henry’s writings and legacy

Henry’s Exposition was published in a series of volumes, beginning in 1706 up through his death in 1714. It took him just under 8 years to write his notes on the Old Testament, and he had just finished the Gospels and Acts (in 2 years) before his death. He left detailed notes on Romans and Revelation, and since he had also preached through both testaments several times in the course of his ministry, some of his friends completed the sixth volume of the commentary after his death. Besides his commentary, Henry wrote a widely-used children’s catechism, a book of family hymns (some set to his own translations from the Hebrew), a biography of his father Philip Henry, and an influential book on prayer (A Method of Prayer). Besides these he published some pamphlets, other devotional books and some of his sermons. His last published book betrays the emphasis of his life and ministry: it’s title was The Pleasantness of a Religious Life Opened and Improved; and Recommended to the Consideration of All, Particularly of Young People. Harman’s comments on this book are worth repeating:

Modern readers have to understand that this book encompasses the Puritans’ vision of the Christian life. They were not morbid and unfeeling. Rather, serving God was with them a thing of the highest joy. Matthew Henry expressed the Christian’s pleasure in God as one ‘which has no pain attending to it, no bitterness in the latter end of it; a pleasure which God himself invites you to, and which will make you happy, truly and eternally happy, and shall not this work for you?’ (Kindle location 3263-66)

Matthew Henry’s commentary has been praised by many down through the years. Charles Spurgeon recommended that his students read it through at least once, preferrably during their first year of ministry. John Ryland, a Baptist pastor of the eighteenth century, said of Matthew Henry’s commentary "a person cannot begin to read without wishing he was shut out from all the world, and able to read it through, without stopping" (Kindle location 3507-10). Harman takes pains to demonstrate the influence of Matthew Henry on Jonathan Edwards, John and Charles Wesley, and George Whitfield. There certainly is evidence that these men drew from Henry’s expository "well" as they carried out their own ministry. The widespread availability of Henry’s commentary, in abridged or unabridged format, and online or coupled with Bible software programs such as e-sword is the definitive statement of Henry’s lasting legacy. It is arguably the most accessible commentary to the average Bible reader today, and it is indeed average Bible readers for whom Henry wrote his Exposition.

Evaluation of the book

Allan Harman has done the Church a service in refocusing attention onto Matthew Henry, whose commentary has been such a perpetual blessing for so many. The book reads easily, although at times some of the details that a researcher revels in, may get in the way of the account. Harman has written essays on various aspects of Matthew Henry’s life or writings, and at times it seems that he has strung together different pieces into one book. This leads to some noticeable repetition in a few spots.

Harman brings out quite a few interesting tidbits that are not widely known. Henry worked on the the last half of the book of Ezra for his commentary in the middle of the night when his wife was in labor!! He also brings out the fact that Charles Wesley’s hymn "A Charge to Keep I Have" is based on Henry’s comment on Leviticus 8:35. He also notes that from our perspective, Henry should have spent more of his free time with his family and looked after his health more. Harman also includes pictures of Henry’s old church, his study, and other places of interest.

Another fault of the book might be how Harman spends so much time detailing Matthew Henry’s childhood home and family life from when he was a child, but so relatively little time on Henry’s own home and his time with his children. Perhaps this is due to having less resources to work with, as Matthew Henry’s diary has not survived and we are dependent on quotes from earlier works for this information. On the whole, the book is solidly done and accomplishes what it sets out to. Henry’s life is detailed, we are transported back to seventeenth century England and the world of the Puritans, and we even imagine ourselves in the pews of his church in Chester.

This biography will encourage many, myself included, to pick up Matthew Henry’s commentary again and spend some time reading through it. And it will also lead to a greater appreciation of the lasting impact of a simple ministry in a country church–and of a life well lived. Henry himself pointed out shortly before his death "that a holy, heavenly life, spent in the service of God and communion with him, is the most pleasant and comfortable life that anyone can live in this world" (Kindle location 3706-8) Matthew Henry lived such a life, and this is why studying Henry’s life is so worthwhile. May God give us more men like Matthew Henry!

