Preface

Page 1 of 176
 Illustration of "Wolf in Sheep's Clothing" – created by Dianas Hunting
(photoshoptalent.com/profile/dianas hunting/)

This treatise has been compiled and edited by

C. Wayne Johnson, B.A., Independent Christian Researcher

I first heard of Promise Keepers (PK) through the body of believers with whom I share membership and
worship at non-denominational Pathways Community Church, in Largo, Florida.
PK came on to me rather strong in their efforts to recruit me into their movement, reminding me of my past
involvement recruiting for the Armed Forces.
After reading a publication, "Promise Keepers (PK), Pro and Con", I felt there was something unscriptural
about the Promise Keepers efforts to fulfill their questionable mission. Since one of the gifts of the Holy
Spirit is the gift of discernment, I opened my Bible, New International Version(NIV), to, ("Job 34:4"):
"let us discern for ourselves what is right; Let us learn together what is good.", and to ("Philippians
2:10") "So that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless until the day
of Christ."
Based upon these scriptures, I began to investigate further into the Promise Keeper's movement. The
information I found in my research troubled me further. The more I found, the more concerned I became. I
prayed for wisdom and Truth in my efforts to bring these facts into the light of God's Word and present this
material in a manner that will allow my brothers and sisters in Christ to better understand what I found.
I pray that God's Holy Spirit will guide your thoughts and impressions as you read these words.
Certain words kept running through my mind and are reflected in the title page of this treatise:
"Beware of Wolves in Sheep's Clothing"", Doctrine of Demons", and "Beware of Promise Keepers".

"And there was war in heaven …… "(Revelation 12:7)

Michael and his archangels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back.
8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven.

Page 2 of 176
9 The great dragon was hurled down-----that old serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the
whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

9 and the great Dragon was cast was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil and Satan, who leads
the whole world astray: he was cast onto the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 and I heard a loud voice saying in Heaven, “Now is come salvation, and strength, and the
Kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of our brothers is cast down,
which accused them before our God Day and Night.”

Table of Contents

Wolves in Sheep's Clothing – Doctrine of Demons Cover Page

Page 3 of 176
Preface 1
War in Heaven 2
Table of Contents 3-8
Promise Keepers (PK), Pro and Con 9
The Whore of Babylon 21
Beware of Promise Keepers 22
The Harmful Impact of Promise Keepers (PK) 24
The Problems Created by (PK) 25
Many Christian Leaders Warn of (PK) 27
The Roman Catholic – (PK) Connection - The Art of Double-Speak 29
(PK)'s Close Connection with Catholic University 33
(PK) Supports Women Pastors 36
(PK) Welcomes Female Pastor Leading Male Members 37
The Seven False Premises of Promise Keepers 38
What is wrong with (PK)? 44
The Problem 45
A Typical Rally 45
Opposition Surfaces 46
Defending its Mission 47
What is the Truth about (PK)? 47
A Charismatic Fervor 48
Unity at the Expense of Truth? 50
It's Affect on Local Churches 51

Promise Keepers - PK: Ecumenical "Macho Men" for Christ 53

(PK) has the Approval of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops 60

Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries 83

The Promise Keepers Movement is Dangerous -- Watch out for It! 86

What are the Seven Promises? 87

Page 4 of 176
Dangers of the (PK) 88

Doctrinal Confusion of (PK) Rally 94

Denominational Divisions are Doctrinal 99

(PK) Assemblies – "Stand in the Gap" 100

(PK) Pastors and Leadership Conference 103

(PK) The Masculine Journey 108

(PK) The Masculine Study Guide 109

Distain for Doctrine 110

(PK) Changes Doctrinal Statement to Appease Catholics 111

Comments by Fundamental Baptist Information Service Editor 112

Salvation by Faith Alone 113

Throw the Gate Wide, for the Great Whore of Babylon is ready to Enter 114

Apostasy – The National Council of Churches (NCC) 115

Are there Communist Ministers in the NCC? Yes. 122
If the NCC has its way, that is JUST the way it will be! 125
What about the NCC? 126
The NCC is not Primarily a Spiritual Organization 126
The NCC's Activities and Publications lean toward the Political Left 127
The NCC is Preparing the way for the False Prophet – The Whore of Babylon 128
The NCC Often Speaks "To" the Churches, and not necessarily "For" those 129
The NCC is not really a cohesive Power within Christendom 130
The World Council of Churches (WCC), a Cup of the Lord or of Devils? 132
True Born-Again Believers will want to heed God's Warnings, Obey God's Commands,
and Rest in God's Promises 135
The WCC and Theological Liberalism 135
Pagan Indian Sacred Flame Heralds Start of Vancouver Assembly 136
WCC Affirms "Presence of God" in people of other Faiths 136
Page 5 of 176
Pagan Sikh Leader Responds to WCC Welcome 137
WCC Interfaith Dialogue Moderator Questions – "Evangelism" 137
"Tentative" Worship in a Candy-Striped Circus Tent 138
Ecumenical Worship with a Eucharistic Liturgy 138
Does the WCC have any Official Theology? 139
The Fantasy of Compromising Evangelicals 139
The "Voice of Evangelicalism" in the WCC 139
The WCC and the Shocking Evangelical "Sell-Out" 140
The Blind Leading the Blind at Vancouver 140
The Conflict between Truth and Error 141
Tiring of the Battle 141
Who is Responsible for the "Evangelicals at Vancouver"? 141
Evangelicals at Vancouver – An Open Letter 142
Another View – Another Voice 145
Why Two Evangelical Open Letters at Vancouver? 145
The Evangelical Minority Report at Vancouver 146
An Evangelical Evaluation of the WCC's Sixth Assembly in Vancouver 146
Bangkok 1973 – Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives, the Beginning, or
End of World Mission 148
The WCC and Communism 149
What about the WCC and Communism? 149
Is the WCC Anti-Communist, Pro-Communist, or Neutral? 149
The Communist "Use" of Religion 149
Theoretically, the WCC is a "Free" Religious Body …. Actually, the WCC is
Now a "Captive" Body 150
What Would the WCC say at Vancouver Concerning the Brutal Communist
Takeover of Afghanistan? 150
Delegates from Iron Curtain Churches "Flex Their Muscles" in this Debate 151
USA Leader helps Soviets win another Victory 151
Page 6 of 176
WCC Again Refuses to Consider Complaints of Soviet Religious Persecution 151
WCC Leaders and the Communists have much in Common 151
The WCC as seen Through the Eyes of a Secular Editor 152
Religious Liberalism Produces Radicalism and Spiritual Blindness 152
A Great and Glorious Patchwork? 152
Radical Youth were at Vancouver! 153
Ecumenical Indoctrination for Children at Vancouver 153
Radical Women at Vancouver 153
Award Winning Humanist Speaks at Vancouver! 154
Capitalism – A Thief that Comes to Plunder the Poor? 154
The Unscriptural Theme of the WCC Vancouver Assembly! 154
The Radical Development of an Unscriptural Theme! 154
The Radical Words of a Finnish Archbishop! 155
A Heathen Dance and False Religions 155
The Blind Leading the Blind at Vancouver! 155
What did the WCC Really say at the Vancouver Assembly? 155
"No Peace without Justice" – A Dominant Theme at Vancouver! 156
What are the Requirements for Peace and Justice? 156
WCC Accuses Secular Press of False reporting! 156
WCC Documents its own Radicalism! 156
Downplaying the Deity and Atoning Work of Christ 157
Promoting Socialism in the Name of Christianity 157
WCC Recommendations – New Symbols 157
An Inescapable Question! 157
Who Controls the WCC? 158
Who Finances the WCC? 158
Where Does the Money Go? 158
Where is the WCC Headed? 158
God says "Come Out!" 159
Page 7 of 176
The Battle Continues – Where Do You Stand? 159
The WCC and Pseudo-Spiritually 159
Liberals are at the Helm of the WCC 160
"God's Justice, Promise, and Challenge 160
What is Truth? 161
Interweaving Different Approaches to the Faith 161
Spirituality or the Spirit of Humanism? 161
"A Humanistic, Socio-Economic-Political Speech" 161
The Call for a New International Economic Order 162
President of Argentina Calls for a New International Economic Order 162
Dr. Castro Gave a Strong Boost for Radical Liberation Theology 162
Radical Women Leaders were presented at Buenos Aires as they had at
Vancouver 162
Radical Youth were also represented at Buenos Aires 163
The Agenda Reflected what was Important to the WCC 163
One Visible Church 163
The WCC Commission on World Mission and Evangelism 164
Gospel and Culture 164
Good News for the Poor 164
Relations with the Evangelicals 164
Mission and Evangelism: An Ecumenical Affirmation 165
Ecumenical Sharing of Resources 165
Plans for the 1988 World Mission Conference 165
Is the Kingdom of Christ Already Here? 165
The Cross? Or the Hammer and the Sickle? 166
"As for Me, I am not afraid of the Revolution, for it is the Power of the People
Unto Salvation." 166
Outright Denunciation and Overthrow of Capitalism Demanded 166
The WCC Commission of Faith and Order 166
Page 8 of 176
The WCC Commission on Faith and Order is Broader than the WCC Itself 166
Convergence Now – Consensus Later? 167
"Spirituality" Claimed for B.E.M. Statement 167
Suggested Steps toward Doctrinal Consensus 167
World Conference of Faith and Order Planned for 1988 167
Chicago Theologians on Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry (BEM) 168

Is the B.E.M. Statement True to Scripture? 173

Unscriptural Teaching on Baptism 173
Unscriptural Teaching on the Eucharist 173
Such False Teachings Contradict God's Word and negate the Principles of the
Protestant Reformation 173
Dialog with Heathen Religions has Top Priority in the WCC 174
What is Ahead for the WCC? 174
Closing Words of Exhortation and Warning 174
WCC Member Churches in North America 175
WCC Member Churches in Asia 175
Attention Christians throughout Asia 176
What a Sham! What a Shame! Pure Blood of all Men 177
"It is Finished" – "It's Your Move Now" 178

Promise Keepers (PK), Pro and Con

Overview:
Promise Keepers (PK) is an Evangelical Christian organization whose membership is restricted to men and
made up almost entirely of conservative Christians. It was founded by Bill McCartney, (1940- ), in 1990.
He is a former football coach from the University of Colorado. It has obviously filled a great need among
men in North America. PK had a small beginning in 1990 when 72 men gathering for prayer in Boulder,
Colo. In 1991, 4,200 men attended its meetings. Annual attendance has grown to 1.1 million in 1996. As of
1997-SEP, a total of 2.6 million men (and at least one woman) have attended their mass rallies across the
US and Canada. The group has since fallen on hard economic times.

Who are the Promise Keepers?

Page 9 of 176
They are a group of men asked, "To live a life wholly set apart for Almighty God".
A survey in 1995 by the National Center for Fathering showed that:
33.1% of the membership is Baptist; the rest are associated with a variety of Christian denominations.
Their median age is 38.
88% are married; 21% have been divorced.
57% have wives that work.
26% had been unemployed for more than 6 months.
Half say their own fathers were "largely absent" during their childhood.
25% are satisfied with themselves as fathers.
Most have at least a bachelor's degree.
91% give financially to their church.
87% attend church services at least once a week.
The vast majority vote Republican; 15% are Democrats.
The mean family income is about $48,000; their members are mostly from suburbia, and overwhelmingly
white. A crowd picture in Time magazine shows four men in the foreground (1 African-American and 3
White), against a background of perhaps 150 men, about three of whom appear to be African-Americans.
The most serious sin, reported by 62% of its members, is "sexual sin". This would include everything from
adultery to feelings of lust towards a woman who is not their wife.
Their headquarters are in Denver CO. Their annual revenues in 1997 totaled $87 million. They had about
350 staff members. McCartney does not draw a salary from Promise Keepers; he charges only for lecture
fees and expenses. PK has created over 16,000 accountability groups, linked with 400,000 churches, and
trained 120,000 "ambassadors" and "key men".

Beliefs of Promise Keepers

The core beliefs of the movement are expressed in the seven promises of a Promise Keeper:
1. Honoring Jesus Christ through worship, prayer, and obedience to God's word in the power of the
Holy Spirit.
2. Pursuing vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him
keep his promises.
3. Practicing spiritual, moral, ethical and sexual purity
4. Building strong marriages and families through love, protection and biblical values
5. Supporting his church by honoring and praying for his pastor and by giving his time and resources.
Page 10 of 176
 6. Reaching beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity
7. Influencing his world, being obedient to the great commandment (see Mark 12:30-31), and the great
commission (see Matthew 28:19-20).
Bill McCartney has described a main goal of Promise Keepers: "You've seen the downward spiral of
morality in this nation; it can all be traced to an absence of Almighty God. Men of integrity - promise
keepers - are what's going to turn this thing around."
Promise Keepers also have a Statement of Faith 1 which follows the basic beliefs of Evangelical
Christianity: belief in the Trinity, inerrancy of the Bible; virgin birth, resurrection and second coming of
Christ; presence of the Holy Spirit; and salvation by faith in Jesus alone.
They are an ecumenical movement, working for the unity of Christianity. They welcome all men at their
rallies, both Christians and non-Christians. However, in practice, the theological beliefs expressed at rallies
and in their literature primarily appeals to men from the conservative wing of Christendom. Dr. Jack
Hayford writes on "Redeeming Worship" in the book "Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper: "Redeeming
worship centers on the Lord's Table. Whether your tradition celebrates it as Communion, Eucharist, the
Mass, or the Lord's Supper, we are all called to this centerpiece of Christian worship." 2 Founder, Bill
McCartney writes in the same book: "...Almighty God wants to bring Christian men together regardless of
their ethnic origin, denominational background, or style of worship...Can we look one another in the eye --
black, white, red, brown, yellow, Baptist, Presbyterian, Assemblies of God, (Catholic?), and so on -- and
get together on this common ground: 'We believe in salvation through Christ alone, and we have made
Him the Lord of our lives'? Is that not the central, unifying reality of our existence? And if it is, can we not
focus on that and call each other brothers instead of always emphasizing our differences?" 3

Practices of Promise Keepers

From their founding in 1990 to 1997-SEP, they have held 61 rallies averaging about 43,000 men, for a total
attendance of at least 2.6 million men.
PK rallies have been described as emotional, cathartic events. 4 "Men are chastised for their sins and
weaknesses, break into tears, and recite vows to become better husbands and fathers. Imagine a cross
between an old-fashioned revival meeting and a gigantic therapy session, and you've got the picture."
Women are excluded from all Promise Keeper events: mass rallies, prayer groups and other religious
activities. The group feels that their presence would be a distraction. Wives of PK members have organized
a number of support ministries. They pray for the success of the movement, and that wives and children are
spiritually prepared for the return of their husbands.
PK members, called ambassadors, form PK accountability groups, consisting of five or six men who meet
weekly. They hold each other accountable as Christians and support each other to keep the 7 promises
A main thrust of the movement in recent years has been to raise consciousness about segregation and
racism within Christianity. They often stress that 11 AM on Sunday morning is the beginning of the most
segregated hour of the week. This is the time when many Christians in the US attend churches whose
congregations are almost entirely of one race. Promise Keepers got off to a bad start, as a white-led
organization. They have consciously worked towards a racially integrated movement. Almost 40% of their
staff are now from a racial minority.
In 1986, McCartney exhorted his followers: "Many of you feel like you've been in a war for a long time, yet
the fiercest fighting is still ahead. Let's proceed. It's wartime." In recent years, they have toned down the
militaristic language. No longer emphasized are the "squads of men" engaging in "spiritual warfare" as

Page 11 of 176
"God's army", fighting "a raging battle" with Jesus as their "commander-in-chief" and clergy as
"commissioned officers".
"They still base much of their belief that a man should be the head of the family on Ephesians 5:23:"For
the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church..." (NIV). PK has recently been
downplaying the matching verse 22, which states: "Wives submit to your husbands, as to the Lord" (NIV).

Support for Promise Keepers

At his weekly radio address on 1997-OCT-4 (the date of the Washington rally) President Clinton said:
"Their presence here is yet another example of the nation's understanding and attention to the need to
strengthen our families. There is nothing more important...The need f or men to take responsibility for
themselves and their families is something that unites Americans of all faiths and backgrounds and
beliefs"
Clinton also acknowledged that some people have "political differences" with the Promise Keepers.
First Lady Hillary Clinton has expressed reservations about the PK leadership, but praised the
movement in her book "It Takes a Village".
On 1997-SEP-16, a group of leading conservative women from a number of Protestant, Orthodox and
Roman Catholic churches denounced NOW for their criticism of PK and decried the negative impact of
"radical feminism" on church and society. Lecturer on Catholic life, Mary Ellen Bork, said: "We believe
that the feminist fixation on power has sadly missed the point of the present cultural situation. In our
view, power is not the goal in life." Pat Funderburk Ware, an African-American expert in the prevention
of teen pregnancies and STD transmission said: "So many white women...are so co-opted by the feminist
movement because they haven't suffered enough. They really don't know what it is not to have their men
there...We've suffered enough."
Donna Minkowitz, a journalist from Ms magazine, smuggled herself into a Promise Keeper's rally in St.
Petersburg FL in 1995. She disguised herself as a teen-aged boy. She recognizes that the group is anti-
gay and anti-abortion. However, she says that this is not their main thrust. She says: "In some ways, I
think they are changing men in a really good way that feminists would like. While some of their message
is antifeminist and right-wing, I think ignoring the good side doesn't do us a service at all."
Jeannette Batz, columnist for The Riverfront Times commented: "Pastors are seeing men throw away
the crutches of pornography, adultery, workaholics, and addiction. Wives are calling themselves
Promise Reapers because they finally have husbands they can count on. Friends are watching these men
open up, admit their failings, sob themselves clean." 5
Nina May is the founder of Renaissance Women. Commenting on attacks on PK from feminist and
other groups, she said: "I question the sincerity, the integrity and the honesty of any self-proclaimed
spokeswoman who challenges a family's right and responsibility to reassess their commitment to one
another."

Criticisms of Promise Keepers

Political Agenda: Some critics maintain that "PK" is not a purely religious organization, but is a component
of the Religious Right, intending to further its political aims. Social analyst Chip Berlet as described the
Religious Right as "an authoritarian society where Christian men interpret God's will as law. Women are
helpmates, and children are the property of their parents.... People are basically sinful, and must be
restrained."

Page 12 of 176
Well-known groups within the Religious Right support PK. James Dobson of Focus on the Family donated
10,000 critically needed dollars to PK in 1992. Dobson has given them publicity on his radio show, has
addressed their rally in Denver CO, and has written a chapter in the PK guidebook. Focus has published PK
books and materials. Other Fundamentalist radio and TV programs have publicized PK.
According to one source: 5
The founder, Bill McCartney has spoken for Operation Rescue, an extremist anti-choice group.
PK speakers Joseph Garlington and Wellington Boone have been closely involved with the Coalition
on Revival (COR), a Christian Reconstructionist group that wants to enforce Old Testament law in the
US, extending the death penalty to include blasphemy, homosexuality, and abortion.
Mark DeMoss, former spokesperson for Moral Majority leader the Rev. Jerry Falwell and former
advisor to Patrick Buchanan, now handles publicity for PK.
Rev. Amos Brown, pastor of the Third Baptist Church in San Francisco CA, called PK a "Trojan horse
for the political and religious right". He criticized the exclusion of women from its rallies. He said:
"Whatever is going to be done to improve the family is going to take a holistic and collective effort
involving husband and wife".
Spokespersons from the Center for Democracy Studies state: "Promise Keepers emerged as the cutting
edge of the religious right and is representative of the "third wave" of the religious right's political
development since World War II. The first was Jerry Falwell's fundamentalist-led Moral Majority. The
second was Pat Robertson's charismatic-led Christian Coalition with its grassroots structures. What
distinguishes Promise Keepers from prior waves of religious revivals in this country is its organizational
prowess, theological extremism, and the extent to which it wants comprehensively to restructure this
country's social order. With backing from Focus on the Family's James Dobson and The Family
Research Council's Gary Bauer, who have criticized Ralph Reed for selling out their principles, the so-
called third wave is positioning itself to the political right of the Christian Coalition." 6

Past Behavior of a Group Led by McCartney:

Bill McCartney was the head football coach at the University of Colorado, prior to his founding of Promise
Keepers. From 1982 until 1994, he transformed the football team from a losing organization into a major
achiever in college sports. They won the national title in 1990. They were a Top 20 team from 1989 until
1994. However, according to Phil Mushnick, sports reporter for the New York Post, these achievements
might have been at the expense of the player's moral stature. 7 Mushnick wrote:
"You name it, brothers and sisters, McCartney's recruits were accused of it. Theft, rape, serial rape,
assault, extortion, drugs, terroristic threats, weapons, DWIs, criminal trespassing, criminal flight, breaking
and entering, and, of course, academic fraud...From 1986 to 1989 alone...24 of McCartney's players were
arrested." In 1989, Tim DeLaria of the Campus Police told Sports Illustrated that "At the first home
football game of every season, a couple of detectives [would] drop by the stadium and pick up a few
programs.8 Saves you time. Instead of having a victim go through the mug book, you just take out your
program and say, 'Is he in here?'"

Male Supremacy.
Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW) has said: "I see the Promise
Keepers and I am afraid. I am very afraid. And I am angry." She describes their goal as a "feel-good
form of male supremacy". She opposes PK as a "stealth male-supremacist group". She believes that they
are "quietly building a mass movement in the US". NOW is selling some amusing buttons with such
slogans as: "God, please save me from your followers," and "Sorry, I've missed church. I've been
Page 13 of 176
 practicing witchcraft and becoming a lesbian." She commented on another occasion: "Two adults
standing as equals and peers taking responsibility for their family is a much different image than the
man being the head and master, and women being back in an old role that historically was very
detrimental."
Feminists and other critics point out that Promise #4 includes a corollary commitment for men to
reclaim their leadership roles in the family - against opposition from their wives if necessarily. They
propose an authoritarian family structure. PK is opposed to families in which both spouses share power
equally.
Tony Evans, a senior pastor of Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship in Dallas TX wrote a section titled
"Reclaiming your Manhood" in a PK book titled "Seven Promises":
"Sit down with your wife and say something like this: 'Honey, I've made a terrible mistake. I've given you
my role. I gave up leading this family, and I forced you to take my place. Now, I must reclaim that
role'...I'm not suggesting you ask for your role back, I'm urging you to take it back...there can be no
compromise here. If you're going to lead, you must lead."
Rev. Barry Lynn, of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State said: They don't just
want to be responsible. They want men to be the leaders, not just of the church but of their families, of
their government, of the whole culture."
Rape and Violence End Now (RAVEN) is a nonviolence education program for men in St. Louis MO.
Mark Moloney, their executive director commented: "I don't think all they stand for is odious. However,
I think we should be concerned with the things they are not saying. They are not talking about how you
raise a child nonviolently or how you enter a relationship in a way that is not controlling." 5
Harry Walls, pastor of Christian Fellowship Baptist Church in Wellston, conceded that: "The message
of male leadership has been oppressive...And if I sit 10 men down and say, `You are the leader of the
house and here's what that means,' some will leave with only one message: `I'm the leader.'"
More than 60 religious leaders formed an anti-Promise Keepers coalition called Equal Partners in
Faith. They sent a letter in 1997-MAY that stated that when Promise Keepers excluded women and
female clergy from their events, they were sending a message "that women belong behind men, not in
equal partnerships, and that this is God's will for men and women".
Karen Grasse from the University of Pennsylvania commented:
"I know many men who have taken 'Christian' teachings and used them as their God-given authority to
'keep a woman in her place' and maintain their male-leadership role. They refuse to let their wives get a job,
to go to college, have her own friends, dress the way she wants to, etc. They want to control a person in
order to be the 'leader.' And guess what a lot of Christian men do when their wives won't do what they tell
them to -- a little verbal hollering, a few slaps, a little hitting, to show them who's in charge because God
said so in the Bible."
"The Promise Keeper philosophy sounds harmless on the front end but indicates oppression of another
person is okay in order to practice the teachings. As Lucie Johnson has pointed out, the teachings indicate
'reclaim your leadership EVEN if the other person is opposed.'"
PK has been severely criticized for trying to bring all conservative Christian men together. One
Fundamentalist source describes this as "radical ecumenism", and criticizes PK's association with groups
lacking "doctrinal purity" and which are modernistic and worldly. 12 "Those who get involved with Promise
Keepers will also be trained in a blasphemous mixture of humanistic psychology and corrupt Christianity."
13, 14 Another source wrote that Promise Keepers "...founder and several of its leaders are part of the

Page 14 of 176
charismatic movement which is a major catalyst in the effort to bring about fellowship and eventual union
with the Roman Catholic Church; whereas, in truth, the Roman Catholic Church is a false church,
preaches a false gospel and is not a part of the body of Christ." 15

Gay-Lesbian Rights:
PK is opposed to equal rights for gays and lesbians, including the right to marry. They describe
homosexuality as a sin that "violates God's creative design for a husband and wife." The founder, Bill
McCartney served on the board of Colorado for Family Values, which sponsored the anti-gay
Amendment 2 in Colorado. That amendment barred local laws in the state of Colorado that guaranteed
equal rights for gays and lesbians. (It was later declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court.) A
PK spokesperson, Jim Jewell said at the time of the Washington DC rally that "The Bible and Promise
Keepers are preaching that any sex outside a marriage between a man and a woman violates God's
standards. If the charge against Promise Keepers is that we are taking the Bible too seriously or literally,
we plead guilty to that."

Freedom of Choice:
PK is opposed to women's access to abortion and to everyone's access to euthanasia. Their official
periodical stated: "The legal undermining of the sanctity of human life, from the pre-born to the old and
infirm, represents a rejection of America's two-century tenet that mankind is made in God's image and is
a repudiation of morality as a factor in court decisions". 9

Excessively Tolerant and Fuzzy:

Some Christian Fundamentalists have criticized PK for being too ecumenical, too New Age, and too
"sissified". 4 PK has been criticized for its "unionism", anti-denominationalism" and "watering down of
doctrine." 5 Dr. Raymond Hartwig, president of the South Dakota district of the Lutheran Church-
Missouri Synod, commented: "They use the Bible in a very simplistic form, as a springboard to jump into
the law. That's scary and it's quite sad." John H. Armstrong wrote: "In the end, Promise Keepers is
simply what evangelicalism has become, a movement without a doctrinally defined focus that can draw
multitudes to exciting events but without a theology of the church that will build Christ's church in a New
Testament sense." 10 Some Fundamentalists have used guilt by association to criticize PK. For example,
the group was blasted because John Maxwell frequently speaks at rallies. 11 And, Maxwell attended a
"Successful Church Leadership" conference in 1995-MAR, where he actually joined hands with well-
known minister Robert Schuller. (Schuller is judged to be scripturally unsound). And to make matters
worse, at the 1997 meeting of the same conference, there were some gay and lesbian pastors present.PK
has been severely criticized for trying to bring all conservative Christian men together. One
Fundamentalist source describes this as "radical ecumenism", and criticizes PK's association with groups
lacking "doctrinal purity" and which are modernistic and worldly. 12 "Those who get involved with
Promise Keepers will also be trained in a blasphemous mixture of humanistic psychology and corrupt
Christianity." 13, 14 Another source wrote that Promise Keepers "...founder and several of its leaders are
part of the charismatic movement which is a major catalyst in the effort to bring about fellowship and
eventual union with the Roman Catholic Church; whereas, in truth, the Roman Catholic Church is a false
church, preaches a false gospel and is not a part of the body of Christ." 15

Religious Intolerance:
There are religious tolerance and religious liberty concerns about the founder of Promise Keepers and
about at least one rally speaker.
While head coach at the University of Colorado, the American Civil Liberties Union criticized him for
instituting a mandatory pre-game prayer. Others criticized him for favoring Christian players. He has

Page 15 of 176
said: "The only way [that] God can be worshiped is through Jesus Christ."
Tom Claus, a Native American of the Mohawk tribe and a Christian angered some Native leader in
1996 when he spoke at a PK rally in a traditional headdress. His speech was interpreted by some as
exonerating Europeans for the invasion of North America and destruction of Native culture and
religion. His reasoning was that the end result of the conflict was the conversion of many Natives to
Christianity. A video of his comments was widely circulated among the American Indian community.
Vernon Foster, a director of the American Indian Movement commented: "He isn't speaking for the
Indian when he stands up and does his ministering. He's telling the United States its okay to oppress
Indian people, its okay to push Christianity on them."

Response of United Methodist Men

At their meeting in Nashville TN on 1997-SEP-27, the United Methodist Church's Commission on
United Methodist Men gave a qualified endorsement of the Promise Keepers movement. 1 The
commission noted some points of conflict between the two organizations in the following areas:
"United Methodist broad theological diversity contrasted with Promise Keepers theological
parameters;
United Methodist affirmation of women in ministry and church leadership contrasted with Promise
Keepers diversity of opinion;
Emphasis of the United Methodist Church on global missions, evangelism and nurture contrasted
to Promise Keepers emphasis as a 'catalytic ministry that motivates and trains men for men's
ministry in the local church;
United Methodist connectional structure contrasted with Promise Keepers predominate
congregational nature."
They plan to work with Promise Keepers and other groups where goals and objectives are not in
conflict.

The 1997 Washington Rally

A record-breaking rally "Stand in the Gap: A Sacred Assembly of Men" was expected to include
700,000 men on 1997-OCT-4 in the National Mall of Washington DC. The rally was originally
scheduled for 1996, but was delayed one year. Organizers were concerned that it would have been
politicized by being associated with the 1996 elections. The name of the rally is taken from Ezekiel
22:30, in which God looks for a man who will "...stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I
would not have to destroy it..." (NIV) One initial attendance estimate was that over 1 million men came
- the largest gathering of men anywhere. (Louis Farrakhan's Million Man March attracted 400,000 to
870,000. A 1993 Mass conducted by Pope John Paul II in Denver CO attracted an estimated 600,000
people.) The Metro subway system reported that 702,000 people had passed through its turnstiles by 9
p.m. Ridership on a typical Saturday is about 200,000. Both Promise Keepers and the National Park
Service did not make estimates of the crowd size, but most professional estimators gave figures in the
range of 500,000 to 1 million. The crowd covered an area 300 yards wide and 1 mile long. The rally
was covered live on the CSPAN cable network.
PK founder Bill McCartney called for rallies on 2000-JAN-1 at every state capitol to take "a roll call"

Page 16 of 176
for Jesus Christ. It is worth noting that these rallies will inevitably be interpreted as political because of
the elections later that year. If the rallies were to be associated with the beginning of the new
millennium, they would have been be scheduled for 2001-JAN-1. He urged "an end to racism inside
the church of Jesus Christ" by the year 2000. He made no similar call for an end to sexism or
homophobia. He promised 37 free events over the next two years. He expected to expand the ministry
globally.
A group of pro-life activists has synchronized the start of their billboard campaign with the PK rally.
They will be erecting large portable anti-abortion billboards across the US. One will show the remains
of an aborted fetus beside pictures of lynched blacks and emaciated corpses from concentration camps.
Another billboard consists of four large photographs of a (rare) second-trimester abortion in progress.
A leader, Gregg Cunningham, said: "We have been systematically denied access to every forum. We
can’t get onto television, we can’t get into newspapers, we can’t get onto billboards, [and] we can’t get
into churches or classrooms or civic organizations. The last forum open to us is the public square."
Helen Alvare, who played a major role in the anti-abortion campaign by US Catholic Bishops,
predicted that the billboard campaign would probably alienate more people than it wins.
The Lesbian Avengers were there in full force. They had been told that they could not make a political
statement, so they removed their shirts and went topless instead. The men generally averted their eyes;
there were no whistles or catcalls. The Avengers said that the Promise Keepers are racist, homophobic
and want a return to patriarchy. They offered seven of their own promises, including fighting this
"perversion of Christianity". Katie Tobler, a young woman dressed only in shorts, said "Promise
Keepers has an agenda to put women back in the kitchen, to have babies and stay at home. They are a
fraud."
Laura Montgomery Rutt, Executive Director of the Alliance for Tolerance and Freedom attended the
rally. She reported that The Family Research Council, a Religious Right political organization put on
an advertising blitz to convince the rally attendees to join their group. They offered a free picture of the
Mall in return for a name and address to add to their database. In violation of the rules, PK solicited
money at the Mall; they gave out Bibles, which included envelopes for donations. Ms. Rutt reported
that: "They had minorities from many nationalities and races take the stand and 'absolve' them from
their sins of bigotry, including Hispanic, African American, Native American...The Atheists held signs
that said 'Real men don't pray'. NOW had a press rally." She attended a pre-event interfaith service that
promoted inclusion and tolerance for all people.

Rally speakers concentrated on three weaknesses of Christian men: 3

Forsaking God by disregarding the Bible, failing in prayer and falling into sexual sins.
Evading spiritual leadership by abusing and abandoning their families.
Fostering disunity in the body of Christ through racism and denominational pride.
These were combined into a single statement, called the "D.C. Covenant" which the crowd recited at
the end of the rally. 4
Equal Partners in Faith is a "broad-based coalition of people of faith committed to equality among all
people regardless of gender, race, or sexual orientation". They promote and celebrate diversity. The
group organized a "Weekend of Witness" in Washington DC, as a response to the PK rally. They held a
"Prayer Vigil for Unity and Equality" at the US Capitol on the Friday afternoon, and an "Interfaith
Worship Service for Unity and Equality" on the Saturday morning of the PK rally.

1998 Financial Crisis

Page 17 of 176
Promise Keepers laid off its entire US staff of 345 employees, effective 1998-MAR-31, and become an
all-volunteer agency. 200 of them are in their head office in Denver, CO. In their press release, they
commented that this "represents a transition of a magnitude unique in the history of nonprofit
organizations."
The financial difficulties apparently arose because attendance at 1997 regional rallies had dropped by
about 50%. Many men did not go, preferring to attend the massive Washington DC meeting instead.
Admission to regular meetings cost $60; the Washington rally was free. Another cause was the decision
to lower admission fees in order to make it possible for more low income Christians to attend and to
attract more men that are non-Christian.
The layoffs were announced at a staff meeting on FEB-18. They asked each church across the US to
donate $1,000 to Promise Keepers. Founder Bill McCartney said "it's the will of God for churches to
give this money...If the church fails to do this, they will have missed the heart of God If they're a small
church, that doesn't let them off the hook. They need to ask a large church for the money." 5
Christianity Today (1998-MAY-18) announced that about 1,500 churches had given $1,000 or more;
others gave smaller donations. Some 35,000 individuals contributed money, making the total receipts
equal to 4 million dollars by APR-9. They recalled their employees; unfortunately, 70 had already
found alternative employment.
Their 1997 budget has been variously reported as $90 to 112 million; the 1998 budget will be $45
million
During 1998-OCT, they reduced their full time staff again, from 250 to 180. They are basing future
conferences on the Billy Graham crusade model. That involves an invitation from local churches,
which will do much of the organizing.

Promise Keepers in Canada

Canada has about 10% of the population of the US. Thus, one would expect to see the numbers of PK
rallies and the total turnout to be 1/10 of the corresponding US figures. But the demographics, the
religious makeup, and social culture of the two countries are quite different; this makes comparisons
difficult. PK Canada had 3 meetings in 1996 and 6 in 1997. (20) They had hoped to attract about
80,000 men to the 1997 meetings, but managed fewer than 30,000. Their most recent rally, in
Edmonton AL, attracted 12,000 men. Their budget is less than $1 million; PK in the US has a budget
more than 116 times larger.
Ken McGeorge, CEO of PK Canada said: "We have an uphill battle; we know that. This is definitely a
more secular society."
There are major differences between the US and Canada:
The largest Protestant denominations are the Anglican Church and the United Church, both from
the liberal wing of Christianity. 80% of Canadians belong to the Anglican, Presbyterian, Roman
Catholic, or United Churches.
Regular church attendance is about 20% of the adult population, much lower than in the US.
There are very few Evangelical Christian radio stations in Canada.
The percentage of Evangelical Christians is much lower than that in the US.
The people are more laid-back; homicide rates are much lower; gun controls are strict.

Page 18 of 176
 Abortion is freely available, although not always conveniently accessible. There are very few
protests by pro-life groups.
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is banned; sexual orientation is a protected class,
similar to gender, age, nationality, etc.
Gay and lesbian partnerships are recognized in one province, British Columbia.
Earl Waugh, head of religious studies at the University of Alberta said that a major religious difference
between the US and Canada relates to the ties between religion and the state. He reasons that religious
organizations in Canada are less likely to criticize government policy or get involved in the political
process compared with the US. "While we do not have a state church, we have a number of semi-state
churches. They're less radical." Canadians have not followed the tradition of inter-denominational
worship that is common in the US.

