Sovereign Grace Motive

By John Immel

Concerned asked me a couple of questions in my post Speaking of Church Polity.  I think the content of the question and the corresponding answer needs its own treatment.

Here is what she asked:

John, in reading some things about the various forms of church government, it seems most “truly” reformed churches adhere to either a congregational or presbyterian form of church government. However, the SGM model is episcopalian it seems (heirarchy: power flows from the top down only)

So here is my question – why do you think SGM tries to pass themselves off as Reformed simply because they are Calvinistic when none of their other beliefs remotely resemble historical reformed theology?

Is is fair to say SGM is Calvinistic but not reformed, even though they call themselves reformed?

*     *     *

I LOVE these questions.  I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THESE QUESTIONS.  LOVE IT.  LOVE IT. LOVE IT.  That means you all are catching on.  These questions show forth that people are actually looking at the content of what the Hair Club for Men claim.  And if you are looking at the content, it becomes very easy to see that the Arena of Ideas they fancy themselves in is NOT as neat and tidy and unarguable as Sovereign Grace Ministries would like to pretend.

Concerned, the heart of your question is WHY? Why does SGM do what they do? Why do they call themselves Reformed when in fact they don’t conform to the content of the Reformed Practice? It is always a bold undertaking to answer about someone else’s motive.  But I’m up to the challenge.

The short answer to why does Sovereign Grace Ministries claim Reformed Status is fear.

No… let me amend. The short answer to why does Sovereign Grace Ministries claim Reformed Status is stone cold, stark terror.

What are they afraid of?  They are afraid that they are not truly authorized to preach, that they really may not be in charge, that they might not have anything to offer, that at the end of the day that they (CJ) might be wrong.

I know… that is a rather bold, generalizing explanation, but given the time and space, I’m pretty sure that I can lay out the parts and pieces of their overriding preoccupation.

But Exhibit A is embedded in Eric “Phenomenal” Simmons’ comments about bloggers. Well, not about bloggers specifically but his overarching need to discredit those folks on the Internet as irrelevant post-adolescents with nothing but heresy to talk about.  His comments are pure demagoguery, designed to play on the fears of his CLC audience to warn them away from ideas: ideas he cannot compete with.

The mindset of fear is endemic within the Sovereign Grace Ministries’ culture.

Exhibit B is their history. Long before SGM was… SGM, they were GOB and PDI/CLC. Their foray into shepherding is part and parcel of the same preoccupation: who is authorized to be in charge, and preach, and arbitrate God stuff. CJ and Larry Tomczak, et al were authoritarian LOOOOONNNNNGGGGG before they read Piper, and Spurgeon, and Packer.

Exhibit C is how they use the doctrines of Reformed Theology. I want to expand on this last point so I need to illustrate some Sovereign Grace Ministries algebra.

“watch your life and your doctrine” = mentally reflecting + Good Theology = Sound Doctrine = a specific Theological system = Orthodoxy = Authentic Christianity.

Orthodoxy = Reformed Theology

Ergo

Authentic Christianity = Reformed Theology

AND

Reformed Theology = Calvinism

With me so far? Okay… good.

Now I need to add the last part of the SGM equation.

Passioned Orthodoxy = PDI Passion + Orthodoxy

The last part of the equation is most important to your original question “How can SGM claim to be REFORMED when they really don’t adhere to the totality of REFORMED TRADITION?”

See, Sovereign Grace Ministries wants to play both sides of the intellectual fence. They use “Reformed Theology” to deflect criticism.  Object to the content of their doctrine and they immediately say, “But we are Orthodox, how can you object? We believe what all right-thinking historic Christians have always believed. How can you object to what Paul himself preached ‘Christ and him crucified’?” Upon criticism, the critic places himself unsound doctrine camp eliminating his disparagement from consideration.

But as PDI/CLC were making the transition from the charismatic-ish movement to the Reformed Tradition, they ran square into their first and second departure from Orthodox teaching. Reformed doctrine is the home of cessationist teaching… meaning the gifts of the spirit–tongues, healing, et al.–passed away.  Many of the churches of the reformed tradition prohibited music and musical instruments from worship.

What to do? We are a bunch of ’60s throwbacks that like to jump around at a rock concert in our tie dyes. Bob Kauflin isn’t going to stop playing the electric piano. And we’re not going to suddenly disavow speaking in tongues for the last 20 years.

How do we justify departures from the very orthodoxy that we use to validate our doctrine?

Well… in reality, they just ignore the implications. But their PR machine went into full gear and decided their doctrinal deviations were the product of Passion. Well… who can argue with that?

Their use of Reformed Theology is a smokescreen to insulate themselves from criticism of the content of their practice. Their deviations from the Reformed Tradition are justified as modern expressions of their unique Sovereign Grace Ministries passion.

As for their use of Calvinism … well … if there was ever a body of teaching that absolved a man of the outcomes of his doctrine … this is it. If you pray for the sick and folks don’t get well, what is the reason?  God is sovereign. Ergo, the content of your life is the product of Divine will. You preach endlessly that folks should not sin but yet they do. This is living proof of the doctrine of Pervasive Depravity. You pray for the unbeliever to get saved but yet they don’t respond.  That is a function of Limited Atonement. You preach the hard truth of the Gospel, but folks leave your church and call you a cult.  No mystery here, this is the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints in action. If one cannot persevere in the hard truth, those who leave are living God’s necessarily appointed deception.

As a pastor, how can you be held accountable to ANY outcome within the body? Logically, you can’t and practically you won’t because the doctrine exempts outcomes from your preview.

As for their polity … in practice, SGM are papists. Charles Joseph is the Vicar.