Author Info:
Allan Harman has had a life-time interest in exposition of the biblical text, and also in the history of interpretation. He is Research Professor of Old Testament at the Presbyterian Theological College in Melbourne, Australia. He has lectured and preached in many countries, and continues to serve as the senior editor of the Reformed Theological Review, Australia’s oldest theological journal.

Where to Buy:
  • Westminster Bookstore
  • Christianbook.com
  • Amazon
  • direct from Christian Focus

Disclaimer:
This book was provided by Christian Focus Publications for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

“Invitation to Biblical Interpretation” by Andreas J. Kostenberger and Richard D. Patterson

Book Details:
  • Authors: Andreas J. Köstenberger and Richard D. Patterson
  • Category: Hermeneutics / Theology
  • Publisher: Kregel (2011)
  • Format: hardcover
  • Page Count: 896
  • ISBN#: 9780825430473
  • List Price: $46.99
  • Rating: Must Read

Review:
I have handled my fair share of textbooks over the years. I’ve also used a variety of Bible commentaries, Bible dictionaries, theology resources and biblical study tools. But I have never come across a more comprehensive and accessible resource for handling the Word of God than Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology by Andreas J. Köstenberger and Richard D. Patterson. This new 900 page book has truly set a new standard when it comes to Christian academic resources. In its thoroughness and detail, usability and accessibility, scholarship and piety, this work is simply unmatched. And I am not alone in this assessment, the book’s opening 13 pages contain no less than 39 endorsements from a wide range of leading evangelical scholars. And the fact that this is a hermeneutics textbook makes such widespread acclaim all the more surprising.

While the book is designed for the classroom, I read through the book from the standpoint of an educated layman looking for a resource on interpreting Scripture. This book proved to be more than just a resource tool, it is a virtual stand-alone hermeneutics course in and of itself, with a limitless supply of suggested books and articles for additional reading and self-study.

The book unfolds Köstenberger and Patterson’s “hermeneutical triad” as an overarching approach to interpretation. This triad consists of history (archaeology, culture, manners and customs, and other historical matters), literature (canon, genres, linguistics), and theology (biblical theology). But before getting into the heart of the book, the authors reveal their philosophical approach to interpreting Scripture, which I find incredibly helpful:

[W]e don’t start with words; we start with the canon. For example, this is also how we would interpret, say, a play by Shakespeare. We don’t just analyze the words in a given sentence; we first try to learn more about Shakespeare, his background, the time in which he wrote, surveying his major works, and so on, before finally settling on a particular play. Even then we might read a good summary before eventually delving in and starting to read the play. When we encounter a given word with which we are unfamiliar, we would not stop reading, because we are more concerned about following the general flow than identifying individual word meanings. Thus we don’t start with analyzing the details of the biblical text (word study); we start with the whole (canon).

What is more, we also don’t start out pretending the Bible is just like any other book, because we don’t believe it is. Rather, our purpose here is not to study just any form of human communication; our purpose is to study the Bible–the inerrant, inspired Word of God…. Ultimately, this is God’s canon, conveyed in the genres intended by God, and communication of God’s discourses using God’s words (without of course denying human instrumentality , style and authorship). Thus, we don’t introduce the notion of the Bible being “special” at some point later in the interpretive process (as if it were immaterial to the early stages of general hermeneutics) but put it front and center in the organization of the book. (pg. 25-26)

I hold that both of these points are incredibly important. We have to encounter God’s Word from a big picture approach that pays attention to authorial intent, but we also have to recognize the Divine Author behind the text.

After explaining their method, the authors more right into focusing on each element of the triad. A brief overview of the history of hermeneutics is given and then the matters of history, archaeology and the historical context of the times of the Bible are discussed at a fairly high level, but with many particular examples. This is helpfully fleshed out in a “sample exegesis” section which concludes most chapters. The research into how the Canaanites viewed the god Baal (the god of storms) helps us appreciate what is at stake when Elijah announces that Yahweh has suspended all rain (and all storms).

After discussing the role that history plays, the authors then devote the lion’s share of the work to the discussion of literature. The canon, its development and current shape, is explored as to how that should shape our interpretation, and a brief theology of the OT and the NT are sketched. The minor prophets offer an example where both the message of the books themselves need to be understood as well as their particular literary arrangement as “the book of the twelve”. I really appreciated this emphasis on canonical interpretation, which the authors define as: “a faithful effort to hear the way in which God addresses his people in and through the text of Scripture as it testifies to God in Christ” but it is not so much a method as “a practice of theological reading” (pg. 157).