Recent developments:
Attendance at 1998 rallies: Promise Keepers reported a severe reduction in attendance in its 1998
rallies compared to previous years. In the 12 months ending 1998-OCT-10, 454,000 men attended 19
PK events. One year previously, attendees totaled 638,000 at 19 events in stadiums and arenas plus
the 500,000 to 1 million men who attended the rally at the Washington DC mall. About 15 rallies are
planned for 1999. 6
Cancellation of 2000-JAN rallies: Promise Keepers had planned to hold rallies at the capitol
buildings of all 50 states in the U.S. on 2000-JAN-1. They have since canceled these plans because
of concern over the Y2K problem. Many conservative Christian leaders had prophesied that
computer program failures on that day will devastate the world. Neither the rallies nor the disasters
happened.
2000-FEB-7: PK has started a series of daily three-minute commentaries called "4th and Goal:
Coaching for life's tough calls." It was originally broadcast over 145 stations in the U.S.
2000-MAR layoffs: A news item dated as 2000-MAR-15 by the Calvary Contender, but received in
MAR-6 stated that PK has undergone a major restructuring. This included staff layoffs and the
closing of eight regional offices.
2000-JUN: PK held its first rally of the year in Lynchburg, VA during JUN-3/4. Attendance was
down compared to previous years. Fifteen more rallies are planned during 2000, starting with one at
Pittsburgh on JUN-23/24.
2001-DEC: PK conducted "Passage", an all-day conference in Columbus OH. An unknown number
of teenage males, ages 13 to 17 were taught about "integrity, courage, humility and faith". They
conducted conferences in 17 cities during 2001. 7

Promise Keepers Mixes Freudian Fables, Jungian Myths, & Other Self-Serving, Man-
Made Psychologies & Philosophies with Biblical Truth
The most dangerous lies are those that are stuffed in the skin of truth. That's what's happening in the PK
movement. Many of the preachers and teachers are teaching a psychological self-love/ self-esteem gospel
that is based on the humanistic psychological principles of Carl Rogers not the Bible. Then there are those
who promote the Freudian Fables and the Jungian Myths. By the way, Carl Jung admits that he got his
teachings from spirit guides (demons) one of whom was called Philemon (not the New Testament letter).
Their gospel message is connected to dealing with the "unconscious" needs and "repressed memories" we

Page 19 of 176
"all" have. Other speakers endorse the occult practices of visualization and inner healing and victimization
therapy.
That brings me to Dr. Robert Hicks, psychotherapist, pastor, and professor of pastoral theology. PK has
distributed thousands and thousands of his book The Masculine Journey and/or the accompanying Study
Guide. In chapter after chapter, subjective insights into manhood are offered through quotes by a host of
secular authors with a psychological or New Age bent. These include psycho-occultist Carl Jung, Inner-
healing therapist Leanne Payne, transpersonal New Age psychiatrist, and occultist/spiritualist Elizabeth
Kubler-Ross, a psychologist Sam Keen, former theologian in residence at Esalen, and the New Age/Eastern
mystical therapeutic center south of San Francisco. Keen's books feature vicious diatribes against biblical
Christianity. [4/94 the Berean Call]
One can also question Hicks concerning his lead-in quote to Chapter One from Former U.N. Secretary
General Dag Hammarskjold: "The longest journey is the journey inwards of him who has chosen his
destiny" (pure New Age); In Chapter Two there is a quote from evolutionist Charles Darwin. "Man with all
his noble qualities still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin."
The book is filled with heresy and New Age psychobabble. Hicks teaches that David was a "manic-
depressive" who's Psalms were the "musings" of a disordered mind (p. 114). [You have to be totally
indoctrinated by inner-healing psychobabble to derive even a jot of such nonsense from the Bible (4/94 The
Berean Call). This also shows Hicks' low view of Scripture.]
Hick's claims "Jesus...was the second Adam...was very much human...was also very much...phallic. ...I
believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent phallic passions we experience as men" (pp. 180-181). This
seems to be either the result of Freudian brainwashing or hanging out in locker rooms. Either way, its
blasphemous (4/94 The Berean Call).
That's not all. The blasphemous movie The Last Temptation of Christ is referred to in a positive light!
Claiming that Jesus is a "phallic male", Hicks says Jesus "may have thought about it as the
movie...portrays" (p. 181) - referring to Jesus thinking about having sexual relations with a woman! To cite
The Last Temptation of Christ as evidence that Jesus may have been tempted with lust for Mary Magdalene
is as blasphemous as that movie itself (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise Keepers, p. 6).
Hicks even justifies gay men being Christians by claiming that Jesus was also tempted with homosexuality
(p.181)!
The majority of the book keeps referring to the phallus. The first 70 pages do so clearly, and so does the
last chapter, "A New Male Journey". For example, Hicks says that all men have a "deep compulsion to
worship with our phallus" (p. 56). Hicks says - "Possessing a penis places unique requirements upon men
before God in how they worship Him. We are called to worship God as phallic kinds of guys, not as some
sort of androgynous, neutered non-males, or the feminized males so popular in many feminist-enlightened
churches" (p. 51). Hicks' "phallus" phraseology is clearly Freudian and brings forth images of Greek
paganism rather than biblical manhood (Jul/Aug 1994 PH Awareness Letter).
On what does Hicks base his teaching? Not the Bible! Yet PK officially endorse the book and it is used for
mentoring men.
"The organization possesses a morally good goal, but it is based on a doctrinally flawed foundation. Truth
is minimized and experienced is maximized." (Dr. Douglas R. McLachlan; Central Baptist Seminary
Testimony.

The Ecumenical Character & Emphasis on Unbiblical Unity

Promise six...a man and his brothers: A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any racial and
denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity. Doesn't that sound great? The problem
Page 20 of 176
is that Baptists, Catholics, Charismatic's, Episcopals, Lutherans, Methodists, Mormons and more are being
encouraged to put aside their doctrinal differences and come together. But there is a BIG PROBLEM! It's
not scriptural. There can be no true Biblical unity apart from doctrinal purity. Or there can be no true
Biblical unity apart from a solid Biblical foundation. Unity Is To Be Rooted In Biblical Truth -- Biblical
unity neither compromises truth nor ignores truth but is rooted and grounded in truth. Jesus makes that
clear in John 17:17-21 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 18 As thou hast sent me into the
world, even so have I also sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes, I sanctify myself, that they also
might be sanctified through the truth. 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall
believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee,
that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. The unity Christ prayer
for is preceded by sanctification in the truth.

Promise Keepers Is Based On A Doctrinally Flawed Foundation.

McCartney's Vineyard pastor, James Ryle, on its Board of Directors, and Vineyard member Randy Phillips
is its president. That's not all, Both James Ryle and Bill McCartney claim to have received direct, special
revelation from God for the body of Christ--some of it having to do with Promise Keepers. I want you to
take a look at some of the "revelations" from God that Pastor James Ryle claims to have received by
"divine revelation". In November of 1990 at a Vineyard Harvest Conference in Denver Promise Keeper
board member received this ludicrous "divine revelation" --
"The Lord has appointed me as a lookout and shown me some things that I want to show you. The Lord
spoke to me and said, 'What you saw in the Beatles - the gifting and sound that they had - was from me. It
was my purpose to bring forth through music a worldwide revival that would usher in the move of my Spirit
in bringing men and women to Christ." (Promise Keepers and the Rising Tide of Ecumenism; by Gil Rugh;
p.22)
Do you understand what James Ryle was saying? God sent the Beatles with their music to bring revival and
bring men and woman to Christ! You've got to be kidding. The man's a false prophet. He's a wolf decked
out in a sheepskin suit (Matthew 7:15).
There's still more. The Vineyard fellowship witnessed the so-called "Toronto Blessing" or "Holy Laughter"
on Oct. 20, 1994 during South African Evangelist Rodney Howard-Browne's meetings. When members
were "slain in the Spirit", they began to roll on the floor and laugh hysterically. Some lay on the floor for
long periods of time giggling uncontrollably. As this "revival" has spread, there have been other
manifestations of the "spirit". People are barking like dogs, growling like lions, clucking like chickens and
more! At Oral Roberts University, Oral Roberts heralded the "laughing revivals" and Rodney Browne's
ministry as signaling an "arrival of another level in the Holy Spirit". A September 1994 issue of Charisma
magazine pointed out that John Wimber and his Vineyard churches had been largely swept up by the
strange incidents. People, I have no doubt that these incidents are "spiritual" in nature, but they are not of
the Holy Spirit!

Page 21 of 176
 The Woman on the Beast (17:1)

17:1 One of the seven angels who had the

seven bowls came and said to me, "Come, I
will show you the punishment of the great
prostitute, who sits on many waters. 2 With
her the kings of the earth committed adultery
and the inhabitants of the earth were
intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries."
3 Then the angel carried me away in the
Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman
sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered
with blasphemous names and had seven
heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was
dressed in purple and scarlet, and was
glittering with gold, precious stones and
pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand,
filled with abominable things and the filth of
her adulteries. 5 This title was written on her
forehead:
MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT
THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND
OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE
EARTH.
Many churches in the United States have
already fall under this accursed apostasy. The
following is a short list of the ever-growing
number of apostate churches:

Southern Baptist Convention United Methodist Churches

National Baptist Convention Roman Catholic Churches
American Baptist Churches Seventh day Adventist
Episcopal Churches Pentecostal Churches
Evangelical Lutheran Churches Assemblies of God
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese Mormon Churches
Orthodox Churches Jehovah's Witnesses
Presbyterian Churches United Church of Christ
(17:6-8) I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore
testimony to Jesus. When I saw her, I was astonished. Then the angel said to me, "Why are you astonished?
Page 22 of 176
I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of the beast she rides, which has the seven heads and
ten horns. The beast which you saw, once was, is not now, and will come out of the abyss and go to his
destruction."

BEWARE OF PROMISE KEEPERS

http://www.wayoflife.org/

An evil, malignant cancer growing among us

This is a listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. Our primary
purpose is to provide information to assist preachers in the protection of the churches in this apostate hour.
If you desire to receive this type of material on a regular basis, e-mail us, tell us who you are and where
you are located, and request to be placed on the list. Also include your postal address and the name of the
church of which you are a member. Some of these articles are from the "Digging in the Walls" section of O
Timothy magazine. David W. Cloud, Editor. O Timothy is a monthly magazine in its 14th year of
publication. Subscription is $20/yr. Way of Life Literature, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak Harbor, WA 98277. The
Way of Life web site is http://www.wayoflife.org/. (360) 675-8311 (voice), 240-8347 (fax).
dcloud@wayoflife.org (e-mail)]
Promise Keepers was founded in 1990 by University of Colorado football coach Bill McCartney. It's stated
goal is to target men of ALL DENOMINATIONS and ethnic groups who desire to promote personal
integrity and moral accountability. The response has been phenomenal. Some 50,000 men attended a
Promise Keepers rally last summer in Boulder, Colorado. Meetings are scheduled in six U.S. cities in 1994,
and 120,000 to 180,000 men are expected to attend.
In conjunction with the growth of this movement a new magazine is being published entitled New Man:
For Men of Integrity. The premier issue has a press run of 200,000. The publisher selected to produce the
periodical is Strang Communication, publisher of the radically charismatic/ecumenical Charisma
magazine.
While we praise the Lord for any man who sincerely repents of his sin and dedicates his life to Jesus Christ,
we are afraid of Promise Keepers. It will do more to build the harlot church of Revelation 17 than it will to
build New Testament churches. The men who are reached through this ministry will not be brought into
sound New Testament Baptist churches and grounded in the truth. They will not be taught to keep
themselves pure from apostasy and heresy. They will not be trained in discerning false gospels from the
true. Rather they will be instructed in unscriptural ecumenism; they will be taught that doctrine is not
crucial, that to fight for the truth is unspiritual. They will be encouraged to accept even apostate
denominations as genuine expressions of Christianity. We know this is true because of the leaders involved
in promoting Promise Keepers. Few men are more radically ecumenical than James Dobson and Stephen
Strang. Both accept Roman Catholicism as genuine Christianity. Further, Promise Keeper founder Bill
McCartney "is a member of a John Wimber `signs and wonders' Vineyard Christian Fellowship church"
(Calvary Contender, June 1, 1994).
Those who get involved with Promise Keepers will also be trained in a blasphemous mixture of humanistic
psychology and corrupt Christianity. The presence of psychologist James Dobson within this movement
guarantees this. The men attending the massive Promise Keepers conference last summer were given
complimentary copies of The Masculine Journey: Understanding the Six Stages of Manhood by
psychotherapist Robert Hicks. In a review of this book, T.A. McMahon notes:
"The book, written to help 'provide directions for a man's life so that he doesn't get lost along the way,' is
mainly psychologically biased conjecture centering around six Hebrew words. In chapter after chapter,
subjective insights into manhood are offered through quotes by a host of secular authors with a

Page 23 of 176
psychological bent, including Carl Jung, inner-healing therapist Leanne Payne, transpersonal
psychiatrist/spiritualist Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, and Sam Keen, former theologian in residence at Esalen, the
New Age/Eastern mystical therapeutic center south of San Francisco. Keen's books feature vicious diatribes
against biblical Christianity.
"The author of The Masculine Journey, who is also a pastor and seminary professor of pastoral theology,
demonstrates what a perverting influence a psycho spiritual bias can have. Consider the following small
sampling of quotes (his and others) related to just two of man's alleged stages:
"The phallic stage: 'Possessing a [male sexual part] places unique requirements upon men before God in
how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of
androgynous, neutered nonmales, or the feminized males so popular in many feminist-enlightened
churches.' 'I believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent phallic passions we experience as men.'
"This seems to be either the result of Freudian brainwashing or hanging out in locker rooms. Either way, it's
blasphemous.
"Regarding man's (emotionally) wounded stage: 'In order for men to discover what manhood is all about,
they must descend into the deep places of their own souls and find their accumulated grief.' 'I am convinced
many men in our society today are lashing out at women, at society, at bosses, even at God--all because
they do not understand the wounding experience.' 'The story of Jacob ... illustrates a young man having
been severely wounded by a dysfunctional family system.'
"You have to be totally indoctrinated by inner-healing psychobabble to derive even a jot of such nonsense
from the Bible.
"There are just too many biblically erroneous teachings in Hick's book to cover here. Most involve his
interpretations based upon psychology. Where do you find male and female categories of emotional
wounds? or anatomically related worship? Where do you find understanding manhood as a key to a godly
life? You don't if you simply take Scripture at its word: 'There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus' (Gal. 3:28)."
That this type of psychobabble will permeate Promise Keepers is seen in the fact that those who attended
last summer's conference were encouraged to purchase the study guide for Hick's book and to form The
Masculine Journey study groups.
We conclude with the warning given by McMahon: "Dr. James Dobson, on a recent radio broadcast, held
out great hope that Promise Keepers would stir the coals of revival among men in this country. That is
indeed a worthwhile hope, but it grieves us deeply to see that the sparks of truth are being fanned into false
flames by the winds of psycho spirituality. The unbiblical preoccupation of this Christian men's movement
is with man himself and from man's perspective. It can only truly live up to Coach McCartney's exhortation
to contend for the faith by getting back to the basics of the faith. The emphasis has to be focusing on God
Himself, getting to know Him and His way through His Word. If not, it is at best doomed to a grace-barren,
fleshly form of godliness."

The Harmful Impact of Promise Keepers

The following is from Promise Keepers and the Forgotten Promise by Ernest Pickering. This booklet is
available from Baptist World Mission, P.O. Box 1463, Decatur, AL 35602:
"Promise Keepers is as serious an attack upon biblical separatism and fundamentalism as the [churches
have] seen since the rise of Billy Graham and his ecumenical evangelism a generation ago. It is going to
cause major problems for pastors who are trying to maintain a biblical position.

Page 24 of 176
"This movement is PROMOTING A DISREGARD FOR THE BIBLICAL TEACHING ON
ECCLESIASTICAL SEPARATION. This is a very difficult teaching to protect anyway, because the tide of
public opinion and even evangelical opinion is running strongly against separatists. It is not fashionable to
raise barriers and delineate theological truths sharply. When a major group like Promise Keepers urges the
Christian public to drop their `biases' and `prejudices' and rally together with all who call themselves
Christians, many within even fundamental churches are going to respond positively. Many think
fundamentalists are too contentious anyway and will welcome an opportunity to break away from what
they feel are overly-narrow parameters.
In most of our separatist churches there are people who are members, and even, in some cases, leaders, but
who do not really share the separatist convictions of the church. If the pastor does not promote Promise
Keepers, such people are likely to promote division in the church.
"Fundamental churches that become active in the Promise Keepers movement WILL BE EXPOSING
THEIR MEN TO TEACHINGS, PHILOSOPHIES, AND ACTIVITIES THAT ARE CONTRARY TO
THE HISTORIC POSITION OF THEIR CHURCH. While some men could perhaps attend rallies without
being negatively influenced away from their church's teachings, they will be relatively few in number. `Evil
communications corrupt good manners' (1 Cor. 15:33), or, as someone has rendered it, `Bad company
corrupts good character.' If men of a fundamental church associate on a regular basis in worship with
Roman Catholics and charismatics, their spiritual character is going to be corrupted, their discernment will
be impaired, and their stand for the faith will be weakened. This in turn will cause the entire church to shift
its position, since men are the leaders of the church. It will be gradual, but it will happen.
"As men participate in Promise Keepers, THEY WILL BE ATTRACTED TO LEADERS WHO ARE
NOT SOUND IN THEIR THEOLOGY AND PRACTICE. The speakers represent a wide spectrum of
theological teaching which would be contrary to the teaching of most fundamental churches. It is already
difficult for pastors of sound churches to protect their sheep from attractive and articulate persons like this.
They are featured in many public settings, author best- selling books, and appear on Christian radio and
television. A pastor does not need to give them further exposure to his people through Promise Keepers.
"Participating in the programs of Promise Keepers OPENS THE DOOR FOR FURTHER AND WIDER
COMPROMISES. Once you begin to ignore or at least minimize the importance of sound doctrine in favor
of certain perceived benefits, it is easier to continue doing this. Convictions begin to erode, and justification
is made for all manner of unholy alliances.
"To involve the men of a fundamental church with a group including many non-fundamentalists encourages
a pragmatic and `feeling-oriented' basis of judgment rather than a scriptural one. We are living in a society
that has largely replaced the objective with the subjective. The important point for many is `How do I feel
about this?' If one `feels good,' or `receives a blessing,' then the activity must be acceptable. To sing
rousing songs with 30,000 men in a stadium is exhilarating to many. They view it as an uplifting spiritual
experience without stopping to consider the theological ramifications of it. This is to put the judgments of
men above the judgments of God. Our prayer and aim ought to be that of the psalmist:
`Make me to go in the path of thy commandments, for therein do I delight' (Ps. 119:35). Our question
should not be whether or not we are having a `meaningful experience,' but whether we are walking in the
commandments of the Lord. Are the premises of Promise Keepers scriptural? This is the key question.
"To worship and cooperate with Roman Catholics and others who are in doctrinal error PROMOTES THE
IDEA THAT CORRECT DOCTRINE IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN FELLOWSHIP. This is a very
popular concept today in Christendom. One is reminded of the slogan of an organization that was one of the
forerunners of the World Council of Churches: `Doctrine divides, but service unites.' Many professed
evangelicals today follow that philosophy, though they may not articulate it in that way. But it is not God's

Page 25 of 176
emphasis. The early [churches] continued `in the apostle's doctrine and fellowship...' (Acts 2:42). Doctrine
is more important than fellowship and is listed first. Fellowship must be built on doctrine.
"There is at least one more potential result from involvement with Promise Keepers that might be harmful.
IT REMOVES THE CENTER OF BIBLICAL INSTRUCTION, AT LEAST IN SOME MATTERS,
AWAY FROM THE LOCAL CHURCH. Where are men supposed to be receiving their spiritual
instruction? The answer is clear from Scripture--from their pastor within the context of their own church.
This is not to say that one cannot be blessed and helped occasionally through the ministry of someone
outside the church. However, the New Testament emphasizes the fact that the God-appointed pastor is to be
the chief spiritual tutor.
"`And he gave some ... pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry,
for the edifying of the body of Christ' (Eph. 4:11,12). The leaders of the Promise Keepers are not the
pastors of the men to whom they minister. Whose responsibility is it to teach men about how to be fathers,
husbands, and spiritual leaders? It is the responsibility of the pastor. ...
"People will travel hundreds of miles and pay lots of money to sit and watch a noted leader put diagrams on
a huge overhead screen, and with much flourish and charisma tell them the very same things their pastor
has been telling them for many years. They will return to their homes, however, and tell their friends, `I
never heard such teaching! I learned so much!' The fact of the matter is, they heard little that their pastor
had not already told them many times. But to hear it in a different, more `exotic' setting from someone who
is supposed to be a noted `expert,' somehow seemed to give to it an authority heretofore unknown.
"Special problems can arise, however, when outside teachers, not part of the local church, give instruction
which is contrary to that given by the pastor. Bill McCartney, as an example, says it is perfectly all right to
worship with Roman Catholics, yet a man's pastor says it is not. A conflict is immediately engaged, and to
whom will the church member be loyal?

"What should Bible-believing pastors and local churches do about the

problems created by Promise Keepers?
"INFORM YOUR MEN OF THE DANGERS OF THE MOVEMENT. We need not do it in a nasty
spirit, but we need to do it. Many good men are taken in by such movements as this, simply because they
are not aware of the problems. It is the pastor's task to `feed the church' as an overseer appointed by God
(Acts 20:28). This involves protecting the sheep from harmful influences.
"REFUSE TO PROMOTE PROMISE KEEPERS. There will be great pressure on some pastors to do
just this, but the pastor must be resolute.
"EVALUATE THE MINISTRY OF YOUR CHURCH TO MEN. Many churches may have inadequate
ministry to men and may need to recognize that weakness if it is present and make plans to correct it.
"EXAMINE YOUR PREACHING AND TEACHING. The pastor should examine his own preaching
and teaching ministry. Is he preaching the `whole counsel of God' which would include truth calculated to
make the men of his church spiritually stronger? Is he exposing his men to biblical truth that will make
them better husbands, fathers, and church leaders? Pastors are human and can sometimes fall into patterns
of preaching that may be lacking in certain truths.
"STAND FIRM AS A CHURCH. The men of the church, particularly the leaders, should not allow a
movement like this to take the church off course from its historic and biblical position. Good laymen within
our churches should stand with the pastor and help other men see the dangers of becoming involved with
Promise Keepers.
Page 26 of 176
"I AM A PROMISE KEEPER; THEREFORE, I CANNOT SUPPORT PROMISE KEEPERS"
"Though I reject the movement called Promise Keepers, I believe in promise keeping. In fact, I have been a
promise keeper for many years.

"I have kept the promises I made to the Lord when He saved me in 1973. I am thankful that salvation is not
based on my promises or my works but on the free unmerited grace of Jesus Christ because of His shed
Blood on Calvary.
But out of a repentant heart I made many promises to the Lord that I would serve Him and seek Him and
honor Him. I have failed miserably in so many ways, but this I can say: I have served the Lord Jesus Christ
for 22 years.
"I have not turned back to the world. I have continued in His Word. I have loved Him and served Him. I am
a promise keeper to the Lord. And as such I cannot affiliate myself with the Promise Keepers movement
which is contrary to His Word.
"I have kept the promises I made to my wife at our marriage altar on August 13, 1976. I vowed to love her
and to be faithful to her, to take care of her, to cleave to her until death do us part. I have done that. I am a
promise keeper. And as such I cannot affiliate myself with the unscriptural Promise Keepers movement
which seeks to insert psychology and self-esteem programs into the family instead of the pure Word of God
and the simple Scriptural pattern for the home.
"I have kept the promises I made before my ordination council. I was questioned in regard to my
understanding of and commitment to the sound doctrine of the New Testament Faith. I was given a solemn
charge to keep the that Faith and to be steadfast in work of God. I agreed to stand fast in the Word of God
and not to turn aside doctrinally or morally, and I have done that. I am a promise keeper. And as such I
cannot affiliate myself with the Promise Keepers movement which claims that doctrine is less important
than unity.
"I have kept the promises I have agreed to with my church. Ever since I was saved in 1973, I have been a
member of a Bible-believing Baptist Church. Each of those churches has had a Covenant which states the
responsibility of a church member as laid out in the Word of God. I have kept those Covenants for 22
years. I am a promise keeper. And as such I cannot affiliate myself with the Promise Keepers movement
which promotes things contrary to our church covenant."
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON PROMISE KEEPERS SEE
Way of Life Literature's Web Site
http://www.wayoflife.org/

MANY CHRISTIAN LEADERS WARN OF PROMISE KEEPERS

[Distributed by Way of Life Literature's Fundamental Baptist News Service. These articles cannot be stored
on BBS or Internet sites without permission from the author. Any articles which are redistributed by e-mail
must be left intact and nothing must be removed or changed, including these informational headers. This is
a listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. Our primary
purpose is to provide information to assist preachers in the protection of the churches in this apostate hour.
If you desire to receive this type of material on a regular basis, e-mail us, tell us who you are and where
you are located, and request to be placed on the list. Also include your postal address and the name of the
church of which you are a member. Please note that we take up a quarterly offering to fund this ministry.
Some of these articles are from the "Digging in the Walls" section of O Timothy magazine. David W.
Cloud, Editor. O Timothy is a monthly magazine in its 14th year of publication. Subscription is $20/yr.
Page 27 of 176
Way of Life Literature, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak Harbor, WA 98277. The Way of Life web site is
http://www.wayoflife.org/. The End Times Apostasy Online Database is located at this web site. (360) 675-
8311 (voice), 240-8347 (fax). dcloud@wayoflife.org (e-mail)]
Updated October 12, 1997; first published June 13, 1996 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist News
Service, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak Harbor, WA 98277) - The idea that Promise Keepers has almost universal
support is not true. Many Christians from a wide variety of churches and denominations have warned of the
errors of this movement, and the number of these is increasing as men have further opportunity to study this
new movement. The vast majority of Independent Baptists, for example--by no means a homogeneous
group-- refuse to participate with Promise Keepers. The term "independent fundamental Baptist churches"
refers not to a denomination but to a type of church. These churches are Baptist in doctrine and polity. They
are independent in relation to other churches, meaning there is no denominational or ecclesiastical
headquarters, which has authority over these churches; each church is autonomous under its one Head Jesus
Christ. They are also fundamentalist in their stand for Bible truth, meaning they are militant in their zeal for
Bible doctrine and they practice ecclesiastical separation. There are an estimated 10,000 independent
Baptist churches in the United States, and these churches support approximately 6,000 missionaries. They
also operate hundreds of theological institutions.
Though independent Baptists do not believe in denominational structures, which influence or control the
assemblies, they do believe in fellowship, and they associate and work together in various ways for the
fulfillment of the Great Commission. Two loosely knit fellowships of independent Baptist preachers and
churches are the Southwide Baptist Fellowship (SBF) and the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship (FBF).
Southwide was formed in 1956 at a meeting held in Highland Park Baptist Church in Chattanooga,
Tennessee. The Fundamental Baptist Fellowship of America can trace its roots back to 1920, but its present
form began in 1967. The Southwide Baptist Fellowship and the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship both
passed resolutions this year warning of the Promise Keepers movement.
"Whereas the para-church organization known as 'Promise Keepers' advocates an unscriptural religious
unity at the expense of sound doctrine and practice, accepts and promotes unscriptural charismatic
teachings and the inclusion of Roman Catholicism, approves and uses psychological approaches that mix
truth and error, uses unholy music and highly questionable speakers, and whereas they are aggressive in the
pursuit of new members, a definite threat to Bible-believing Baptist churches who hold to doctrinal purity;
therefore, be it resolved that the Southwide Baptist Fellowship stands firmly against it and its ecumenical
bent" (Southwide Baptist Fellowship, meeting at Trinity Baptist Church, Jacksonville, Florida, October 7-9,
1996).
"The FBF continues to oppose the burgeoning movement known as Promise Keepers, seeing in this
'grassroots ecumenism' one of the gravest dangers to the cause of true Biblical separation in this generation.
A recent example of this ecumenism occurred at the 1996 Clergy Conference for Men held in Atlanta,
Georgia, February 13-15, where Bill McCartney, leader of Promise Keepers, said, 'It is exciting to see the
denominational barriers come down as we have Protestants and Roman Catholics together. The purpose of
this meeting is to have the unity of the church.' While giving lip service to Jesus Christ, Promise Keepers,
in its attempt to break down denominational walls, sends out a confusing message concerning doctrinal
walls that God sets up in His Word as essential to Biblical Christianity" (Fundamental Baptist Fellowship,
meeting at Bethel Baptist Church, Schaumburg, Illinois, June 11-13, 1996).
Though not as strictly independent as the aforementioned churches, another association of Baptists which
has taken a public stand against Promise Keepers is the General Association of Regular Baptists. The
following resolution was passed at its annual meeting, June 21-25, 1997 --
"We express our opposition to the inclusive character of Promise Keepers, which minimizes doctrine and
denominational distinctions in an attempt to achieve unity and fellowship. We voice our concern over the

Page 28 of 176
practice of using some speakers who are identified with denominations that are apostate or charismatic"
(General Association of Regular Baptists, June 25, 1997).
Another Baptist group which has publicly testified against Promise Keepers is the National Convention of
Free Will Baptists. At their 1997 convention in Cincinnati, Ohio, they issued a motion "urging our people
and our churches to avoid Promise Keepers and instructing denominational departments and employees not
to promote nor participate in the movement."
Other organizations and associations which have taken a public or written stand against Promise Keepers
include the American Council of Christian Churches, the Ohio Bible Fellowship, the Fundamental
Evangelistic Association, Mission to Catholics, Media Spotlight, Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries,
Independent Baptist Fellowship of North America, Bob Jones University, Biblical Discernment Ministries,
The Berean Call ministry, and Baptist World Mission. This is only a small sampling.
Douglas Comin, Reformed Presbyterian pastor, has written a booklet entitled Promise Keepers in the Light
of Scripture (413 W. 8th St., Washington, IA 52353).
Douglas Wilson and David Hagopian have written a book warning about Promise Keepers. It is entitled
Beyond Promises: A Biblical Challenge to Promise Keepers (1996, 269 pages, Canon Press, P.O. Box
8741, Moscow, Idaho 83843). It has been recommended by such well-known Evangelical leaders as John
MacArthur, Jr., John Armstrong, R.C. Sproul, Jr., and Don Matzat. MacArthur says of the book, "I found
the entire book deeply thought-provoking and profoundly sobering. ... My prayer is that it will help
multitudes of men from making shipwreck of the faith."
We don't agree with these men on a number of important issues. We also do not agree with them that there
is much redeeming good in Promise Keepers, but it is our purpose here to note that a broad range of
Evangelical leaders are publicly warning of Promise Keepers.
Another example of the testimony against Promise Keepers is Phil Arms’ book Promise Keepers Another
Trojan Horse (1997, 414 pages, Shiloh Publishers, P.O. Box 770, Alief, TX 77411; 800 829-9673). Arms,
pastor of Houston Church in Houston, Texas, spent 15 years as a Southern Baptist evangelist. He has
spoken to hundreds of thousands of students on high school and college campuses. He has a national
weekly television ministry called Phil Arms Presents.
Let me give one more example. Dr. A.L. Barry, President of The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, in a
letter to a church member who asked about Promise Keepers, gave clear warning about PK's doctrinal
error. This letter was published in its entirety in Christian News, June 10, 1996. Following are some
excerpts:
"In your letter you do raise a number of important concerns about the PK movement. I have watched the
PK movement develop. The background of the movement is important for us to understand. It traces its
theological roots to the Pentecostal movement. For instance, the magazine of the PK movement features
many advertisements from charismatic and Pentecostal organizations. The magazine itself is published by
individuals who have been associated with a popular charismatic magazine called Charisma. So, we need
to be cautious as we hear the PK movement's doctrinal assertions.
"The PK movement very purposefully de-emphasizes the importance of complete faithfulness to the Word
of God. They tend to overlook differences between denominations as not all that important. The Holy
Scriptures time and again urge us to be completely faithful to all that Jesus has given us ... The PK
movement tends to view specific doctrinal points of disagreement as non-essential, unimportant and thus
able to be overlooked. This would explain why the PK movement offered Holy Communion to a very
diverse crowd of people at the PK clergy conference recently held in Atlanta.

Page 29 of 176
Differences must be ignored in order to facilitate this sort of ecumenical gathering, which we would
describe as unionist. Because God commands us to be faithful to the whole counsel of His word it is both
dishonest and insincere for us to pretend that differences do not 'matter' or are 'insignificant' and thus join in
fellowship with those who do not accept the teachings of the Word on whatever the subject might be, the
sacraments or the doctrine of regeneration, or justification, faith, sanctification and all the rest.
The PK movement downplays differences in these key areas and tries to reduce everything to a very
simplistic formulaic approach to the Faith. The PK movement tends to accept the notion that there is a
'generic' sort of Christianity to which the various denominations add their particular emphases, sort of like a
'base' of paint to which various colors are added to give the paint the particular color desired. ...
"Overlooking differences is not an option for the faithful man of God. Recognizing them and realizing that
in this life we may have to separate over them is a responsible choice, as opposed to simply 'agreeing to
disagree' and then neglecting these divisive issues" (A.L. Barry, President, The Lutheran Church - Missouri
Synod, Christian News, June 10, 1996).
FRIENDS, PROMISE KEEPERS HAS DRAWN SOME LARGE CROWDS, BUT BY NO MEANS IS
THERE A CONSENSUS AMONG CHRISTIANS THAT THIS MOVEMENT IS FAITHFUL TO THE
WORD OF GOD. ANY MOVEMENT MUST BE TESTED BY THE WORD OF GOD, NOT BY THE
EXPERIENCE OF THOSE WHO ATTEND ITS MEETINGS.
At Way of Life Literature's End Times Apostasy Online Database, there are dozens of articles exposing the
error of the Promise Keepers movement -- http://www.wayoflife.org/special/spec001.htm

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC-PROMISE KEEPERS CONNECTION-

THE ART OF DOUBLESPEAK
Updated September 15, 2001 (first published December 5, 1995) (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist
Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org) -
Promise Keepers is a men’s movement that was formed in 1990 by members of the late John Wimber’s
Vineyard Fellowship. Bill McCartney, who at the time was a successful football coach for the University of
Colorado, founded Promise Keepers in 1990, in association with his pastor, James Ryle. McCartney is a
member of the Boulder Valley Vineyard in Boulder, Colorado. The first president of Promise Keepers,
Randy Phillips, also is a member of the Boulder Vineyard. (This church left the Association of Vineyard
Churches in late 1997, after the death of John Wimber.)

Promise Keepers’ stated goal is to target men of ALL DENOMINATIONS and ethnic groups who desire to
promote personal integrity and moral accountability. The response has been phenomenal. A crowd of 4,200
men attended the first convention at the Coors’ Event Center in Boulder in 1991. By 1994, roughly 300,000
men attended seven conferences. The organization’s financial and numerical peak was achieved in 1997.
PK’s “Stand in the Gap” rally in Washington, D.C., in October 1997 drew as many as one million men. Not
only have hundreds of thousands of men attended PK conferences, but permanent local PK groups have
also been established in many parts of the country.

The Promise Keepers movement encourages men to adopt the “Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper.”
Promise Number six states, “A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any ... denominational
barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity.” That is ecumenism, and Promise Keepers is one of the
most ecumenically successful movements in history.
Page 30 of 176
When men of God warn about this and expose Promise Keepers’ ecumenism, though, two very different
types of responses occur. First, some Promise Keepers defenders admit the ecumenical aspects of PK and
glory in them. Second, other Promise Keepers defenders deny that PK is ecumenical in any unscriptural
sense.

A case in point is information available on one of the unofficial Promise Keepers Internet Web sites. Posted
on this site is “Promise Keepers Controversy--a Defense of Promise Keepers Ministry”--an extensive
apologetic against the charges, which have been made by fundamentalist Bible-believing Christians.
Consider an excerpt:
“The doctrinal error that is cited concerning Promise Keepers is its ‘ecumenical emphasis.’ Indeed one of
the stated goals of Promise Keepers is to ‘break down denominational barriers’ and promote unity among
Christians, but by definition a Christian is one who has ‘accepted by faith God’s gift of salvation which was
made possible by Christ’s death.’ This would not include liberals who deny substitutionary atonement, or
Roman Catholics who believe they are saved through the church or the sacraments. This would include all
who have come to genuine faith in Christ, without regard to the denominational label they may wear.”
The author of this, Jim Korth, says that his information is based on Promise Keepers books, attendance at a
Promise Keepers conference, and an interview with Dallas Seminary professor Howard Hendricks, who
speaks at PK meetings.
The problem is that Pastor Korth’s defense of Promise Keepers denies the facts. He says that the unity
sought by Promise Keepers does not include “Roman Catholics who believe they are saved through the
church or the sacraments.”

Every Catholic who accepts Roman Catholic doctrine believes that the church and the sacraments have a
part in salvation. The New Catholic Catechism states: “The Church affirms that for believers the
sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation” (1129). Words could not be plainer.

It is evident that Roman Catholics believe the sacraments are necessary for salvation. Are Roman Catholics
participating in Promise Keepers?

First, we need to point out that Bill McCartney has never rejected the Roman Catholic Church. The
following overview is from Dave Hunt’s The Berean Call:
“Bill McCartney was a lifetime devout Roman Catholic who attended Mass daily until he visited the
Boulder Vineyard Fellowship, liked the pastor’s preaching, and began attending there. He has never broken
with the Catholic Church. If he has, then let us hear it from him: when he left Romanism and why --i.e.,
what was wrong with it that caused him to leave and why he would seek to rescue other Catholics from its
errors. Any ex-Catholic I have ever known came out of that church because of having come to know the
Lord Jesus Christ personally as Savior, and thereafter desired to see other Catholics delivered from Rome’s
false gospel. In contrast, McCartney accepts Catholics as Christians and sees no reason to evangelize them.

“In his autobiography, From Ashes to Glory, McCartney admits that as a ‘daily communicant in the
Catholic Church’ he ‘had never been encouraged to read the Bible, so ... knew nothing about the Word of
God’ and ‘had been totally without a clue about what it’s like to be a whole-hearted, committed Christian’
(p 110). Those statements alone condemn Catholicism! He then tells what he apparently offers as his
conversion story (pp. 110-13) and calls himself a ‘born-again Catholic.’ In fact, it sounds like a ‘dedication’
of his life to Christ, as though he thinks he was already saved and is confusing ‘sanctification’ with
‘salvation.’

“His next statement is even more confusing: ‘Making a profession of faith like I did may not be expected
Page 31 of 176
and may not even be important in the Catholic church.’ This is an astounding declaration if he has just
related how he got saved! No ex-Catholic who has come to faith in Christ as his Savior would ever say that
to do so would not be essential for other Catholics. In fact, he would insist that they, like all mankind, are
lost and on their way to hell until they receive Christ and look to Him alone for their eternal salvation
instead of to their Church and its sacraments. Clearly McCartney has no such conviction” (The Berean
Call, November 1996).
Further, PK Founder Bill McCartney said plainly that Roman Catholics are invited to participate in Promise
Keepers. He did not specify what kind of Roman Catholics. In an interview with the Catholic publication
Our Sunday Visitor, McCartney said that full Catholic participation was his intention from the start. “Back
in 1992, at our first stadium event, we very clearly stated from the podium that we eagerly welcomed the
participation of Roman Catholics, and we’ve had scores of Roman Catholics attend and go back to their
churches excited” (Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, p. 10).

In 2001, Bill McCartney told the press that he considers the Roman Catholic Church “a legitimate Christian
church.” Following is an excerpt from a telephone interview with Richard Scheinin of Knight Ridder News
Service:
Question by Richard Scheinin: What parts of your Catholic upbringing do you hold onto?

Answer by Bill McCartney: I know many Catholics love God with all their heart. I have genuine respect for
anyone who truly has given their life to Christ. We read about Mother Teresa and her heart and what a
wonderful example she was.

Q. Do you see yourself as having been “converted” from Catholicism?

A. I had a born-again experience at the age of 33. And as a result of that I found a church to fellowship in
where I felt I was being fed properly. I don’t say that as a reflection on Catholicism. But once I was born
again, I got an evangelical spirit.

Q. Do you consider the Catholic Church to be a legitimate Christian church?

A. Of course. (“Men’s faith group founder keeping his Promise,” The Daily Oklahoman, Sept. 15, 2001, p.
6B).
Thus it is obvious that Bill McCartney does not believe that Rome preaches a false gospel. He considers
Mother Teresa a genuine Christian even though she was committed to Rome’s sacramental faith-works
gospel, she prayed to Mary, and worshipped the mass wafer. (See “Was Mother Teresa a True Christian” in
the Fundamental Baptist CD-ROM Library.) Bill McCartney’s position is entirely contradictory and
untenable. He claims to have accepted an evangelical gospel even while continuing to hold to Rome’s false
gospel. This is impossible. You cannot believe in the truth and in lies, too. You cannot worship God and
idols. You cannot believe in a true gospel and a false gospel. This demonstrates the incredible confusion
that is created by the positive-only, judge-nothing ecumenical philosophy!

