Questions Regarding “Fundamentalism’s Great Softness”

Pastor Tod Brainard’s article in the latest edition of The Projector, “Fundamentalism’s Great Softness,” was recently forwarded to me by a couple of my pastor-friends. I read it, and I was troubled by its content. Frankly, I’m not sure whether I agree or disagree with Pastor Brainard’s assessment. The reason for my uncertainty is this: Pastor Brainard bemoans the current state of fundamentalism, and he indicts many men and churches for their “great softness.” However, he speaks so vaguely that one is left wondering which specific issues and people so concern him. I have included the article below, along with questions it raised in my mind as I read it. (My questions appear in bold, italicized text throughout the article.)

Though I initially dismissed the article, there are several reasons why I believe it is appropriate to post a response. First, the article is being read and passed along by many who see it as an exemplary warning against compromise. I disagree with that assessment. Second, because I am a separatist, it grieves me to see separation promoted or applied in an imprecise manner. Ill-advised and imprecise militancy puts forward a caricature of separatism rather than the reality. The result is that some may reject biblical separatism in their haste to avoid the misrepresentation of it. Finally the article is teeming with accusations, including the impugning of men’s motives. Pastor Brainard accuses pastors of refusing to apply truths they know because of cowardice. How he knows what these men are doing, what they know, and what motivates them—whoever they are—isn’t clear. He goes on to declare that many fundamental pastors are trading “the Biblical and historic faith” for “‘mixed and matched beliefs’ tailored to their likings.” It is a bold assertion, indeed, to say that fundamental preachers are forsaking the faith, and one which I hope he doesn’t make lightly! He goes on to call out men for “toeing the line” and cow-towing to powerful institutions.

Of what profit is such general, shoot-from-the-hip criticism? Pastor Brainard, even as he calls for boldness, fails to mention which doctrines are being forsaken, which pastors are cowering in the pulpit, which institutions are looking to black-ball all who disagree with them, which biblical commands are being compromised, etc. If these things are true—if men are truly absconding from “the Biblical and historic faith”!—Pastor Brainard should name them so we can mark and avoid them as the apostates they are!

As it is, we are left with a hard-hitting article that seems to hit everyone in general and no one in particular, that criticizes many fundamentalists without specific examples or proofs, and that heaps suspicion on unnamed people and institutions for forsaking unnamed doctrines and compromising unnamed standards.

Sans specifics, the article just seems like militancy for the sake of militancy, which is not at all helpful. Indeed, it can be absolutely harmful.

“For if the trumpet makes an uncertain sound, who will prepare himself for battle?” (1 Corinthians 14:8)

______

Fundamentalism’s Great Softness
By Pastor Tod Brainard
The Projector, Vol. 36, No. 4, Fall 2007 (pdf)

Looking over the landscape is a sad sight to behold. Every practice, every standard, every article of clothing, all music, all versions, all worship, movie theater’s all social drinking, you name it, everything is on the table, open for discussion and up for grabs.

Which practices are you especially concerned about? Which articles of clothing? What are some examples of the music that concerns you? Which versions? What kind of worship are you seeing coming into fundamental churches that concerns you? And is the fact that some of these issues are up for discussion really a great threat?

Things that were once taken for granted as solid Biblical precedent are now challenged as being archaic and pharisaical.

Of what things are you speaking? Were they merely taken for granted as being built on solid Biblical precedent (a phrase I’m not certain I understand), or did they genuinely grow out of sound biblical exegesis? Who is calling these things (whatever they may be) archaic and pharisaical?

Substitutes for the old standards are being hailed as “balanced” and “acceptable” and therefore all within Biblical parameters. Yet, the substitutes look just like the one’s promoted by the world and the modern culture, and very few in the church are alarmed.

Which substitutes—for which old standards—are “being hailed as ‘balanced’ and ‘acceptable’”? Who is doing the hailing? By what specific issues should we be alarmed?

Fundamentalists have become like a band of teenagers who finally have come of age and now get to do the things they were told they could not do. The fact that their forebears established certain standards of excellence and forbid certain things because they had our welfare in mind is lost to this generation. “We can do what we want now, so let’s do it” is the attitude of the moment. Such is the attitude in many “Fundamental” churches.

What specific issues are you talking about here? Is that really the reasoning behind the decisions of many fundamental churches—that “we can do what we want now?” Can you provide examples of this?

Anxiety About Being Too Strong
There are preachers who know what is right and they can articulate what is right, but they are afraid of taking too strong a stand for the LORD.

On what issues are preachers afraid of taking too strong a stand, despite knowing what is right? How do you know they are afraid of taking too strong a stand?

If they sound out too strongly, they may be labeled by the talking heads of Fundamentalism as “trouble-makers” and be blacklisted, losing speaking opportunities, honors from Bible colleges and universities, and removal from consideration for potential leadership positions themselves.

Who are these “talking heads of Fundamentalism”? What Bible colleges and universities do you have in mind? Are you certain that this is the motivation behind what these preachers are doing? How can you be sure?

Certainly, pastors should be responsible and use good discernment so as not bring shame on the work of the LORD by overreacting to issues that are inconsequential. That being said, pastors who are overly concerned about perceptions of being “too strong” generally only take stands that are approved by the “group” or that cost them very little.