The discussion of Genre covers OT historical narrative, poetry and wisdom literature, prophecy, NT historical narrative, parables, epistles and apocalyptic literature. Some genres are covered more in depth than others, with epistles and prophecy perhaps getting pride of place. The discussions give numerous examples and flesh out the why and how in an extremely clear and careful manner. Wise cautions and helpful insights abound. No real theological biases are detectable except perhaps a bias against full preterism. The authors don’t rush to make judgement calls on how everyone must read prophecy or view Revelation, either. At times I felt they must be historic premil, yet they stressed the symbolic nature of Revelation, as per its genre. The discussions take care to root themselves as much as possible in analysis of the biblical text rather than forcing foreign genre considerations onto textual data. I found the discussion of parables extremely helpful and balanced, not advocating a rigid “one-point” approach to parables yet not aiming for a no-holds-barred allegorical free-for-all, either.

The discussion on analyzing the language of literature was extraordinarily helpful. The authors emphasize looking at how the larger sections of the text relate to one another (discourse analysis) rather than just doing word studies. They give a helpful overview of some technical points of Hebrew and Greek (as well as English) grammar, and even point out occasional problems with the lexical approach of even such classic works as Kittel’s TDNT, and stress the role of context and semantic range in determining meaning. They also include a helpful section covering 12 exegetical fallacies with plenty of examples to illustrate the discussion. They also discuss figurative language and how we can recognize and interpret it.

The book then shows how to put everything together. The third tier of the triad, theology actually begins this process by stressing that we make our theological connections based on the text, which is the essence of biblical theology. After discussing the nature and method of biblical theology, the book closes with an exceedingly helpful chapter that offers a method for preaching through the various genres and applying the message of the text to the lives of people today. This chapter includes a discussion of Bible software tools and commentaries and other resources, but spends the bulk of the time discussing how to preach through all the various genres that were discussed earlier in the book. Cautions, challenges, methods, and sample outlines make this section especially practical and useful in the context of a daily ministry. An appendix is also included that has a short list of the best commentaries to get on each book of the Bible as well as other important resources to have handy.

My biggest critique of the book would be that it doesn’t go on to cover in detail absolutely everything I would want it to! But that is hardly fair, and it would make for a more unmanageable and unwieldy tool. I do have one bit of criticism, however. I would have liked to see the “how to” section at the end, with the example of how to preach through the genres more clearly called out from the sections covering the genre. For example, the section covering Proverbs in the chapter on Wisdom literature doesn’t deal with some of the pastoral concerns such as whether proverbs apply universally to all situations or not. Yet this concern is addressed in the how to section in the last chapter. I think a clearer link would have served those of us who will use the book more as a reference work than a seminary text book. My only additional quibble is that the assignments and bibliography from the previous chapter blend right in with the introductory objectives and outline for the next chapter. The formatting of the book just seems a bit odd in that regard.

Mentioning the bibliographies leads me to one more positive feature of the book. Each chapter has a selected bibliography for additional reading, and then in the footnotes, specific articles or books are called out that will be pertinent to the topic at hand. The footnotes and bibliography are usually helpful and accessible, rather than merely technical and scholarly.

As the book closes, the authors warn their readers against just putting this book on the shelf and ignoring this material. Instead the reader is encouraged that this book can “serve as a point of departure for a lifetime of studying and preaching or teaching the Bible” (pg. 727). I would most heartily concur. This book deserves pride of place on the shelf of anyone studying, preaching or teaching the Bible. Even where one may have a different theological bent or a disagreement with the authors, the book still will prove useful.

Invitation to Biblical Interpretation truly is a must-read, need-to-get book. It is evangelical scholarship at its best, and cannot be ignored. If you are not employing the techniques and practices put forth in this book, you owe it to yourself, at the very least, to read it and justify why you are not. This book can’t do the hard work of faithful exegesis for you, but it can set you in the right direction and prevent you from stumbling at all the wrong places. You really need to get this book!