Roman Catholic paper The Tidings (March 31, 1995) stated that Promise Keepers is “being expanded to
include Catholic congregations.” Catholics were encouraged to participate in Promise Keepers because
“there is no doctrinal issue which should cause concern to the Catholic Church” and “there is no attempt at
proselytizing or drawing men away from their [Catholic] faith to another church.”

According to the December 1995 issue of the Charismatic Roman Catholic publication New Covenant, a
Promise Keepers group was formed in a Catholic parish in Tallahassee, Florida.

Page 32 of 176
Catholic priest John Salazar spoke at a Promise Keepers meeting in Plainview, Texas, in December 1995.
A local newspaper reported, “Father John Salazar, who leads Catholic churches in Kress and Tulia,
implored listeners to value themselves because they were made in the image of God. . . . ‘That is the Jesus
Christ we need to bring, especially to other men and to young men,’ Salazar said to an audience that
encompassed everyone from quietly reverent Episcopalians to openly enthusiastic Pentecostals” (Lubbock
Avalanche-Journal, Lubbock, Texas, December 3, 1995).

The Promise Keepers field representative for the upper Midwest, Steve Jenkins, is a Roman Catholic. He
represents Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Iowa, and Wisconsin. He became involved in Promise
Keepers after attending the 1992 PK conference in Boulder, Colorado.

The March-April 1996 issue of the respected Foundation magazine reported the following relevant bit of
information: “Some people find it difficult to believe that Roman Catholics are actually participants in the
Promise Keepers movement, but it is true. A Promise Keepers Wake Up Call brochure distributed in San
Louis Obispo, Calif., urges pastors, churches and their men to attend special rallies during March, one of
which is to be held at the St. Rose Catholic Church in Paso Robles, Calif. This fact was confirmed by a
phone call to the Promise Keepers leader in that church.”

In 1997 Promise Keepers appointed a Roman Catholic, Mike Timmis, to its Board of Directors (1997
Summer Conference brochure for the Franciscan University of Steubenville).

One of the speakers at several of 1997 PK rallies was Roman Catholic “evangelist” Jim Berlucchi
(“Making New Catholic Men?” Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, p. 10).

In June 1997, Promise Keepers hosted a Catholic Summit at its headquarters in Denver, “sounding out
Catholic volunteers and leaders from around the world” (Ibid.).

In June 1997 Promise Keepers organized a Roman Catholic mass as part of its Rich Stadium conference in
Buffalo, New York. About 50 men participated in the mass, which was designed to prepare Catholic men
for the Promise Keepers conference. Catholic priests participated in the clergy luncheon that Promise
Keepers also conducted prior to the conference (John Swomley, The Humanist, Sept. 19, 1997).

In January 1998, Roman Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver gave a “thumbs-up” to Catholic
men who want to participate in Promise Keepers (The Catholic Register, quoted in Religious News Service,
Jan. 19, 1998). Chaput’s remarks followed a lunch meeting with Promise Keepers founder Bill McCartney.
Chaput stated that though Catholics have legitimate concerns about the PK movement, they are obligated to
“joyfully embrace groups like Promise Keepers.” The Catholic Archbishop said a chief concern was
Promise Keepers failure to understand that the Bible alone is not the Christian authority. He said that
Catholics also believe in “sacred tradition” and noted that “the church preceded Scripture.” He said that the
Catholic Church has been given the authority “to interpret, teach and safeguard the Scripture.” He said that
task resides with the Catholic bishops. According to this false and blasphemous Catholic dogma, the Bible
does not rule the church, the “church” rules the Bible. The Catholic Church claims that no one can
understand the Bible properly apart from its authority. Chaput said that in early March he will conduct a
Catholic mass for Catholic members of Promise Keepers.

Roman Catholic Ralph Martin was a speaker at the Promise Keepers conference in western Michigan in
August 1998. Fundamentalist Digest Editor Don Jasmin attended the meeting with press credentials and
noted: “The PK emphasis is more dangerously ecumenical than ever, with Roman Catholics now occupying
strategic places of prominence in administration and operation...” (Calvary Contender, February 15, 1999).

Promise Keepers holds weekly meetings at St. Anthony’s Catholic Church in Lakeland, Florida. Lakeland

Page 33 of 176
is my hometown, and I personally saw this meeting advertised on St. Anthony’s signboard on a visit with
my relatives in August 1999. I also called St. Anthony’s and spoke with a representative of the church. I
was told that their weekly Promise Keepers meetings are connected with the national Promise Keepers
organization and that the group is scheduled to attend the Promise Keepers conference at the Tropicana
Dome soon. The meetings are led by John Angel, who works at St. Anthony’s.

PROMISE KEEPERS’ CLOSE CONNECTION WITH CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY

Since 1995, Promise Keepers representatives have been featured at the Catholic Men’s Conferences held at
the Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio. The July 23, 1995 issue of Today’s Catholic contained an
article entitled “Promise Keepers Christian crusade draws Catholic men.” This paper reported that in July
1995, an official Promise Keepers Leadership Seminar was conducted at the Catholic Franciscan
University of Steubenville (Ohio). More than 600 Catholic men participated. The meeting concluded with a
Catholic mass led by the school’s president, priest Michael Scanlon. This same priest distributed elements
at one of the masses at the North American Congress on the Holy Spirit & World Evangelization in New
Orleans, July 1987. I attended this massive charismatic-ecumenical conference with press credentials.
Scanlan is a traditional Catholic. He believes the sacraments are necessary for salvation. He believes he can
turn the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper into the very body and blood of Christ. He prays the rosary.
He prays to Mary, hailing her as “the Mother of God.”
At another North American Congress on the Holy Spirit & World Evangelization, held in Indianapolis in
August 1996 (which I also attended with press credentials), he told the story of being jailed for
participating in ecumenical anti-abortion marches. During his time in jail he conducted masses and taught
the Protestants how to pray the rosary. He considered it a great achievement that some of the Protestant
anti-abortion crusaders adopted the rosary into their worship. This Catholic priest will not give up any of
his heretical doctrines, but he certainly is not opposed to teaching them to any gullible “Protestants” who
will listen. And now he is a participant in Promise Keepers.

Promise Keepers representatives Dale Schlafer and Glenn Wagner spoke at the Franciscan University in
1995 and again at the May 31 - June 2, 1996 “Christian Men’s Conference.” The Franciscan University
sponsors annual “Defending the Faith” conferences, in which Catholic dogma is upheld and defended with
great boldness. The Catholicism of the Franciscan University is even more dangerous than traditional
Catholicism because its adoption of charismatic experience has given it a semblance of biblical piety and
spiritual fervor. This university sponsored a conference in June 1996 dedicated to “Mary as spouse of the
Holy Spirit.” The announcement said, “Rediscover Mary’s prophetic role through her recent apparitions.”
The Franciscan University Summer Conference Magazine advertises pilgrimages to Mary shrines. The
theme of the 1996 issue was “Following Pope John Paul II into the Third Millennium.” The cover of the
1997 issue features this prayer by Franciscan University President Michael Scanlan: “With renewed fervor,
we re-consecrate our lives and our work to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”

When Promise Keepers leaders Dale Schlafer and Glenn Wagner returned to the Franciscan University in
1996, they attended a Catholic mass. Their guide, John Sengenberger, an official at the university,
explained that the mass only made sense “if you believe in the real presence of Jesus” (Our Sunday Visitor,
July 20, 1997). This, of course, is true. The Vatican Council II stated that in the mass “Christ perpetuates in
an unbloody manner the sacrifice offered on the cross, offering himself to the Father for the world’s
salvation through the ministry of priests” (Vatican II, The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Instruction
on the Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery, Introduction, C 1,2, p. 108).

Page 34 of 176
“In this sacrament Christ is present in a unique way, whole and entire, God and man, substantially and
permanently” (Ibid., Instruction on the Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery, Chap. 1, E, p. 114). Further,
the Catholic Church teaches that the mass is a necessary part of salvation. Vatican II stated: “As often as
the sacrifice of the cross by which ‘Christ our Pasch is sacrificed’ (1 Cor. 5:7) is celebrated on the altar, the
work of our redemption is carried out” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Chapter 1, 3, p. 324).

This doctrine is blasphemy. It denies the once-for-all finished atonement of Jesus Christ, and it exalts sinful
men to the place of God in claiming to have the power to offer the very Jesus Christ on their altars. When a
Roman Catholic bows before the consecrated wafer of the mass, he thinks he is bowing literally before
Jesus Christ. The wafer is placed in a “tabernacle” and is available to be prayed to and worshipped between
masses. Consider the following solemn statement from the authoritative Vatican II Council of the mid-
1960s:
“All the faithful ought to show to this most holy sacrament the worship which is due to the true God, as has
always been the custom of the Catholic Church. Nor is it to be adored any the less because it was instituted
by Christ to be eaten. For even in the reserved sacrament he is to be adored because he is substantially
present there through that conversion of bread and wine which, as the Council of Trent tells us, is most
aptly named transubstantiation” (Vatican II, The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Instruction on the
Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery, Intro., C 6, pp. 109,10).
During the aforementioned mass at Franciscan University, John Sengenberger knelt on his knees before the
consecrated wafer, then he fell prostrate upon his face before it. In his mind he was worshipped God in the
form of the wafer, but in reality he was worshipping a man-made idol, for there is absolutely no biblical
authority for the Catholic mass. There is not even New Testament instruction for the appointment of
priests, and without a consecrated priesthood there can be no mass. SENGENBERGER SAID THAT
PROMISE KEEPERS LEADER GLENN WAGNER, A VICE PRESIDENT OF THE ORGANIZATION,
FOLLOWED HIS EXAMPLE AND PROSTRATED BEFORE THE IDOLATROUS WAFER (Our
Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997).

This Catholic institution is a participant in Promise Keepers, and has been since 1995. This is plain
evidence that though Promise Keepers claims to preach the true gospel, it refuses to expose false gospels
and it willingly joins hands with those who are committed to false gospels.

Are these Roman Catholics confused about Promise Keepers’ doctrines and goals? Have they been
mislead? Why do they have the idea that Promise Keepers will accept them regardless of their false
doctrine? I will tell you why. Because Promise Keepers already has accepted them and has made no issue
of doctrine whatsoever. For Promise Keepers representatives to claim that they only desire unity among
those who follow the true Gospel is a deception. Further, for them to claim that their only motive in inviting
Roman Catholics to participate with them is evangelism, is nonsense. The facts refute this.

The Promise Keepers’ doctrinal statement is weak enough to allow for all sorts of false doctrine. In fact, in
1997, it amended its statement of faith, revising some of the lines that Catholics had found offensive (Our
Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, pp. 10,11).

Section five of the PK statement of faith read: “We believe that man was created in the image of God, but
because of sin, was alienated from God. That alienation can be removed only by accepting, through faith
alone, God’s gift of salvation, which was made possible by Christ’s death.”

After receiving a review of their statement by Catholic theologians in the summer of 1997, Promise
Keepers changed the previous statement to the following: “Only through faith, trusting in Christ alone for
salvation, which was made possible by His death and resurrection, can that alienation be removed.” This
statement was accepted by the Catholic theologians who reviewed Promise Keepers’ position, whereas the
Page 35 of 176
previous statement was rejected.

Those not familiar with Rome’s false gospel might not understand the importance of this apparently
insignificant difference. Rome does not deny that salvation is through Christ alone (though he redefines this
to mean Christ through the Catholic Church). The Roman Catholic Church acknowledges that salvation is
through faith and grace which was made possible by Christ’s death and resurrection. What Rome denies is
that salvation is through faith ALONE by grace ALONE as a gift ALONE ENTIRELY WITHOUT
WORKS OR SACRAMENTS! In fact, the Catholic Council of Trent, which is still in force, placed a curse
upon anyone who teaches this.

The article in Our Sunday Visitor claims that “by faith alone” is a doctrine devised by Martin Luther. This
is perfect nonsense. Salvation by grace alone through faith alone is precisely the Gospel preached by the
Apostles and given to us in the Word of God. Paul described this Gospel by revelation in Romans 3:23 -
4:6. It is the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone without works of any kind. Paul also
carefully described the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Again, there is not one word about works or
sacraments. The Gospel is salvation through faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Period. It is Christ alone, grace alone, faith alone, no works, no sacraments. Praise the Lord!

When the Philippian jailer asked the Apostles, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” they said, “Believe on
the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house” (Acts 16:30,31). Nothing here about works
or sacraments or church or priests.

The Lord Jesus Christ taught the same thing, of course. When the crowd asked Christ, “What shall we do,
that we might work the works of God?” he replied, “This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom
he hath sent” (John 6:28,29). Again, nothing here about works or sacraments. John 3:16 says “whosoever
believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life.” Faith alone. Faith in Christ, plus nothing and
minus nothing.

Biblical grace means the unmerited eternal salvation of God which comes freely and directly to the
believing sinner through the atonement of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:24 -- 4:6; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9; Tit. 3:4-7). The
Roman Catholic Church has redefined grace to include sacraments. “Grace,” by Rome’s definition, means
Christ, by His death, has provided (“made possible”) salvation to be distributed by the Catholic church to
those sinners who adhere to its sacraments. The New Catholic Catechism states: “The Church affirms that
for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation” (1129). Words could not be
plainer.

We see that Promise Keepers leadership has bent over backwards to increase Catholic participation in its
movement and to calm the fears of Catholic leaders about the prospect of Catholic men leaving Romanism
because of their participation at Promise Keepers events. They are not requiring that Roman Catholics
reject Rome’s false doctrines. Promise Keepers leaders are not exposing Rome’s blasphemous gospel and
doctrines that have led multitudes to eternal damnation. PK leaders are faced with the same dilemma as all
ecumenists. If they were to preach the truth boldly and identify false doctrine plainly, it would destroy their
ecumenical agenda. The Apostles were not content merely to preach the Gospel in a positive manner; they
continually exposed false gospels and warred against doctrinal perversion. We are to follow in their
footsteps. Our commission is to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3). We are
to fight for the truth and AGAINST error. Promise Keepers leaders refuse to do this.

In explaining the doctrinal change, Paul Edwards, a Promise Keepers vice president, said the PK statement
of faith is “a dynamic document” and that “Promise Keepers is open to change.” He said: “Truth and unity
are equal, but in tension. We try to present truth, not washed down, yet not truth that devolves into
Page 36 of 176
denominational squabbles” (Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997). This is absolutely false. Truth and unity
are not equal. The Bible exalts truth far above any man-made unity. The goal of Promise Keepers to hold to
truth in the midst of an ecumenical unity between denominations in this apostate day is an absolutely
impossibility. Truth is the loser.

A wise pastor said, “We will have either a limited fellowship or a limited message.” Those who preach the
whole counsel of God find that their fellowship is extremely limited today. It is impossible to preach the
whole counsel of God, like Paul did (Acts 20:27), and have a broad-based Promise Keepers-type
fellowship. The Apostle Paul was concerned about the purity of the Gospel, but he was also concerned
about the purity of every detail of Bible doctrine.

In all of this we have evidence that the leaders of Promise Keepers are playing politics with their
ecumenical agenda. When questioned by concerned “Protestants” about Catholic participation in Promise
Keepers, they claim they want Catholics to come simply because they want them to hear the Gospel and be
saved. When questioned by Catholics about Catholic participation in Promise Keepers, they claim they
want to receive Catholics as they are, as brothers in Christ, without any desire to evangelize them away
from their “church.”

For more information see the following articles at Way of Life Literature’s End Times Apostasy Online
Database at http://www.wayoflife.org/special/spec0001.htm

PROMISE KEEPERS SUPPORTS WOMEN PASTORS

January 27, 1998 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port
Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org) - Promise Keepers is inviting women pastors to participate in
its 1998 conferences. According to the Los Angeles Times religion page, Jan. 24, 1998, a few female
pastors participated in the regional clergy conference on January 20 in San Diego, California. The LA
Times interviewed one of these, Roberta Hestenes, pastor of Solano Beach Presbyterian Church and former
president of Eastern College near Philadelphia. She said, "I find it surprising that I am going. But I've heard
[Promise Keepers founder] Bill McCartney say that they desire to be supportive of women pastors, and I'm
taking him at his word."
This is not a new feature of Promise Keepers. In July 1996, Promise Keepers director for the state of
Missouri, Louis Monroe, said PK welcomes female pastors. Monroe is a Baptist pastor. He also is quoted
as saying: "Initially most participants were members of evangelical churches or had no churches. Now it
attracts mainline Protestants and Catholics. It recently began recruiting Mormons" (Christian News, July
29, 1996).
Many of the Promise Keepers speakers support women pastors. T.D. Jakes is an example. He is the popular
black Church of God in Christ conference speaker and pastor of the Potter’s House in Dallas, Texas. He
often speaks at Promise Keepers meetings. In an interview with Charisma magazine, Dec. 16, 1996, Jakes
was asked what he believes about women as pastors. He replied: "I try to avoid setting myself up as a judge
to tell anybody what God did or did not call them to do. There are many women who are celebrated as
ministers: Marilyn Hickey, Joyce Meyer, Jackie McCullough, Dr. Iona Locke, Ernestine Reems and Iverna
Tompkins. Many women are making a contribution to the body of Christ."
This is typical New Evangelical-Promise Keepers-type doublespeak. He is positive, up-beat, non-
controversial. In regard to the hard issues he is a fence-straddler. In spite of the clear teaching of the Word
of God, in spite of the fact that the Apostle Paul solemnly forbade women to preach or usurp authority over
men, Jake refuses to judge whether it is right or wrong for a woman to be a pastor. He refuses to enter into
controversy and risk destroying his popularity. Instead of basing his answer on the Word of God, he bases
Page 37 of 176
it on pragmatism. He points to women who appear to be successful in the ministry. In other words, if it
works, it must be right.
Their position in support of female pastors is another evidence that Promise Keepers is willing to ignore the
Word of God to further their own agenda.
August 3, 1996 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron,
MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org) - According to a story in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Promise
Keepers director for the state of Missouri says female pastors are welcome. Following is an excerpt from
the article:
"Kiel Center will be rocking with the sound of men singing hymns and renewing promises of fidelity to
their families on a Saturday afternoon in August. Promise Keepers, a male Christian fellowship group, is
planning its first large St. Louis Assembly August 24. They hope to sell 10,000 to 12,000 seats at $15
each....
"[PK] is a nondenominational group. Initially most participants were members of evangelical churches or
had no churches. Now it attracts mainline Protestants and Catholics. ...

"[PK] WELCOMES FEMALE PASTORS LEADING MALE MEMBERS,

[Louis] Monroe said. [Monroe is the Promise Keepers' state director.] ("Promise Keepers to Rally at Kiel,"
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, July 13, 1996).
Women pastors are in rebellion to the plain teaching of the Word of God, and those who ignore this issue
are themselves in rebellion to the Word of God. The Apostle Paul, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, said
that he forbade a woman to teach or usurp authority over the man (1 Timothy 2:12). No man or woman has
the authority to allow that which the Apostle of Jesus Christ forbade. If God is calling women to be pastors
in spite of what He has said in His own Word, there is utter confusion and we cannot be certain of anything.
Promise Keepers is inviting women pastors to participate in its 1998 conferences. According to the Los
Angeles Times religion page, Jan. 24, 1998, a few female pastors participated in the regional clergy
conference on January 20 in San Diego, California. The LA Times interviewed one of these, Roberta
Hestenes, pastor of Solano Beach Presbyterian Church and former president of Eastern College near
Philadelphia. She said, "I find it surprising that I am going. But I've heard [Promise Keepers founder] Bill
McCartney say that they desire to be supportive of women pastors, and I'm taking him at his word."
This is not a new feature of Promise Keepers. In July 1996, Promise Keepers director for the state of
Missouri, Louis Monroe, said PK welcomes female pastors. Monroe is a Baptist pastor. He also is quoted
as saying: "Initially most participants were members of evangelical churches or had no churches. Now it
attracts mainline Protestants and Catholics. It recently began recruiting Mormons" (Christian News, July
29, 1996).
At a press conference for the 1996 Promise Keepers Clergy Conference in Atlanta, the PK representatives
were asked if they had a position regarding the "laughing revival," in which people get "drunk in the spirit"
and stagger about and fall down and mutter like they are intoxicated with liquor. Dr. Henry Blackaby
(Southern Baptist) said: "We don’t try to evaluate that, AND NEITHER DO WE TAKE A POSITION
REGARDING WOMEN SERVING AS PASTORS" (An Eyewitness Report on the 1996 Clergy
Conference for Men, Atlanta, Georgia, February 13-15, 1996, by Ralph G. Colas, American Council of
Christian Churches, P.O. Box 19, Wallingford, PA 19086-0019. 610-566-8154).

Page 38 of 176
Many of the Promise Keepers speakers support women pastors. T.D. Jakes is an example. He is the popular
black Church of God in Christ conference speaker and pastor of the Potter’s House in Dallas, Texas. He
often speaks at Promise Keepers meetings. In an interview with Charisma magazine, Dec. 16, 1996, Jakes
was asked what he believes about women as pastors. He replied: "I try to avoid setting myself up as a judge
to tell anybody what God did or did not call them to do. There are many women who are celebrated as
ministers: Marilyn Hickey, Joyce Meyer, Jackie McCullough, Dr. Iona Locke, Ernestine Reems and Iverna
Tompkins. Many women are making a contribution to the body of Christ." This is typical New Evangelical-
Promise Keepers-type doublespeak. He is positive, up-beat, non-controversial. In regard to the hard issues
he is a fence-straddler. In spite of the clear teaching of the Word of God, in spite of the fact that the Apostle
Paul solemnly forbade women to preach or usurp authority over men, Jake refuses to judge whether it is
right or wrong for a woman to be a pastor. He refuses to enter into controversy and risk destroying his
popularity. Instead of basing his answer on the Word of God, he bases it on pragmatism. He points to
women who appear to be successful in the ministry. In other words, if it works, it must be right.
Their position in support of female pastors is another evidence that Promise Keepers is willing to ignore the
Word of God to further their own agenda.

The Seven False Premises of Promise Keepers

By Pastor Jack Stephens
Columbus, Ohio
The Ohio Bible Fellowship Visitor, August 1995
3865 North High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43214-3797
(614) 262-2006
BLWidder@aol.com (e-mail)
What an exhilarating scene--an arena jam-packed with thousands of sincere men standing together to
declare their allegiance and devotion. Before the main event ever takes place a crescendo of praise erupts.
Everyone is caught up in the evident power of the moment and they sense that they are part of an invincible
force. Men who had previously been cool or lackadaisical in their worship are invigorated, renewed in their
devotion, and leave with new determination to be faithful in their vows and worship.
Can you place this event? It occurred in Ephesus during Pauls third missionary journey. But if you guessed
this was describing a Promise Keepers conference, you would be right as well. Promise Keepers (hereafter
referred to as PK) is a mushrooming men's movement begun in 1990 by former football coach Bill
McCartney of the University of Colorado. His burden was to restore strong male leadership to our homes
and churches. A noble goal in light of the sad facts that 22% of white children and 68% of black children in
our country are born to unmarried mothers and 5.6 million children under the age of 15 are being raised
without a father (Edward Gilbreath, "Manhoods Great Awakening," Christianity Today, 39, No. 2, Feb. 6,
1995, p. 25).
So what could possibly be wrong with an organization whose purpose is to develop Christian men? Who
can fault the Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper? Read them for yourself:
1. A PK is committed to honoring Jesus Christ through worship, prayer, and obedience to God's Word in
the power of the Holy Spirit.
2. A PK is committed to pursuing vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he needs
brothers to help him keep his promises.

Page 39 of 176
3. A PK is committed to practicing spiritual, moral, ethical, and sexual purity.
4. A PK is committed to building strong marriages and families through love, protection, and biblical
values.
5. A PK is committed to supporting the mission of his church by honoring and praying for his pastor and by
actively giving his time and resources.
6. A PK is committed to reaching beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power
of biblical unity.
7. A PK is committed to influencing his world, being obedient to the Great Commandment and the Great
Commission (Mike Betancourt, ed., "Promise Keepers: Should Fundamentalists Get Involved?" O
Timothy, 12, No. 4, 1995, p. 8).
Isn't that tremendous? Shouldn't every pastor rejoice and throw his support behind PK? In a word No. In
the next few pages, observe the many fatal flaws in the foundation of this movement--flaws that we will
call:

False Premise #1 - If it works, it must be right.

This is the philosophy of pragmatism. One of the key defenses of PK is its claim of results. Men return
from the conferences changed, committed, and actively involved in their churches and families. They have
committed themselves to the Seven Promises, yet God declares that vows should not be made hastily
because God holds us accountable for every vow we make (Ecclesiastes 5:2,4,5). In addition, the "need" to
be held accountable to "brothers" who are "to help him keep his promises" is an unscriptural, humanistic
addendum to the vowing process. Rather, every member of the Body of Christ is to consider one another to
provoke one another to good works (Hebrews 10:24). Surely, committing to vows during a highly
emotional mass rally of "pumped" men is questionable at best and dangerous at its worst.
The results from such a gathering have all the marks of being short-lived, shallow, and humanist. Mob
psychology rules. The atmosphere is anything but spiritual. Published reports relate the prevalence of
Frisbees, paper gliders, beachballs, and footballs being tossed throughout the stands. Blaring rock music
pounds to increase the hype. In some meetings, popular new evangelical leader Chuck Swindoll has ridden
in on a motorcycle to the accompaniment of the rock song, "Born to Be Wild" (Gilbreath, "Manhoods Great
Awakening," p. 23). One pro-PK observer noted that
"at times the... crowd seems excited not so much by what is being said as by the opportunity to 'hang' with
other men" (Gilbreath, p. 23).
With all this hype, glitz, and gimmickry, isn't it clear that PK has substituted what God can do through the
Word for what man can do through worldly means? It is virtually impossible to achieve true lasting
spiritual results through the artificial, ungodly means of men.
Regardless of the results, pragmatism has never been the measure of spiritual success. If any men are truly
changed to lives of solid commitment rather than to lives of flash-in-the-pan decisions, it will be in spite of,
not because of, PKs methods.

False Premise #2 - If it moves me, it must be right

The reason PK is so entrenched in experiential influence may well be traced to the charismatic roots of it
founder and leadership. Founder Bill McCartney and PK president Randy Phillips are both affiliated with
the Vineyard Christian Fellowship (Betancourt, "Promise Keepers: Should Fundamentalists Get Involved?"
p. 12). At least one third of the 15 men on the PK Board of Directors are openly charismatic (Martin and
Deidre Bobgan, "Promise Keepers Board Members and Church Affiliation," Psycho heresy Awareness
Page 40 of 176
Letter 3, No. 3, May-June 1995, p. 8). Strang Communications, publisher of Charisma magazine, "the
official voice of the Charismatic movement," publishes New Man magazine as a partnership endeavor with
PK (Betancourt, p. 9). Charismatic speakers such as Jack Hayford and Greg Laurie are often featured (Rick
Miesel, "Promise Keepers, Ecumenical Macho-Men for Christ?" Biblical Discernment Ministries
Notebook, Nov. 1994).
While not dedicated to converting its participants to charismatics PK is committed to creating unity based
on a common experience at least as heady as the "signs and wonders" of the charismatics.

False Premise #3 - If it combines Gods truth with mans truth, it must be right
There is a burgeoning market for PK-endorsed books on ways to revive the role of "Christian manhood."
The views and methods may differ but they share the flaw of attempting to combine Scripture with the
psychological theories and methods of man. Robert Hicks book, The Masculine Journey, is a prime
example. Hicks twists the meaning of six Hebrew words for "man" to fit his own psychological theories of
manhood. He
"follows the predictable pattern of the integrationist. He takes a psychological theory, believes it to be
valid... and then considers what the Bible might add" (Martin and Deidre Bobgan, "Promise Keepers and
Psycho heresy," Psycho heresy Awareness Letter 2, No. 4, July-August 1994, p. 4).
He blasphemes the Lord Jesus by declaring that He was tempted to be homosexual and that He lusted
sexually (Albert James Dager, "Promise Keepers: Is What You See What You Get?" Media Spotlight,
1994, p. 6). He speaks of man's need for "celebrating the experience of sin" in adolescence as a "rite of
passage" (Bobgan, "Promise Keepers and Psycho heresy," p. 6).
Additionally, PK finds itself on the horns of a dilemma in regard to its treatment of homosexuality. PK
officially declares that it
"shares the same historic and biblical stance taken by Evangelicals and Catholics (Fax, "Promise Keepers
Statement," sent to Pastor Greg Dixon, Indianapolis Baptist Temple, Dec. 8, 1993).
Yet in trying to placate as many people as possible they conclude just as officially that this abomination is
"a complex and potentially polarizing issue to be understood in the context of psychology and genetic
research" (Ibid.).
They state that "homosexuals are men who need the same support, encouragement and healing we are
offering to all men.... We, therefore, support their being included and welcome in all our events" (Ibid.).
Whatever happened to condemning sin and calling for repentance and receiving the Gospel?

False Premise #4 - If it brings us all together, it must be right

Openly ecumenical. Their conference speakers are indicative of their ecumenical position: Chuck Swindoll,
president of Dallas Theological Seminary; Luis Palau, ecumenical evangelist; Bill Bright, director of
Campus Crusade for Christ; E.V. Hill, ecumenical charismatic pastor aligned with the National Council of
Churches (Rick Miesel, "Promise Keepers," pp. 5-6); Joseph Stowell, president of Moody Bible Institute;
and Bill Hybels, pastor of Willow Creek Community Church (National and International Religion Report,
8, No. 13, June 13, 1994, p. 2) to name a few.

Page 41 of 176
No fundamentalist in his right mind would ever associate with the hodgepodge of men and ministries
involved with PK. God has declared for us to come out from among them and be ye separate (11
Corinthians 6:17).

False Premise #5 - If it reconciles us to Rome, it must be right.

The outcome of the previous premise of ecumenicity is the acceptance of Roman Catholicism along with
new evangelical and apostate Protestantism. Martin and Deidre Bobgan quote Father Christian Van Liefde's
evaluation of PK in an archdiocese periodical, The Tidings:
"... there is no 'doctrinal issue which should cause concern to the Catholic Church.' Promise Keepers places
a very strong emphasis on returning to your own church congregation or parish and becoming an active
layman.... There is no attempt at proselytizing or drawing men away from their faith to another church"
(Martin and Deidre Bobgan, "Promise Keepers, Catholics, and Mormons ... Together," Psycho heresy
Awareness Letter 3, No. 3, May-June 1995, p. 3).
PK rallies "have attracted a significant number of Catholics, including some priests" (Carl Crawford
Schmidt, "Promise Keepers, Message to Men," Christian Century, Sept. 7-14, 1994, p. 806). McCartney
himself has said, "Hear me: Promise Keepers doesn't care if you're Catholic" (Dager, "Promise Keepers," p.
12).
Was Paul mistaken, then, when he declared:
"If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed"? (Galatians
1:9).
Of course not. Active evangelism--the proclamation of the true Gospel of salvation by grace through faith
in the finished work of Christ--referred to above as proselytizing, is the duty of every believer. Catholics
are still one of our mission fields. We can never reconcile with the false gospel of Romanism.
I am told that when "oleo" was first sold it came in white, bland-looking sticks. A separate packet of yellow
dye was included with your purchase and had to be kneaded into the oleo to give it a "butter" color. PK is
like that old oleo. It is totally colorless regarding any true doctrinal substance. Anyone involved with it can
add whatever doctrinal coloring in whatever amount they choose in order to make it personally palatable.
But no matter how much you attempt to color it, PK still isn't butter. It is simply a bland carrier for
ecumenical and Catholic dialogue and cooperation.

False Premise #6 - If it purports to help the church, it must be right

PK declares that its purpose is to "celebrate biblical manhood and motivate men toward Christ like
masculinity." But doesn't Ephesians 4:11-16 tell us that God has provided for these things and all else we
need by the ministry of the church? Is it not the church's responsibility to feed the flock (Acts 20:28) rather
than relinquish such areas of ministry to "parachurch" organizations?
What pastor doesn't appreciate encouragement in the midst of his trials and disappointments? In some PK
rallies, thousands of pastors are called to the front to receive applause and great swelling cheers of "WE
LOVE YOU! (David Halbrook, "Promise Keepers Looks Ahead," Ministries Today, March-April 1995, p.
61). Pastors exposed to this attention are often moved to tears as roars of affirmation reverberate from the
sea of men around them. How exciting! How uplifting!

Page 42 of 176
But wait a minute. Think about it. Do these pastors understand the condescending connotations of these
mammoth pity parties? PK purposes to do what churches and their leaders have failed to do. PK is in effect
saying,
"You poor guys. You have beaten yourselves silly trying to do this job. We truly appreciate your efforts,
but you are so tired and ill-equipped. Why don't you just step aside and let us handle the job? We love you
because your failure to do your job effectively has given us a reason to exist."
These pastors were also being cheered for renouncing their "denominational barriers" as sin (Mark Nispel,
"Promise Keepers 1994," Christian News, 32, No. 34, Sept. 19, 1994, p. 7). This indicates that PK not only
embraces the false doctrine of inclusivism, but strongly opposes the Bible doctrine of separation. This is
blatant blasphemy against God's Word. God pronounces woe on those who are guilty of it (Isaiah 5:20).
McCartney has said, "that he thought perhaps the Lord's main purpose for Promise Keepers was to gather
his clergy" and in 1995 he hopes "to gather 75,000 of them in Denver."' Pastors, if you love the Lord and
honor His Word, keep yourself and your men far from PK.

False Premise # 7 - If anyone disagrees with us, they must be wrong.

Albert James Dager, in a special report on PK, describes
"its militant in-your-face challenge to accept sexual perversion or risk being called 'unloving'" (Dager,
"Promise Keepers," p. 6).
This same attitude pervades all of PK as it grows: 4,200 in 1990; 22,000 in 1991; over 52,000 in 1993;
234,000 in 1994; and projections of over 750,000 for 1995. Next year PK hopes to gather one million men
for a rally in Washington, D.C.
With its pragmatic approach, its emotional hype, its snowballing attendance, its ecumenical appeal, and its
condemnation of separation, the PK juggernaut seems intent on steamrolling its opposition. Although some
of its goals, if interpreted within a separatist context, may be commendable, PK fails (in the same way as
have the Moral Majority, Concerned Women for America, Right to Life, and other crusading movements)
to meet the Bible's criteria for a Christian's involvement. Any movement that leads men away from their
need to accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ and draws men to any other means of reform, religion, or
referendum is wrong, regardless of its size and strength.

Brethren, we stand opposed to Promise Keepers. Where do you stand?

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON PROMISE KEEPERS SEE
Way of Life Literature's Web Site
http://www.wayoflife.org/

Page 43 of 176
 WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE
PROMISE KEEPERS?
It's Leaders Espouse Views That Are Antithetical to the Bible's
Teachings, and Outside the Realm of Mainstream Belief"
"Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from
God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." -- 1 John 4:1

By MATT ANDREWS

How faithful to the Word of God, is the Promise Keepers men's movement? How close of an association do
its founders and board members have with the charismatic fringe? What theology is really being espoused
by its guest speakers, and in the numerous books, videos, and other materials that carry the PK official
statement similar to the hierarchy of the Catholic Church that a literary work is free from error in matters of
catholic doctrine and morals, and authorizing therefore their reading by the PK faithful?

These and other legitimate questions have largely been overlooked as this evangelical Christian men's
group attracts uncritical and enthusiastic press coverage, and its ranks of members swell with every big
conference it holds.

"PK", as it is affectionately called by its followers, has been described by Time magazine as "one of the
century s fastest-growing religious phenomena". It attracts a largely white, male, middle-class Protestant
audiences who listen to soft Christian rock and hard Christian preaching, and weep in one another's arms.
Page 44 of 176
Founded in 1990 by Bill McCartney, the controversial and outspoken ex-coach of the University of
Colorado football team, the Promise Keepers movement has grown in Malthusian proportions.

McCartney's idea was to organize a nondenominational parachurch that would minister to and disciple men
to "celebrate Biblical manhood and motivate men toward a Christ-like masculinity."

He came up with the concept of men-only stadium rallies -- a combination of Super Bowl game and revival
meeting.

Though his idea attracted only 72 participants in 1990, more than 727,000 "Jesus Jocks" -- as one British
publication called them -- came to PK events last year. They have filled arenas from Detroit's Silverdome
to Washington's RFK Stadium, from Minneapolis' Metrodome to Atlanta's Georgia Dome, for 20 Promise
Keeper two-day marathons.

Its leaders say they are tapping into a mass identity crisis among American males, who have for a long time
felt isolated, powerless and disenfranchised by a society in transition that seems to view them as
expendable.

They trace the country's free-fall to the fact that many men are not keeping their promises to wives,
families, and churches. They see the skyrocketing crime rate, huge number of divorces, increasing racial
tensions, juvenile delinquency and out-of-wedlock births as indications that men have abdicated their
Biblically defined role as leaders in the home.

Many Christians would find it hard to argue with any of these premises.
The Problem

However, critics of Promise Keepers charge its leaders routinely express views that are antithetical to the
Bible's teachings, and outside the realm of mainstream belief. They claim it has an unbridled ecumenicist, a
charismatic leadership emphasis, and relies on an anti-God secular psychology.

They say Promise Keepers mimics new-age male bonding and self-discovery therapies, and endorse a
book, which suggests levels of initiation rites to manhood. They decry its emphasis on phallic symbolism
and the fact that Jesus is presented as a sexual male. They note that PK requires submission to leaders and
employs a pyramid structure in its organization that it intrudes on the privacy of a man's family life and
sexual habits. They point out that the group encourages male domination of women, and is rooted in the
Vineyard ministry, with strong links to the Kansas City Prophets -- a controversial cult claiming visions
and revelations from God.

Critics say they do not presume to judge the integrity or the motives of all those in Promise Keepers or
question the salvation of these men. They concede that many involved with PK are sincere. Instead, they
say they are concerned with the doctrine of the movement and the ministry being promoted. They stress
that any group that claims to represent Jesus must 1) preach a pure Gospel, and 2) address man's spiritual
growth from an accurate interpretation of God's Word. Critics say Promise Keepers fails on both counts.

They worry that the vast majority of men who attend PK rallies probably know very little about the beliefs
or church affiliation of the speakers who appear. The lecturers are accepted as authorities on Christian
living simply because they say they are Christians and believe the Bible.

"Since the ministry of these teachers runs the gamut from compromising new-evangelicalism and
charismatic error, to ecumenical liberalism, it is clear that they are introducing the Promise Keepers to

Page 45 of 176
unscriptural doctrines and fellowships," says Al Dager of Redmond, WA. "This is a very serious matter."

Rev. Gil Rugh, senior pastor of Indian Hills Community Church in Lincoln, NE. agrees. "There is so much
theological diversity among those involved with Promise Keepers that no in-depth discussion of Scripture
or what it means to be a Christian could take place without tearing the movement apart."

As one former Promise Keepers member remarked, "it's so diluted and deluded, you can't get very much
out of it."

A Typical Rally

There's no doubt that this is one men's movement that attracts followers
from all economic and social strata.

At a typical PK rally, bearded, rough-looking and scraggly bikers with

tattoos park next to the mini vans which spill forth groups of clean-cut,
athletic, preppie types that all look like they work for the insurance
industry.