Which specific issues are inconsequential? What is “the ‘group’”?

Jesus Spoke with Authority
Unlike the Scribes, Jesus taught the people as one having authority. As preachers of the Word, we are not to give out options and theories to our people. We are to believe the Word of God and wholly recognize that the authority of heaven is behind its words. The Scribes knew nothing of that authority and power behind their words and the people could tell the difference. An old-fashioned belief that the Bible is the authoritative Word of God should put some starch in a preacher’s spine and bring him to experience the power of the Spirit in his ministry.

Apparently you see many fundamentalist pastors who do not preach with authority? Can you give specifics regarding what this looks like? Are you looking for authoritative proclamation of truth? An authoritative voice? Authoritative applications? Please be specific.

Powerful Words
Like Eli, the High Priest of old, many preachers know what is right, they know how to articulate what is right, but they cannot wield authiority (sic) to enforce what is right because they are afraid of the reaction that will ensue (I Samuel 2:22; 3:11-14). Our Lord had no stomach for the softness of Eli. God killed his two boys, the ark of the Covenant was taken away from the Tabernacle by the Philistines, and Eli died. In the place of the spineless Eli, God put Samuel and the Bible says, “And Samuel grew, and the LORD was with him, and did let none of his words fall to the ground” (I Samuel 3:19).

In what specific ways are fundamentalist pastors being like Eli? How are they not “wielding authority to enforce what is right? Are you certain that their motivation for what they do is that “they are afraid of the reaction that will ensue”? How?

That one phase indicates that God purposed to make Samuel His voice of authority as the last of the Judges. The days of Eli with his persuasive talk hat lacked authority had come to a close. Samuel became God’s enforcer of right, a true authority figure in Israel. When Saul disobeyed God’s commands in regard to the Amalekites, it was Samuel that took up the sword and hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal (I Samuel 15:33). Obviously, the New Testament preacher does not take a literal sword and dispatch those he deems trouble makers. Yet, the Sword of the Spirit must be taken from the sheath and wielded against the flesh and the Devil. Being perceived as “too strong” should not be the concern of the hour; it is the perception of being “too weak” that should concern the preachers of God’s Word.

You are concerned that pastors are not taking “the Sword of the Spirit…from the sheath and wield[ing] it against the flesh and the Devil.” That is a strong accusation. Can you give examples to support it? Furthermore, is our goal really a matter of weakness vs. strength, or should it instead be a matter of being biblically accurate in our preaching and applications?

Toe the Party Line
There are certain people and agencies of Fundamentalism who are considered untouchable because of their stature.

Who are these people and agencies? Who considers them to be “untouchable”?

For instance, if you criticize or expose the leaders or agencies leading the decline of music standards and Biblical preaching in Fundamentalism you will be hung out to dry. Therefore, toeing the party line has become the choice for many pastors.

Who are the leaders or agencies leading the decline of music standards? Who is leading the decline of biblical preaching? What does it mean to be hung out to dry? And how can you be certain that pastors who disagree with you are merely “toeing the party line”?

Keep in mind, dear pastor, that you will be held accountable before God as to the music standards you allow in your church. Excuses such as, “I am not a musician” will not cut it before the throne of Christ. Accepting weak music standards by default because everybody else does it will not be accepted either.

What, specifically, are the “weak music standards” that concern you?

You must be a Samuel in your place of ministry without fear and take the pulpit and the church back to God’s standards. This will probably cost you families, friends, and invites. This will no doubt put you outside the realm of “popular” Fundamentalism; however, the glory and holiness of the name of the LORD is at stake here, not your rise to fame.

What are God’s standards? How can I know them? What is “the realm of ‘popular’ fundamentalism?

Staying Safe
It is far better never to start down the wrong road than it is to go down the wrong road and try to turn around. What is often not understood in Fundamental churches is that once you begin down the wrong road you lose control of your situation. Your walk down the wrong road is now controlled by the unintended consequences of your choice to move in the wrong direction. It is far easier not to begin to go wrong, than it is to turn back and do better after beginning. The safe course is to never take one step down the wrong road. However, this profound principle escapes the modern Fundamental church.

What specific “wrong roads” are fundamental churches taking?

Rather than adhering to the Biblical and historic faith, which is built on the solid foundation of the Word of God, Fundamentalists have become shoppers for their belief systems. The Mall of Ideas is open for business and people in our Fundamental churches are out shopping and bringing home their “mixed and matched beliefs” tailored to their likings.

That is another strong indictment. Are you aware of fundamental churches that are genuinely rejecting “the Biblical and historic faith?” Are they really trading in “the solid foundation of the Word of God” for “the Mall of Ideas”? In what areas? What specific doctrines of the biblical and historic faith are being forsaken? What commands of the Word of God are being traded in? What are the “mixed and matched beliefs” that so concern you?

Look to Yourselves
II and III John are epistles that pastors need to spend a great deal of time studying in these days of compromise and shallowness. II John 7 is a constant reminder to “Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.” I fear that we are losing things that are important for things that are unimportant.

What specific important things are we losing? What specific unimportant things are we gaining?

May God raise up a remnant of men and women who will not take one step down the wrong road!