Author Info:
Andreas J. Köstenberger
 (PhD, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) is Senior Professor of New Testament and Biblical Theology and Director of PhD Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.  He is also editor of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society.

Richard D. Patterson (PhD, University of California, Los Angeles) is Distinguished Professor Emeritus at Liberty University.

Where to Buy:
  • Westminster Bookstore
  • Christianbook.com
  • Amazon.com
  • Kregel Publications

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

Why I’m Not 100% for Fairhaven Baptist Church

Most who follow my blog know that for me to come out and name an institution and criticize it openly is not typical for me. And with the interest my recent post on Fairhaven has generated (more than 170 comments to date), I feel the need to explain myself and my own perspective on Fairhaven Baptist Church and College.

Over a period of several years, I gradually became dissatisfied with fundamentalism, and in January of 2005 I finally left the movement. 10 months later, I founded Fundamentally Reformed, as a way to share my own thoughts and walk through all the changes in my thinking. It was an online journal, and I did a bit of venting at first. (You can still read my story, here.) Writing was good for me, and in the first several months it made me face some issues and gain clarity by thinking through them and standing up to scrutiny. After my first few months of blogging, I had learned to temper my tone and I realized that I still did appreciate the good in much of fundamentalism. I continue to be thankful for fundamentalism’s zeal for truth and seriousness about Scripture.

Today, I frequently get asked for advice from people in fundamentalist churches who are awakening to some of the problems in fundamentalism. I almost never tell them to just bail ship, tuck tail and run. I have come to the conclusion that it isn’t always practical or responsible to just abandon the IFB movement and not touch it with a ten foot pole. People still have families and friends there, and sometimes they don’t know what to do. I try to encourage incremental change, and a time of prayer and evaluation. It might be wise to leave your church, it might be wise to stay and work for change. I’m happy when people stay and when they leave, and when they find another church (IFB or otherwise) that allows them to focus more on God’s grace.

But over my years of blogging, I have not apologized for speaking out against what I see as real problems in fundamentalism. And along the way, I’ve encountered literally dozens and dozens of people who have shared their stories with me, and thanked me for this blog. (You can read some of these stories here.) I have also come across stories elsewhere in other forums, I’ve reconnected with old friends on Facebook and over the phone, and I’ve been heart-broken many times at what I hear. Some people are so harmed by hyper-fundamentalism (the worst variations of fundamentalism), that they walk away from the Faith altogether. And I hope my blog helps prevent some of that, and helps people find others with similar stories who haven’t left God or Christianity, but have found a vibrant Christianity outside fundamentalism’s rigid boundaries.

Enter Fairhaven.

[As this post will get a bit long, I’m putting a “read more” link here. Click for the full post.]

I’m going to elaborate on my story here, because I think it will help people evaluate my motives in blogging about the problems at Fairhaven.

I am thankful for so many things from my time at Fairhaven. I went for four years of college plus 14 months of Master’s school. I was accepted and respected by many of my peers, and was involved in a number of ministries while at Fairhaven. Pastor Jeff Voegtlin befriended me, and I was also a helper in the junior high youth ministry since my freshman year. I studied Greek and came to respect Dan Armacost, and I rubbed shoulders with some of the other staff members. All of these men seemed serious about Christ and dedicated to the Gospel. They were trying to raise the bar when it came to education standards at the college and academy, and seemed to be true men of God. They invested in me and positively impacted me, of that I’m sure. I also had the opportunity to represent the college on ensemble one year, and mens’ quintet for two years. I had a lot of fun, learned a great deal, matured and grew through my time there. I made mistakes and was ministered to. But the best thing of all was that I met my dear wife there!

However, during my last few years at Fairhaven, I began to wake up to some of the problems there. My sophomore year is when I really should have realized something was up. I got back to the dorm and rumor had it I wasn’t going to come back. That was news to me. There was a blow up with missionaries sent out by Fairhaven, and some squabbling. Since my parents were missionaries in the same field, and since they were friends with the one who was in the wrong (per Fairhaven), they assumed I would leave. I was asked to leave or challenged to leave by some who knew me. But I just figured it was a misunderstanding and determined to think the best about it. Then Dr. Behrens left (that may have happened first, but both happened my sophomore year). I was shocked at all the dirt that was dug up on Bill Behrens in front of the congregation Sunday night, and my roommate at the time was skeptical to the extreme about it all. I thought my roommate was just exaggerating things, and again I just decided to overlook this.