A Promise Keepers rally is a spirited affair. Balloons, gliders and beach balls are batted around. Blaring
rock music pounds to increase the hype. Entire sections of the stadiums stand to challenge the other sides,
with chants of, "We love Jesus, yes we do! We love Jesus, how about you?" Guys wear T-shirts reading
"Men with a mission."

Scores of single young men are called to take a vow of chastity until marriage, and nearby mentors move
close to them to lay hands of support on their bodies, all heads bowed in prayer.

Between munching on sausages and nachos, they do "The Wave," and commit themselves to God, family
and racial reconciliation. One pro-PK observer noted that "at times the...crowd seems excited not so much
by what is being said as by the opportunity to 'hang' with other men."

"Promise Keepers is a fun thing as well as a serious time for men to grow," says Nate Adams, author of
"Nine Character Traits Separating the Men from the Boys," who attended a rally in Indianapolis. "An
important aspect of the conference is the chance men have to express their boyish and playful sides." How
does this carnival atmosphere help in preaching and teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ!?

Karl Sooder, a communicant of St. Peter's in Chattanooga, TN., and a volunteer for the PK national
organization, says "Promise Keepers deals with contemporary social issues with contemporary men at a gut
level and because of that it is attracting young men at an incredible rate." He reports that "The greatest
response has been from young married men with small children at home. Promise Keepers helps them in
dealing with social issues head-on -- marriage, raising kids, values at home -- in a practical way."

Opposition Surfaces

While PK literature is filled with testimonials from women who say their once-philandering or errant
husbands have been transformed into upright citizens and loving spouses, the movement has not been free
of controversy.

California Catholics for Free Choice, which picketed one Promise Keepers rally, claims PK is "really not
about religion." Rosemary Stasek, director of the Catholic group, says Promise Keepers "have a social

Page 46 of 176
agenda. They take the trappings of religion and all their Biblical citations and use them to legitimize their
social view about the relative roles of men and women."

According to a statement released by the National Organization for Women (NOW), Promise Keepers
"ideology is one of power and control. It resembles the rationale of the batterer, not the savior."

In USA Today, Stuart Wright, a sociologist at Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas, called the organization
"an attempt to raise the authority and status of angry white men who find themselves declining in privilege
and power. It is part of a movement of the religious right to reconstruct the 1950s."

Jay Coakley, a sociologist at the University of Colorado, said in the same article that Promise Keepers
"gives moral legitimacy to men who wish to regain power," and represents "the same white male
Republican vote you saw in the last election."

In the New Age Journal, writer Jeff Wagentheim observed: "...despite the group's assertions to the contrary,
Promise Keepers is an organization with vast political influence. The fact that hundreds of thousands of
men are being actively encouraged to adhere to a highly conservative set of values and to work to instill
those values in their communities and nation should not just be a matter of theological interest."

Promise Keepers reports receiving 10,000 phone calls and up to 5,000 pieces of mail per day. It has a staff
of 360 and a budget of $120 million.

William Martin, a Rice University sociologist who specializes in modern revival movements, warns that
"There is no doubt that the leaders of the religious right will see [PK] as a major resource, and seek to
strengthen ties with it. There is a danger it might be hijacked."

There is other evidence that PK leaders are involved in political or controversial issues. In 1992, founder
McCartney supported an initiative on the Colorado ballot to block civil rights protections for gays and
lesbians.

Harvey Baynes, a full-time employee of the Promise Keepers, was arrested in March 1995 in connection
with a protest outside a Denver Planned Parenthood clinic.

Christianity Today magazine even warned in an editorial, "Nothing would sink [PK] quicker than getting
drawn into a mean-spirited political crusade."

Although the media frequently describe the Promise Keepers as a fundamentalist movement, there are those
who would take issue with this portrayal.

A resolution passed at a Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches session complained that "Promise
Keepers' teachings are a strange mixture of truth and error. Its methods for promoting these teachings are
questionable."

The fundamentalist resolution claimed that, while "some Scriptural values are taught...they are mingled
with pop-psychology and have an ecumenical emphasis, while a charismatic aura pervades the
proceedings." It condemned the fact that "One of the Promise Keepers' stated goals is to 'break down
denominational barriers,' including Catholic, liberals, charismatics, and neo-evangelicals under its banner.
It urges its members to 'break down the walls that separate us, to be a bridge builder, and to pray daily for
unity among Christians in your community.'"

Therefore, the pastors and delegates to the Fundamental Bible Churches urged Christians to "be wise, to be
Page 47 of 176
warned, and to beware of this false movement."

Defending Its Mission

What's the truth about the Promise Keepers?

Defenders of the men's organization counter that while their supposed ecumenical emphasis does include
"all who have come to genuine faith in Christ," without regard to the denominational label they may wear,
this by definition naturally precludes certain segments of the population.

For example, they point out that the doctrinal positions officially held by Promise Keepers include a belief
in the inspiration of Scripture, the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, bodily
resurrection and the need for regeneration -- and these things are all rejected by liberal theology.

Additionally, the teaching that man's alienation from God can be removed only by accepting through faith
God's gift of salvation distinguishes Promise Keepers from Roman Catholic doctrine, which teaches
salvation through the church and its sacraments.

Defenders explain that the goal of Promise Keepers is not unity of all men, or all faiths, but of all who hold
to what PK literature calls "the true Christian faith." Stated another way, Promise Keepers claims it "does
not promote unity at the expense of sound doctrine. It does seek, however, to focus on the essential issues
of the faith, and leave other important, though less essential issues, in the hands of the local church."

All of this sounds reasonable in theory, but it does not appear to be adhered to in practice. How else to
account for the fact that members of widely divergent denominations -- evangelical, Pentecostal, mainline,
Mormon and Roman Catholic all -- identify with PK beliefs, and enthusiastically so?

Indeed, an investigation by Midwest Today, which included a careful examination of PK tapes, biographies,
speeches, literature and interviews with those both inside and outside the movement, cast a far different
light on the group and found substantial evidence to contradict many of its official claims.

Others see a far more sinister possibility. Jewel Van Der Merwe, a writer in the UK warns, "Is Promise
Keepers creating a new folk religion? The large mass rallies, the exaltation of emotion over reason, the lack
of doctrinal integrity, the taking of oaths (Seven Promises), the focus on fatherland and fatherhood, and the
ecumenical inclusion of aberrant esoteric doctrines bears a disconcerting similarity to the Nazi era which
gave rise to one of the most dreadful armies in history."

A Charismatic Fervor

While information contained on an (unofficial) Promise Keepers Internet page on the World Wide Web
assures that "Charismatic doctrine and practice is not promoted or endorsed in any Promise Keeper
publications or conferences," this appears to be a misstatement.

The Promise Keepers make available a teaching manual written by Dr. Robert Hicks entitled, "The
Masculine Journey: Understanding Six Stages of Manhood." At the end of the book is a statement that
reads: "Promise Keepers wants to provide men's materials like this book."

A close examination of the book raises serious questions about the true theology and teachings of the PK
leadership.
Page 48 of 176
The Rev. Dennis L. Finnan, pastor of the St. Charles Bible Church in St. Charles, Minnesota, and host of
"The World, the Word and You" weekly radio broadcasts, says that "Hicks' book is Biblically erroneous,
blasphemous and centered on the exclusivity of human wisdom. For example, in chapter after chapter,
subjective insights into manhood are offered by quotes of a host of secular authorities such as Carl Jung,
who turned out to be a demon-possessed psychiatrist; Leanne Payne, a New Age psychiatrist; and
occultist/spiritualist Elizabeth Kubler-Ross."
In the book, Dr. Hicks accuses Jesus Christ of being a sinner, of having sexual thoughts and fantasies about
Mary Magdalene, and of being tempted by homosexuality. He urges men to celebrate such rites of passage
as their first sexual experience or the first time they are influenced by drugs or alcohol.

And he says David's Psalms are the musings of a manic-depressive.

"Until their endorsement of this book is withdrawn publicly, no man of God should trust any publication or
statement of Promise Keepers," says James l. Holly, M.D., a frequent critic.

Another area of great spiritual concern to those who trust the Bible alone, and in its entirety, is the close
association of the Promise Keepers with the radical fringe of the Charismatic movement.

James Ryle, one of the Board of Directors of PK, has come under fire for some of his rather far-out beliefs.
For instance, he has declared himself to be a modern prophet who has had personal revelations from Jesus
Christ.

In 1990, at a Vineyard Harvest Conference in Denver, Ryle asserted that God had personally instructed him
to reveal to the church that the 1960's rock stars, the Beatles and their music, were the direct result of what
he called a "special anointing of the Holy Spirit."

Ryle boldly proclaimed that he, personally, had been designated by the Lord as a lookout. He quoted God
as having told him in these exact words: ":The gifting and sound that [the musicians] had was from Me... It
was My purpose to bring forth through music, a worldwide revival that would usher in My Spirit in
bringing men and women to Christ."

Not to be outdone, Jack Hayford, who has been a keynote speaker at several PK conferences, claims he,
too, has seen a vision of Jesus Christ seated in heaven and has personally heard Him speak.

Hayford also relates a story about how a man rids his house of evil spirits by rituals in his yard. Many
Bible-believing Christians would reject this as an occultist practice.

The founder and main spokesman of Promise Keepers, Bill McCartney, is a former Catholic who converted
to the Vineyard movement. Consistent with Vineyard doctrine, McCartney, when addressing Promise
Keeper rallies, often gives what he claims are direct revelations from God. Thousands of men thus subject
themselves to the teachings of a man claiming to speak on behalf of the Almighty, when Scripture is clear
God is not giving new revelation in this age.

Rev. Finnan comments that "This troubles me that this seemingly wonderful movement, to unite men in the
common bond of Jesus Christ, is being founded by those who are at the least spiritually misguided and at
the worst are under Satanic delusions."

Critics refer to the Book of Revelations' clear warning that "If anyone adds to these things, God will add to
him the plagues that are written herein." (Rev. 22:18).

Page 49 of 176
 Vital Relationships With Men

The Promise Keepers' emphasis on pursuing vital relationships with other men includes the stipulation that
"Each man willingly grants the others the right to inquire about his relationship to God, his commitment to
his family, his sexuality, and his financial dealings."

"This is a common thrust of the Promise Keepers, to call men to openly discuss private sexual matters with
other men," observes pastor Dennis Finnan. "This is very alarming to me for the Bible tells us we are not to
discuss such intimacy with anybody but our mates."

Rev. Gil Rugh concurs. "Certainly as brothers in the Lord men are to encourage, rebuke, and admonish one
another, but nowhere in the Bible are men told to give other men the right to inquire about those things.
Obviously, if a man is involved in sin, he needs to be confronted (see Gal. 6:1). There is, however, nothing
in the Bible that gives other men the right to inquire into private family and sexual matters."

A Confused Model of Manhood

Promise Keepers preaches that Jesus was a "man's man," a carpenter (In Jesus' time on the earth, houses
were not built with wood, but with stone) who lived at a time, according to PK advocate Rev. J. Alfred
Smith Sr., "when they didn't have power saws."
Steve Farrar agrees that true manhood can be gleaned from the example of Jesus. "[He] could be tender and
gentle, but Jesus could also walk in and clear out a corrupted temple," Farrar asserts.

It is this emphasis on Jesus' masculinity that troubles some observers. As theologian Lewis Smedes, who
recently retired from Fuller Theological Seminary, points out, following Christ "is a gender-neutral calling:
That which is important about Jesus being a model is not his modeling of maleness but his modeling of
humanity," he insists.

On the other hand, Jesus's leadership was also based upon humbling himself, washing the feet of the
Apostles. The leaders of Promise Keepers talk about establishing a new, non-domineering male leadership
in the home through such servant hood to spouse and family.

But some think PK takes things too far. One of the leading spokesmen on this subject within Promise
Keepers, Gary Smalley, is resoundingly criticized.

Al Dager thinks that "Smalley is destroying God's institutional structure of the family by suggesting that the
husband submit himself to his wife. This is [found] nowhere in Scripture. I am not suggesting that a
husband has the right to boss his wife around. I am stating that it is the husband's responsibility to ensure
that his family is following the Lord."

The Biblical mandate for this is seen in Titus 2:5, Proverbs 14:1 and elsewhere.

"It seems as if Smalley is more concerned with how the wives feel about their husbands than how God feels
about them.

"Women love Smalley because he focuses men's attention not on how to please God, but how to please
their wives," observes Dager. "His courses do not utilize Scripture as much as psychological theory."

Indicative of this approach is that a cartoon included in a Gary Smalley piece portray a man holding
window cleaner, a vacuum cleaner, and a laundry basket while offering strawberry cheesecake to his wife
who is lounging in her Laz-E-Boy recliner with a rose, a telephone, the TV remote control, and the Bible.
Page 50 of 176
Dager concludes, "The Bible does not tell us to glorify our wives, it tells us to glorify Christ, and Christ
alone."

Unity At the Expense of Truth?

Critics claim Promise Keepers blurs the distinction between truth and error. Comments Rev. Rugh: "Those
involved in ecumenism often quote Jesus' prayer in John 17:21, where He prayed, 'that they (Christians)
may all be one to show that believers should be unified.'

"Certainly, believers should earnestly desire the unity Jesus referred to." he acknowledges. "However, in
that same prayer, Jesus prayed, 'Sanctify them in the truth; Thy Word is truth' (John 17:17). True unity
must be based on the truth of Scripture or else it is a false unity. The Bible nowhere calls for unity at the
expense of truth.

"Promise Keepers attempt to promote godliness without following God's plan as set forth in His Word,"
Rugh contends.

Rev. Bill Randles, pastor of Believers in Grace Fellowship Church in Cedar Rapids, IA. complains, "People
are being encouraged to de-emphasize doctrines so they can come together as though doctrine is a
meaningless detail.

"If PK is supposed to be a great move of God, doesn't truth and discernment count for anything?" he asks.

Its Affect On Local Churches

Many who have embraced the Promise Keeper ministry are now bent on recruiting new followers with
fully as much zeal and pressure as sports-minded college alumni men seek to recruit top athletes for sports
programs.

The organization has sought to infiltrate local churches through encouraging the formation of men's small
groups to aid in building what it calls its "network." PK reports having 11,842 "Key Men" and
"Ambassadors" who introduce Promise Keepers to clergy and make available to churches its questionable
resources.

Promise Keepers claims it has a commitment to build up the local church through empowering pastors. The
rallies have typically concluded with all the clergy in attendance being called to the front of the arenas to be
prayed for and applauded by the other men.

But many clergy are distancing themselves from the movement. Gil Rugh says this is because "the pressure
to follow the crowd and silence the voice of scriptural reproof is growing."

Critics observe warily that the machinery is coming into place for PK to have a continuing influence on its
members and their denominations for years to come.

M.H. Reynolds, Editor of Foundation magazine, sees this dilemma: "How could a pastor say 'No, we
cannot...' to men returning from a Promise Keepers conference who promise the pastor they will support
him, work with him, and pray for him as never before? How can he deal with these undoubtedly well-
meaning, yet misled, men within his own church who are now exerting pressure upon him to fall into line
with the program?"

Page 51 of 176
Bill McCartney has offended clergy by his bullying statements about the reluctance on the part of pastors to
ally themselves with Promise Keepers. He said at a Detroit rally that any clergyman who wasn't planning to
attend the 1996 Pastors Gathering in Atlanta "needs to be able to tell us why he doesn't want to go."

A Summary

The problem with the Promise Keepers is summed up by Pastor Jack Stephens of Columbus, OH. He says,
"I am told that when oleo was first sold it came in white, bland-looking sticks. A separate packet of yellow
dye was included with your purchase and had to be kneaded into the oleo to give it a butter color. PK is like
that old oleo. It is totally colorless regarding any true doctrinal substance.

Anyone involved with it can add whatever doctrinal coloring in whatever amount they choose in order to
make it personally palatable. But no matter how much you attempt to color it, PK still isn't butter... "
God's word must be obeyed to enjoy God's blessing.
To remain silent about the "wolves in sheep's clothing" is disobedience and receives God's rebuke.
(Isaiah 56:10-11) Israel's watchmen are blind, they all lack knowledge; they are all mute dogs, they cannot
bark; they lie around and dream, they love the sheep. They are dogs with mighty appetites; they never have
enough. They are shepherds who lack understanding; they all turn to their own way, each seeks his own
gain.

To remain in fellowship with false teachers is disobedience, which can produce

disastrous results.
(1 Corinthians 15:33) Do not be mislead: "Bad company corrupts good character."

The Bible says, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw
yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us …
and if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man and have no company with him that he may
be ashamed."(2 Thessalonians 3:3,14)

Page 52 of 176
 Promise Keepers
Ecumenical "Macho-Men" for Christ?
Promise Keepers was founded in 1990 by Bill McCartney (born 1940), then the head coach of the
University of Colorado football team. The stated goal of this "nondenominational", parachurch organization
is to celebrate Biblical manhood and motivate men toward Christ-like masculinity. "To unite men through
vital relationships to become godly influences in their world -- by making promises to Jesus Christ and to
one another that last a lifetime," reads Promise Keepers' purpose statement.
[By definition, a parachurch ministry is one "raised up" supposedly to accomplish something churches are
charged to do by the Scriptures. However, one should question rising up an organization outside the church
(parachurch) to accomplish objectives ordained by God to be produced by the normal, proper functioning
of the local church and all its parts, especially the development of "godly men." All too often, what is
established to assist local churches ends up competing with them and introducing unscriptural philosophies
and practices.]
"Promise Keepers' mission is to help promote spiritual revival in the homes, churches, and communities of
this nation. This will be accomplished by modeling, praying for and instructing all men to grow in Christ-
like masculinity, enabling them to become 'promise keepers' to the Lord who loves them, to their wives
who trust them, to their children who need them, and to the world which must be influenced by them"
(Spring 1992, Men of Action).
Although Bill McCartney is credited with founding Promise Keepers, until late 1998 he was the figurehead,
holding the title as CEO of PK. Randy Phillips was the president and administrative head of Promise
Keepers. As of October 1998, McCartney is overseeing three divisions as president and founder. Randy
Phillips has moved from president to the new position of vice president for global ministries. Phillips has
served as a senior pastor for five years, as an associate pastor for ten years, and led the Denver Broncos'
Bible study for two years. Phillips, like McCartney, is a former Roman Catholic. Both are also affiliated
with the hyper-charismatic Vineyard movement -- Vineyard churches emphasize the validity of "signs and
wonders" for today and view miraculous displays of divine power as essential to the growth of the Church.
(See Note at end of report.)

Page 53 of 176
Promise Keepers programs include regional stadium rallies, pastors' conferences, one-day leadership-
training seminars, books, study guides, videos for small men's groups, national TV spots, a newsletter, and
an Internet web site. Books have become a big seller for PK; Thomas Nelson Publishers has nearly two
dozen titles on the market for men, including a revised version of McCartney's autobiography, From Ashes
to Glory. Nelson is coming out with new titles from PK speakers and is offering retailers merchandising
aids to help direct mail customers to newly expanded men's sections (4/29/96, Christianity Today).
- Various newspaper articles appear to accurately portray the Promise Keepers movement:
(a) "Many people credit Edwin Louis Cole of Euless with starting the Christian men's movement with his
1982 book Maximized Manhood. His organization, called the Christian Men's Network, publishes a
quarterly newspaper, and conducts seminars for men across the country called the Real Man Event. ...
Promise Keepers' gatherings at football stadiums ... often are accompanied by men sharing problems,
openly crying and embracing one another. After a conference ends, they are encouraged to form small
groups to meet regularly and continue to talk about their struggles" (10/27/94, Dallas Morning News, p.
7A).
(b) "Promise Keepers asserts that men, by walking away from their family duties, are responsible for much
of America's societal dysfunction, which the group's leaders say includes high school dropouts, a soaring
crime rate, racism, divorce, homosexuality and abortion. ... [And that we can] restore the nation by
exhorting men to become 'promise keepers instead of promise breakers.'... The women's movement,
Promise Keepers says, is at least in part a reaction to the pain and abuse women suffer at the hands of men.
This analysis worries critics, who say that such talk could move the group beyond the family to political
activism. Some observers see Promise Keepers as the latest turn in the search for male identity in a fast-
changing and conflicted society. In American history through the 1950s, the family structure was
unabashedly patriarchal. The 1960s and 1970s ushered in the Sensitive Man who acknowledged a feminine
side and sought to nurture. The 1990s brought the Wild Man, hairy-chested and testosterone-driven,
extolled in author Robert Bly's bestseller, Iron John. Now, Promise Keepers' slogan is: 'A man's man is a
godly man.' In some ways, it is a throwback to the days of 'Father Knows Best.' Dad is still in charge, but
he is kinder, gentler and a lot more spiritual" (7/9/94, The Bloomington Herald-Times [Los Angeles Times
story]).
(c) "Promise Keepers combines the Jesus Saves preaching of Billy Graham with the male bonding message
of Robert Bly, the call for racial conciliation of Martin Luther King, Jr., and the marital advice of Ann
Landers. ... It [the 6/95 PK rally in Houston's Astrodome] had men roaring and applauding Jesus as if he
had just scored a touchdown. ... Leaders hope that men will leave the rallies, return to their neighborhoods
and churches, and form support groups and partnerships with other men to share feelings, concerns, and
advice" (6/27/95, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, p. B10).
- Promise Keepers started out small in 1991 -- 4,200 men attended the first Boulder, Colorado Conference
(held at the Coors' Event Center). In 1992, 22,000 men attended. In 1993, 50,000 men jammed University
of Colorado's Folsom Stadium and another 52,000 in 1994. However, that is not all. For the first time in
1994, Promise Keepers held regional conferences in six additional cities, with over 227,000 men in total
attendance. All totaled, Promise Keepers 1994 attendance at its seven conferences was approximately
280,000 men.
In 1995, Promise Keepers held rallies in football stadiums in 13 major U.S. cities that attracted 727,000
men. Registration fees of more than $38 million were taken in (at $55 per registrant). In 1996, Promise
Keepers held 22 rallies and drew 1.1 million attendees (1,098,534 to be exact); revenues exceeded $65
million (at $60 per registrant). (One event was cancelled in 1996, at Denver's Mile High Stadium, due to a
dispute over an alleged $300,000 seat-tax liability.) In 1997, 18 rallies were held, but attendance was down
more than 40% to about 630,000 (leading to the cancellation of two of the rallies). In 1998, the slide in PK
popularity continued -- 19 events attracted only 453,000 men; this in spite of the fact that the events were
Page 54 of 176
now free. Only 15 events have been scheduled for 1999 (with 10 of the 15 rallies to be in smaller indoor
arenas; total attendance is projected to be about 300,000), and revenues have been projected at only $41
million.
- On October 4, 1997, PK held its Stand in the Gap: A Sacred Assembly Of Men rally on the Mall in
Washington, D.C. -- to "kneel in prayer between the Lincoln Memorial and nation's Capitol to seek
forgiveness as men ask God to restore America ... we must be of one accord ... our feet in unity...
confessing personal and collective sin" (PK's version of the Farrakhan "Million Man March"?). Ten million
dollars was budgeted for this free event. Attendance estimates ranged from 480,000 to 700,000. (Speakers
included Mike Timmis, a Roman Catholic and PK board member, Jack Hayford, Joseph Stowell, Max
Lucado [Church of Christ pastor/false gospel of baptismal regeneration], James Robison, and Tony Evans,
along with a taped message from Billy Graham.)
At the Stand in the Gap rally, it was also announced that PK would no longer charge a registration fee of
$60 for its conferences. Since then its income has plummeted. McCartney announced that some of the 19
conferences scheduled for 1998 might be cancelled, since the stadiums and arenas require substantial
deposits and Promise Keepers do not have the money. McCartney unveiled PK's plan for the next three
years. He said he wanted every pastor in America to participate in this plan. Every pastor was expected to
march to the same unified plan. He said, "We need a unity of command," and, "We need to have everybody
on the same page". The page, of course, is PK's page. He said that the Promise Keepers clergy conferences
in 1998 would be for instructing the pastors in their marching orders. He said, "[R]racial and
denominational reconciliation standards will be presented at these pastors' conferences in practical ways
that we can live in unity in the Body of Christ, and together make a difference for the Kingdom!"
- To keep up with phenomenal growth of its early-days, Promise Keepers had more than 500 staffers at one
point in 1997 (about 30% made up of minorities) (up from 22 employees in 1993, 85 in 1994, 300 in 1995,
and 437 in 1996) and a 1997 annual budget of more than $117 million (up from $96 million in 1996, $64
million in 1995, and only $4 million in 1993). (Tax records show that from 1993-1995, PK has booked a
profit of $14.7 million, with more than half of that in 1995, the last year for which tax records are available.
Net assets are $15 million.)
However, because of falling attendance and free admission at future events (PK's 1997 income fell shy of
$70 million), PK laid off about 100 employees in 7/97, and the remainder of all paid employees worldwide
effective 3/31/98. PK hired back about 180 staffers later in 1998 after a successful fund raising campaign
(see below). Part of the problem might be attributed to the pay levels of PK's executives. PK's 1996 tax
returns, which were obtained by Time magazine, show that PK's five vice-presidents were paid between
$78,000 and $100,000 each; then president, Randy Phillips, earned $132,512. Their 1997 salaries were the
same or higher. McCartney currently draws no salary, other than paid health insurance. However, he is paid
"honorariums" for speaking at PK rallies (about $4,000 each; $21,000 total in 1996). In addition, tax
records show McCartney received $61,833 in compensation plus other benefits for the years 1995-96.
(Source: Plains Baptist Challenger, 8/97).
- Due to its financial woes, McCartney claimed in early 1998 that God wants every church in America to
give $1,000. Speaking to a clergy conference in St. Petersburg, Florida, on February 19, attended by more
than 3,000 pastors and church members, McCartney said that God told him to say that "every church that
names the name of Jesus is supposed to give Promise Keepers $1,000" (Steve Persall, "McCartney appeals
for church donations," The Denver Post, Feb. 20, 1998). He went on to say that big churches are "supposed
to call the smaller churches and say, 'It wasn't all that hard for us, but can we help you?'" and small
churches which lack the $1,000 are supposed "to call a larger church and say, 'Can you help us out here?
We want to facilitate what God is doing.'"
To claim that every church in America is supposed to send Promise Keepers $1,000 is absolute insanity.
PK does not obey the Bible and has no Biblical authority for its existence. It has its own fabricated agenda,
Page 55 of 176
yet it has the gall to think that every church in America should be at its disposal. (Source: 2/24/98, FBIS.)
[McCartney also sent a "Speed Alert" letter in early-March, 1998, to every person on PK's mailing list -- a
$98 donation was requested.]
- Promise Keepers has made concerted efforts to bring their program into the local church body. Their
success is evidenced by the fact that many churches have now assimilated various Promise Keepers
programs into their churches as a "springboard" for their local men's ministry. Men have been specifically
designated as Promise Keepers "Point [Key] Men", who then aggressively recruit others and are
responsible for keeping the group going. The Key Man serves as the link between his group and PK
headquarters. (The "Point Man" name was changed to "Key Man" in 11/95):
"The Point [Key] Man plays an important position for initiating and facilitating men's ministry in his
church, and he is vital to Promise Keepers. ... The Point [Key] Man, with the approval of his pastor, is the
critical connecting link between the men's ministry of his church and Promise Keepers. Either a lay leader
or a pastor, the Point [Key] Man initiates, organizes, and supports the men's ministry program of his church
[including small group development]. He acts as a conduit for resources, including materials, national
conferences, and training seminars provided by Promise Keepers and other contributing ministries" (Spring
1992/April 1995, Men of Action). [The Key Man application (circa 1999) has a statement to be signed that
reads: "I support Promise Keepers' desire to see Vibrant Men's Ministry, Vital Prayer Networks, and
Intentional Reconciliation established in every church".]
PK's Dale Schlafer was asked, "What if a pastor wanted to remove a Key Man, but men's group disagreed
and pressured the pastor to keep him?" Who would carry the authority in the local church? Schlafer stated
that the pastor would prevail; however, the pastor is urged to contact PK before any final decision is made
so that PK can work through what is going on. This is an unhealthy arrangement and sets the stage for the
possible destruction of the local church. If a local church is to maintain its independency, the church must
have the final authority in such matters. This question would never have been asked if PK was not trying to
gain a foothold in the local church. Perhaps pastors who support PK will respond to this by saying "Not to
worry -- if I have to remove my PK Key Man, I just won't notify PK headquarters". Who is to say that none
of the men will call PK? Would you bet your life on it that PK will not meddle in the matter, when they
have expressed interest in doing just that? Can a pastor be sure that the PK men in his church (who have
made vows to support PK no matter what) will not have the pastor fired or start a church split? Why would
PK express any interest in challenging a decision by any pastor to remove or replace a PK Key Man, while
at the same time telling the PK's to "Obey your pastor, no matter what?"
- Promise Keepers "Ambassadors" have been positioned by PK between the Field Ministry staff and the
Key Men. Their function is to introduce Promise Keepers to churches in the community and to recruit Key
Men -- "He carries the message of Promise Keepers to his community, identifies potential Point [Key]
Men, and encourages reconciliation across denominational and racial lines" (4/95, Men of Action). The
Ambassador Candidate booklet states that, "Because Promise Keepers is committed to building relational
bridges, Ambassadors must avoid negative political, doctrinal, and denominational remarks and
discussions," and that if an Ambassador encounters "a church outside his personal comfort zone" in
doctrine or culture, "he should remember he doesn't have to answer every question" (pp. 3-4). (Emphasis
added.) Nevertheless, the "walls of denominationalism" are difficult to break down -- "this process may
take six months to a year" (p. 12).
Once a man is accepted to be a Promise Keepers Ambassador, the cautions against standing for sound
doctrine become even more specific. The Ambassador's Instructional booklet warns the Ambassador that he
no longer represents himself and his "personal stands on a doctrinal issue," but instead represents Promise
Keepers "unique mission" and is "participating in the task of uniting men." The booklet gives "Some of the
[doctrinal] issues that should not be addressed: Eternal security; the gifts of the Spirit; Baptism; Pre-
tribulation or post-tribulation; Sacraments or ordinances" (p. 10). The Ambassador is told that the PK's
Purpose Statement and Statement of Faith had been "carefully worded" in order to avoid doctrinal conflict.
Page 56 of 176
Of course! How else could it be accepted by Mormons and Catholics alike (see later in this report)?
(Reported in the 11/95, The Berean Call.)
Texas PK Conference Director Vinton Lee has stated that PK is "not just a conference ministry. ... It is an
entry point for men", through PK's church ministries in an effort to pump its discipleship curricula directly
into local congregations. Over 200,000 local churches had tapped Promise Keepers for information as of
7/95. However, because much within Promise Keepers' teaching materials is Biblically unsound and
heavily psychologized, this is a real problem for lovers of the truth. [As of 5/95, there were 10,840 Point
[Key] Men and Ambassadors with Promise Keepers (4/29/95, Houston Chronicle). (11,842 at year-end
1995)]
- Two of our main concerns about Promise Keepers are the blatant promotion of psycho heresy on the part
of most of Promise Keepers most popular authors and speakers and a rising tide of ecumenism that blurs
doctrinal distinctive. (Two other concerns, discussed later, are PK's charismatic emphasis and its outright
disdain for doctrine.) Indeed, Promise Keepers is both aggressively psychological and ecumenical:
"We believe that we have a God-given mission to unite men who are separated by race, geography, culture,
denomination, and economics. ... (John 17: 20-23) We are dedicated, then, to addressing the division that
has separated the body of Christ for too long. We are committed to call men to reconcile in Christ, to live as
one. ... In the context of covenant relationships, a man willingly grants other men the right to inquire about
his relationship to God, his commitment to his family, his sexuality, and his financial dealings. Together
they form a team that is committed to advance God's kingdom. Coach McCartney's challenge to us at
Promise Keepers '93 targeted two phases of man-to-man relationships. Phase one focuses on meeting with a
squad of men 2-4 times a month. Phase two involves meeting once a month with men of different ethnic or
denominational backgrounds. ... Coach challenged us to focus on the three P's: (1) the pages of Scripture,
(2) prayer, and (3) understanding one another's pain. ... When we take the risk of becoming vulnerable and
transparent, we more readily understand and share the pain of our brothers. This establishes trust" (Fall
1993, Men of Action). (Emphasis added.)
It could be argued that ecumenism is the very heart of Promise Keepers. This aggressive ecumenism (the
attempt to break down the barriers that separate world religions so that cooperative efforts can be
undertaken) can be further illustrated from the Promise Keepers 1994 Conferences brochure -- Seize the
Moment, and from the winter 1994 issue of Men of Action:
"Clearly, something unprecedented happens when men from all denominational, ethnic, and cultural
backgrounds assemble in the name of Jesus Christ. ... Invite and travel with not only your friends and
family but with men from different ethnic and denominational heritages. ... Remember those who are
outside your church, denomination, and ethnic group." (Emphasis added.)
Notice in the above quotes the subtle line that is crossed as denominational barriers are placed in the same
category as racism and social discrimination, as if they are equitable concepts. How are these barriers
created? By doctrinal differences! The implication, thus, is that doctrinal differences, like racial, ethnic, and
socioeconomic differences, must be ignored if unity is to be achieved. Hence, the slogan of all ecumenists
-- "doctrine divides." Groups like Promise Keepers call upon Christians to disobey Christ by accepting and
accommodating the presence of theological error in their midst (The Communications Digest, November-
January 1996, Marc A. Graham, "Promise Keepers: Satan's Newest Ecumenical Strategy," pp. 5 & 9).
[The 1/6/97 Christianity Today reported that PK was taking new steps to achieve its goal of denominational
unity and to allay fears that it will steal men's loyalty from their churches. PK was forming separate
"partnerships" with various denominations. Agreements had already been made with three tongues-
speaking groups (Assemblies of God, Church of God [Cleveland, Tenn.], and the International Pentecostal
Holiness Church). (The AOG had appointed a staff member as a liaison between the two groups, had sent
many of its leadership for training in men's ministries, and planned to use PK for some technical support.

