Heretics and Politics by Thomas A. Fudge

[Roxanne Murphy]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Did I say that? Now if I was quoting EY like he was a saint and scholar you would have a point! These folks are fawning over DF like he is a star. Both DF & EY are a reproach to the gospel not someone to be adoring.

Fair enough. However, when you point at the end of DF's life as 'proof' of his error in doctrine, then the same measuring stick should be applied to EY as well, but then that would imply that his ultra conservative preaching and teaching led to his eventual terrible moral failing. Just sayin'!

[Roxanne Murphy]

Originally Posted by Sabby

Yes, this was Phil. This is in the context of the Culture of the times.
A question was asked earlier on this thread if the acrimony between the district and the school existed before Don Fisher arrived. Yes, there absolutely was.
If I am not mistaken CLC has its own church(?). CBC didn't have that luxury, although in '78 or '79 (can't remember the year) the school made a proposal to the Portland area pastors to allow any students attending their churches to be able to prioritize school functions OVER local church functions. The PDX area pastors by this time were claiming ownership ( which included staffing of S.S. and financial $upport) of students in their churches. The pastors rejected the proposal OUTRIGHT. These things happened with Gary Geason in Oregon City, Bill Davies in McMinnville, B.A. King in Beaverton, Langley in Hillsboro, Barlow in St Helens, Phil in the church at Killingsworth and Paul in St John's just off Lombard Street. I don't know if they rejected the proposal over doctrinal "purity", needing control, or both.
It only weakened the structural integrity of the school and exascerbated the bad vibe between the school and local area pastors. It seemed that the pastors opposed any promotional activity of the school UNLESS it directly benefited their church.

That helps me understand! The time period you are referencing I was too young to be aware of all the church politics. And, I lived in the southern part of the state so was removed from it.
Yes CLC has it's own church so that made it very easy for myself and the other students to be involved in lots of different ministry opportunities without all the strife that was going on around CBC.
You mention the mindset that the only time students and the school were utilized was when the pastor of the particular church thought it was of direct benefit to him/'his' church. Sadly I believe this to be true because some of these same men still pastor churches in this state and that is their approach to pretty much anything that comes along. There are a few newer pastors who at times seem to reach out beyond their own personal interests for the sake of bringing the gospel to a lost world, but even all of those things are kept tightly held in the bonds of the official fellowship/district leadership. And they can't seem to figure out why their churches aren't growing (some of them are mere shadows of what they used to be 20 years ago). The trend over the past several years in UPC churches in the Portland Metro Area had been growth by migration from one church to another, and by the young people who get married and stay to raise their families in their home church (or their spouse's home church). And then pretty much the entire Eastern part of the state joined the WPF, making the district smaller in numbers and resources.

[Disciple4life]

I just read - The Journey Out of the United Pentecostal Church by Dan Lewis (there was a link to the PDF a few post ago)
and Don Marler's Imprisoned in the brotherhood.

Anybody read these? Thoughts?

[Sabby]

I had not read the book until I received the (hardback) copy last week. I must have PTSD because Fudge writes as if he were there in the last days of CBC and his reiteration of events are exactly as I remember.
The addendum of letters and Fisher's sermons are items I'll be going over again. The letter that Toole wrote to the District in which he asked the pastors to have ALL licensed ministers attend.....was a mind-blower. My pastor didn't invite me, of that I can assure you.
Lew Davies wrote a beautifully constructed letter to Toole objecting to the way the "by laws" were held in higher regard than the scriptures. Lew was a non-conformist. After resigning First Church he used the broadcasting talents he used and fine-tuned at WABC to instrumentally grow the Salem broadcasting network through the Portland Christian Radio station KPDQ. Lew had the first Christian talk radio program on KPDQ and was responsible for bringing on Georgene Rice, now a well-known black Christian radio personality. His impact on the greater Christian-politico world was great and he helped inform the greater Christian community of pertinent socio-political events on the national level. Leaving the mother-ship was the best thing that could have happened.
The level of acrimony of the pastors towards CBC's staff was as I remember it.
I've recently been in Thailand with Br Nigh, and he is still a Jesus' name, Holy Ghost preacher. He might wear a beard now and then....
Jerry Dillon, imo had the best of intentions but knew full good and well what he was doing when teaching what were (then) controversial topics, particularly in the "Life of Christ" class. He was not innocently "seized upon". He was aware that what he was teaching could (and did) cause tremors in the district. That said, he did not deserve being treated in the despicable manner that he was by the district.
Walter Nigh, who was succeeded by D. Wasmundt, appeared before the Oregon board after graduating from CBC, after interning a year and while on the staff of CBC (circa '81-'83). It was at this time he appeared before the Oregon District Board and was denied his General License, being told to return when his "eschatology" got straightened out. Being from Idaho and being informed by Br Rutzen around the same time that the church in McCall needed a pastor, he subsequently appeared before the Idaho board, which dutifully issued the son of a long-time missionary and CBC alum, one that had not only attended, graduated and taught at a UPC endorsed Bible college a General License.
To say that the Portland area brethren were "guardians" is an understatement.
I theorize that Montague is Fudge, and Maynard is either Dan Sirstad, Mike Nigh, or Kendall Cobb, since a comment was made about a well-known father preacher. I'm not sure about Whalen, although he is probably one of the above.
In sum, a well-researched and documented book.