As time went on, I came to realize that many of the sermons in chapel and at the church were more about the delivery style and the vigor of the preacher, than they were about Biblical content and depth. At least it seemed to me, that the sermons were pressed onto the passages of Scripture, rather than flowing from them. And the same themes seemed to dominate: salvation, character, “grit your teeth and do it”, calls for re-dedication, toe-stomping messages, and parenting. I got the best I could from the sermons and tried to keep a good attitude, but sometimes friends I respected in the dorms would also point out the lack of Scriptural basis in this sermon or that, and express dismay over this.

There was also an excessive emphasis on manliness. I remember being lectured against using hair spray or wearing pink shirts. I thought that a bit extreme, but I was a conservative kind of guy, so I didn’t let it faze me. Then there was the humiliation of the men in the college who didn’t want to wrestle in the college wrestle-off. They were publicly called “fish” and sometimes staff members or preacher Voegtlin would even declare that if you didn’t wrestle, you’d never do anything for God, or you’d never amount to much in the ministry. A close friend of mine conscientiously abstained from wrestling just to protest this excessive and errant teaching. A few others joined him. I reasoned that since I was in the youth ministry, I needed to go along and wrestle so as to set a good example, but I respected my friend for raising valid objections. Added to this, were occasions where college guys would haul off and hit someone in a college sports match, and then be applauded and lifted up as a man’s man, when in fact a true man would hold his temper and not do the easy thing and just hit someone (on a team that was not even a Christian team, no less).

I also was a bit alarmed when the staff talked about their 18 month olds and 2 or 3 year olds fighting each other with boxing or wrestling, or having long spanking sessions with them. It seemed too much.

But my biggest lesson in the Fairhaven way came my senior year. Sermons in chapel started to reference “those Masters’ students” in a negative way. We were causing trouble, asking questions (unbelievable, right?), and worse some of us were quoting John MacArthur (who doesn’t believe in the blood, mind you — according to Fairhaven). Problem was, there were only 5 or 6 of us, and sometimes only 1 or 2 of us in the chapel sessions where these things were being said. Several of us had weekly prayer meetings with key staff members, Armacost, Damron, Jeff Voegtlin, Randy Love. None of these men raised the issue with any of us directly. But the matter came up in sermons. We heard that if you quoted John MacArthur, you’d get a zero on any paper you turned in. And yet the dorm supervisor knew that one of us (a friend of mine) had been teased about having MacArthur books all four years he was there. It was in the open and known, and now all of a sudden, as it gets closer to graduation, they are alarmed about it.

So we talked with each other about this, what else are we to do? Two guys thought their books and tapes from John MacArthur’s mailing list were not being delivered to them. We felt like we were being spoken ill of on all sides with no opportunity to speak up or explain ourselves. So one day, my friend Jerry and I were dragged into Roger Voegtlin’s office. They were looking for some of the other Masters’ students but none were around. Jeff Voegtlin was there too. And then preacher had Jerry’s girlfriend (she may have been his fiance at the time) brought in as well, to observe. We were given the “what for”. We were spreading gossip and talking with each other instead of going to staff. I tried to bring up some of our valid points of contention. I talked about the mail. I talked about how Charles Finney (who denies the substitutionary atonement) was required reading while MacArthur was censored. But pretty much we just were quiet. At one point, Roger pointed at Jerry’s girlfriend and said, if you don’t stand down on this, I’ll say one word to her father and this will be over (indicating Jerry’s relationship). Needless to say we acquiesced and apologized. I’m sure we really did do something wrong, but looking back what were we expected to do? I did ask Preacher what I should tell my friend who was reading MacArthur. At that point he got upset and said he didn’t want to even talk to my friend, because if he did, he’d get mad and kick him out of college (it was the spring semester of our senior year). When I told my friend that, he started weeping because this college president was supposed to be his pastor (we were encouraged to join their church), and yet his own pastor wouldn’t even talk to him! I came away from the experience learning how to strong arm any dissent and how best to silence opposition: hold their fiance or anything else you can get, over their head! I shook my head at this story for a long time, but figured it was just a political way of doing business, just a minor thing, no big deal. I determined to think the best of Fairhaven anyway.