Page 57 of 176
The AOG's new men's ministry was named "Honor Bound: Men of Promise.") PK was finalizing
agreements with the Southern Baptist Convention and the Christian and Missionary Alliance.]
The whole thrust of Promise Keepers, then, is anti-doctrine. Theology is of very little significance to PK;
instead, it is a "relationship with Jesus" that matters. Life, not doctrine is important. Nevertheless, there can
be no spiritual life without truth, and there is no relationship with Christ unless it is grounded in the Word.
Christ and His truth cannot be separated! (3/97, Think on These Things, p. 3).
- The book Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper is a workbook being used by the Promise Keepers
movement. Contributing authors include Campus Crusade's Bill Bright, pop psychologist James Dobson,
ecumenical evangelist Luis Palau, psychologist Gary Smalley, hyper-charismatic Jack Hayford, and Bill
McCartney. It was published in 1994 by Dobson's Focus on the Family Publishing. Under Promise #6 is a
chapter entitled "A Call to Unity" by Bill McCartney. The following excerpts from this chapter and the
workbook notes, which follow it, reveal the unscriptural confusion pertaining to the nature of the church
and the dangerous ecumenical goals of Promise Keepers:
"The Body of Christ comprises a wide diversity of members. There are many denominations, various styles
of worship, and representatives from all occupations. ... The Bible says there is only one Body. Jesus
prayed that we all might be one. [John 17] As men who are Promise Keepers, we must determine to break
beyond the barriers and our comfort zones and get to know other members of that Body. ... We're going to
break down the walls that separate us so that we might demonstrate the power of biblical unity based on
what we have in common ... be a bridge builder ... Pray daily for unity among Christians in your
community."
The prayer of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 17 is abused and twisted out of all sense of context when it is
said to be a prayer for ecumenical unity. The unity Christ prayed for is one based on truth and the Word of
God (Jn. 17:6, 8, 14, 17, 19), whereas the ecumenical movement downplays the importance of doctrine. (In
fact, in Promise Keepers zeal for unity, it has decided that doctrine is an obstacle to unity, rather than the
Biblical basis for it.) True unity is a product of the Holy Spirit's regenerative and enlightening power, not
of man's puny, imperfect efforts. The Bible knows absolutely nothing of a proper unity apart from mutual
commitment to God's Truth -- "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" (Amos 3:3). The answer is
no, they cannot, unless they aim to disobey the Word of God. That Promise Keepers leaders care nothing
for a pure Gospel and for Bible truth is plain by their attitude toward Roman Catholicism (see below).
(Excerpted from the 1/95, O Timothy, p. 23.) (For an excellent analysis of Seven Promises of a Promise
Keeper, see also the Jan-Feb 1995, Foundation Magazine, "The Promise Keepers Movement is
Dangerous", pp. 4-12, 31-33. This article is also available in tract form from the Fundamental Evangelistic
Association, P.O. Box 6278, Los Osos, CA 93412. The tract demonstrates how PK has looked to extra-
Biblical sources and has attempted to dress up the seven promises in Biblical garb.)
- Promise Keepers not only erases doctrinal distinctive, but embraces and supports error. At the 1994
National Conference, Bill McCartney made it clear just how far Promise Keepers is willing to go with their
doctrinal indifference and desire for "Christian" unity (quoted in the 9/19/94, Christian News): (Statements
similar to the one below were also made by McCartney at the 1994 Promise Keepers' regional conference
held in Portland, Oregon, and in the book Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper, pp. 160-161.)
"Promise Keepers doesn't care if you're a Baptist. Are you born in the Spirit of God? Promise Keepers does
not care if you are a Pentecostal. Are you born in the Spirit? Now hear this! Promise Keepers doesn't care
if you're a Roman Catholic. Are you born into the Spirit of God?"
Thus, McCartney views the Catholic Church as just another Christian denomination with a few unique
aspects, rather than an apostate organization that teaches works salvation, extra-Biblical revelation, the
worship of idols, and dozens of other false doctrines. And yet in Folsom Stadium (1994 National
Conference), all were led into what was called and considered to be public worship and prayer with all the

Page 58 of 176
others there in the stadium in the name of "Christian" unity. However, it is a false unity because there is no
agreement in the true Christian faith! (Jude 3 -- ... contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to
the saints.) [See Media Spotlight editor Al Dager's interview with Promise Keepers then president Randy
Phillips in the Media Spotlight 11/94 Special Report: "Promise Keepers: Is What You See What You Get?"
pp. 11-12. In summary, Promise Keepers official policy toward leading Roman Catholics to the truth is one
of hands-off. Within Promise Keepers, it seems that rebuke, correction, and exclusion apply only to those
who would insist on purity of doctrine among those with whom they fellowship.]
- As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the feeling is apparently mutual. The Catholic Archdiocese of
Los Angeles is quite willing to welcome McCartney and friends back into fellowship with Romanism. An
article in the 3/15/95 The Tidings, an official publication of the L.A. Archdiocese, had this to say about
Promise Keepers ("'Promise Keepers' Promises Spiritual Renewal for Men", p. 3):
"[Promise Keepers] began among more fundamentalist and evangelical Christian communities, but [is] now
being expanded to include Catholic congregations. ... At the urging of Cardinal Roger Mahony [of the L.A.
Archdiocese] ... has studied the feasibility and appropriateness of utilizing Promise Keepers at the Catholic
parish level. [It was concluded that] there is no 'doctrinal' issue, which should cause concern to the Catholic
Church. Promise Keepers places a very strong emphasis on returning to your own church, congregation, or
parish and becoming an active nonprofessional. There is no attempt at proselytizing or drawing men away
from their faith to another church." (Emphasis added.)
One Catholic who attended the Anaheim, California regional Promise Keepers conference in May of 1994
was so "inspired" he brought "the concept back to his parish, which in turn sponsored a Promise Keepers
seminar for 100 men, with presentations by local priests". The Los Angeles Archdiocese has concluded,
"Promise Keepers can grow at the local parish level ... without adversely impacting existing parish
programs or finances." In fact, the L.A. Archdiocese is quite confident that no Catholics will be lost to
Protestant churches through Promise Keepers, since "one of the promises of the [Promise Keepers]
program is to return [a PK participant] to [his] local church ..." Thus, Roman Catholic leaders are quick to
observe how Promise Keepers can be used to build their own church which preaches a false gospel! [With
this official Roman Catholic endorsement of Promise Keepers, the 5/5/95-5/6/95 Promise Keepers Los
Angeles Men's Conference drew in excess of 72,000 to the 100,000-seat Los Angeles Coliseum.]
The Catholic charismatic magazine New Covenant has also featured Promise Keepers. On the front cover
of the 4/95 edition and in an article titled "Bands of Brothers," New Covenant cites Promise Keepers as a
hope for bringing men back into the churches. The article describes Promise Keepers as focusing on male
bonding as a means to restore men's identities as members of a warrior class. (Reported in Media Spotlight,
Vol. 16 - No. 1, "Promise Keepers Update," p. 3.) [Patterned after PK, the Catholic church has developed
two separate new men's groups of their own: "Saint Joseph's Covenant Keepers, which focuses on small
groups and obedience to eight commitments; and Ministry to Black Catholic Men, which accentuates
personal and community change through a message of responsibility for rebuilding relationships, families,
and communities" (4/29/96, Christianity Today).]
An article in the 7/23/95 Today's Catholic titled "Promise Keepers' Christian crusade draws Catholic men,"
claims that Catholics have become very active in Promise Keepers. In fact, PK has even made a practicing
Roman Catholic (Steve Jenkins) a PK Field Ministry representative for all of the states of Minnesota, North
and South Dakota, Iowa, and Wisconsin! Jenkins used to be a computer salesman, but became involved in
PK after attending the 1992 PK conference in Boulder, Colorado. The same issue of Today's Catholic also
reported that an official PK Men's Ministry Leadership Seminar was held in July of 1995 at Catholic
Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio, where 640 Catholic men attended. The conference closed
with a Catholic mass performed by Steubenville's president, priest Michael Scanlan. [Men's Ministry
Leadership Seminars were held at Franciscan again in 1996 and 1997. Scheduled to speak at the 1996 event
was PK V.P. Dale Schlafer. Other speakers included Catholic priest Michael Scanlan and Catholic Deacon
Raphael de los Reyes, Director of Radio Peace Catholic Broadcasting. The notice in the Franciscan
Page 59 of 176
University '97 Summer Conference Magazine says: "Join NFL coach Danny Abramowicz, pro-family
advocate Alan Keyes, Detroit business leader Mike Timmis [now a PK board member], Hispanic evangelist
Deacon Raphael de los Reyes, and a dynamic team of speakers including Jim Berlucchi, Jeff Cavins, John
Mooney, Mark Nehrbas, Father Michael Scanlan, TOR, and Dale Schlafer of Promise Keepers as we strive
together to be men of Jesus Christ and faithful sons of our heavenly father."]
- PK has also received endorsement from the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. The 5/17/97
Buffalo News (New York) contained a report on the upcoming Promise Keepers conference in that area.
Following are excerpts from this report:

"Although the movement is perceived to be largely Protestant, [Bill] McCartney said during a news
conference in the Buffalo Christian Center that:
PROMISE KEEPERS HAS THE APPROVAL OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF
CATHOLIC BISHOPS, USES SOME CATHOLIC SPEAKERS, AND WELCOMES CATHOLIC
MEN, INCLUDING PRIESTS.
The bishops' position, contained in a 1996 position paper prepared by its Committee on Marriage and
Family, indicates that Catholics may participate in Promise Keepers events. The conferences, the paper
suggests, may 'be filling a spiritual and pastoral vacuum' in the lives of some Catholic men and challenged
church leaders to develop programs to meet those needs. Bishop Henry J. Mansell of the Buffalo Catholic
Diocese said Friday that 'Catholics are free to attend the Promise Keepers conference.'... 'It is his hope that
after the conference there will be follow up experiences in their home parishes,' said Monsignor David M.
Lee, diocesan director of communications."
- At a PK meeting in Plainview, Texas in 1995, a Catholic priest urged listeners to value themselves
because they were made in the image of God. He also encouraged PK-ers to keep themselves pure. One
observer commented on this:
"Imagine involving the Catholic Church and Catholic priests into telling men to keep their promises and to
keep themselves pure. Look at any country where the Catholics make up the majority and you will find an
immoral and corrupt society. In those societies, women have very few rights, and the men have open
season on committing adultery. Imagine Catholic priests speaking on keeping promises and staying pure,
when 40% or more of the Catholic priests are homosexuals [by the Catholic Church's own admission]. ...
[And] are charged with molesting children, especially boys" (12/95, Plains Baptist Challenger, p. 4).
- Promise Keepers also has no problem involving Mormons in its meetings. While Mormon headquarters
has no official position on Promise Keepers, many Mormon men have and continue to participate in
Promise Keepers. Local Mormon leaders generally agree with Promise Keepers seven promises and have
privately praised the movement and commented on how attendance "has been a life changing experience
for some of the Mormon men". Promise Keepers has given at least one presentation to a Reorganized
Mormon church that was "very high" on the Promise Keepers and "would no doubt be going with it" since
they had "no problem with it at all. ... It is a wonderful program. The men at my church will be
participating." (Reported in the May/June 1995, Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter, "Promise Keepers,
Catholics, and Mormons ... Together," pp. 1, 3.)
[Chip Rawlings, a local Los Angeles lawyer and leader in the Palos Verdes Stake (a group of Mormon
congregations), has publicly urged members to participate in PK. PK's seven promises are "like something
straight out of the men's priesthood manual for the [Mormon] church," he told the L.A. Times (5/6/95
article). It is interesting that Promise Keepers, while claiming to preach a non-doctrinal gospel at its rallies,
finds acceptance even among Mormon leaders, whose theology and Christology are aberrant (Mormons
view Jesus as Satan's brother, the product of the Father's physical intercourse with Mary, who then attained
Page 60 of 176
Godhood as had His Father before Him), and Roman Catholic clergy, who insist that true salvation rests
only in the sacraments of the Church.]
- In late 1997, a unique opportunity to examine the validity of PK's salvation message became available on
the Internet -- Promise Keepers posted their opinion of an online salvation tract titled "Meet Jesus". When
printed on paper, "Meet Jesus" is six pages long. The first three pages culminate in a "salvation prayer",
while the last three-address discipleship. It is a very professional presentation complete with pictures, but
more than that, it is positive proof that the PK doctrine of salvation is a perversion of that found in the
Bible:
NO GUILT -- The essence of "Meet Jesus" is that "we have inherited" a "disease" called sin, but that we
are not at fault. Blame is placed on Adam; personal guilt for our own sin is completely ignored.
NO ACCOUNTABILITY -- The words "punishment" and "hell" never appear in "Meet Jesus". The
consequences of sin are said to be "eternal separation from God". In addition to being a half-truth (at best),
this must seem rather inconsequential to a man, who has already lived his entire life separated from God.
NO REPENTANCE -- Aside from a pat on the head repentance is ever mentioned. The prayer for salvation
has a sentence that says, "I turn from my sin", but the reader is never given any indication of what this
means, or that he even has any personal guilt or sin from which to turn. His sin could very well be nothing
more than the "diseased spiritual DNA" mentioned earlier in the tract.
NO TRUTH -- Without a doubt, "Meet Jesus" was intended to be acceptable to all. A Catholic, Mormon, or
Jehovah's Witness could read it without seeing any contradiction to their own false doctrine. In fact, the
Mormon heresy that we are all children of God from birth is well supported in "Meet Jesus". The opening
words of the "salvation prayer" are "Father, I've come home."
NO JESUS -- Perhaps the most egregious offense in "Meet Jesus" is the fact that you do not. You would
think that a document intended to introduce the Lord would talk about who He is or what He did. In the
first three pages of "Meet Jesus" (which lead up to the "salvation prayer", there are two sentences (36
words) that say anything about the person and work of Christ. The words "blood" and "atonement" never
appear. Aside from one allusion to His deity, He is never specifically identified. The doctrines of
substitution and propitiation are never mentioned in either name or concept.
We cannot say we are surprised. An ecumenical organization made up of men who cannot agree on what
one must do to inherit eternal life cannot be expected to accurately present Biblical salvation. A group like
Promise Keepers, dedicated to the un-Biblical agenda of a one world church and government, is not likely
to ignore its goals by proclaiming the truth of the word of God. Could anyone be surprised to learn that
such a group is not actually bringing lost sinners to "meet Jesus"? (Source: 10/97, Plains Baptist
Challenger; "Promise Keepers vs. Biblical Salvation", by George Shafer.)
- On the national radio program "Promise Keepers This Week", for 8/31/96, PK founder Bill McCartney
made the following remarks:
"I look for real problems in the future in the area of denominations. I believe that what we have seen has
been the grace of God. I believe that -- there have been thousands of Catholic men that have come to
Promise Keepers, and they have been blessed and they have gone back to their churches, and they have
said, 'We want more of this.' In addition, the Catholic churches have gathered, the bishops have gotten
together, and they have sanctioned Promise Keepers. They said, 'Go ahead and go. This is something God
is doing.' Well, in the meantime, while this has been slow to develop, God has been bringing the various
Protestant denominations together. ... Now Promise Keepers is going to have to understand that more and
more Catholics are going to participate. In addition, what every person needs to do is stop looking at
people's labels and ask this question: 'Does this guy know Jesus? Does he love Jesus with all his heart? Has
he been born of the Spirit of God?' In addition, if you see that fruit, then quit making judgments. Just accept
Page 61 of 176
him. We are all the same before God ... So let us not start categorizing people. Let us just allow God to be
God and he can bless whom He chooses to bless. And that's how Promise Keepers is going to grow."
We should focus on the matter of labels, but Bill McCartney is very confused about labels. Labels mean
something. They are important. I am glad that the pharmacist uses labels. I am glad that the grocer uses
labels. I am also glad that Christians use labels. Our labels commonly define what we believe; they define
our doctrinal position, which tells others whether we have the Jesus of the Bible or a counterfeit one. PK
has a counterfeit one.
- Based on the information detailed above, it is evident that in addition to the well-known Seven Promises
of Promise Keepers, there are three unwritten promises also being made and kept. The three unwritten
promises are just that -- unwritten. You will not find them directly stated in Promise Keepers' books; nor do
they appear in any of their talks, whether at the rallies or in smaller gatherings. It is doubtful, if asked, that
the Promise Keepers would directly affirm or deny these three promises. Nonetheless, Catholics, Mormons,
and Reorganized Mormons know that the three unwritten promises exist and they trust the three promises
will be kept. The three unwritten promises of Promise Keepers are very simply:
(1) Promise Keepers will not violate your doctrines;
(2) Promise Keepers will not proselytize your men; and
(3) Promise Keepers will send men back to their parishes, churches, and wards.
If these three unwritten promises were not committed to and kept, why would Catholics, Mormons, and
Reorganized Mormons encourage their men to participate? Would they send their men to rallies or
meetings where their doctrines would be violated or their men would be proselytized and stolen from their
parishes, churches, and wards? Absolutely not!
The "gospel" message of the Promise Keepers is not the true Gospel message. The true Gospel message
will, at times, offend and condemn. Furthermore, true Biblical preaching and teaching will speak of
heresies and aberrant teachings and will even name names, as the apostle Paul did. Imagine, if you will, the
apostle Paul having a "rally" and inviting the Scribes, Pharisees, Essenes, Judaizers, and others. Then
imagine Paul committing himself to not violating their doctrines, not proselytizing them, and then sending
the men back to their "churches". Underneath the hoop, holler, and hype of the Promise Keepers movement
is an ecumenicalism that smacks of the last days spoken of in Scripture, rather than what some have called
the "greatest move of God since the day of Pentecost". This "move of God" is arguably the largest (in terms
of numbers) and broadest (in terms of denominations) ecumenicalism that the world has ever seen (Adapted
and/or excerpted from "Promise Keepers' 3 Unwritten Promises," Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter, Sept-
Oct 1995, pp. 1-2).
- McCartney also stated at the 1994 National Conference that he thought perhaps the Lord's main purpose
for Promise Keepers was to gather His clergy, and that in the summer of 1996 McCartney hoped to gather
75,000 of them in Denver (see next item for change of venue). To exaggerate this plan, McCartney held a
revival-style "altar call" of sorts for pastors. All the pastors present among the 52,000 in attendance were
asked to come down to the stage. All the people sang and yelled for ten minutes while about 3,000 pastors
came forward. McCartney had all the pastors assembled in front of the stage turn and hold up their hands to
the crowd and a blessing was pronounced on the people. Then the pastors turned and kneeled, and there
were prayers said confessing sin for not carrying out their office faithfully, including "putting up barriers
on account of denominational dogma"; i.e., a prayer asking for forgiveness for being a pastor who is not
doctrinally indifferent! Some pastors there called this the "emotional highlight" of the weekend and
"special". There was waving of thousands of hats in the stadium and a screaming liturgy of the crowd "we
love you", and the pastors responding "we love you." (Reported in the 9/19/94, Christian News, p. 6.)
Those who love the truth should take note and watch carefully because Promise Keepers has a very large
emotional following and organizational momentum. In spite of their errors, they could be very effective at

Page 62 of 176
this point -- an appeal to a priestly pastoral class. In fact, McCartney has stated that we as Christians need
our pastors to rightly divide the Word of Truth for us because we cannot do it for ourselves!
- Promise Keepers held a "1996 National Clergy Conference" (2/13/96-2/15/96) in Atlanta's Georgia
Dome stadium. The theme for the conference was "Fan into Flame", because McCartney believes "God
wants to bring revival to His church through its clergy" (2/26/96, Christian News, p. 10). The purpose of
this gathering, according to McCartney, was to "tear the hearts of pastors wide open so that a single
leadership can be produced". He had hoped to "bring as many as 100,000 ministers and priests of all races
together" (7/1/95, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, p. C8). [Actual attendance was 39,024, which
represented all 50 states and more than a dozen foreign countries; 600 in attendance were Roman Catholic
priests!] Speakers for the event were Jack Hayford, Joseph Stowell, Chuck Swindoll, and E.V. Hill. Steve
Green provided the ecumenical contemporary music, while Billy Graham sent a message relayed to
everyone that PK is "the organization that helps the church work," and needs to "tear down the walls that
separate us." In addition, James Dobson's Focus on the Family sponsored a three-hour evening reception
for the attendees on 2/14/96.
At the beginning of the conference, hyper-charismatic Jack Hayford was speaking and trying to influence
everyone to "dance in the Lord," an unscriptural routine favored by the fanatical wing of Pentecostal
charismatic's. Hayford said he learned the dance in Africa, and later the Lord spoke to him directly saying,
"May I have this dance?" He then began doing an African folkdance around the podium, suggestive of the
dances associated with heathen witch doctoring. [Nobody at the conference seemed disturbed that Hayford
was teaching him or her Charismatic worship forms, much less that he claimed to receive these teachings
through direct revelation from God!] General musical choices at the conference were of the satanic hard
rock variety (ear-splitting noise) that was utterly devoid of true spirituality. (Reported in the 3/11/96,
Christian News, p. 11.)
In keeping with the spirit of paganism, PK had a group of Cherokee Indians walk 168 miles from North
Carolina to perform a name-giving ceremony. Since the highest honor, that an Indian can receive is a name,
the Indian's Chief conferred names on Randy Phillips and Bill McCartney. Phillips was given an Indian
name that means "God's Eagle", while McCartney received the name "Victorious Warrior". Both were
honored with Indian Headdress, a poem was read called "No More Broken Treaties," and a former Indian
Medicine Man, Peter Gray Eyes, prayed over Phillips and McCartney. What will PK come up with next?
(Reported by Christian Interactive Network's live coverage; and the Spring 1996, Men of Action.)
McCartney even encouraged the pastors present to enter into a blood covenant. A major thrust McCartney
gave was, "Commitment is seen in discipleship and a blood covenant. The blood covenant means to be
bound in speech and action with all who are in this covenant. This covenant is stronger than family and
denominational ties." He then asked, "How strong is your commitment to the blood? Do you agree?" This
was followed by an ear-piercing shout of "We all agree!" from the 39,000 clergy. The idea of a blood
covenant is not Biblical; it is rooted in pagan spiritual practices whereby two people would cut themselves
and mingle their blood in order to form a bond stronger than family ties. McCartney's idea of a blood
covenant is to accept everyone who calls himself born again without regard to beliefs and practices that are
contrary to Scripture. McCartney was asking the "clergy" to enter into a blood covenant with false teachers.
In addition, the amazing thing is that they heartily agreed! What does this say about the discernment and
spiritual condition of so many "clergy", particularly the PK-enamored clergy? (Reported in the 8/96, Media
Spotlight, "Promise Keepers Keeps On Keeping On," p. 6.)
When a question was asked at a press conference regarding "laughing revivals" -- where those involved
"bark like dogs" and "bray like donkeys" -- Dr. Henry Blackaby (SBC author of the mystical book
Experiencing God), speaking on behalf of PK said, "We don't try to evaluate that, and neither do we take a
position regarding women serving as pastors." Dr. Joseph Stowell [President, Moody Bible Institute]
immediately declared, "Our God does not ever wear an angry face. He deals with compassion." [We do not
know what Bible Dr. Stowell uses, but it is not the same one we use! Does he really think God did not have
Page 63 of 176
an angry face when He told Moses He was going to destroy Israel for its sin (Exodus 32:9,10), or that Jesus
Christ did not have an angry face when He drove the money changers out of the temple? The Bible says the
Lord Jesus Christ "looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts"
(Mark 3:5).] These thousands of clergymen hugged one another, laid hands on one another's head, and
exchanged names, addresses, and phone numbers. This took place so that when they returned home they
could be to network in communication and to begin "prayer meetings" together. They were urged to refrain
from "criticism of any other group". PK wants reconciliation in spite of doctrinal differences between
churches -- even Protestant and Roman Catholic groups (Ralph Colas report, 4/1/96, Christian News, pp. 1,
9-10; bracketed comment from O Timothy editor, David Cloud).
The Atlanta Clergy Conference included compromise, ecumenism, apostasy, Jesuit casuistry (the end
justifies the means), and hyper-emotionalism, along with a theology based on relationships rather than
Biblical truth. Thus, Promise Keepers has once again proved that it is much more than a group attempting
to help men live godly lives. It is a committed program of intentional compromise -- an ecumenical train
moving from one area to another. PK's premise that unity "is based on our love of Jesus" is incorrect. Unity
must be based on the unchanging Word of the living God (Ralph Colas report, 4/1/96, Christian News, pp.
1, 9-10). [The very idea of a clergy conference is itself antithetical to Biblical truth. There is no clergy class
found in Scripture; it was an invention of Roman Catholicism and has been maintained through the
Protestant churches. The concept is that of priesthood separate from the priesthood of all believers.]
- Promise Keepers even invited women pastors to participate in its 1998 conferences. According to the Los
Angeles Times religion page, Jan. 24, 1998, a few female pastors participated in the regional clergy
conference on January 20 in San Diego, California. The LA Times interviewed one of these, Roberta
Hestenes, pastor of Solano Beach Presbyterian Church and former president of left-wing Eastern College
near Philadelphia (the teaching home of Tony Campolo). She said, "I find it surprising that I am going. But
I've heard [Promise Keepers founder] Bill McCartney say that they desire to be supportive of women
pastors, and I'm taking him at his word." This is not a new feature of Promise Keepers. In July 1996,
Promise Keepers director for the state of Missouri, Louis Monroe, said PK welcomes female pastors.
(Source 1/27/98, FBIS.) [Nine such Clergy conferences were held in 1998 (1/15/98-3/12/98), with the
theme, "Equipping Leaders of Men: Practical Ways to Develop Men of God in Your Church.")
- In the spring '92 issue of the Promise Keepers' Men of Action newsletter, it was reported:
"12,148 Committed Promise Keepers & Counting -- To date, that's how many men have made a decision to
live their lives dedicated to the seven tenets of Promise Keepers. ... We have identified seven areas of a
man's life which are directly affected by this commitment."
The Winter 1994 issue of Men of Action reports that there are now over 13,000 men who have signed the
seven tenets of Promise Keepers; a 6/95 newspaper article said over 65,000 have signed pledges. Promise
Keepers is now including commitment cards with each conference attendee's syllabus, so the number of
commitments should dramatically increase.
The following is tenet number 5, which we believe encourages ecumenism and, thereby, directly violates
the doctrine of Biblical separation (Rom. 16:17; 2 Jn. 10, 11; etc.):
"A Promise Keeper is committed to reach beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the
power of biblical unity. He acknowledges the current division in the church and is discovering that God
wants Christian men of all ethnic and denominational heritages, rich and poor, educated and uneducated, to
stand together in honor of Jesus Christ. He is willing to cultivate relationships with his brothers in Christ in
order to understand their pain. A Promise Keeper is willing to cross over the lines that have divided the
church and meet with at least one man of a different race or denomination at least once a month."
(Emphasis added.)
In addition, tenet number 7 states: (Emphasis added.)
Page 64 of 176
"A Promise Keeper is committed to pursue vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he
needs his brothers to help keep his promises. [Where is this in the Bible?] He agrees to meet with a small
group of men 2-4 times each month. ... Each man willingly grants the others the right to inquire about his
relationship to God, his commitment to his family, his sexuality, and his financial dealings. ..."
[Of the Promise Keepers' seven promises, Promise #5 reads: "A Promise Keeper is committed to supporting
the mission of the church ... by actively giving of his time and resources." So, what is the result of the past
eight years of PK? Religion researcher George Barna reported recently that male church attendance has
shown NO increase since 1991, when PK sponsored its first event in Colorado. (Source: 12/1/98, Calvary
Contender.)]
- For an example of just how silly Promise Keepers' infatuation with breaking down racial and
denominational barriers has become, one only need look to the 6/94 Promise Keepers regional conference
held in Denton, Texas (2/6/95, Christianity Today, "Manhood's Great Awakening," p. 23):
"Some 33,000 men gathered for the conference held last June, only to be sent fleeing by a devastating
rainstorm that destroyed equipment and shut down the program for more than five hours. Recalls President
Randy Phillips, 'When we got back together, we said, "Lord, is there something you want to show us
here?"' The men unanimously concluded that God had allowed the storm to happen to show them how
much they were lacking in making the Texas meeting a racially mixed affair, says Phillips. 'After that, all
the speakers laid aside their prepared messages and united together to address how racism has divided the
church.'"
Over three years later, McCartney did his Martin Luther King impression at an 11/96 PK staff conference
("two marathon days of confession, repentance, and reconciliation") -- "Promise Keepers has got to be a
place where our brothers and sisters of color feel respected, where they feel accepted, and where they can
finally say, 'Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty we are free at last'" (Spring 1997, Men of Action,
pp. 5-6).

- One of the movements within Promise Keepers that is also gaining prominence within other ministries is
the concept of mentoring. Promise Keepers is based on the belief that every man must have an older mentor
to whom he can be held accountable for his decisions and actions in life. Moreover, Promise Keepers
believes that every man should not only have an older mentor, but also have a spiritual peer, as well as a
younger man to whom he can be a mentor. Another word for mentoring would be discipling or
shepherding, which has gained prominence within the charismatic movement. Yet, as much as Promise
Keepers insists on the importance of male bonding and accountability to one another, the Promise Keepers
manual on the subject (Brothers! Calling Men Into Vital Relationships: 1993) is heavily psychological in
orientation, not Scriptural (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise Keepers, pp. 7-8).
Promise Keepers believes that as a part of mentoring, every man must be accountable to some other man,
especially in the areas of one's finances, sexual life, and relationship to God. This partner gained through
mentoring, then, must be given complete freedom to inquire into any of these areas at will; with the
understanding that he may bring correction to those areas, he feels are not in proper alignment. This is a
kind of covenant relationship not found anywhere in Scripture. In fact, to the contrary, God takes such
covenants far more seriously than does Promise Keepers (cf. Num. 30:2). [Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special
Report on Promise Keepers, p. 13. See also the 4/95, Men of Action, p. 8, for "An Open Letter from
'Generation X,'" which is a plea for mentors, all couched in psychological terms.]
One error that comes from this covenant relationship is the encouraging of men to take oaths. This
unbiblical practice is not at all uncommon at Promise Keepers meetings. These oaths are supposed to entail
life-changing decisions. Instead, they impose an extra-Biblical series of requirements on men. The Seven
Promises themselves comprise nothing more than a surrogate sanctification that puts men under legalism
rather than grace (9/95, The Christian Conscience, p. 24).
Page 65 of 176
- Promise Keepers even goes so far as to mandate mentoring relationships. In Seven Promises of a
Promise Keeper (pp. 55, 61) and its sequel, The Power of a Promise Kept (p. 4), PK teaches:
"It is impossible for men to fulfill the commands of Scripture without being in significant relationship with
other men." (Emphasis added.)
Apparently, God overlooked this fact when He only made Eve to help Adam fulfill the commands entrusted
to him. Another PK author actually asks, "Do you have someone other than your wife with whom you can
share your secret temptations and failure" (The Power of a Promise Kept, p. 123). By "other than", this
author clearly means someone instead of your wife, not in addition to her, since only six pages later, he
commends to the reader the example of one so-called promise-keeper who salved his conscience by telling
his male soul mate, instead of his wife, about some infidelity he had committed. Another PK writer even
lists factors to help husbands decide on a case-by-case basis whether they should confess infidelities to
their wives (Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper, p. 96), but then, without skipping a beat, this same
author mandates that men develop bonds with a few other men with whom they can "acknowledge" their
"secret sins." (Excerpted and/or adapted from the 3/4/96, Christian News, p. 13.)
- Does a "promise-keeper" even need to be a believer? Apparently not. Despite all the hype about
developing godly men, Promise Keepers has now admitted that it does not know if its conference attendees
have ever trusted Christ. In a 4/94 letter sent to men in the Indianapolis, Indiana area, Promise Keepers V.P.
of National Ministries and "PK Minister at Large", E. Glenn Wagner, confessed that at an "invitation"
during the opening session of Promise Keepers '93 in Boulder, Colorado, more than 5,000 men responded!
But since there were not enough "trained counselors" available to help those responding, Promise Keepers
decided to employ Billy Graham Evangelistic Association trained instructors to train the volunteer
counselors that were to work each of the seven conference locations in the Spring and Summer of 1994:
"The Promise Keepers Counselor Training Course [is] the same as the Billy Graham Counselor Training
Course [with] ... classes ... developed over the last forty years to train counselors for Billy Graham
Crusades." This should be cause for alarm to anyone familiar with Billy Graham Crusade methods.
Promise Keepers claims that at 1994's conferences, approximately 16,000 men "surrendered or
recommitted their lives to the Lordship of Jesus Christ" (4/95, Men of Action). But for Promise Keepers,
instead of that meaning that men's hearts were flooded with grief and repentance and seeking forgiveness,
we are told they answer some form of an altar call, are given some words of loving assurance during
"counseling" in the name of Jesus, and then challenged to go out there and try harder; i.e., they are pointed
to a list of promises they must keep. Even under the most optimistic circumstances, if broken-hearted men
were to hear the pure Gospel of Christ at a PK rally, with no strings attached, where would they seek
ongoing comfort and fellowship once the rally had moved on to the next town? Would they be directed to
nameless churches, churches that commend social friendships as the means of comfort, or to churches that
obscure the gospel with their zeal? Nowhere in the Bible does it say that God wants to unite men through
vital relationships with each other in order to become godly influences in the world. It says that God wants
to unite men into His Church with the One Man, Christ (10/16/95, Christian News, p. 14).
- Who are the speakers at Promise Keepers national meetings and what is their theology? The ministries of
the speakers/teachers at Promise Keepers meetings run the gamut from compromising neo-evangelicalism
and charismatic error, to psycho spiritual occultism and ecumenical liberalism. It is, therefore, clear that
these men are introducing the men attending these meetings to unscriptural doctrines and fellowships.
(Dates spoken at Promise Keepers National or Regional Men's Conferences and/or concurrently held
National Leadership Conferences are in parentheses.):
(a) Bill McCartney (1991-1999) -- Founder and board member of Promise Keepers, and head football
coach at the University of Colorado until his January 1995 resignation. A former Roman Catholic,
McCartney's theology is now charismatic as evidenced by his membership in a local church affiliated with
the Vineyard Christian Fellowship [the church has since changed its name to try to remove its Vineyard
Page 66 of 176
stigma] -- a denomination founded by hyper-charismatic, signs &wonders "healer" John Wimber. Promise
Keepers also has McCartney's Vineyard pastor, James Ryle, on its Board of Directors, and Vineyard
member Randy Phillips was its then president. (See later in this report for more on Ryle and McCartney.)
[In his book From Ashes to Glory McCartney speaks glowingly of his Roman Catholic background, and
asserts that he still believes much as a Roman Catholic. He states that he did not leave Roman Catholicism
as much as he joined James Ryle's Vineyard Fellowship because it was "meeting his needs at the time".]

(b) Gary Smalley (1991-1997) & John Trent (1992-1993; 1995-1998) -- author, founder and President of
Today's Family, Gary Smalley is the "Church's" leading proponent of Right-Brain/Left-Brain
pseudoscience. This right-brain/left-brain myth, which claims to describe personality types by brain
hemisphere dominance, as well as give insights to male/ female communication effectiveness, has been
thoroughly discredited by secular neuroscientists (to say nothing of the fact that it also has no support in
Scripture). The popularization of right-brain/left-brain has been largely due to the book The Language of
Love, co-authored by Smalley and fellow psychologist, John Trent. (Both also have theological degrees, but
apparently believe that the Bible alone is insufficient to handle people's problems of living.) As for John
Trent, former Vice President of Today's Family, and now President of Encouraging Words, he talks about
personality traits, not like those of the Bible, but astrology. He compares our behaviors to animals and says
this is why we act the way we do -- he has you compare your actions to a lion, a golden retriever, a beaver,
or an otter. (Trent has also endorsed Robert Hicks' book, The Masculine Journey, as teaching "what
Biblical masculinity" is all about, and has written a book titled How to Handle Your Promise Keeper,
directed to women who desire to control their husbands in the manner Smalley and Trent teach.) (See later
in this report for details of the teachings in Hicks' book.)
(c) Chuck Swindoll (1994-1995) -- Swindoll is the former senior pastor of First Evangelical Free Church
of Fullerton, California (for 24 years); he resigned in mid-1994 to become president of neo-evangelical
Dallas Theological Seminary. Swindoll's "résumé of heresy" is seemingly endless -- he recommends the
books of many of the worst psychologizers, New Agers, and occultists imaginable, all under the banner of
"all truth is God's truth"; he teaches a psychological self-love/self-esteem gospel that is virtually
indistinguishable from that of the atheistic psychologists, in effect, denying the doctrines of grace and
redemption; he openly supports ecumenical cooperation with Catholics and charismatics, all under the
guise of "grace" and non-judgmental "acceptance"; he endorses the occult practices of visualization and
inner healing/victimization therapy; and he teaches that believers can be demon possessed. [At the 7/94 PK
Boulder, Colorado conference, Swindoll, clad in faded denim, roared onto the stage astride a motorcycle to
the band playing "Born to Be Wild," and then delivered a sermon on avoiding temptation.]
(d) Luis Palau (1992; 1995-1999) -- internationally known Argentinean evangelist Luis Palau ("the Billy
Graham of South America") is a Catholic sympathizer whose ecumenical message is heavily diluted with
pop psychology and Armenian easy-believes. He regularly cooperates with apostate Methodism and the
radical fringe of Charismatic's (e.g., Oral Roberts).
(e) E.V. Hill (1992-1999) -- hyper-charismatic pastor of the Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church in the
Watts section of Los Angeles (member in the apostate National Council of Churches) and V.P. of the
National Baptist Convention. Hill praises Jesse Jackson (apostate, radical social activist) and has been
linked with liberal groups such as the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (which endorsed the
early-1993 Gay Rights march on Washington, D.C.!). Hill is a frequent guest speaker on various
charismatic platforms (e.g., at Kenneth Hagin's RHEMA Center).
(f) Jack Hayford (1991-1999) -- author and hyper-charismatic pastor of The Church on the Way in Van
Nuys, California; he claims to have seen a vision of Jesus seated in heaven and to have heard Him speak!
(At the 5/94, Promise Keepers regional conference in Anaheim, California, Hayford gave three reasons
why God required circumcision in the Old Testament: "[1] God wants to touch your very identity as a man;
[2] He wants to reach out and touch your secret and private parts. This enables Him to better perform
surgery on the heart; [3] God wants to touch man's creative parts.") He is the senior editorial advisor for
Page 67 of 176
Ministries Today, a pro-charismatic magazine published by Strang Communications, is a Promise Keepers
board member, believes that the Catholic mass is a valid form of Christian worship (Seven Promises of a
Promise Keeper, p. 19), and believes that being committed to doctrinal distinctive at the expense of unity is
an example of "small-minded sectarianism" (12/95, Charisma, p. 68).
(g) Gary Oliver (1991-1993; 1995-1996; 1998) -- author of Real Men Have Feelings Too, psychologist,
Clinical Director of Southwest Counseling Associates, and Promise Keepers board member. Among the
many Freudian and miscellaneous humanistic psychological models used by Oliver, his favorite appears to
be one based upon the teachings of "Christian" psychologist Dr. Larry Crabb. Concerning PK and
Catholicism, Oliver says, "Since day one, we've really encouraged Catholic participation, not because they
are Catholics, but because anyone who loves the Lord is welcome."
(h) Larry Crabb (1992; 1996) -- author, clinical psychologist, and founder and Director of the Institute of
Biblical Counseling at Colorado Christian University in Morrison, Colorado. Crabb's model of counseling
is primarily a psychological system of unconscious needs that supposedly motivate all behavior. This
system has been derived from Freudian (the "unconscious") and humanistic (a hierarchy of needs)
psychology, with great emphasis on so-called emotional needs.
(i) Robert Hicks (1993) -- Professor of Pastoral Theology at the Seminary of the East (Dresher, PA),
pastor, psychotherapist, president of the psychologically-oriented Life Counseling Services, and author of
the Promise Keepers endorsed book The Masculine Journey (foreword by John Trent). (See later in this
report for details.) Hicks is the author of other psychobabble books: Uneasy Manhood, Returning Home,
Failure to Scream, and Man of All Passions.
(j) Howard Hendricks (1993; 1995; 1997) -- psychologically oriented Distinguished Professor and
Chairman of the Center for Christian Leadership at Dallas Theological Seminary. He has authored many
books about marriage and family life (e.g., Heaven Help the Home), and spends considerable time
conducting so-called "Christian" marriage enrichment seminars. (Hendricks has also endorsed Robert
Hicks' book The Masculine Journey as "an eye opening key to understanding the Bible's teaching on what it
means to be a man".) He is also a Promise Keepers board member.
(k) Joseph Stowell (1994-1999) -- Ecumenical psychologies and president of the Moody Bible Institute.
Stowell has previous strong ties to the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches (GARBC).
(l) Jim Smoke (1993) -- Executive Director of the Center for Divorce Recovery and author of Ten Ways
You Can Grow through Divorce. Smoke is a self-love advocate whose terminology sounds much like that
of Carl Rogers.
(m) Bill Hybels (1994-1996) -- Author, church-growth guru, and the ecumenical, psychologically-oriented
pastor of the 12,000-member Willow Creek Community Church in Barrington, Illinois.
(n) James Dobson (1993) -- pop psychologist, author, and founder and Director of Focus on the Family
Ministries. According to Dobson, "low self-esteem" is the root cause of most societal ills. Dobson has
heavily promoted Promise Keepers on his nationwide radio program, and Focus on the Family Publishing
is one of Promise Keepers' publishers and produces most of its tapes. In fact, PK credits Dobson's
nationwide radio program promotion of the PK '92 Convention as instrumental in PK's subsequent
extraordinary growth. In PK's early years, Promise Keepers was keep afloat by a gift from Focus on the
Family.
(o) Greg Laurie (1994-1999) -- author, crusade evangelist, and charismatic pastor of the 12,000-plus
membership Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California; Calvary Chapel's Chuck Smith is
mentor for this ecumenical psychologies.