[Sabby]

I am SO glad I don't live in that toxic environment anymore.
I do not believe, based upon the evidence, that Fisher acted upon his homosexual tendencies while a member of the United Pentecostal Church. There is no empirical evidence, no "victims" have presented themselves. There was MUCH innuendo about Fisher's doctrine, and ad hominem about the man, which tactic also used by those that wish to kill, steal or to destroy someone that threatens the status quo.
I wept when I read of his demise. I was assassinated in character, but not butchered like Fisher was. I agree with Donna his wife that ultimately it was Don's choices and not the fault or blame of one man or district that caused him to walk away from a lifetime of service and into an active homosexual lifestyle. But the "brethren" didn't help much. In fact, they didn't help at all.

[Disciple4life]

I kept wondering something the whole time I read the book.

If there was all this talent and drive to reform the UPCI, why didn't these people leave and start a new denomination/organization?

There were preachers, teachers and theologians that were all on the same page as far as the need for a better system.

Why didn't they create it instead of getting picked off one by one?

After the battles where over many seemed to just go wherever they could. There was no organized effort to leave as a whole, healthy group.

I am not criticizing anyone. It just seems like everyone would receive a beat down then leave hurt and wounded. I know hind sight is always 20/20.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by Disciple4life

I kept wondering something the whole time I read the book.

If there was all this talent and drive to reform the UPCI, why didn't these people leave and start a new denomination/organization?

There were preachers, teachers and theologians that were all on the same page as far as the need for a better system.

Why didn't they create it instead of getting picked off one by one?

After the battles where over many seemed to just go wherever they could. There was no organized effort to leave as a whole, healthy group.

I am not criticizing anyone. It just seems like everyone would receive a beat down then leave hurt and wounded. I know hind sight is always 20/20.

I have wondered the same thing. Of course I have also wondered why the one step PCI folks ever thought they had a home in an org. with 3 step folks. In my mind they are mutually exclusive from the 3 stepper side. If you truly believe salvation is only through the 3 steps then how could you accept those who taught differently as saved brothers?

I know the response will be about how they had tolerance and things happened like the early Oneness preachers considering trinitarians brothers. That must have been fueled by their recent departure themselves from a different doctrine and their close friendships and respect for those still in it. Once a few years passed that personal connection was not there and the effort at tolerance and inclusion was gone.

[RunningOnFaith]

Originally Posted by CC1

I have wondered the same thing. Of course I have also wondered why the one step PCI folks ever thought they had a home in an org. with 3 step folks. In my mind they are mutually exclusive from the 3 stepper side. If you truly believe salvation is only through the 3 steps then how could you accept those who taught differently as saved brothers?

I know the response will be about how they had tolerance and things happened like the early Oneness preachers considering trinitarians brothers. That must have been fueled by their recent departure themselves from a different doctrine and their close friendships and respect for those still in it. Once a few years passed that personal connection was not there and the effort at tolerance and inclusion was gone.

Good point. It is hard for me to understand what the PCI folks were thinking at the merger. The doctrine of Salvation is not a peripheral issue.

The saved at repentance group started out in a weak position from the very beginning of the organization in my view. Although they were probably in the majority with the PCI-- upon the merger they effectively put themselves in in a permanent minority. It would only take six years for a figure as beloved as Howard Goss to be voted out as superintendent.

People that held to the PCI views that Fudge describes in his books had a much stronger claim to their historical religious heritage than the liberal/moderate Baptist, Lutherans, Catholics that he compares them to. Some of the professors at those institutions had wandered far from the faith of their fathers. The PCI leaders simply wanted to maintain the diversity that was promised at beginning.

It did not help their cause that they usually capitulated on important points (e.g. Greer favoring the motion to add "for the remission of sins" to the fundamental doctrine).

On P. 360 Fudge asserts that numerous Ministers had talked about leaving with potentially Fisher taking the lead. Evidently, the events that happened at the Bible schools during this period was not of sufficient importance in their own thinking to be a catalyst for them to bolt the UPC. For many, I guess this would only occur when they were basically forced out for refusing to sign the affirmation statement.

[Reader]

Of course I have also wondered why the one step PCI folks ever thought they had a home in an org. with 3 step folks.

It is hard for me to understand what the PCI folks were thinking at the merger.

It is interesting how the focus is often on the PCI at this juncture. What about the PAJC? Why would they ever consider joining with people they knew allowed for the salvation of those that they themselves would consider lost? They were the ones lowering their standards in joining with the PCI. Was it because they gained something from it? Could they have possibly gotten what they wanted/needed (funds, status, buildings, etc.) & then started pushing the PCI out?

The emphasis should be upon the PAJC since they were allowing ones who believed differently to join with them, as the PAJC stand on salvation was narrower.

[Monterrey]

Originally Posted by Reader

It is interesting how the focus is often on the PCI at this juncture. What about the PAJC? Why would they ever consider joining with people they knew allowed for the salvation of those that they themselves would consider lost? They were the ones lowering their standards in joining with the PCI. Was it because they gained something from it? Could they have possibly gotten what they wanted/needed (funds, status, buildings, etc.) & then started pushing the PCI out?

The emphasis should be upon the PAJC since they were allowing ones who believed differently to join with them, as the PAJC stand on salvation was narrower.

I believe that one of the reasons for the merger was because the PCI had the exemption necessary for the draft which the larger orgs wanted. Remember, the draft was in force then.

Definently not doctrinal that is for sure.