Then later I encountered or became aware of the Fairhaven policy of parents shunning their way-ward children. I met some who had their parents abandon them. I heard of one 19 year old locked out of his house with no advance warning. Left on the street in the cold. I heard from one who was a member at a Reformed-type church, but who since they advocated careful, moderate drinking, were still treated with disdain by their parents. Their children had never met their grandparents, and the oldest was something like 7 years old. It’s not like these were pagan people living it up in the world, they were part of an active vibrant church, from what I knew. I also saw a negligence toward parents and family and an emphasis on spending time at Fairhaven or away by your own selves as a family. A relative of mine confided in me that he was so angry over his sibling’s treatment of their family that he had given up on Baptists of any kind. I can’t even share all that was said to me, I remember how much it shocked and devastated me to realize how these oddities of Fairhaven were wreaking havoc on people and families all across the country.

Over the last few years I’ve learned of stories of what was alleged to have gone on at Fairhaven. Recently in a Facebook group that I’m a member of (I didn’t start it), I heard tales of four or maybe five different individuals recounting spanking sessions they received at the hands of their parents where the numbers of swats ranged from 70 to 300 at one time. And these individuals are not related to each other. Five different families with that level of abuse, and yet looking back the culture of Fairhaven seems to encourage that. Preacher would berate fathers who didn’t spank hard enough, or diligently enough. People would be reminded from the pulpit about their wayward children, and he’d get everyone all fired up to go out and do something. And then with Fairhaven’s past troubles with the law (an investigation into the spanking there), the government was always portrayed in the worst possible light, so no one would think of calling authorities or anything. People turned a blind eye and just let parents do what was needed to get their kids to grow up right.

I’ve heard other stories. One is worth sharing here. After a wedding, the newly married couple were walking to the reception and crossed paths with Preacher Voegtlin (who had just married them). He said something to the effect, “What do you think your chances are of having your kids turn out right?” Stunned, they didn’t know how to answer him. His reply, “You’re a _____ and you’re a _______, I’d say your chances are zero.” What kind of comment is that? Don’t you think you shouldn’t have married them then, if you really thought that way? And why can you write off people like this?

Fairhaven claims to be the best church in America. At least Preacher Voegtlin would say that often in the pulpit. People acted that way. And there was always something wrong with any other college, and any well-known names that weren’t invited to Fairhaven.

Much of what I’ve shared is hearsay. I can’t prove much of it. It’s my impression of Fairhaven. There are more damaging claims and more serious claims, and based on my history with Fairhaven, I suspect they are true (many of them). But the ethos of the place is definitely one of rigidness and a bit of hysteria. I felt it was so hard to keep going when I was there. There was a burden and everything depended on you so much. Right things were taught and preached often, but the onus was on you to get right, you to go out and reach the lost, you to tithe and give, you to just “do it”. I felt we were beaten down and then our guilt would make us fall in line, repent and keep going. Very rarely were we encouraged to lay it all at Jesus’ feet, rarely was He presented as a Lord of Grace and healing, we felt that God was distant and demanding, and only interested in what we turned in on our soul-winning and ministry slips.

These are my opinions, and may be clouded by my own experience. I think there is a problem with legalism there. There is a performance-based sanctification model. A man-centered Christianity. Powerless Preaching, and a lack of grace. Not everyone is bankrupt, there is much good there. But the power and the life is hidden and tucked away. The energy to live the Christian life is clouded by the demands to live the Christian life. There is too little teaching and too much doing. Too little encouraging, and too much judging. Too little praying for people, and too much talking about people. I hope the picture I’m painting is very misguided and wrong, but I don’t have much basis to think it is.