Page 68 of 176
(p) Bill Bright (1992; 1995-1996) -- ecumenical/Catholic promoter and founder and Director of Campus
Crusade for Christ. Bright was a signatory to the 3/94 ecumenical accord -- "Evangelicals & Catholics
Together: the Christian Mission in the Third Millennium", and won the $1 million 1996 Templeton Prize
for Progress in Religion.
- Also speaking at one or more of the six 1994 Promise Keepers regional conferences held in May-June
and October of 1994 (in addition to those listed above) were Calvary Chapel's charismatic pastor, Chuck
Smith and Boulder Valley Vineyard Christian Fellowship pastor and Promise Keepers board member,
James Ryle. Total attendance at the six 1994 regional conferences was estimated at more than 225,000.
(The October 28-29, 1994, Dallas meetings were not originally scheduled, but still they drew over 30,000
men.)
At the 7/94 Boulder, Colorado National Conference, "A Christian rock band set the mood. When the music
stopped, the crowd rose to do 'the wave,' shouting 'Jesus, Jesus, Jesus.'... 'We're scoring baskets for Jesus,'
declared emcee Bob Horner, an official with Campus Crusade for Christ." Then there were Swindoll's
motorcycle antics described above. (7/29/94, Newsweek, "The Gospel of Guy hood", pp. 60-61). Not to be
outdone, later in the evening Gary Smalley made his entrance on a kiddy-sized Big Wheel bike. All this in
the name of Christian manhood! (Nate Adams, author of Nine Character Traits Separating the Men from
the Boys, says that Promise Keepers is a fun thing and stresses the importance of the conferences giving
men the chance to express their boyish and playful sides. Another observer described the 1994 National
Conference as a "techno-tent revival"; another as a "charismatic camp meeting experience ... [resembling] a
cross between a Bill Gothard Seminar and a Billy Graham Crusade"; another as "part tent revival, part mass
male bonding ritual"; and another as a stadium show that is the "time-tested snake oil of tent revivalism --
contrived emotion, a fervent push for here-and-now decision, dumbed down doctrine, and the elision of
denominational differences.")
- Promise Keepers held thirteen, 2-day (Friday-Saturday) stadium conferences in 13 major U.S. cities in
1995; the first was in late-April in Detroit's Silverdome, and the last was in late-October in Dallas's Texas
Stadium. Total attendance was 727,000. (There was no special 1995 "National Conference" in Boulder,
Colorado, as in previous years; all conferences are now equal in status.) Special Friday morning seminars
were also held in each of the 13 cities. One seminar was for pastors on how to "encourage and equip pastors
for men's ministry", and the other was for "worship leaders" on how "to lead men in their church".
The theme for Promise Keepers '95 was Raise the Standard. Each of the 13 conferences had the same eight
topics, with only the 45 scheduled speakers rotating topics from conference to conference. Dallas
ecumenical pastor Tony Evans spoke at 11 of the 13 conferences, while Jack Hayford and Bill McCartney
spoke at eight each, Howard Hendricks at six, E.V. Hill at five, and Gary Smalley at four. Some of the first-
time Promise Keepers conference speakers included Juan Carlos Ortiz, the pastor of Hispanic Ministries at
apostate Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral; Chuck Colson, co-author of the ecumenical accord
"Evangelicals and Catholics Together" and recipient of the Progress in Religion Award; self-esteem
psychologizer, Dennis Rainey; psychologizing financial guru, Ron Blue; Billy Graham's liberal son,
Franklin Graham; Far East Broadcasting Company's Billy Kim, who speaks and travels with hyper-
charismatic David Yonggi Cho and is vice president of the apostate Baptist World Alliance; John Wesley-
White, evangelist for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association; and charismatic Bruce Wilkinson.
- The theme for 1996's rallies was Break Down the Walls -- Randy Phillips said, "There are centuries-old
walls built of pain, hurt, neglect and abuse. Our desire is to exalt the person of Christ and power of the
cross in a way that breaks down the walls that exist brother-to-brother, brother-to-sister, and church-to-
church" (2/12/96, Christian News, p. 1). Promise Keepers held 22, 2-day (Friday-Saturday) stadium
conferences in 22 major U.S. cities; the first in mid-April in the Los Angeles Coliseum, and the last in late-
October in Dallas/Ft. Worth's Texas Motor Speedway. Total attendance for the 22 conferences was more
than one million men! Special Friday morning seminars were also held in each of the 22 cities for "men in
church leadership ... with the goal of uniting in worship, instruction, and encouragement".
Page 69 of 176
Each of the 22 Break Down the Walls conferences covered the same seven topics, with only the 69
scheduled speakers rotating topics from conference to conference. Bill McCartney spoke at 13 of the
meetings, while Dallas ecumenical pastor Tony Evans, Jack Hayford, John Trent, Gary Smalley, Greg
Laurie, Franklin Graham, Bruce Wilkinson, and Chuck Colson spoke at three meetings each. [At the 9/96
rally in NYC, Colson, sounding like "Mother" Teresa, said, "If you trust in God it doesn't matter what
religion or race you are, we all belong to each other."] Some of the first-time Promise Keepers conference
speakers included John Dawson, charismatic author and International Director for Urban Missions of
Youth With A Mission (YWAM); Max Lucado, popular psychologically-oriented author and Church of
Christ pastor; James Robison, hyper-charismatic pastor and televangelist; Haddon Robinson, ecumenical
Gordon-Conwell professor and neo-evangelical writer for Radio Bible Class; and Rick Ryan, pastor of the
charismatically-oriented Calvary Chapel of Santa Barbara, California.
In addition to 1996's stadium rallies, hundreds of Wake-up Calls/Rallies (also called "Men's Ministry
Leadership Seminars"), "Key Men/Ambassador Training Seminars"; "Foundations for Effective Men's
Ministries Seminars"; and "Building Men of Integrity Seminars" were held by PK from February-May,
some of them in Catholic churches, and some in Pentecostal churches. As an indication of PK's total lack of
discernment, one of the Wake-Up Call meetings was held on 2/6/96 at apostate Robert Schuller's Crystal
Cathedral in Garden Grove, California.
- The theme for 1997's rallies was The Making of a Godly Man. Promise Keepers had originally scheduled
20, 2-day (Friday-Saturday) stadium conferences in 20 major U.S. cities; the first in early-May in the
Pontiac Silverdome, and the last in late-October in Texas Stadium. Two were cancelled due to low
attendance. [PK also held a rally on 1/10/97 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Speakers included Jack Hayford, Billy
Kim, and Bill McCartney.] Each of the 18 The Making of a Godly Man conferences covered the same six
topics, with only the 40 scheduled speakers rotating topics from conference to conference. Total attendance
for the 18 conferences was expected to be about 900,000, but was only about 630,000. Special Friday
morning "Clergy Conference for Men" meetings were also scheduled in each of the 18 cities, with the
theme "Becoming an Agent of Revival".
[Note: We are no longer going to make specific comments on each year's conference (as with the
1994-1997 conferences above), due in part to the waning influence of PK as national phenomena.]
- Not only can we surmise Promise Keepers theology by examining the theology of those it invites to
speak at its conferences and seminars, but also by the materials, it makes available to its attendees. At the
July 1993, National Conference in Colorado, psychotherapist Dr. Robert Hicks' book The Masculine
Journey: Understanding the Six Stages of Manhood was provided in hard cover to each of the 50,000 men
who attended. Both the book and the accompanying Study Guide at the time carried the Promise Keepers'
logo, information, and/or phone numbers. At the end of the book, the statement was made: "Promise
Keepers wants to provide men's materials (like this book) ..." (p. 203). Moreover, the book was advertised
in the July/August 1994 premier issue of the Promise Keepers magazine New Man (as well as in subsequent
issues -- New Man is now controlled by Charisma's Stephen Strang), as well as in Charisma magazine.
Thus, it was reasonable to assume that Hicks' teachings were representative of the Promise Keepers'
doctrine of manhood. [In 10/94, Promise Keepers first began to make available a seven-page statement that
was supportive of Hicks' teachings; see the end of this section and the 10/94 revised edition of Psycho
Heresy Awareness Ministries' 44-page booklet, Promise Keepers & Psycho Heresy, for an analysis of this
statement. As of early 1996, Promise Keepers no longer sells The Masculine Journey at conferences or
through its catalogs, and when inquiries are made of PK, it no longer tries to defend the book and the study
guide. Nevertheless, PK continues to refer to Hicks' theology as "orthodox". See clarifying statement at
the end of this section.]
Hicks claims that his book will help identify the landmarks to watch out for along one's "masculine
journey", "help discover where you are in the journey, how to grow comfortable with your unique identity,
how to move closer to God, and how to experience genuine camaraderie with other men." To the contrary,
Page 70 of 176
we contend that Hicks' efforts are nothing more than the same old psycho heresy (Freudian and Jungian, in
Hicks' case), wrapped in bad exegesis and a convoluted, psychologically biased interpretation of Biblical
language.
Hicks looks at the six Hebrew words translated as "man" or "male" in the Hebrew Bible and concludes that
each of these words reflects a different stage or stop on "the masculine journey" to manhood. (Hicks claims
he learned these words at seminary.) He claims that the Hebrew word zakar "depicts man as a phallic
being. Men have an innate sexual force, which sometimes is denied, denigrated, or perverted. ... Gibbor ...
means to be a warrior. ... Sometimes the warrior ends up being wounded. ... Enosh describes man in his
woundedness, weakness, and frailty. Men today have been wounded by abusive or absent fathers; by
domineering mothers or teachers; by layoffs; by failure, alcohol and divorce. ... Many men are bleeding to
death on the inside. ... Zaken ... elder [mentor/sage]. This is the man the Bible presents as connected to all
of life, reconciling his past conflicts, and making significant contributions to his community and culture. ...
The zaken time of life is the destination of the male journey and should be sought after and celebrated"
(Spring/Summer 1993, Men of Action). Hicks also claims that the word àdam speaks of man created as a
"noble savage"; this apparently comes from humanistic anthropologist Margaret Mead's romantic idea that
uncivilized people have a natural purity because they have not yet been corrupted by society. Hicks also
claims that Ìsh "reflects man as a ruler of his own soul, being independent of outside considerations."
(Reported in the Jul/Aug and Sep/Oct issues (1994) of Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter.)
Therefore, Hicks' six stages to manhood, in order, are (1) creational male (àdam); (2) phallic male (zakar);
(3) warrior (gibbor); (4) wounded male (enosh); (5) native man (Ìsh); and (6) the sage (zaken). Following
are some lowlights from The Masculine Journey and/or the accompanying Study Guide: (All emphases
added.)
(a) In chapter after chapter, subjective insights into manhood are offered through quotes by a host of
secular authors with a psychological or New Age bent. These include psycho-occultist Carl Jung, inner-
healing therapist Leanne Payne, transpersonal New Age psychiatrist and occultist/spiritualist Elizabeth
Kübler-Ross, and psychologist Sam Keen. (Keen is a former theologian in residence at Esalen, the New
Age/Eastern mystical therapeutic center south of San Francisco. Keen's books feature vicious diatribes
against Biblical Christianity.) [4/94, the Berean Call] One can also question Hicks concerning his lead-in
quote to Chapter One from former U.N. Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold: "The longest journey is the
journey inwards of him who has chosen his destiny" (pure New Age); and to Chapter Two from
evolutionist Charles Darwin: "Man with all his noble qualities still bears in his bodily frame the indelible
stamp of his lowly origin."
(b) In Hicks' discussion of man's (emotionally) wounded stage (enosh), he confuses sins and wounds: "In
order for men to discover what manhood is all about, they must descend into the deep places of their own
souls and find their accumulated grief. ... I am convinced many men in our society today are lashing out at
women, at society, at bosses, even at God -- all because they do not understand the wounding experience. ...
The story of Jacob ... illustrates a young man having been severely wounded by a dysfunctional family
system" (pp. 115-117). In addition, Hicks teaches that David was a "manic-depressive" whose Psalms were
the "musings" of a disordered mind (p. 114). [Wouldn't the Holy Spirit would be impressed with such a
statement! -- You have to be totally indoctrinated by inner healing psychobabble to derive even a jot of
such nonsense from the Bible (4/94, The Berean Call). This also shows Hicks' low view of Scripture.]
(c) Hicks claims that what keeps men moving along this journey is having some other male mentors in their
lives and seeing Jesus as the primary voice of God in each stage. "Jesus ... was the second Adam ... was
very much human ... was also very much zakar, phallic. ... I believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent
phallic passions we experience as men" (pp. 180-181). [This seems to be either the result of Freudian
brainwashing or hanging out in locker rooms. Either way, it is blasphemous (4/94, The Berean Call).]

Page 71 of 176
(d) More blasphemy -- the movie The Last Temptation of Christ is referred to in a positive light! Claiming
that Jesus is a "phallic male", Hicks says Jesus "may have thought about it as the movie ... portrays" (p.
181) -- referring to Jesus thinking about having sexual relations with a woman! Nevertheless, doesn't Hicks'
suggestion make Jesus guilty of the sin of lust, thereby embracing the movie's blasphemy? In fact, the
movie portrayed graphic sexual desire, not merely temptation. To cite The Last Temptation of Christ as
evidence that Jesus may have been tempted with lust for Mary Magdalene is as blasphemous as that movie
itself (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise Keepers, p. 6). Hicks even justifies gay men being
Christians by claiming that Jesus was personally tempted with homosexuality (p. 181)! (Has not Hicks read
Romans 1:18ff?)
(e) In the book's accompanying Study Guide, Section Three, "Exploring the Issues with Other Men" (p.
33), the following statement is made: "Our culture has presented many initiation rites, or passages to
manhood, that are associated with the phallus [penis].
Which ones have you experienced? Do you have a story to share with other men about one such event?"
He then lists such supposedly debilitating "phallus" experiences as potty training and bed-wetting, pubic
hair development, pornography, first date, wedding night, and conceiving one's first child.
[Why do Christians need to talk about these things? Why so much emphasis on the penis? Freudian
psychology is based upon genitalia and the discussion of these matters, but the Bible condemns such
discussions (Eph. 5:4; Col. 3:8; Phil. 4:8, 9). If we are dead to sin (Col. 3:1-3), should these questions even
be allowed in church? For example: What experience with pornography and the male sexual organ could be
discussed without the potential for stirring sinful thoughts? Moreover, what experience about one's
wedding night would be permissible to discuss with other men? Does not one's body now belong to his
wife? Is not the marriage bed sacred? How ungodly to discuss such intimacy with anyone else but her!]
(f) Hicks does not stop here, but whines, "If only the church had alternative initiation rites to the ones
offered above. What creative alternative celebrations can you think of?" (p. 33). [How can this be? Again,
this is not possible without sin.]
(g) The majority of the book keeps referring back to the phallus. The first 70 pages do so clearly, and so
does the last chapter, "A New Male Journey". For example, Hicks says, "The phallus has always been the
symbol of religious devotion and dedication" (p. 51), and that all men have a "deep compulsion to worship
with our phallus" (p. 56). Hicks discusses the phallic stage -- "Possessing a penis places unique
requirements upon men before God in how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as
phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of androgynous, neutered non-males, or the feminized males so
popular in many feminist-enlightened churches" (p. 51). Hicks' "phallus" phraseology is clearly Freudian
and brings forth images of Greek paganism rather than Biblical manhood (Jul/Aug 1994, Psycho Heresy
Awareness Letter).
(h) Hicks further discusses the matter of initiation, bemoaning the absence of ceremonial initiation rites for
adolescent males. He wishes there was "some way we could make more ceremonial the first rich awareness
of our mortality and utter sinfulness". He continues, "I'm sure many would balk at my thought of
celebrating the experience of sin. I am not sure how we could do it. But I do know we need to do it." To
defend (rationalize) his point, he talks about how we condemn our teens when "... they have their first
experience with the police, or their first drunk, or their first experience with sex or drugs ..." He says we
could look upon any of these "... as a teachable moment and a rite of passage. ..." Then he purposes that
"true elders could come forward and confess their own adolescent sins and congratulate the next
generation for being human". Hicks closes the paragraph by saying, "Then they could move on to the all-
important issues of forgiveness and restoration ..." (p. 177). Unbelievable!
On what does Hicks base his teaching? Not the Bible, but rather his own personal experience of what it
means to be a man -- his arbitrary stages of manhood are developed in order to accommodate his own

Page 72 of 176
personal experience and subjective psychological notions. By giving Biblical labels to these stages and
mixing in some Biblical language, Hicks deceives the undiscerning into believing the Bible validates
everything he says about manhood. Yet Hicks follows the predictable pattern of the psychological
integrationist. He takes a psychological theory, believes it to be valid under the guise of "all truth is God's
truth", and then considers what the Bible might add. His teaching originates from the opinions of godless
men and the Bible is bent to conform. Since Hicks' book is the official guide for "the masculine journey", it
is reasonable to assume that Promise Keepers' mentoring will utilize Hicks' stages of manhood, his secular
psychology, his deceitful descriptions, and his mixed methods of maneuvering men along (Jul/Aug &
Sept/Oct 1994, Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter).
Sadly, attendees at the 1993 Promise Keepers National Men's Conference were encouraged in a post-
conference follow-up letter to purchase The Masculine Journey Study Guide and to form Masculine
Journey study groups (4/94, The Berean Call). In fact, Promise Keepers media director Steve Chavis says,
"All our success here [regarding PK in general] is contingent upon men taking part in small groups when
they return home" (2/6/95, Christianity Today, p. 28).
[For further details of the psychotherapeutic encounter group format incorporated in the Masculine Journey
Study Guide, see Sarah H. Leslie's article in the 1/95, The Christian Conscience: "Promise Keepers:
'Encountering' Guys at Risk," pp. 14-18.]
[See the Jul/Aug, Sep/Oct, and Nov/Dec 1994 issues of the Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter for further
detailed analysis of Hicks' book and of Promise Keepers' official response to those questioning Promise
Keepers' support of Hicks' book. PAL also has available for $3.00 a 44-page booklet titled Promise
Keepers and Psycho Heresy, or for $10.00, the 44-page booklet along with a two-tape message set and the
previously cited 16-page Special Report from Media Spotlight (Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries, 4137
Primavera Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93110).]
- In a seven-page fax received from Promise Keepers (PK) in 10/94, 2/95, 9/95,
and again in 4/96, Promise Keepers details its official support for Robert Hicks and
The Masculine Journey. (This fax was being sent to anyone who protested PK's
use of The Masculine Journey.) PK states that they originally decided to officially
sponsor Hicks' book and Study Guide because, in their analysis, "What we
discovered was a biblically-centered, frank, and honest account of a man's journey
with God. We were convinced that it would help men pursue Jesus Christ ... it
would be a tool that challenged men to grow in Christ likeness ..." PK claims that
"Dr. Hicks is clearly choosing God's Word to describe maleness." PK
acknowledged that humanistic ideas clearly conflict with Christian values and
contradict Biblical teaching, "But those are neither the values nor the teachings
we find in the writings of Dr. Hicks, Dr. James Dobson, Gary Smalley, Dr. John
Trent, and Dr. Gary Oliver". Moreover, PK went to great length to rationalize the
sexual explicitness in the book, and concluded that the problem with The
Masculine Journey is not in its content, but "... in the way that the book is read".
[!!] [Gary Smalley, John Trent, James Dobson, Chuck Swindoll, Jack Hayford,
Gary Oliver, Robert Hicks, and many others are in the forefront of Promise
Keepers speakers and writers. Their seduction by the most ungodly aspects of
psychology has seriously tainted their understanding of God's Word and even of
the person of Jesus Christ Himself. This, if nothing else, should raise red flags of
danger for anyone who might feel attracted to Promise Keepers.]

[Note on PK's Promotion of The Masculine Journey: The following is

excerpted and/or adapted from the Psycho heresy Awareness Letter, July-August
1996:

Page 73 of 176
 Shortly after our article "Promise Keepers Still Endorses The Masculine Journey
went to press in 3/96, they replaced the seven-page support letter with a brief
statement, which said: "Promise Keepers no longer distributes the book The
Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks, published in 1993 by NavPress." After
admitting, that Promise Keepers distributed (gave) the book to every man that
attended the 1993 conference, the rest of that statement simply talked about
Promise Keepers rather than about The Masculine Journey. No warning, apology,
or repudiation of the book could be seen.
As of 6/17/96, Promise Keepers has begun to supply yet another position statement
regarding The Masculine Journey. The current statement says: "Several passages in
The Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks (1993, NavPress) could be understood in
more than one way. Some of the content of the book has unfortunately lent itself to
a wide range of interpretations and responses involving theological issues which
Promise Keepers does not feel called to resolve." The statement continues to say
that they do not want these unforeseen controversies to detract from the focus of
Promise Keepers. After again saying that they no longer distribute the book, they
state: "At the same time, we believe Mr. Hicks' core theology is consistent with
orthodox evangelical Christianity, and that The Masculine Journey was a
forthright attempt on his part to deal with male issues from a biblical context."
(Emphasis added.)
Sadly, the organization only seems to be trying to avoid further controversy over
the book. There is still no hint of warning, apology, or repudiation. Any fair reader
of Promise Keepers' present statement on The Masculine Journey would have to
conclude that Promise Keepers still supports The Masculine Journey! The fact that
leaders of Promise Keepers were involved in the development of the book,
identified it as a Promise Keepers book, and gave a copy to every man who
attended the 1993 conference reveals the psychological foundations of the
movement. Until Promise Keepers makes a definitive statement confessing the
error of being involved in the development of the book The Masculine Journey, as
well as of promoting and distributing it, they must be held culpable.]
- One thing that sounds so worthwhile is Promise Keepers attempt to stress strong male leadership in the
local church. However, it seems as if Promise Keepers problem is not so much with female leadership per
se, as it is with lack of male leadership. In other words: Women are leading more than men; it's better if
men lead as much as women -- an "equality of leadership" as one Promise Keepers writer says (Seven
Promises of a Promise Keeper, p. 142). What PK clearly seems to be expressing is a desire not for men to
take absolute leadership (as the Bible teaches), but to begin to share in the leadership now held by women.
If Promise Keepers were to take the Biblical position as stated by the apostle Paul, they would lose some
popularity, because they would no longer receive the unbridled endorsement of wives that they now
receive. (Women say they want a strong man to follow, but not too strong. Certainly, they do not want a
man whose strength or determination for God might interfere with the wife's psychological "needs" being
met.) Promise Keepers somehow recognizes this, and thus the macho posturing, all the while being very
careful not to offend the women who really remain in control. Thus, too, the popularity of Gary Smalley
and his ilk that emasculate men while claiming great success in achieving marital harmony. Women love
Smalley because he focuses men's attention NOT on how to please God, but how to please their wives, i.e.,
"meet their needs". Smalley even teaches wives how to manipulate their husbands to get what they want.
Gary Smalley's books and seminars are probably the most dangerous to true masculinity on the market
today, yet Promise Keepers promotes him widely. (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise
Keepers, p. 8.) [The 6/95 Houston PK rally held in the Astrodome serves as a good indication of the
behind-the-scenes involvement of women in Promise Keepers. Of the 3,000 volunteers, about two-thirds
Page 74 of 176
were women. Prior to the conference, these 2,000 or so women took part in anointing each chair in the
Astrodome with oil and then prayed over them. (Reported in the 6/18/95, Houston Chronicle, p. 4G).]
- Promise Keepers also has established inclusivity, anti-Biblical position on homosexuality. The following
was taken from a Promise Keepers' 12/8/93 fax, titled simply, "Promise Keepers Statement":
"As to homosexuality, Promise Keepers shares the same historic and biblical stance taken by Evangelicals
and Catholics -- that sex is a good gift from God -- to be enjoyed in the context of heterosexual marriage.
Promise Keepers also recognizes that homosexuality is a complex and potentially polarizing issue. There is
a great debate surrounding its environmental and genetic origins, yet as an organization we believe that
homosexuals are men who need the same support, encouragement and healing we are offering to all men.
While we have clear convictions regarding the issue of homosexuality, we are sensitive to and have
compassion for the men who are struggling with these issues. We, therefore, support their being included
and welcomed in all our events."
What is so "complex" about the "issue" (read "sin") of homosexuality? God says this perversion is His
judgment for the sins of rejecting and rebelling against Him, and He condemns it throughout Scripture
(Rom. 1:21-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 1 Tim. 1:9-10; Jude 7). Then, sin is always a "polarizing issue" to those who
live in the flesh rather than by the Spirit. In addition, homosexuality is not the result of environment and
genetics (cf. Rom. 1:18-32)! Though Promise Keepers acknowledges homosexuality as a sin in some of
their literature, by claiming it can be understood only in the confines of humanistic psychology and genetic
research, rather than in what God says, they actually promote homosexuality. Promise Keepers
Representative Steve Chavis concurs with the fax statement -- he says that homosexuals "will find a
message not of condemnation but of compassion", in PK's ministry (6/27/95, The Atlanta Journal-
Constitution, p. B10). Rather than including and welcoming the homosexuals, Promise Keepers should be
preaching the Gospel of Christ to them, which is repentance for their sin and trust in Jesus Christ for
salvation. Instead, Promise Keepers is apparently convinced that a person can be content to remain an
unrepentant homosexual and still be a genuine child of God. However, God's Word is clear -- no
unrepentant homosexual will inherent the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11). Further, the apostle Paul
commands that those who profess Christ and yet openly practice sin should be removed from fellowship (1
Cor. 5:9-11), not "tolerated". [A Promise Keeper can evidently be a committed abortionist also! An
interview with Bill McCartney published in the 6/18/95 Houston Chronicle quotes McCartney as saying
that a Promise Keeper can be pro-choice because, "That's an individual preference. We would not try to
direct or influence that. ... We welcome everyone; no one is excluded."]
Robert Hicks, in his book heavily promoted by Promise Keepers, espoused a similar "sensitive" approach
to the sin of homosexuality (The Masculine Journey, pp. 133-134). This "tolerant" position on
homosexuality is found in many of the materials sponsored by Promise Keepers. While calling for strong
male leadership in the churches, Promise Keepers has wimped-out on an "issue" that strikes at the very
heart of masculinity, and presents an affront to God by its militant in-your-face challenge to accept sexual
perversion or risk being called "unloving" and judgmental (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on
Promise Keepers, p. 6).
- Promise Keepers views Jesus as "the non-confrontive encourager". Geoff Gorsuch, in the PK manual
Brothers! Calling Men into Vital Relationships presents a distorted view of Christ. For example, he says,
"Jesus didn't view men as losers. He saw them as lost" (p. 49). The Christ of Promise Keepers seems to
prefer looking at men in an inoffensive and positive manner -- humanity is not to be thought of in a
demeaning term such as "loser", but as individuals who just need a little help to find their way. The truth is
that all men are losers and lost. A loser is one who does not triumph. Since no man can by himself
overcome sin, much less its penalty, he cannot be said to be just neutrally "lost": He is a loser as well. Apart
from God's grace we will all remain desperate losers condemned and under the curse of sin. In man-to-man
associations, some are winners and some are losers. However, in man-to-God relationships, every man is a
loser of the worst sort. Our victory can only come through the Holy Spirit as the merits of Christ's finished
Page 75 of 176
work on the cross are applied. (Excerpted and/or adapted from the 4/95 O Timothy, "PROMISE KEEPERS:
Should Fundamentalists Get Involved?," pp. 11-12).
- Also of great concern is Promise Keepers close association and fellowship with those in the charismatic
movement. (This concern arises because the "common experience" gained through charismatic's has
typically allowed for the setting aside of doctrinal differences, and has, thereby, more easily facilitated an
unbiblical unity, i.e., ecumenism.) As mentioned earlier in this report, not only have charismatics E.V. Hill
and Jack Hayford regularly spoken at the Promise Keepers Men's Conferences, but Bill McCartney's local
Vineyard Christian Fellowship pastor and ex-convict/ex-drug addict, James Ryle, is on the Board of
Directors of Promise Keepers. (He is, also, now a regular speaker at PK meetings, and has left the pastorate
for a full time speaking/conference ministry.) Ryle's position of leadership in Promise Keepers is most
disconcerting because of his clear association with "signs & wonders," hyper-charismatic, self-proclaimed
"prophet" John Wimber, the (now deceased) co-founder of the Vineyard Movement.
Ryle, like Wimber, declares himself to be a modern prophet, and thus, claims to have many of the same
"revelatory" powers claimed by Wimber. For example, at an 11/90 Vineyard Harvest Conference in
Denver, Ryle asserted that God instructed him to reveal to the church that both the Beatles and their music
were the result of a special anointing of the Holy Spirit, and that God was looking for others upon whom to
place that anointing, supposedly to bring about a worldwide revival through music. Ryle said:
"The Lord has appointed me as a lookout and shown me some things that I want to show you ... The Lord
spoke to me and said, 'What you saw in the Beatles -- the gifting and the sound that they had -- was from
Me. ... It was my purpose to bring forth through music a worldwide revival that would usher in the move of
My Spirit in bringing men and women to Christ. ...'"
In the same manner, Ryle claimed that God gave him a vision of a Beatles' concert where the audience,
instead of screaming the names of the Beatles, were this time "screaming the Name -- Jesus". Such a
prophecy, that millions will be saved through a reintroduction of the "anointed music" (and demonic,
Hinduistic philosophies) originally "given" through the Beatles, could not possibly have been from the
Holy Spirit! Instead, Ryle's statements clearly reveal the Satanic delusions under which he and other so-
called modern prophets are "ministering" (Jan-Feb '91, Foundation). One should be leery of any "prophet"
who discerns the demonic as anointed.
[Ryle preached a similar sermon at his Boulder Valley Vineyard Church on 7/1/90, entitled "Sons of
Thunder". In that sermon, Ryle alleges that God is about to anoint Christian musicians with the same
"anointing that was originally given to the Beatles". He said God told him in a dream that, "I called those
four lads from Liverpool to myself. There was a call from God on their life; they were gifted by my hand;
and it was I who anointed them, for I had a purpose, and the purpose was to usher in the charismatic
renewal with musical revival around the world." Ryle goes on to say that God told him He lifted the
Beatles anointing in 1970 and has held it in His hand since, but that He is about to release it again in the
church. (Reported in the 2/96, The Christian Conscience, p. 20.) In other words, Ryle says the Beatles
rebelled against God's purpose, so the idea had to be sacked! Apparently God's will was thwarted by the
Beatles and God has yet to come up with plan "B"!]

More on Ryle's charismatics -- from a Dreams and Visions Prophetic Conference brochure (8/4/94-8/6/94),
announcing James Ryle as a speaker:
"After a traumatic childhood, years of neglect in an orphanage, and imprisonment in the Texas State
Penitentiary, God filled James Ryle with love, identity, and purpose. He began preaching in 1972,
exhibiting a great gift for communicating the Word of God in relevant, revealing, and redemptive ways.
James travels extensively in the U.S., Canada, and Europe, advancing the church through prophetic
preaching and conference teaching. James is the author of the very popular book The Hippo in the Garden
(Creation House: 1993). In 1989, it was prophesied that James would be a 'seer' to the body of Christ. That
Page 76 of 176
same year, he had a dream where he saw a hippo in the garden. After seeking God for the interpretation,
James says the Lord revealed that the hippo represents a new prophetic movement that will sweep the
church and affect the world. According to James, the new movement will appear as out-of-place amid the
status quo as a hippo walking in an English garden. James has also written an article about dreams and
visions in the 8/93 Charisma: 'Hearing God's Voice in Living Color.'"
In a 1995 book (with foreword by Bill McCartney), A Dream Come True: A Biblical Look at How God
Speaks Through Dreams and Visions, Ryle again adds to God's written Word his own subjective personal
revelations, visions, words of prophecy, and dreams. Ryle invites men to begin analyzing their dreams, and
concludes the book by inviting the reader to ask the Lord for a vision of Jesus as "God has given each one
of us what I call vision hunger -- an appetite for revelation from God, an inner need for visual soul
stimulation" (p. 228). As Ryle proclaimed in The Hippo in the Garden, to him "The Bible is not an end in
itself, rather, it is the God-given means to an end" (p. 74). What Ryle and others in the Vineyard, and,
hence, the Vineyard-spawned Promise Keepers, are teaching is that God's written Word should be viewed
through the lens of one's personal, spiritual experiences, dreams, and visions as opposed to rightly asserting
that one's personal spiritual experiences ought to be viewed through the lens of God's written Word.
(Reported in the 2/96, The Christian Conscience, pp. 21, 26. See also Carl Widrig Jr.'s article in the 5/96,
The Christian Conscience, "Is God Saying What James Ryle is saying", pp. 46-47)
- Like James Ryle, Bill McCartney also claims direct revelation for God. On a "PK This Week" radio
program (9/28/96), McCartney speaking at the 1995 Oakland PK Conference, in a message titled, "The
Power of a Promise Kept", said that God told him, "If men of color don't come to PK, then I'm not coming
either." McCartney said that some men sent him mail challenging him that what he said "wasn't scripturally
sound -- what right do you have to get up and say this?" McCartney's answer: "But I knew in my heart I
had heard that [from God] so I stood by it." Later he says that at the PK Portland meeting: "The Holy Spirit
of God came on me like you can't believe and validated me and said, 'Yes, you have been speaking my
heart. Keep speaking what I have put on your heart.'"
- The Vineyard influence in Promise Keepers is most disconcerting. As mentioned earlier, McCartney,
Phillips, and Ryle were all affiliated with Vineyard churches. Paul Cain, one of the original Vineyard
"prophets", claims that PK is the fulfillment of a divine dream he received when he was 19 years old
(8/30/95 message at Christ Chapel, Florence, AL). The Vineyard movement believes that God is giving
new revelation today[Research Editor's Note] Rev. 22:18, "Warn everyone who hears of this prophesy
of this book: if anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described on this book",
19 "and if anyone takes words away from this book of prophesy, God will take away from him his share
in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book] and that the miraculous signs of
the early church should be normative for today.
The phenomenon known as "Holy Laughter" revivals began in a Vineyard church in Canada in January of
1994. It became known as the "Toronto Blessing" during South African Evangelist Rodney Howard-
Browne's meetings there in October of 1994. When people were "slain in the Spirit", they began to roll on
the floor and laugh hysterically, sometimes for hours. (These revivals now even include barking like dogs
and making other animal noises as evidence of the working of the Holy Spirit.) A 9/94 Charisma magazine
article reports that John Wimber's Vineyard churches in the U.S. had been largely swept up by the strange
incidents. Would it be surprising to see this "advanced" (demonic) form of charismatic show up in the near
future in one of Promise Keepers stadium rallies? Charisma is even now referring to Promise Keepers as
the "Boulder Blessing" (5/95, Charisma). (For more on the laughing phenomena, see the 1995 Media
Spotlight 16-page Special Report titled "Holy Laughter: Rodney Howard-Browne and the Toronto
Blessing.")

- I think we can only expect to see more of this evil, ecumenical, hyper-charismatic influence in future
Promise Keepers' conferences, materials, etc. For example, Charisma magazine is the official voice of the
charismatic movement. (Charisma has supported the work of such leading charismatics as Oral Roberts,
Page 77 of 176
Jimmy Swaggart, and Jim and Tammy Bakker. It has endorsed Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, and
other hyper-charismatics who have denied such fundamental doctrines as the deity of Christ and the
Trinity. It has also endorsed the "Holy Laughter" phenomena.) Charisma's founding editor, Stephen Strang
(Strang Communications Company), entered into a partnership with Promise Keepers in early 1994 to
publish a bimonthly men's magazine titled New Man: for Men of Integrity. (Initial 5/94 premier issue press-
run was 225,000, and was distributed free to attendees at the first six 1994 PK conferences; as of 4/97, the
publisher reports a paid circulation of over 330,000, more than double that of Christianity Today, the
leading "evangelical" magazine in America.) Strang says:
"This high-quality magazine will feature practical articles designed to encourage and equip its readers to
become godly men. It will be a lively publication for men of the '90s, appealing to their interests, such as
sports, hobbies, and health. Like Promise Keepers, the magazine will cross ethnic and denominational
boundaries to unite men in Jesus Christ -- a magazine for any man who loves Jesus and is born of the Spirit
-- charismatic, evangelical, Protestant or Catholic" (4/94, Charisma).
The editorial advisory board of New Man includes Reconstructionist Wellington Boone and hyper-
charismatic Jack Hayford. New Man also publishes articles, advice, and interviews from psychologizers
Gary Smalley, Tony Evans, Larry Burkett, Howard Hendricks, Jack Hayford, Bill McCartney, Gary Oliver,
Luis Palau, James Dobson, Ken Canfield, and Bill Bright. [In April of 1997, New Man became an
independent publication, but remained part of Strang's publishing conglomerate.]
- The premier issue of New Man featured a profile on Bill McCartney (pp. 29-37). The story reports that
before dawn most days, the "emotionally challenged" McCartney (i.e., "I'm just learning to love and be
loved.") and his wife read together a few pages from psychologies Gary Oliver's book Real Men Have
Feelings Too. McCartney would then go to his office overlooking Colorado's Folsom Stadium. Upon
arrival, he would make sure to "pray over each chair, 'invoking the Spirit of the Living God' on any fixtures
in reach" of anyone who might enter that day. McCartney thinks this charismatic ritual "honors God and
invites His Spirit here". McCartney also tells of his consecrating the Colorado football program "to the
Lordship of Jesus Christ", and that by God's grace, Colorado then won a national championship! This
charismatic nonsense would be humorous were it not for its tragic consequences.
[McCartney resigned his $350,000-a-year head football-coaching job in January of 1995, in order to spend
more time with his family and working with Promise Keepers. It remains a mystery what qualifies this man
to lead a men's movement. He readily admits that for decades he failed his wife and family in the worst
possible ways. Moreover, to our knowledge, he was "the only major college football coach in America with
two illegitimate grandchildren sired by two different players upon his only daughter" (1/96, GQ magazine,
p. 111).]
- The 12/13/97 World magazine says: "PK founder Bill McCartney has written a disturbing book --
disturbing for what it leaves out". Sold Out, supposedly an autobiography about the difficulties of his
marriage, omits any mention of his adulterous affair, or that his daughter got pregnant twice out of wedlock
by two different members of his football team. He did mention though that his wife four years ago was
bulimic and suicidal and that he had been an alcoholic [drunkard]. (Source: 1/1/98, Calvary Contender.)
- Not to be left out of the "rally crowd," a number of look-alike PK organizations for women have been
created (the total attendance at all look-alike events for 1998 were expected to top 600,000, which makes
the women's groups larger than PK itself). The women's groups "are a combination of revival meeting and
spiritual pep rally ... [having] much in common with secular self-improvement and motivational seminars:
Disorders are the order of the day, and victimhood almost always precedes victor" (4/6/98, Christianity
Today):
(a) "Heritage Keepers" conducted its first conference 8/10/96 in Wichita, Kansas, with 8,000 registration
requests for only 3,000 available seats. "Heritage Keepers is designed to teach a woman how to be godly to

Page 78 of 176
her family, God, and community," says Pastor Bob Beckler, who created it with his wife Lori. Speakers
were John Trent, a frequent speaker on the PK circuit and author of How to Handle Your Promise Keeper
[does not this title speak volumes about the manipulative focus of PK and why PK receives such
overwhelming support from the wives of PK-ers!] along with psychological counselor Marge Caldwell and
four-temperaments guru Florence Littauer.
(b) Deborah Tyler of Morristown, Tennessee, organized four "Keys for Abundant Living: A Promise
Keepers Counterpart" conferences in 1996. Meetings were held in Dallas, Birmingham, Nashville, and
Little Rock, each drawing about 1,000 women, with speakers including Anne Graham Lotz, Gloria Gaither,
and Luci Swindoll. Conferences were planned for seven Southern cities in 1997. They are part of Tyler's
Renaissance Ministries, designed "to provide opportunities for women to be challenged, inspired, and
encouraged and to lead each woman to a personal commitment to God's Word as the ultimate authority for
successful living".
(c) One of the most ambitious undertakings may be that of "Chosen Women: Daughters of the King." This
new Pasadena, California-based group (founded by Susan Kimes, in conjunction with Calvary Church in
Santa Ana, California, where she has held women's conferences since 1985) had hoped to attract 80,000
women to the Rose Bowl May 16-17, 1997, with speakers such as Ruth Graham, Anne Graham Lotz,
Elisabeth Elliot, Bunny Wilson, and Jill Briscoe. Actually, 30,000 attended, which is still the largest
women-only stadium rally since the Promise Keepers men's movement began. Women of all ages sang,
danced, did the wave, blew bubbles, batted beach balls, prayed, and applauded the all-female slate of
speakers. Attendees paid between $56 and $71 in registration fees for the experience (6/16/97, Christianity
Today).
(d) In 1997, "Women of Faith: Joyful Journey" meetings nationwide drew about 197,000 women at 15
conferences organized by Women of Faith (up from 38,000 in 1996). (For 1998, Women of Faith's
leadership was projecting double that total for 29 conferences under the theme "Bring Back the Joy.") They
are sponsored by Minirth-Meier New Life Clinics, the Freudian "mental health" clinics in Richardson,
Texas ("It was time for the clinics to do something for women in America [to] help them celebrate life and
God's grace," says New Life's Stephen Arterburn -- "I really believe that the idea was a gift from God."
Arterburn sees Women of Faith as a good patient-recruiting tool for psychological counseling: "The clinics
always did conferences dealing with problems, and the response was underwhelming". He says they revised
the Women of Faith conference focus "to see how many more people we could reach by celebrating what is
good about life". "At Women of Faith events, New Life and their Remuda clinics (which specialize in
eating disorders) are on hand to provide information about their counseling services."). Several speakers on
the Women of Faith circuit are best known as humor writers, including Patsy Clairmont, Barbara Johnson,
and Luci Swindoll. Zondervan is producing a Women of Faith Bible and study guides; Integrity Music is
planning worship music products; and Campus Crusade's Women Today International will provide follow-
up materials. (Reported in the 3/3/97 & 4/6/98 issues of Christianity Today.)
(e) Other groups that have sprung up in recent years include "Aspiring Women" of Nashville, Tennessee;
"Suitable Helpers" of Wheat Ridge, Colorado; "Promise Reapers" of Houston; "A Promise Kept" of Los
Angeles; and "Praise Keepers" of Eldon, Missouri [the latter's co-founder Donna Henley says: "Women's
ministries are always bigger than the men. This will be bigger than the men's" [she has proved to be
correct] (3/1/97, Calvary Contender)].
(f) A Focus on the Family sponsored one-day event in Nashville on 9/21/97 drew 19,600 women from 47
states and Canada (with a 20,000 wait-list). James Dobson was the only male speaker at the "Renewing the
Heart" conference. Five more conferences are scheduled for 1998, at $48 per attendee.
- There are also PK off-shoots targeting other groups. One such group is "Young Warriors", a PK program
targeting teens. The first program was held in 9/96 in Dallas, and featured a day of rock concerts, speakers,
and games. The concerts included Christafari, Sixpence None the Richer, Prayer Chain, The Walter
Page 79 of 176
Eugenes, E-Ric, Judah, Audio Adrenaline, and others including local bands. The speakers included Miles
McPherson, Jacob Aranza, and local youth pastors. Games included Sumu Wrestling, Velcro Wall, Bungee
Run, Just, and more. Tickets were $20. Z Music Television, World Vision, CCM Magazine, and others
sponsored Dallas YOUNG WARRIORS.
- The music at PK rallies has usually been typical "Christian" Contemporary Music (CCM). Look for rap
music to begin to take over. Mike De'Vine, a rapper, and former member of the vile rap group "2 Live
Crew" (De'Vine says he left the group in 1989 after growing sick of the lifestyle) hooked up with PK to
provide "music" at its 1996 stadium rallies (both writing and performing). De'Vine claims to have "turned
to Christ and a new rap message, recording five albums on his own label. ... [He] believes he's on the cusp
of breaking into the big time, and he's looking to PK as a pulpit." PK is also interested in De'Vine and his
rap music to help bolster PK's new youth program. De'Vine says: "That's what the aim is, to blow up
positive rap music, man. We are going to bust it up with Promise Keepers. We'll be doing the 2 Live Crew
thing all over again -- only this time it will be positive." (Reported in the 1/26/96, Rocky Mountain News,
"Ex-2 Live Crew member on a divine mission," pp. 17D & 19D).
- Promise Keepers has also gotten into the Study Bible business. PK and Zondervan have entered into a
partnership to create a Promise Keepers Study Bible that will contain notes and guides specifically designed
for men who attend PK conferences. This is PK's second such venture with Zondervan, the world's largest
Bible publisher. Zondervan produced 200,000 Next Step kits for sale at the 1995 conferences -- a
multimedia kit containing a book, a video, and an audio cassette "to help men take the next step in their
Christian walk" (7/31/95, Christian News, p. 14).
- Theistic evolution is the unbiblical belief that God was involved in the evolutionary process, originally
creating lower life forms, then letting them evolve by random chance (or continuing to create various
species over millions of years), and eventually infusing evolved man with a soul. PK's official magazine at
the time, New Man, endorsed theistic evolution and argued that whether or not God used evolution to bring
man into existence is of little importance (New Man, Jul-Aug, 1996, p. 54; as reported in the 3/97, The
Berean Call).
Contrary to PK's belief, the manner in which man came into existence is of critical importance! If the earth
is millions or billions of years old, with death thereby occurring prior to Adam's sin, then the Biblical
doctrines of sin and salvation are moot. If death and bloodshed preceded Adam's rebellion against God,
then what are "the wages of sin" and how did the entrance of sin change things? Moreover, if death
preceded sin, then death is not the penalty for sin, and Christ's death on the cross-accomplished nothing!
Since such evolutionary and old-earth thinking is totally incompatible with the work of Christ, should it not
be a requirement that a so-called "Christian" ministry believe in literal creationism as taught in the Bible?
- To combat the decline in masculine virtue, our humanistic society offers a cure far worse than the disease
itself. A rash of neo-pagan books and seminars attempts to get men in touch with their buried masculinity.
And thousands of men flock to rustic retreats to don tribal masks and beat drums in hopes of forcing their
hidden "Wildman" to emerge (4/94, Charisma). But is there really much difference here from the
"Christianized" version emerging through McCartney's Promise Keepers meetings (with Promise Keepers'
endorsement of Robert Hicks' six stages of manhood), Ed Cole's Christian Men's Network, Ken Canfield's
National Center for Fathering, Gene Goetz's Maximum Man conferences, and other such charismatic and
psycho heretical attempts at "celebrating Biblical manhood"? (PK is also spawning dozens of other
parachurch groups such as Dad's University, Career Impact Ministries, Business Life Management, Men
Reaching Men, and Fathers and Brothers.) Even Promise Keepers supporters such as Strang and Charisma
magazine appear to have inadvertently recognized the similarity:
"At times, July's meeting [1993 National Men's Conference in Boulder] resembled a pep rally with Jesus
cheers.' Hit him! Hit him! Hit him!' men chanted, as Pastor E.V. Hill of Los Angeles challenged them to
defeat the devil in their lives" (4/94 Charisma).
Page 80 of 176
Robert Hicks, when discussing his warrior stage in the previously referred to book, The Masculine Journey,
even quotes favorably from Patrick Arnold's book, Wildmen, Warriors and Kings: Masculine Spirituality
and the Bible. Arnold's book is not based on Scripture, but on the Jungian collective unconscious, Jungian
archetypes, and other aspects of Jungian occult spirituality. Hicks also refers authoritatively to another
men's movement author, Jungian psychoanalyst Robert Moore, from a book co-authored by Moore -- King,
Warrior, Magician, and Lover: Rediscovering the Archetypes of the Mature Masculine.
Many of the speakers at Promise Keepers conferences refer to what is called "the wounded male soul". This
woundedness supposedly "springs from the cultural estrangement of boys from their fathers and the
emotional repression American culture has deemed necessary for true maleness" (2/6/95, Christianity
Today, p. 25). In response, the hidden "Wildman/warrior" is resurrected to save the day, but this time in
"Christian" garb. At the 10/94 Dallas meeting held in Texas Stadium, the men in attendance raised their
hands and sang, "'Face to face, brother to brother, back to back, warrior to warrior,' as the words were
flashed on the giant screens overhead" (11/10/94, The Charlotte Observer, p. 11A). Even D. James
Kennedy, in a salute to Promise Keepers on his 9/18/94 television show, inadvertently (?) acknowledged
that Promise Keepers is a "Christian" alternative to "the secular revolution of men leading them out into the
woods and to their tom-toms ..." (In early 1995, Kennedy also taped a radio interview with Robert Hicks, in
which Hicks' book The Masculine Journey was treated with great favor.)
- Promise Keepers may be a tool for those holding the Manifest Sons of God doctrines to market their
beliefs to the rest of the American church. These beliefs, which are foundational to the "laughing
phenomenon" associated with Rodney Howard-Browne, are now entering mainstream churches of all
denominations via Promise Keepers. (Former Vineyard head (deceased) John Wimber had given his whole-
hearted approval to the laughing phenomenon.) The Manifest Sons of God believe that Christ cannot
incarnate in a divided body; therefore, it is crucial that the Church be united. Another term for this is "Joel's
Army". Promise Keepers has been linked to this army. An article in Jewell van der Merwe's Discernment
newsletter states:
"In a recent interview in response to a question as to whether the Promise Keepers could be fulfilling the
prophecy in Joel of raising an army, [Pastor] James Ryle answered, "Yes. ... 300,000 men have come
together so far this year under Promise Keepers. ... Never in history, have 300,000 men come together
except to go to war. These men are gathered for War."
Promise Keepers has incorporated key doctrines of the Manifest Sons of God into their material. The 2/95
issue of Suitable Helpers, a newsletter for women participating in Promise Keepers, expresses that
believers can become Christ Incarnate: "Our Lord is calling out a great host of men ready and willing to
become 'Christs' in their homes: Promise Keepers. In grand, bold sweeps, God has mustered an army."
[Noticing the potential political nature of this men's movement is none other than The New Age Journal,
which ran an article favorable to Promise Keepers in its 4/95 edition. The article noted the odd combination
of New Age men's movement ideology (Robert Bly's pantheism) combined with the political
evangelicalism of Pat Robertson.]
Promise Keepers appears to be creating a new "folk" religion. The large mass rallies, the exaltation of
emotion over reason, the lack of doctrinal integrity, the taking of oaths (the seven promises), the focus on
fatherland and fatherhood, and the ecumenical inclusion of aberrant esoteric doctrines bears a disconcerting
similarity to an era, which gave rise to one of the most dreadful armies in history; Hitler's Nazis. The
infiltration of Manifest Sons of God doctrines into Promise Keepers (via Vineyard) combined with New
Age ideologies (via Robert Bly and Robert Hicks) appears to create a new American folk theology
pantheism, the idolatry of self, the belief in a divine mandate to take the land, the superiority of a group,
and the necessity of group hysteria. (Excerpted and/or adapted from "Promise Keepers: A Militant Unity?,"
Ed Tarkowski and Sarah Leslie, 4/95, The Christian Conscience, p. 18.)

Page 81 of 176
[Is Promise Keepers going to be used to mobilize worldwide support for a bi-millennial celebration of Jesus
2000th birthday Jubilee, a celebration already intertwined with the New Age movement? This appears to be
the case. There was a favorable review in the Jul/Aug 1995 issue of New Man, of New Ager Jay Gary's
book, The Star of 2000. Gary's self-published book advocates such a celebration (Pastor Bill Randles,
8/22/95 open letter to Bill McCartney). (See the recent Spiritual Counterfeits Project article entitled "Sign
of the Times: Evangelical and New Agers Together," for a detailed exposé on Jay Gary and New Age
friends.)]
- Charles Grandison Finney was an early-19th century revivalist in the Northeastern part of the United
States, and a kindred spirit of John Wesley. (Wesley was steeped deeply in the writings of Roman Catholic
medieval mystics, claimed to have read them avidly, and was instrumental in publishing a great number of
these Roman Catholic works. This false mysticism stayed with Wesley all his life. Finney doctrinalized
Wesley's "second experience" teaching.) Finney's introduction of new methods for getting converts and the
orchestrating of emotion and excitement in huge revival gatherings was clearly based on his heretical
understanding of being born-again. Finney writes that he repudiated all the fundamental doctrines of God's
sovereignty in salvation, including the vicarious nature of the atonement of Jesus Christ, in the interests of
preaching revival. Finney's purpose was solely to convince the human will and produce decisions and
commitments.
Finney's "new measures" in revivalism left an indelible stamp upon Evangelicalism. Evangelism crusades,
revival meetings, the altar call, the "decision" to "accept" Christ, the "prayer of faith," the use of excitement
and emotion to facilitate "decisions" for Christ, and the attempt to promote the moral reformation of the
culture can all be attributed to the "new measures" introduced by Finney in the 1830s. Many of the modern
movements such as Church Growth, Promise Keepers, and the so-called Religious Right find their roots in
Finney. Evangelicals cannot escape his influence.
The problem with Finney's influence on modern-day evangelicalism is that Finney's methods produce
"results". He initiated what was called the "Second Great Awakening". Great revivals were reported in
towns and cities throughout the country. Lives were reportedly changed. Moral reformations reportedly
occurred. However, since Finney did not preach the total corruption of the human nature and rejected the
truth of justification by grace through faith alone, the basis for his "results" could not have been the Holy
Spirit. Finney's results were exactly as Finney defined them -- a human dynamic.
We must, therefore, also question the multitudes who have become "men of integrity" by sharing in the
emotion and excitement of Promise Keepers revivals. Is not Promise Keepers also not the work of the Holy
Spirit, but rather of emotions, methods, and group dynamics orchestrated to produce decisions,
commitments, and modify behavior -- in other words, a human dynamic? By employing Finney's methods,
one gains Finney's results ("Assessing the Promise Keepers", 12/25/95, Christian News, pp. 1, 7-8.].
- Promise Keepers is apparently willing to give up the true treasures given by Christ for a feel-good
experience with the guys. Promise Keepers and others dedicated to the Christian men's movement are
unbiblically preoccupied with man himself and from man's perspective. They are at best doomed to a grace-
barren, fleshly form of "godliness". Instead, the emphasis should be focusing on God Himself, getting to
know Him and His way through His Word (4/94, The Berean Call, and 9/19/94, Christian News).
It is highly unlikely that an organization that waffles on doctrinal integrity will inspire men to truly be men
of God. Strength of leadership honors God only when it complies with God's written Word. To ignore
doctrinal integrity, as Promise Keepers does, nullifies any other claims to integrity. While claiming to be an
instrument to draw men closer to Jesus Christ, Promise Keepers is in reality minding earthly things. Their
God may not be their belly (Phil. 3:13-21), but it certainly appears to be their loins (Media Spotlight, Vol.
16 - No. 1, "Promise Keepers Update," pp. 8,10.).

Page 82 of 176
If men were to come together as men, they would do well to follow what the Bible says rather than
Freudian fables, Jungian myths, and other self-serving, fabricated psychologies. Moreover, they would do
well to gather in the place where they are meant to grow -- in the local church -- not in huge "techno-tent"
rallies with "mob psychology" or in groups using encounter group techniques and undermining important
doctrinal distinctiveness. Indeed, the magnitude and the extent of Promise Keepers' aberrations from
orthodoxy warrant a rejection of the entire movement (Promise Keepers &Psycho Heresy, p. 29).
- A telltale sign that there is something desperately wrong with the PK movement is the favorable press
given to Promise Keepers by the worldly media. Why would the world be promoting Promise Keepers
when Jesus said the world would hate us as it hated Him? (Pastor Bill Randles, 8/22/95 open letter to Bill
McCartney).
One worldly source that has not praised Promise Keepers is Scott Raab, writer-at-large for GQ magazine:
"There's nothing new, much less revolutionary, in what Promise Keepers is pushing, which is not really
about Jesus Christ at all, but about Satan. After listening to all the speeches and the prayers [at the 9/95
Oakland, California PK conference], after reading their books and magazines, it is abundantly clear that
these guys see the Archenemy everywhere, but especially in the mirror. What PK offers men finally is
protection -- from themselves" (1/96, GQ magazine, pp. 129-130).
- Can two walk together except they be agreed? (Amos 3:3). It must be assumed that those who participate
in the PK movement also agree with their kindred in that movement. It must also be assumed that pastors
who attend PK rallies embrace the doctrine that God was once a man as do their "Mormon brethren". It
must also be assumed that those pastors who send or take their men to PK meetings agree with the
Pentecostal "flavor" of those meetings and wouldn't mind if those men came back home from PK speaking
in tongues, rolling down the aisles, and recruiting other men to do the same. Any pastor who takes or sends
his men to a PK rally is a traitor to the cause of Christ, is an unfaithful shepherd over the flock of God, and
has betrayed the trust placed in him by his congregation to protect them against the wolves. (Excerpted
and/or adapted from the 1/96 The Wilderness Voice, pp. 6-7).
Note fm Media Spotlight: The 7 Promiscuities (a miscellaneous mixture or mingling of persons or things)
of Promise Keepers -- (1) Catholicism; (2) Mormonism; (3) Charismatic's; (4) Psychology; (5)
Merchandising; (6) False Doctrine; (7) Blasphemy.

Note from Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries:

Promise Keepers Board Members and Church Affiliation:
Readers have asked us the names and church affiliations of the members of the Board of Directors of the
Promise Keepers. Promise Keepers supplied the following names to us. The church affiliations were
established by calling individual board members or secretaries to these men, or by asking one board
member the church affiliation of another board member. We believe the following is accurate: [Updated for
late-1997 changes.]
Dick Blair -- Vail Bible Church, Vail, CO
Ron Blue -- head of Ronald Blue & Co., a financial advisory firm
Huron Claus -- American Indian (CHIEF--Christian Hope Indian Eskimo Fellowship)
Jack Hayford -- Church on the Way (Four Square; Charismatic), Van Nuys, CA
Dr. Howard Hendricks -- Northwest Bible Church, Dallas, TX
E. Peb Jackson -- First Presbyterian (PCUSA), Colorado Springs, CO
Bill McCartney -- Vineyard Christian Fellowship (Charismatic), Longmont, CO
Dr. Jesse Miranda -- Faith Tabernacle (Charismatic), El Monte, CA
George Morrison -- Faith Bible Chapel (Charismatic), Arvada, CO
Page 83 of 176
Dr. Gary Oliver -- Mission Hills Baptist (Baptist General Conference), Denver, CO
A. L. Overton -- Greenwood Community Church (Evangelical Presby.), Greenwood Village, CO
Hank Peters -- Cherry Hills Community Church (Evangelical Presby.), Cherry Hills Village, CO
Bishop Phil Porter -- All Nations Pentecostal Church of God in Christ, Denver, CO (Board chm.)
David Roadcup -- Grace Fellowship, Louisville, CO (Board v.chm.)
James Ryle -- Vineyard Christian Fellowship (Charismatic), Longmont, CO
Alonzo E. Short, Jr. -- (Affiliation unknown at this time)
Michael T. Timmis* -- Roman Catholic Attorney and Businessman, Detroit, Michigan
[Note: PK has recently made a significant effort to dissuade observers of its Vineyard connections. James
Ryle changed the name of his church to "Vine life Community Church". At an 8/98 Oregon PK rally,
Randy Phillips was identified as a member of Faith Bible Chapel in Denver. Nevertheless, since the
Vineyard stigma remains, we have not changed the names of the McCartney-Ryle church affiliations.]
[Back to Text]
*4/97 & 8/99 Updates: The 1997 Summer Conference brochure for the Roman Catholic Franciscan
University of Steubenville said: "And you won't want to miss Mike Timmis, a highly respected Catholic
attorney and businessman, an inspiring evangelist, and a member of Promise Keeper's Board of
Directors". In addition, in July 1998, Timmis was named chairman of Prison Fellowship, succeeding
Catholic-sympathizer Chuck Colson.

*7/97 Update: PK has now changed their Statement of Faith to not exclude Catholics! Section five of the
Promise Keepers credo previously read: "We believe that man was created in the image of God, but
because of sin, was alienated from God. That alienation can be removed only by accepting, through faith
alone, God's gift of salvation, which was made possible by Christ's death." Concerned about PK's
exclusionary statement in light of PK's courting of Catholics, several Catholic theologians reviewed the
statement and presented their objections to Glen Wagner, PK's V.P. of National Ministries. As a result, PK
revised section five to read "Only through faith, trusting in Christ alone for salvation, which was made
possible by His death and resurrection, can that alienation be removed." This change suits the Roman
Catholic Church just fine. Its definition of grace includes sacraments. "Grace," by Rome's definition, means
Christ, by His death, has provided salvation to be distributed by the Catholic Church to those sinners who
adhere to its sacraments. The New Catholic Catechism states: "The Church affirms that for believers the
sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation" (1129). Paul Edwards, Promise Keepers' vice
president for advancement, explained that the statement of faith is a 'dynamic' document, and that Promise
Keepers is open to change. (Mike Aquilina, Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, pp. 10, 11). [In the same
article, McCartney was quoted as saying that full Catholic participation in PK was his intention from the
start.]
Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper Update: A revised edition of this book (now in paperback) was
published in early 1999. Some new material was added from new authors, as well as changes in wording in
a few places, most notably being the revision of Jack Hayford's infamous statement that: "Redeeming
worship centers on the Lord's Table. Whether your tradition celebrates it as Communion, Eucharist, the
Mass, or the Lord's Supper, we are all called to this centerpiece of Christian worship"; the naming all of
these has been removed, and, instead, says merely, "whatever your tradition ..." The Tony Evans' chapter
was also gone from the revised book (he previously received a lot of heat for his comments on the roles of
men and women in marriage), and the Randy Phillips introduction was also gone in exchange for a similar
one (plenty of stories) from Bill McCartney. In addition, a significant change was the suggested reading
material at the back of the book -- gone was The Masculine Journey. It is clear that PK is trying to take out
of the book things that were particularly controversial.

Page 84 of 176
The Promise Keepers Movement is Dangerous -- Watch Out
For It!
By M. H. Reynolds, Editor, Foundation magazine
Foundation, Vol. XVI, Issue 1
Fundamental Evangelistic Association, P.O. Box 6278, Los Osos, CA 93412
A new men's movement called Promise Keepers is sweeping our nation like a wildfire. Is it of God, or
man? Will it solve the problems of those who have embraced its principles and teachings, or will it
compound those problems? Can a Biblical answer be given to those important questions now, or is it best to
withhold judgment until a later time? Obviously, some very conflicting views already exist as to the basis,

Page 85 of 176
programs, benefits, and goals of the Promise Keepers movement. This report is based upon the actual
words of its leaders made in public meetings, contained in press releases, or printed in books, magazines,
and articles, which have either been published or endorsed by leaders of the Promise Keepers movement. It
is obvious that this movement is superbly organized and has tremendous financial resources at its disposal.
The way it has caught on since its formation in 1990, and its ambitious plans for expansion in the future,
require our immediate response and warning.
Most pastors and other individuals have so far heard only good reports about it. Even though some have
questions and a feeling of uneasiness concerning it, they have had little or no opportunity to examine it
carefully. While it is true that most if not all of the major evangelical and charismatic leaders are praising,
supporting and participating in Promise Keepers, that, in itself is no guarantee that its principles, practices
and goals are in accord with the Scriptures. Having personally read every word of the book, Seven
Promises of a Promise Keeper, as well as all the latest press releases and many of their other articles, we
have come to the inescapable conclusion that this movement represents another massive effort of Satan to
mix truth and error in some very deceptive ways.
Therefore, we do not hesitate to give the strongest possible warning now concerning the dangers of the
Promise Keepers movement. Our reasons will be clearly stated and properly documented from original
sources so that God's people may be able to see for themselves how this new movement is mixing truth and
error. If for no other reason, the Promise Keepers movement is dangerous because it promotes an
unscriptural agenda of forging a religious unity which is absolutely forbidden in God's Word (2 Cor. 6:14-
7:1; Eph. 5:11). Its founder and several of its leaders are part of the charismatic movement, which is a
major catalyst in the effort to bring about fellowship and eventual union with the Roman Catholic Church;
whereas, in truth, the Roman Catholic Church is a false church, preaches a false gospel and is not a part of
the body of Christ.
Throughout the centuries, the Roman Catholic Church has been an enemy of all true believers and the
blood of hundreds of thousands of martyrs is upon its hands. However, for the past few decades, the Roman
Catholic Church has changed its outward appearance and approaches. It has a new face of tolerance and a
kindlier public image but the damnable heresies it proclaims remain as dangerous as ever. Furthermore,
those who are only familiar with Roman Catholicism, as practiced in this country, would not believe the
raw heathenism, which is part of their worship in countries where they have been in control for centuries.
It should be of great concern to every believer to know that the Promise Keepers movement is taught and
led by men who blindly praise the Pope and are giving Roman Catholicism an undeserved and unwarranted
vote of confidence and even appreciation instead of sounding the warnings God's Word commands.
The Promise Keepers movement and its leaders totally reject the many plain commands of Scripture to
separate from and warn about false teachers, disobedient brethren and the world. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18; 2
Thessalonians 3:6, 14, 15; 1 John 2:15-17. As a result, those whom they seek to "disciple" are deprived of
the warnings God's Word says are necessary to preserve the purity of the Gospel and the purity of the
church. Instead of obeying the command of God's Word to "preach no other doctrine" (1 Tim. 1:3); and by
refusing to heed the warning God gives in Galatians 1:6-10 concerning all who preach "any other Gospel,"
they have become "blind leaders of the blind" about which Jesus Christ warned (Matt. 15:10-14). Since the
inevitable result of such spiritual blindness is that "both shall fall into the ditch", the strongest warning must
be given.
Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper is the title of a book published in 1994 by "Focus on the Family",
Colorado Springs, CO., and distributed in the USA and Canada by "Word Books", Dallas, TX. It is key to
the understanding of what Promise Keepers is trying to do. Contributing authors are Bill Bright, Edwin
Cole, Dr. James Dobson, Tony Evans, Bill McCartney, Luis Palau, Randy Phillips, Gary Smalley, Jack
Hayford, Wellington Boone, Howard Hendricks, E. Glenn Wagner, Gary Oliver, Dale Schlafer, H. B.

Page 86 of 176
London, Jr., Philip Porter, and Gordon England. Al Janssen and Larry K. Weeden edited this 210-page
book.
"Seven solid promises that will change a man's life forever" -- This bold claim, printed on the back jacket
of this book, only serves to heighten the need for an immediate, Scriptural analysis of the Promise Keepers
movement; for, indeed, these seven promises are not solidly based upon the sure foundation of God's Word
alone, but upon a mixture of God's Word with the suppositions of men.

What Are The Seven Promises?

Promise one -- a man and his God: A Promise Keeper is committed to honoring Jesus Christ through
worship, prayer, and obedience to God's Word in the power of the Holy Spirit.
Promise two -- a man and his mentors: A Promise Keeper is committed to pursuing vital relationships with
a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him keep his promises.
Promise three -- a man and his integrity: A Promise Keeper is committed to practicing spiritual, moral,
ethical, and sexual purity.
Promise four -- a man and his family: A Promise Keeper is committed to building strong marriages and
families through love, protection, and Biblical values.
Promise five -- a man and his church: A Promise Keeper is committed to supporting the mission of the
church by honoring and praying for his pastor, and by actively giving of his time and resources.
Promise six -- a man and his brothers: A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any racial and
denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of Biblical unity.
Promise seven -- a man and his world: A Promise Keeper is committed to influencing his world, being
obedient to the Great Commandment (see Mark 12:30, 31) and the Great Commission (see Matthew 28:19,
20).
At first glance, it is not difficult to understand why most Christians might feel that the Promise Keepers
movement is greatly needed and should be encouraged and supported. Without question, there is a great
need today for Godly men who will assume their responsibilities in the home, in the church and in the
world. However, a careful examination of the programs and goals as set forth by its leaders in public and in
print, and by comparing these with the Scriptures, it becomes clear that discerning believers must raise
serious questions now concerning this rapidly growing men's movement.
The emphasis upon self-effort within the Promise Keepers program supplants absolute dependence upon
the Lord Jesus Christ. Only God can unfailingly keep a promise. Therefore, those in the movement will
face disillusionment and disappointment because of their failure to look to God and His promises alone.
Before giving an analysis of the Promise Keepers movement in the light of the Scriptures, we trust it will
be helpful to mention several basic issues, which should not be disregarded nor treated lightly.

Dangers of the Promise Keepers:

• Advocacy of an unscriptural religious unity at the expense of sound doctrine and practice.
• Acceptance and promotion of unscriptural Charismatic teachings.
Page 87 of 176
 • Approval and use of psychological approaches and techniques.
• Use and promotion of corrupted modern versions of the Bible.
• Twisting, misapplying, and misinterpreting key Scriptures.
• A program stressing the importance of evangelism while ignoring the need of a pure gospel.
• A subtle and very harmful influence upon local churches, which have heretofore resisted
unscriptural programs and fellowships.
Are the promises demanded of the Promise Keepers Scriptural? A careful review of their Seven Promises
clearly reveals that a mixture of truth and error is involved. For instance:
Promise One -- A man and his God: A Promise Keeper is committed to honoring Jesus Christ through
worship, prayer, and obedience to God's Word in the power of the Holy Spirit.
(Analysis): Technically, and if these words are understood in their scriptural and historical meaning, any
true believer -- man or woman -- would gladly support such a statement. However, we live in days when
wonderful words like these are being abused and misused.
For example, in the first chapter of the book, Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper, Charismatic leader Dr.
Jack Hayford sets forth some precious truths concerning the different aspects of worship as set forth in the
Scriptures. However, when he writes about "Redeeming Worship" on page 19, he teaches serious error.
Hayford writes: "Redeeming worship centers on the Lord's Table. Whether your tradition celebrates it as
Communion, Eucharist, the Mass, or the Lord's Supper, we are all called to this centerpiece of Christian
worship."
Is there any difference between the Eucharist and the Mass (celebrated by Roman Catholics and Orthodox),
and the Lord's Table, Lord's Supper and Communion observed by true believers? Of course there is!
Historically Bible believers have recognized the mass as blatant blasphemy. Yet, today, Hayford, like other
Charismatic leaders, is teaching Promise Keepers and others that God and proper for all Christians to
accept approve this false view of Christian worship. Promise One has the right words but the wrong
application. Many other examples could be cited of errors concerning prayer and the ministry of the Holy
Spirit, which are believed and taught by Charismatic leaders. We have to ask, "How could anyone possibly
promise to obey God's Word and in the same breath disobey that Word?" This inconsistency and
incongruity make Promise Keepers a deceptive movement.

Promise Two -- A man and his mentors: A Promise Keeper is committed to pursuing vital relationships
with a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him keep his promises.
(Analysis): How very dangerous is this false premise, which is based upon psychological theories rather
than on Biblical principles. Of course, Godly men can be of help to others and be helped by others. But to
encourage the false notion that a godly man cannot make it on his own in these tumultuous times without
depending upon other Promise Keepers to help keep him "on the right track" is another trick of Satan to
belittle the power of God and negate His "... great and precious promises" (2 Pet. 1:3, 4).
God's Word repeatedly warns about the danger of putting trust in men. Isaiah 2:22, "Cease you from man,
whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?" Jeremiah 17:5, "Thus said the Lord;
Cursed be the man that trusted in man, and makes flesh his arm, and whose heart departed from the Lord."
By contrast, note Jeremiah 17:7, "Blessed is the man that trusted in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is."
God's Word clearly commands us to "... have no confidence in the flesh" (Phil. 3:3). God specifically warns