More than twenty years ago, Roger Voegtlin stood up on a Sunday evening and preached a very famous sermon: “Why I’m Not 100% for Jack Hyles”. For two hours he listed and detailed numerous personal stories that were shared to him, he played clips of Hyles’ sermons, and he expressed his conviction that Hyles was guilty of immorality and that the evidence was too great to be ignored. The charges against Pastor Roger Voegtlin are not as severe as Jack Hyles. But a lot of them are similar in the sense that they are based upon a large amount of personal stories and recollections. Eventually the number of the stories overwhelm you and you have to believe either there are an awful lot of good liars, or something is rotten in Denmark.

I share this story because I’m no longer on the fence. I think Fairhaven has proven itself to be a hyper-fundamentalist institution. They have avoided criticism and tried to smear those who would bring it. They have flaunted recent allegations of abuse, by the fact that for a time they had a picture of the paddle they presented to CNN on their church website. They have not issued a public statement and show no remorse. Instead they insist nothing wrong ever happened, and that everyone who would speak out against them is a liar or hates the cause of Christ. Well, I think the cause of Christ is BIGGER than Fairhaven.

The story of Fairhaven is a lesson to us all. Well-meaning religion, old-fashioned tradition, man-centered pragmatism, performance-based Christianity doesn’t work. Fairhaven is not standing for the old-time religion. They are standing against the world for their peculiar brand of Christianity. The stories told of them sound awful similar to tales of Jack Hyles, and J. Frank Norris. They represent an approach to the Christian life which is damaging and harmful.

Please, don’t abandon Christianity because of the Fairhavens of this world. Study out legalism and grace. Learn how the Gospel is for believers. Find some good Christian books (like these and these). Research for yourself on the internet the claims of arrogant pastors. Don’t just follow blindly, mindlessly obey the rules given to you, and let someone else do your thinking for you. Be wary and don’t let someone turn you against your family. And don’t glory in the fall of another, but stay focused on Jesus Christ.

Some have said that I instigated this whole thing with Fairhaven. As if I was behind the CNN report. My wife and I laughed when we heard that. I’m a spectator seeing how all this will turn out, as I don’t have too much time to devote to “the cause”. I’m not for a cause that wants to shut down Fairhaven altogether or to expose all IFB churches as harbors of abuse. And that goal is not what is behind the efforts to get the story out about Fairhaven either, from what I’ve read and seen. People are standing up to specific abuse which has been harbored in Fairhaven, and they want an apology, an admission of wrongdoing, and they hope to save some other little ones from the fate they endured. Is that so wrong?

Should this be aired in public? Well it has been. I brought the story when I knew it would be aired. People have been saying these things in other venues, and on other forums. But here at my site some have given their names and stood out in public to stand against this abuse. I applaud them. I don’t want to silence a voice that might need to be shared. Is this the best way to handle things? I don’t know, but this is definitely grass roots and I’m pretty confident that these people couldn’t all get together walk down to Fairhaven tomorrow, share their story before the church, and see any change happen. This tactic has been effective in the past, and if you don’t have anything to hide why be afraid of something like this anyway? If all you hear are ad hominem attacks and Fairhaven pointing to the failures and flaws of those speaking up, then what really is going on here? Doesn’t it seem like they’re just backpedaling as fast as they can? Slinging mud and hoping to avoid serious damage? Why aren’t they just stating their side of the story boldly, courageously and candidly? I didn’t get that impression from the CNN interview.

This isn’t about the freedom to spank. This isn’t about spanking, as any honest hearing of the CNN reports (and there were three prior to the Fairhaven report) would show. This is about a specific cover up and history of abetting abuse, and the refusal for Fairhaven to face up and apologize or admit wrongdoing.

Barring any more significant developments, I don’t intend to post on Fairhaven again. Eventually these posts won’t be on the front page of my site and will be forgotten. I have purposely tried to moderate the comments here carefully. I have not spread the story far and wide on multiple different forums where I could have brought it up. I have tried not to say more than I think I should. But right now, even if I differ with some of the perspectives, language, and tactics of those sharing their stories, I feel it is right to stand up with them as victims of abuse. I don’t want to be in any way complicit when stories such as these are coming out and there’s an opportunity to prevent anything like them from happening again.

I pray that Fairhaven takes a good internal look, and tries to purge out any wrongdoing and clamp down on parental abuse in the church. I hope more accountability and oversight can be arranged in the church structure and that steps can be taken to own up to any failures, and set a course to change for the better. Other fundamentalist institutions faced with similar problems have done this (ABWE and BJU are recent examples). I hope and pray that Fairhaven will be wise enough to follow suit. An independent investigator could be hired to look into these very real and hurtful allegations, and other such steps can be done. I say this because some don’t know that this is how other Christian fundamentalist institutions handle such public up-cries and allegations. There is a right way to handle things. I hope Fairhaven follows that path.

J. Frank Norris on Loyalty & Pastoral Leadership

Here is an excerpt from The Shooting Salvationist by David R. Stokes, a detailed account of J. Frank Norris’ murder trial. My review of the book is forthcoming. This excerpt reveals how the fundamentalist leader thought in terms of how to run his “business”, i.e. his church. How many fundamentalist pastors and leaders have followed his lead in this regard, I wonder? And all of them to the disregard of 1 Pet. 5:2-3. How sad.

________________________________________

Norris fascinated students at Southwestern Baptist Seminary across town from his church. Though they were discouraged from associating with the preacher because of his antagonism toward the denomination, some found a way to see the controversial clergyman in action. And when one of them had the courage to try to visit Norris at his office, risking the wrath of seminary officials, J. Frank was gleefully accommodating.

Roy Kemp was one such gutsy guy. When he decided to pay a call on Norris, the ever-present secretary-gatekeeper, Miss Jane Hartwell, ushered him immediately into the preacher’s office on the second floor of the church’s Sunday school building.

“Roy, I take it you have come up to find out how I run my business,” Norris said, looking fiercely at Kemp.

“Yes, sir.”

The preacher then pointed to a portrait on his wall — one of a locomotive — and told his visitor that he was like that powerful lead car on a train forcing all in its way off the tracks. He pointed to another picture on another wall — Napoleon Bonaparte — and said:

Roy, do you know that man’s philosophy? One: he believed — and said so — that no man ever served another man except for personal gain. Two: Or, out of fear. He would never have a man around him for long who had his first allegiance to any other man or woman. Full and unconditional allegiance had to be to him and him personally. That’s the way I run my business!

Quotes to Note 30: Pastors as True Shepherds or Mere “Mutton Farmers”

Recently, I’ve been reading some forums that have been lamenting poor leadership in certain IFBx circles. Some have shared painful testimonies about years of harsh treatment by parents and teachers who ostensibly cared about the children’s welfare, but ultimately just rejected them (literally throwing them out, and disowning them completely) when it became clear that they weren’t keeping in step with the brand of fundamentalism these pastors and church leaders advocated.

Then I stumbled across this quote in studying for my Men’s Bible Study lesson on Mark 6:31-44 where Jesus looks on the crowds with compassion and considers that: “they were like sheep without a shepherd.” I almost started weeping when I read these words about what a true shepherd should be. Praise Jesus he is not like some of the “shepherds” I’ve known…

Most contemporary listeners are unfamiliar with the job description of a shepherd. Lena Woltering has pointed out that a shepherd “is needed only when there are no fences. He is someone who stays with his sheep at all cost, guiding, protecting, and walking with them through the fields. He’s not just a person who raises sheep.” They lead sheep to food and water and are ever mindful of the sheep’s condition (Gen. 33:13). They gather lambs that cannot keep up in their arms (Isa. 40:11). They seek out lost sheep, and when they find them, they carry them back to the fold on their sholders (Luke 15:5). They guard against predators and thieves. It is a dirty and hard job. Woltering castigates those bishops who regard themselves as “tenders of the flock” and brands them as little more than “mutton farmers.” “They build fence after fence after fence, keeping the flock within sight so they don’t have to dirty their feet plodding along the open fields.” They turn the difficult role of shepherd into a position of rank and superiority and sequester themselves from the sheep. Ezekiel’s castigation of the self-indulgent and irresponsible shepherds in his day (Ezek. 34) is no less applicable today to those who want to dominate and crush others rather than feed them. — David E. Garland, Mark, The NIV Application Commentary, pg. 258-259 [quotes from Woltering were cited in Salt of the Earth 15 (July/August, 1995), 34]