Page 88 of 176
in 1 Corinthians 10:12, "Wherefore let him that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall." Those who
disregard God's warnings are surely headed for a fall.
Promise Three -- A man and his integrity: A Promise Keeper is committed to practicing spiritual, moral,
ethical, and sexual purity.
(Analysis): Once again, here is a statement that all Christians should desire to see fulfilled in their lives,
not just the men but women also. However, if the men have to depend on their brothers to attain these
goals, what about the women? Will a women's Promise Keepers movement also become a necessity and be
established as the newest women's movement on the scene?
In fact, however, the spiritual, moral, ethical and sexual purity needed by every believer is not to be found
in making boastful promises nor in dependence upon other believers but can only be obtained by heeding
the Word of God which says, "Whereby are given unto us [all of us!] Exceeding great and precious
promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in
the world through lust" (2 Peter 1:4). It is the promises of God that are all-important and they assure divine
power to accomplish His purpose of godliness in an ungodly day, not the promises of even the finest, most
sincere men who attempt to formulate what they believe is needed to change men and then the world.
Promise Four -- A man and his family: A Promise Keeper is committed to building strong marriages and
families through love, protection, and Biblical values.
(Analysis): Here is another promise, which is certainly desirable as stated. However, the question, which
must be asked and answered, concerns just what are these "Biblical values?" A careful study of Promise
Keepers literature reveals that their programs are based upon some Biblical values given by God, but are
also mixed with some very dangerous psychological principles and practices which rest upon the theories
of men. This unsound material will continue to flow into churches long after the initial excitement of the
program wanes.`
Promise Five -- A man and his church: A Promise Keeper is committed to supporting the mission of the
church by honoring and praying for his pastor, and by actively giving of his time and resources.
(Analysis): Whether such a promise is scriptural or unscriptural depends entirely upon which church is
involved. Is it a church, which proclaims a false gospel (such as the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and liberal
Protestant churches)? Is it a church, which is disobedient to God's Word by its fellowship with false
teachers and those who "love the world"? (1 John 2:15-17). If so, to "support the mission of such a church,
honoring, and praying for its pastor, and actively giving of his time and resources" is helping to build the
one-world harlot church of the antichrist. Promise Keepers ignore the plain commands of God's Word
concerning separation from those who teach error, and fail to "reprove" such (Eph. 5:11). As a result, the
men in the Promise Keepers movement are much unprepared to stand against all the "wiles of the devil"
(Eph. 6:11).
Promise Six -- A man and his brothers: A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any racial and
denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of Biblical unity.
(Analysis): This required promise once again mixes truth and error and provides another example of how
the word "Biblical" is misused. While reaching beyond racial barriers is Scriptural, reaching beyond
denominational barriers as Promise Keepers are doing amounts to open defiance of God's plain commands.
It is not "Biblical unity" which Promise Keepers think they are demonstrating, but an unbiblical unity,
which will bring God's eventual judgment. 2 Peter 2:1-3.
Should anyone doubt the fact that the Promise Keepers movement seeks an unbiblical unity, just read the
words of its founder, Coach Bill McCartney, as found on pages 160, 161 of Seven Promises of a Promise
Keeper: "Now, I don't mean to suggest that all cultural differences and denominational distinctiveness are
Page 89 of 176
going to disappear. However, what I know is that Almighty God wants to bring Christian men together
regardless of their ethnic origin, denominational background, or style of worship. There is only one
criterion for this kind of unity: to love Jesus and be born of the Spirit of God. Can we look one another in
the eye -- black, white, red, brown, yellow, Baptist, Presbyterian, Assemblies of God, and Catholic
[emphasis ours], and so on -- and get together on this common ground: 'We believe in salvation through
Christ alone, and we have made Him the Lord of our lives'? Is that not the central, unifying reality of our
existence? In addition, if it is, can we not focus on that and call each other brothers instead of always
emphasizing our differences? Men, we have to get together on this!"
In this statement, McCartney's contradictory words should be noted concerning the necessity of believing in
salvation through Christ alone -- and then including Roman Catholics as "brothers" in spite of the fact that
they do not believe in salvation through Christ alone, adding sacraments and good works as requirements
for salvation.
Promise Seven -- A man and his world: A Promise Keeper is committed to influencing his world, being
obedient to the Great Commandment (see Mark 12:30, 31) and the Great Commission (see Matthew 28:19,
20).
(Analysis): The Great Commandment referred to in Mark 12:30, 31 records the words of Jesus Christ in
which love to God and love to one's neighbor are commanded. However, Promise Keepers presents a faulty
understanding of genuine Christian love in which reconciliation with a disobedient brother is insisted upon,
whereas, in truth, separation from disobedient brethren is commanded by God (2 Thess. 3:6, 14, 15). In
these days of increasing compromise, Satan has succeeded in blinding the eyes of many believers to the
fact that separation from disobedient brethren is not only for the preservation of a pure church, but is also
for the disobedient brother's spiritual welfare. Promise Keepers' mistaken premise that genuine Christian
love necessitates fellowship with, rather than separation from disobedient brethren, will do untold harm to
all concerned.
The Great Commission referred to in Matthew 28:19, 20 involves not only the preaching of the Gospel, but
also teaching those who believe "... to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." Giving the
impression that it does not matter what church is attended or what doctrinal creed any true believer
embraces is foolish -- it does matter to God and a warning against error must be given. The apostle Paul,
one of the greatest evangelists, pastors, missionaries, and teachers of all time, writing by inspiration of the
Holy Spirit in Acts 20:17-32, reminded the Ephesian elders that he had not shunned to declare "all the
counsel of God" (v. 27), warning "every one night and day with tears" for three years (v. 3l). What were
these warnings about? The grievous wolves (false teachers) who would enter in, "not sparing the flock" (v.
29), and those from within the church who would arise, "speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples
after them" (v. 30). Separation from, not reconciliation with such false teachers, is God's way of preserving
the purity and power of the church.
Much of the strong appeal of the movement is based upon humanistic psychological principles and
techniques. Many of its leaders, however, have become very proficient in using such dangerous theories
even while claiming to repudiate humanistic psychology. In another of Satan's "dangerous mixture"
deceptions, the term "Christian Psychologist" has mesmerized its proponents into believing that it is
possible to take the "good things" from humanistic psychology and combine these with Biblical teachings.
The result supposedly provides answers to problems Christians are experiencing which can be found in no
other way. As a result, Dr. James Dobson, who is one of the Promise Keepers leaders, and other well-
known "Christian Psychologists" such as Gary Smalley, John Trent, and Robert Hicks are leading many
astray.
We fully concur with the statement of Martin and Deidre Bobgan on page 29 of their 41-page booklet,
"Promise Keepers & Psycho Heresy". We quote: "If men are to come together as men, they would do well
to follow what the Bible says rather than Freudian fables, Jungian myths, and other self-serving, man-made
Page 90 of 176
psychologies. And they would do well to gather together in the place where they are meant to grow -- in the
local church -- not in huge rallies with "mob psychology" or in groups using encounter group techniques
and undermining important doctrinal distinctiveness." For a comprehensive and Biblical analysis of the
highly questionable book, The Masculine Journey -- Understanding the Six Stages of Manhood, which has
been given massive distribution to Promise Keepers, write to Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries, 4137
Primavera Rd., Santa Barbara, CA 93112. A second book, AGAINST Biblical Counseling: FOR the BIBLE
(200 pages) will also be very helpful to all those who want the facts concerning the dangers of "Christian"
Psychology.
Our own publication, "The House That Freud Built", will provide valuable information concerning the
dangers of "sensitivity training" and "small group" psychological techniques as devised for those who claim
to be evangelical believers. This 40-page booklet gives the history of how "sensitivity training" was
introduced into evangelical churches. Originally printed in the September/October 1994 issue of
Foundation, this reprint will be a revelation to all who want to know the truth.
What does Promise Keepers say about its history and future plans? The following information is quoted in
full from the Fact Sheet, which was part of the official press packet prepared in January 1995:
How we started: On March 20, 1990, University of Colorado Head Football Coach Bill McCartney and his
friend Dave Wardell, PhD were on a three-hour car ride to a Fellowship of Christian Athletes meeting in
Pueblo, CO, when the idea of filling a stadium with Christian men first came up. Later in 1990, seventy-
two men began to pray and fast about the concept of thousands of men coming together for the purpose of
Christian discipleship.
Yearly attendance figures as given in this Fact Sheet testify to its small beginning and rapid growth.
1991 -- 4,200 men met at the Univ. of Colorado Events Center; 1992 -- 22,000 men met at CU's Folsom
Stadium; 1993 -- 50,000 filled Folsom Stadium to capacity; 1994 -- Seven sites nationwide totaling
278,600 men. 1995 Plans: Promise Keepers has scheduled 13 conferences across the United States from
April through October 1995. Sites include Pontiac, MI; Los Angeles, CA; Boise, ID; Washington D. C.;
Houston, TX; Denver, CO; Indianapolis, IN; Atlanta, GA; Seattle, WA; Minneapolis, MN; St. Petersburg.
FL; Oakland, CA. and Irving, TX. Total attendance for these 13 conferences is projected to be between
500,000 and 600,000. [BDM Editor's Note -- 10/96: 1995's stadium rallies attracted 727,000 men. PK
scheduled 22 rallies in 1996, with an expected attendance of 1.5 million. They plan 50 conferences in 50
states by the year 2000.]
Why "For men only": The conferences are designed for specific men's issues in the context of an all-male
setting. We have discovered that men are more apt to hear and receive the full instruction of the sessions
when they are not inhibited by concern for a woman's responses. One of the primary goals of the
conference is to deepen the commitment of men to respect and honor women.
(Analysis): Yes, Promise Keepers is a rapidly growing movement. In addition to the plans for 1995, we
understand that tentative plans for 1996 include bringing together 75,000 clergy for a Conference as well as
a huge rally in Washington, D.C. with the goal of one million men in attendance. In Promise Keepers
literature, repeated references are made to the supposition, "There is strength in numbers". However, where
is such a false idea supported in Scripture? God usually had to reduce the numerics of Israel's armies so
they would not become proud and take glory unto themselves for victories won -- glory which belonged to
God. Read the record of Gideon in Judges 7:1-22 as a prime example. Of course, in our day, the great
majority of professing Christians are willing to compromise Biblical principles, mistakenly assuming that
size is all-important to God as it is to men. That is a grievous error. Fidelity to the Truth is of utmost
importance.
Speakers at Promise Keepers "Raise the Standard" conferences include: Ron Blue, Wellington Boone, Bill
Bright, Dave Bryant, Ken Canfield, Tom Claus, Ed Cole, Chuck Colson, Rod Cooper, Daniel DeLeon,
Page 91 of 176
Tony Evans, Steve Farrar, Joseph Garlington, Bill Glass, Franklin Graham, Jack Hayford, Howard
Hendricks, E. V. Hill, Bill Hybels, T. D. Jakes, Jeffrey Johnson, Billy Kim, Greg Laurie, Crawford Loritts,
John Maxwell, Bill McCartney, Bob Moorhead, Gary Oliver, Juan Carlos Ortiz, Luis Palau, John Perkins,
Randy Phillips, Dennis Rainey, Raul Ries, James Ryle, Gary Smalley, Joe Stowell, Chuck Swindoll, John
Trent, E. Glenn Wagner, Stu Weber, John Wesley-White, Al Whittinghill, Bruce Wilkinson, and Ravi
Zacharias.
(Analysis): Without doubt, these speakers are very capable teachers who are able to give forceful
presentations of what they teach. The question to be raised however, concerns whether or not they will be
giving these huge crowds of men the whole counsel of God or a modified, altered, misleading presentation
of essential Scriptural truths. Since the ministry of these teachers runs the gamut from compromising new-
evangelicalism and charismatic error, to ecumenical liberalism, it is clear that they will be introducing the
Promise Keepers to unscriptural doctrines and fellowships. This is a very serious matter.
Promise Keepers officers and major staff members are obviously very capable communicators and
seasoned motivators -- their combined talents provide an amazing base for publicity and continued support.
An article by Stephen R. McLauchlin in the January/February, 1995 issue of Religious Broadcasters
magazine reports that the free 90-second daily "Promise Keepers Men in Action" spot announcements are
already being carried on approximately 400 stations. This article encourages stations to publicize Promise
Keepers by "giving coverage to the conferences, signing up to air "Men in Action", and covering local
stories that highlight grass roots experiences of the movement".
Campus Crusade for Christ is also involved in the movement. In the "Alumni Relations" newsletter of
January 1995, the following article was included, which describes the purpose of "Strategic Alliance", the
title they have given to the Promise Keepers/Campus Crusade organizational link: "Strategic Alliance --
Have you attended Promise Keepers and want to receive further training?' M.A.N. to Man' seminars are
part of a Strategic Alliance between Campus Crusade for Christ and Promise Keepers to help men 1)
personalize issues that concern men; 2) provide basic leadership training; and 3) give information on small-
group Bible studies especially for men."
Campus Crusade has a long history of increasing compromise. It adopted at its inception the policy of
totally rejecting Biblical separation; infiltration rather than separation has always been CCC's stated
strategy. Because of adopting this unbiblical course, CCC has increased its compromise. Liberal, Roman
Catholic and Charismatic delusion are now firmly lodged within this incredibly influential organization.
Their support will give Promise Keepers a tremendous boost.
Consider also The National Religious Broadcasters, which now numbers some 800 broadcasters,
representing a wide array of diverse theological positions. The NRB is an official arm of the National
Association of Evangelicals, which, since it is founding in 1942, has represented a position of compromise
between Biblical Fundamentalism and Ecumenism. Fifty years ago, the NAE recognized Roman
Catholicism as a false religious system, but it has now become one of the major forces, which, while
admitting that there are some differences, is now advocating cooperation with Roman Catholics as though
it could now be considered a part of the body of Christ. It is obvious that such a position is held by the
majority of professing believers today, but that makes it all the more important for all who stand for the
Bible and against all compromise to warn all who will listen.
Roman Catholic leaders in Southern California are welcoming promise Keepers. According to the official
publication of the Los Angeles Roman Catholic archdiocese, The Tidings, March 31, 1995 edition, Promise
Keepers is now considered a viable ministry for Catholics. The Tidings reported that at the urging of
Cardinal Roger Mahony, Christian Van Liefde, Roman Catholic priest and pastor of St. Hillary Church in
Pico Rivera, "has studied the feasibility and appropriateness of utilizing Promise Keepers at the Catholic
parish level." Van Liefde, while noting "the evangelical roots of the program", was quoted as stating,
"There is no doctrinal issue which should cause concern to the Catholic Church". Van Liefde was further
Page 92 of 176
quoted as saying, "Promise Keepers places a very strong emphasis on returning to your own church
congregation or parish and becoming an active layman". Van Liefde also mentioned the fact that one of the
promises of Promise Keepers is his commitment to "give generously of their time, treasure, and talent to
their local church". Roman Catholic leaders are quick to observe how Promise Keepers can be used to build
a false church, which preaches a false gospel.
The pressure to follow the crowd and silence the voice of scriptural reproof is growing. In closing this
article, however, we would point out that any pastor and church wanting to stand against such compromise
will have to take a stand now against the Promise Keepers teachings. Many who have already joined this
group are now bent on recruiting new members with fully as much zeal and pressure as sports-minded
college alumni men seek to recruit top athletes for sports programs.
We see this recruiting zeal of those who become involved in the movement to be one of its greatest
hazards. Why? Because there will be many faithful pastors who have in the past taken a stand against all
ecumenical endeavors and movements which would introduce doctrinal error and the devilish spirit of new-
evangelicalism into their congregations, but who now are pressured into buying into the Promise Keepers
program.
How could a pastor say "No, we cannot ..." to men returning from a Promise Keepers conference who
promise the pastor they will support him, work with him, and pray for him as never before? How can he
deal with these undoubtedly well-meaning, yet misled, men within his own church who are now exerting
pressure upon him to fall into line with the program? Imagine the faithful pastor's dilemma! Up until now,
he could herald a warning against Romanism, liberalism, ecumenism, charismatic delusion and the like
without reservation. Now he has men within his own flock who are introducing the people to all of the
above and more under the attractive packaging -- Promise Keepers!
Fundamental, Bible-believing pastor, you must take a stand against this or you will be taken down by it.
The machinery is coming into place for this movement to have a continuing influence on its Promise
Keepers for years to come. Should you be forced into the program now, dear brother, you will be battling
its impact for the duration.
A closing word about those who say, "Why not just emphasize the good things in Promise Keepers?" Such
an argument sounds reasonable until you consider the very serious doctrinal errors involved. When a
deadly poison is discovered in a popular medicine, no one insists on emphasizing the good ingredients;
every one insists on identifying and warning about the poison. When meat or other food is found to be
contaminated, the concern is not about the beneficial substances involved, but rather the giving of strong
warnings as to the nature, source, and elimination of the contamination. Spiritual poison and contamination
(error) are even more dangerous since they affect the eternal welfare of individuals and the reward or loss
of reward for believers (1 Cor. 3:9-15; 2 Jn. 8; Rev. 3:8-11).
As far as naming names is concerned, most believers also frown upon this today. Yet, the Lord Jesus Christ
(who is the very personification of love) issued some of the strongest warnings and rebukes ever given to
the false teachers of His day. Read Matthew chapter 23 and pay careful attention to the words our Savior
used concerning the Scribes and Pharisees. Notice His instruction to "call no man father" upon earth (v. 9),
and the particular words He used forbidding repetitious prayer (Matt. 6:7). Roman Catholics disobey both
of these. In addition, mark well the warning of Jesus Christ in Matthew 7:15: "Beware of false prophets,
who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves". In addition, what about Peter,
one of the three disciples who were closest to Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry? Was Christ's rebuke
of Peter before the other disciples unnecessary and unloving (Matt. 16:21-23)? In addition, look carefully at
the experience of Peter who learned the hard way about the disaster of claiming to be a promise keeper in
his own strength (Mark 14:26-42).

Page 93 of 176
Furthermore, the apostle Paul, one of the greatest Bible teachers, pastors, evangelists and missionaries of
his day spent three years warning the Ephesian elders about the wolves (false teachers) who would enter
into the flock from without; and a similar warning about those who would arise from within the church who
would desire to "draw away disciples after themselves" (please read Acts 20:17-32). Likewise, both Paul
and the other apostles, writing by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, did not hesitate to mention names. Notice
how often they rebuked by name those who were disobedient to the Word of God. 1 Timothy 1:20; 2
Timothy 4:10, 14; 3 John 9. We must follow their example and obey God rather than to trust the promises
of any man.
Promise Keepers is dangerous, but please do not forget that these words of warning are an effort to "speak
the truth in love"; praying always that God will help those affected to see this.

DOCTRINAL CONFUSION OF PROMISE KEEPERS RALLY

October 28, 1997 (Fundamental Baptist Information Service, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak Harbor, WA 98277) --
The following is part of an eye-witness report by Brian Snider (bsnider@quicklink.net) of the "Stand in
the Gap" rally in Washington, D.C. -- 'Promise Keepers' 'Stand In The Gap Rally': A Firsthand Report,"
Foundation magazine, September-October 1997.

More than a million men crowded onto the National Mall Oct. 4 [1997] to hear from a diverse array of
speakers who came to call this cross-section of American churches to repentance. The throng heard from
charismatic, evangelical, black, white, Indian, Asian, and Hispanic speakers. They spoke of the gospel of
Jesus Christ, repentance from racism and sexual sin, the need for stronger churches and the conversion of
sinners.

Yet, under scrutiny, we find that their words, plans, and deeds are hollow and unbiblical, and are deceiving
many millions into false and dangerous beliefs and alliances. While television and newspaper cameras
showed hundreds of thousands of men sprawled on their faces in prayer, a survey of those in attendance
revealed that many of those same men lacked even a basic understanding of the simplest Bible doctrines
and could give no solid testimony of their conversion to Jesus Christ.

How is it that a million men, many of whom do not have a clear testimony of salvation, can redeem a
nation by "standing in the gap"? Moreover, why do they need to? Hasn't Jesus Christ once and for all stood
in the gap for anyone who will come to him?

In fact, a large percentage of those surveyed became angry that someone would have the gall to question
such an obvious display of unity. Men who would never consider getting upset over lesbian ministers or the
doctrines of Rome, quickly become red-in-the-face at the idea that there is something unbiblical about the
mixing of belief with unbelief, that God might not honor their noble pilgrimage to Washington. In addition,
this in spite of the clarity of God's Word on the subject of separating from all appearance of evil. In
interviewing the men at Stand in the Gap, the writers of this article found the words in Galatians to be true
-- "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" (Gal. 4:16). This is the very thing that
happened. The men considered us the enemy there. This is what happens when you leave the old-fashioned
faith. When false doctrine comes in, people begin to view those who believe right as the enemy. People do
not like the negative part of the Bible; it is not what it is for, but what it is against. Listen to what one
Promise Keeper wrote to a fellow brother that believes that the PK is of the devil:
"What is your problem, brother? Did you or did you not see what happened Saturday in DC? ... The
opposition from NOW and gay and lesbian organizations is a sign that it was a divine appointment. Why
must good Christian men like you and Phil Arms use your platform and ministry to join the opposition? I
do not understand.
Page 94 of 176
"You have such a problem with Catholics attending Promise Keepers; I hope they don't attend your church
-- they might save. That is what is happening at PK. Evangelism, you should try it. You know the great
Commission. If you have time in between bashing sessions or tearing down the body of Christ. Get real,
Get in love with Jesus.

"You guys are NUTS. To think that the only way to be saved is by being Baptist, and that Catholics are
wrong is just plain crazy. You really should attend a Promise Keeper event and allow it to change your life.
The Holy Spirit moves in strange and mysterious ways. He just might even be able to help you out of your
narrow view point."
The message that Jesus Christ of the Bible preached was a very narrow message. They (the religious
leaders, much like the PK leaders) crucified Him for the message He preached.

The concept of unity in diversity has so permeated the evangelical church [es] that seemingly no one on the
Mall could offer any reason why God should not smile at this patched together conglomeration of liberals
and conservatives, holy rollers and liturgists, Catholics and Baptists, old scholars and new-agers.

An announcer on a local Washington radio station covering the event spoke of the beliefs of most of those
present. "To a God who sees all, this must please his heart."

While we are instructed by Scripture to be of one mind, the evangelical today scoffs at the idea of true
biblical unity, based on complete agreement with, and submission to, God's holy Word.

As the speakers preached the PK gospel of repentance from denominational division, the men on site
revealed by their beliefs and opinions just what that means in a practical sense. The following is a
paraphrased summary of answers given to a list of questions posed to a number of attendees at this meeting.
As the surveys were being conducted, it seemed apparent that the real unity being displayed by the men on
the Mall was their inability to answer any of these questions consistent with the teaching of Scripture:
1. What church do you attend? Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, charismatics, independents, and others
answered the survey. One Liberty University student claimed to be a Baptist with a Catholic background,
and said that both traditions were valid.

2. Are you born again? Almost everyone, including the Catholics interviewed, responded "yes" to this
question, though several offered disclaimers by saying something along the lines of "I don't mean 'born
again' the way most people mean it."

3. Do you speak with other tongues? About a third responded that they did.

4. What is your understanding of the Bible? Is it to be taken literally? At this point, the answers began
coming less quickly and with far more explanation needed to develop each respondent's personal view of
what the Bible has to say and how it is to be read. Answers were extremely mixed on the inerrancy of
Scripture. Most indicated that the Bible should not be taken literally on history or science.

5. What do you believe will be the final condition of the church when Jesus returns? Answers to this
question were almost evenly split between those who believe the church of Christ will be large and
powerful and those who had never considered such a question and had no thoughts to offer on it. No one
said that they believed the church would be a remnant.

6. How important is it to you that there is little doctrinal agreement among the members of Promise

Page 95 of 176
Keepers? Almost every person interviewed quickly answered that it was of no consequence to him or her
that there was no agreement on Bible doctrine. Most took great pride in the ability to ignore Bible doctrine
for the greater good of the cause of unity. The one pleasant surprise to this question came from the only
woman interviewed. She was a 27-year-old volunteer handing out some of the one million free Stands in
the Gap CEV New Testaments. She answered that she was very concerned that there was not much stress
on doctrine.

7. What do you believe the Bible says about the importance of doctrine? Many answered with the
question, "What do you mean by doctrine?" Others said the Bible teaches only that there are essentials that
all Christians must subscribe to and that there is great freedom beyond that. The female PK volunteer was
the only one who answered that the Bible treats the subject of doctrine seriously.

8. Do you believe there will be a revival before the return of Jesus Christ? How will in manifest
itself? "Yes. You're looking at it", was the primary response. One respondent said that there would be a
revival and deception at the same time. No one else interviewed depicted any type of apostasy to avoid.

9. Do you believe that Roman Catholics are Christians? Almost every respondent said yes, though
several added weak stipulations. "Yes, they can be," or "Yes, if they accept Jesus Christ, they are", were the
most typical answers. No respondent said flatly that Roman Catholicism is not Christianity.

10. Do you know what the Eucharist is? Most had no understanding of the Catholic Eucharist. One
former Catholic understood completely and renounced the Eucharist as unchristian and another evangelical
understood that it represented the literal body and blood of Christ, though seemed not to object to its use.

11. Do you believe that a Christian can pray to Mary? This question produced some of the most
surprising answers as several said that a Christian can pray to Mary but should not expect an answer. After
receiving that answer, the question was rephrased to say, "Do you think God minds when a Christian prays
to Mary?" Some of the respondents changed their opinion to limply say something along the lines of,
"Well, I suppose", but many did not.
Given space, many direct quotes could be provided that would further show the woeful lack of Biblical
doctrine that most Promise Keepers understand or subscribe to. For most reading this article, that is
probably not necessary.

Nor is it necessary to give a great deal of space to the fair speeches delivered from the platform. Most of
the danger in Promise Keepers, as with all neo-evangelical organizations, lies not in what they say (though
that is often bad enough), but in what they refuse to say.

We could cite Dr. A.R. Bernard, pastor of Christian Life Center in Brooklyn, NY, and his continued
references to the great work of reconciliation performed by Martin Luther King. Would the cause of Christ
not be better served by calling on black Christians to jettison their allegiance to a man who was no
Christian in any biblical sense? Will God not judge those who follow a man who denied the deity of Christ,
who spent his last night on earth in the same adulterous pattern he had lived the last years of his life, and
who preached, not the gospel of Jesus Christ, but rather the gospel of social reform?

We could point to Jack Hayford, Randy Phillips, Raleigh Washington, or any of the numerous speakers
who urged men to their knees in repentance, yet refused to acknowledge that there was anything to repent
of in attending churches run by false prophets, or liberals, or homosexuals or women.

We could call on James Ryle, the pastor of the Boulder Valley Vineyard, who gave a clear presentation of
the gospel, calling on all the men present to repent, and yet failed to acknowledge his own false prophecies
and repent of them. (See Foundation magazine article on Ryle's false prophecies for more information)
Page 96 of 176
While more than a million men streamed into Washington to acknowledge their sins, they went home none
the wiser for what many of those sins are, even after spending the day between prostration and group hugs.

Anyone who has ever witnessed to a modern-day evangelical knows firsthand of the overwhelming
ignorance that exists today on the subject of apostasy. Multiply that by one million and you have "Stand in
the Gap". One British newspaper described the audience in this way: "Every denomination was represented,
from Roman Catholics, Episcopalians, and Baptists to 'Bikers for Christ' wearing T-shirts declaring 'Satan
sucks.' There were guitar-playing Christians calling on people to 'Jam for the Lamb,' and muscular
Christians sporting logos of a Herculean Christ under the words 'Lord's Gym.' There were also T-shirts that
had the saying from a Bud-Light commercial with the words 'I Love you Man,' but instead of having a man
saying that to a friend trying to get his beer, it was Jesus saying the words 'I Love You Man'."

One of the saddest sights was to see the thousands of men wearing the shirts that said "BREAK DOWN
THE WALLS." In Nehemiah, the Lord's people were building up the walls to keep the enemy out.
However, at D.C., they were telling the men to break down the walls. When the walls are broke down, the
enemy can easily come in. That is exactly what the Devil wants -- for Christians to have their spiritual
walls broken down so that he can come in and wreck their faith.

Even the Chicago Tribune took notice of the disparity of beliefs among participants: "... Joseph Stowell,
president of Chicago's Moody Bible Institute and representative of one of America's most venerable and
buttoned-down evangelical institutions, spoke from the same podium as Charismatics and Pentecostals who
practice a wildly different kind of worship." [Actually, Moody very well represents the doctrinal
smorgasbord found at PK.]

For Promise Keepers, "wildly different" beliefs and practices do not constitute any cause for concern,
unless they produce division. Only then are they to be repented of. Fellowship with apostasy is not
something to be avoided, but something to be embraced. How different this is from the attitude of
Scripture: "I have not sat with vain persons; neither will I go in with dissemblers. I have hated the
congregation of evil doers; and will not sit with the wicked" (Psalm 26:4).

In this treacherous and deceitful age, a number of issues should be of primary concern for a group that
caters to evangelical Christians. Some of them are:
• Ecumenism and the return to Rome
• Worldliness in the churches
• The replacement of the gospel with psychological counseling
• Homosexuality in the church
• The charismatic invasion of churches
• False prophets in the church
• The legitimization of liberal churches which desecrate the Word of God through unbelief and
apostasy
• The flippancy with which publishers have perverted the Word of God
Not once was any man at Stand in the Gap warned of, or given an opportunity to repent of, these grave sins
before a Holy God. The concept of standing firm on any particular doctrine or belief has been utterly

Page 97 of 176
abandoned by the majority of evangelicals today. It has been replaced by a concept of God's love in which
anyone who names the name of Christ, no matter how far afield in doctrine, is welcomed into the
fellowship of believers.

Promise Keepers is just the latest tower of Babel

A feeble attempt by all concerned to reach God on their own terms. As the days of Babel were marked by
reliance on human effort to reach God, we know from Scripture that the same haughty spirit of spiritual
self-achievement will characterize the last days.

"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves,
covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural
affection, truce breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors,
heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying
the power thereof: from such turn away" (1 Timothy 3:1-5).

Never was that more evident than on the Washington Mall.

[This article is part of an eye-witness report by Brian Snider (bsnider@quicklink.net) of the "Stand in the
Gap" rally in Washington, D.C. Brian Snider is a free-lance writer from Birmingham , Alabama; he
represented FOUNDATION Magazine at the Promise Keepers Washington D.C. rally. The FOUNDATION
Magazine article contains photographs taken by brother Snider].

Additional comments by David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak
Harbor, WA 98277

DENOMINATIONAL DIVISIONS ARE DOCTRINAL

One of the theme songs of the ecumenical movement is "God is destroying denominational lines". This, as
we have seen, is still one of the chief goals of the Promise Keepers movement. They are breaking down the
walls between denominations. This is a gross error, which ignores the reason for denominational divisions.
Some divisions between Christians are manmade and unnecessary, but many others -- most, in fact -- are
doctrinal. Why, for example, is an Episcopal church different from an Independent Baptist church?
Different doctrine. One teaches baptismal regeneration; the other teaches baptism is symbolic only. One
baptizes infants; the other practices believer's baptism. One sprinkles; the other immerses. One has
priesthood; the other has pastors and deacons. One has a hierarchical church structure; the other practices
the autonomy of the New Testament assembly. One interprets prophecy symbolically and is working to
establish the kingdom of God on earth; the other interprets prophecy literally and is looking for the
imminent return of Jesus Christ. One allows its leaders and members to hold every sort of heresy and
immorality; the other practices discipline and separation.

What is the difference between an Assemblies of God congregation and an independent Baptist church?
Doctrine. One believes the baptism of the Holy Spirit is something the believer must seek and that its
manifestations are tongues and other spiritual gifts; the other believes the baptism of the Holy Spirit
occurred at Pentecost and that every believer has the Holy Spirit and has no need to seek a Spirit baptism.
One believes the sign gifts are operative today; the other believes the sign gifts were given to the Apostles
and ceased with the passing of the Apostles. One believes the Holy Spirit "slays" people; the other believes
"spirit slaying" is unscriptural and demonic. One believes the gift of tongues is operative today; the other
believes the gift of tongues had a temporary purpose and that its purpose ceased in the first century. One
believes salvation can be lost; the other believes salvation is eternally secure. One believes ecumenical
unity is the work of the Holy Spirit; the other believes ecumenical unity is the work of the devil.
Page 98 of 176
Those who call for the removal of denominational divisions are ignoring these serious doctrinal differences.
Any Bible doctrine worth believing is worth fighting for. When Paul wrote to Timothy to instruct him in
the work of the church, he did not tell him to "lighten up" and to ignore doctrinal differences. He solemnly
instructed him to remain steadfast in the apostolic doctrine and not to allow ANY other doctrine to be
taught.
"As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay here in Ephesus so that you may command certain men
not to teach false doctrines any longer" (1 Timothy 1:3).

"And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will
also be qualified to teach others" (2 Timothy 2:2).
Many Charismatics and other ecumenists are practicing gross hypocrisy. They teach their doctrines about
the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts and ecumenical unity and they expect everyone to agree with them. Those
who do not support their doctrine are labeled schismatic and unloving. Why is it right for the Charismatic
to teach and practice his doctrine, but it is wrong for the non-Charismatic to teach and practice his doctrine?
Why is it the non-Charismatic who is unloving and schismatic? Why is it not the Charismatic ecumenist
who is unloving and schismatic for calling upon non-Charismatics to give up their doctrinal convictions
and join hands with them?

Those who have the most to lose from the ecumenical call to dissolve denominational walls are those
whose doctrine is based upon the Word of God. A man who is convinced his doctrine is based on the Bible
is a traitor to hold hands with those who oppose his doctrine.

In Jude 3 God's people are exhorted to "earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints". The
faith once delivered to the saints is that body of truth delivered to us by the Apostles under divine
inspiration of the Holy Spirit and perfectly recorded for us in the New Testament Scriptures. Tell me, what
part of the New Testament faith am I to give up for the sake of ecumenical unity? I will answer that. None;
not one part.

PROMISE KEEPERS (PK) ASSEMBLY -- "STAND IN THE GAP"

National Mall
Washington, D.C.
October 4, 1997
Dr. Ralph G. Colas, Fundamental News Service
American Council of Christian Churches (ACCC)
"At Promise Keepers, we're not concerned about a man's denominational label," said PK founder and CEO,
Bill McCartney. Dozens of denominations sent official representatives to Stand in the Gap, PK's Assembly
on October 4, 1997, at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. -- including American Baptist, Assembly of
God, Christian and Missionary Alliance, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Episcopalian, Evangelical
Free, Lutheran, Messianic Jewish, Nazarene, Presbyterian Church USA, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist
Convention, and United Methodist.

A number of the above religious groups are a part of the National Council of Churches (NCC) or the
National Association of Evangelicals (NAE). Other denominations represented in Washington are outside
the NCC and NAE, such as the Roman Catholic Church and the Free Will Baptist Churches. While more
Page 99 of 176
than forty speakers addressed this large gathering, not one could be identified as a separatist
Fundamentalist.

Some of the men who were participants on the speaker's podium were Mike Timmis (a Roman Catholic
who was recently added to PK's Board of Directors), Joe Stowell (Moody Bible Institute president), Max
Lucado (Oak Hills Church of Christ, San Antonio, TX, pastor), Jack Hayford (Church on the Way, Van
Nuys, CA, pastor), Joseph Garlington (Covenant Church, Pittsburgh, PA, pastor), Tony Evans (Oak Cliff
Bible Fellowship, Dallas, TX, pastor), James Robison (TV host and charismatic Southern Baptist from
Texas), and James Ryle (Bill McCartney's pastor, Vineyard Christian Fellowship, Longmont, CO). Bill
McCartney spoke for 20 minutes while the others took a shorter amount of time.

The Public Relations organization used was the DeMoss Group, Atlanta, GA. They handled all of the
media contacts and credentialing of the more than 1,000 members of the press who had come from 10
countries. Strict procedures regulated the press, who met in a large tent with numerous videos set up so
they could see and hear what was taking place on the large stage set up on the Mall. The one and only press
conference that day was held with Bill McCartney in the media tent before the program began. At that
press conference, before inviting any questions from the press, McCartney shared that this long-planned
meeting came into existence because Randy Phillips, PK President, had a vision as he was jogging around
the National Mall. According to McCartney, this vision came from the Lord, and Phillips saw a large
gathering of men for a religious service at that place.

McCartney read the purpose statement that had been adopted for this giant assembly: " ... to gather a
diverse multitude of men in the name of Jesus Christ, to confess personal and collective sin, so that we may
present to the Lord godly men on their knees in humility, then on their feet in unity, reconciled and poised
for revival and spiritual awakening."

Coach McCartney gave the members of the press a preview of his talk scheduled for later in the day. He
said: "The church of Jesus Christ has been divided and a house divided cannot stand. The reason that we
see a downward spiral in morality in the nation is because the men of God have not stood together. We ask
each guy to go back to his own local church and to make a stronger commitment inside that church."
McCartney made another important statement: "We are asking that churches, through the leadership of the
pastor, connect with other churches in the community over a broad scale. Weekly, we want them to come
together -- the leaders -- to pray and share the needs of the community so that these pastors can bring the
burden back to their own men." In listing one of PK's major goals, the former coach said, "As a matter of
fact, on January 1, in the year 2000, in every state all across the United States, we are asking the pastors
and their men inside that geographical state to gather on the state capitol steps and take roll call. ... We do
not speak against other denominations, but as a matter of fact, we are all one brotherhood."

Jack Hayford, a charismatic pastor from Van Nuys, CA, emceed this event, which cost about $10 million.
His skill in behavior tactics was evident. He kept the program moving along in steps that were structured
around various appeals to the men. At given times, the men were urged to bow their heads, to kneel, to fall
prostrate on the ground, and even to hug one another. The music, for the most part, was not as wild as at
some of the previous rallies held in stadiums or even at the PK Clergy Conference in Atlanta, GA.

As speaker after speaker issued proclamations and confessions, the men formed small groups to confess
and repent for moral failures: cheating their employers, hating their enemies, ignoring their children, and
abusing their wives. They were asked to take a family photo from their wallet, hold it and look at their
loved ones, and then lie prostrate before God and confess, "I have been an abusive man. I have sinned
against you."

Max Lucado (Oak Hills Church of Christ, San Antonio, TX) led in confessing the sin of disunity in the

Page 100 of 176

Body of Christ. Using the same technique that he did at the PK Clergy Conference in Atlanta, in February
1996, Lucado had them call out all at once the various denominations with which they were identified. Of
course, the result was a confused, loud sound. Then they were asked to shout out the name of Jesus, and
they willingly did so in unison. In this manner, Lucado shows that PK is unified because they claim to love
Jesus.

The PK men at this assembly were asked to pray for "the Miracle of the Millennium". This was to be done
so the "sin of sectarianism" could be confessed. It was declared, "Those who think they know all the truth
and that their denomination is more faithful to God's Word than another are guilty of sin. The world has
never seen a united church. We have seen a divided small church in communities from which we have
come. Today we see a united Great Church."

An example given to this large crowd of a great and noble Christian was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Yet
Dr. King rejected foundational truths, namely the virgin birth and physical resurrection of Christ. History
revealed that King was an adulterer; but this, of course, was not shared at the PK Assembly. The pastor of
the above and Beyond Baptist Church, Houston, TX, William J. Lindsey, said, "I believe part of the dream
that Martin Luther King expressed here in 1963 is being fulfilled today."

Although for a long time PK leaders had boldly announced that no offering would be taken at the
Washington Assembly, reduced income during 1997 necessitated a different strategy. Charismatic
evangelist James Robison made a strong appeal. He announced that it would be the greatest offering ever
given in all history. The free New Testament (Contemporary English Version) given to everyone contained
two offering envelopes, one for the person with the New Testament and the other for someone else who did
not have one and thus had no offering envelope. The men were strongly urged to write out their check or to
use a credit card. Robison encouraged everyone to put down a monthly pledge to PK -- $100, $50, $25, etc.
"Give the greatest gift you have ever given. Give a love offering to Promise Keepers", he pled.

It took so long to take the offering that no time was left to present the pre-recorded address by Billy
Graham. The press were given an advance copy of Dr. Graham's remarks. Graham said, "Coach
McCartney has just challenged each of you to return home with a renewed commitment to your local
church and pastors. Return to your churches as one who is a player, not a spectator." (As usual, and not
unexpectedly, Dr. Graham failed to distinguish between solid, Fundamental, Bible-believing churches and
those who are a part of Roman Catholic, Charismatic, salvation by works, etc., churches).

Some observations by this reporter:

1. The large crowd -- 700,000 up to more than 1 million -- was orderly. The police actually stood around
with very little to do besides directing the traffic. The only time we witnessed any strong rebuke and
warning came when a member picketing the PK men got out of line and tried to thwart the PK men from
reaching the National Mall. The police officer told this member of the National Organization for Women
(NOW) he would haul him off to jail if he tried it one more time.

2. Some have suggested that Promise Keepers is an organization approved by God because the NOW and
the gay and lesbian organizations oppose it. However, bear in mind that these same radical groups also
oppose the U.S. National Catholic Bishops and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons).
Holy Scripture is the test of truth, not the presence or proclamations of opposition groups.

3. Promise Keepers continues to "break down the walls", biblical truth being replaced with the perceived
benefit of a male-bonding experience. Promise Keepers is an ecumenical hodgepodge, for it brings
together, under one umbrella, churches and individuals with various non-Fundamentalist affiliations (e.g.,
NCC, WCC, NAE, WEF, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist, Mormon, Oneness Pentecostal, independent
groups), as well as many compromising "Fundamentalists."
Page 101 of 176
4. Bill McCartney is a Roman Catholic who has become a convert to charismatic's since visiting the
Vineyard Fellowship Group in Boulder, CO. In his autobiography, From Ashes to Glory, he calls himself a
"born-again Catholic". He adds in that book, "Making a profession of faith like I did may not be expected
and may not even be important in the Catholic Church". Can anyone who is truly born again treat so
lightly, what the Lord Jesus declared to be an absolute essential? John 3:3 says, "Except a man be born
again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." PK continues to seek the approval of Roman Catholic leaders
and even changed its doctrinal statement so it would not offend Roman Catholics who reject "by faith
alone". The National Conference of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Marriage and Family said, "Catholic
men are being drawn to Promise Keepers. ... PK is the proverbial wake-up-call to the Church to encourage
and offer more ministry suited to the needs of men."

One need not be surprised when a Roman Catholic Monsignor in New York leads a special mass to help
Roman Catholic men prepare for a PK Conference. Promise Keepers continues to welcome Catholic
participation in its ministries. Mike Timmis was added to PK's Board of Directors and clearly identified
himself at the PK Assembly in Washington as a Catholic. Speakers at the PK rallies include signers of the
manifesto "Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission of the Third Millennium." Among
those who signed this unbiblical document, which called on Evangelicals to stop winning Roman Catholics
to Christ, were Chuck Colson, Jesse Miranda, Pat Robertson, Bill Bright, J.I. Packer, and a large number of
Roman Catholic leaders. Yet, PK leaders apparently consider unimportant or irrelevant -- in comparison
with PK's goal of "breaking down the walls" -- Roman Catholicism's heresy of teaching salvation by
belonging to their church. Steve Green sang, "Let the Walls Come Down" at PK's Assembly just as he did
at the PK Clergy Conference in Atlanta.

5. No less than five of the 16 PK board members have ties to charismatic churches. In spite of his extra-
biblical beliefs and practices, many Evangelicals associated with PK look with favor on John Wimber
(who died a month after the PK gathering), the Vineyard Denomination, and its third wave theology. A
leading charismatic leader, Jack Deere, has said that every Christian has the capacity to receive prophecy.
He declares, "In order to fulfill God's highest purpose for our lives, we must be able to hear His voice both
in the written Word and in the Word freshly spoken from heaven." Another charismatic, Marc Dupont,
believes that when a spirit of revelation is upon a person, that person can go into a mall and discern whether
an individual is involved in homosexuality or adultery or is suffering from child abuse.
The facts reveal that PK's unbiblical base is composed of charismatics and those who defend or excuse
maintaining membership in liberal, apostate denominations. Years ago, a rancher from one of the Western
states shared with me how they killed gophers that were damaging their fields and causing injuries to their
cattle and horses. "If you take a bushel of poison and just a peck of wheat," he said, "the gophers will not
eat it. However, if you take a bushel of wheat along with a peck of poison, the gophers take the bait and the
gopher population goes on the decline."

There are pastors and nonprofessionals who suggest that there is "good" in PK's goals and program.
However, mixed in with the wheat (truths) is the "poison" that gullible individuals swallow because of the
bait of psychological manipulations and mass confessions. "Biblically illiterate" people led by Bill
McCartney are propagating religious error.

Isaiah 8:20 spells it out most forcefully: "To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to
this Word, it is because there is no light in them."

THE PROMISE KEEPERS (PK) PASTORS and LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE

Page 102 of 176

Bank One Ballpark
Phoenix, Arizona
February 18–20, 2003
Dr. Ralph G. Colas, Fundamental News Service
American Council of Christian Churches (ACCC)
With descriptive terms, Coach Bill McCartney set the tone for the 2003 Promise Keepers Pastors and
Leadership Conference. [McCartney resigned as PK’s president in October 2003, turning the job over to
Thomas Fortson, Jr., a Southern Baptist.] “I believe this one event in 2003 will forever change what it
means to be a pastor in America. In three short days, something supernatural will be seen in the Bank One
Ballpark in Phoenix.” Later he declared, “We have had a catalytic anointing of the Spirit that is across all
boundaries.”
At the first press conference McCartney said, “We will reveal God’s planks of how to get together in
everyone’s community. The church of Jesus Christ is in real difficulty. Only 1% of all the churches are
growing and 46% of all teenagers do not believe the Bible is the Word of God—in fact, 9 out of 10 young
people in the Church do not believe the Bible is the Word of God. The truth is denominational distinctive
and a big obstacle and so in Promise Keepers our distinctive asked is simply ‘Do you love Jesus?’” Ed
Barron, vice president of PK’s U.S. Ministries, put it this way, “It does not matter if you are Baptist,
Methodist, or Catholic. Regardless of distinctive we come surrounded by the Biblical truth that they love
Jesus.”
While the earlier publicity had predicted 50,000 would attend, only 9,000 showed up in Phoenix. The
theme was “Come Near To Me.” This was the second-ever major clergy and leaders conference. In
February of 1996, Promise Keepers held the largest clergy gathering in modern history, as 39,024 pastors,
priests, and ministers met at the Georgia Dome in Atlanta, Georgia. However, in Phoenix, Steve Chavis,
Director of Advance Planning for Promise Keepers, said, “We have no other clergy conference scheduled.
In fact we are not getting into that again.”
It was in partnership with other ministries that this large gathering of pastors and leaders was made
possible. Among those were: Alpha, Answers in Genesis, Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, Campus
Crusade For Christ, Focus on the Family, Jews for Jesus, Mission America Coalition, World Vision,
Seventh Day Adventists, National Association of Evangelicals, American Bible Society and the Abba
Anointing Oil Company. NavPress gave a copy of “The Bible in Contemporary Language—THE
MESSAGE” to everyone in attendance. It was prepared by Dr. Eugene Peterson, Professor Emeritus of
Spiritual Theology at Regent College, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and recommended by Bill
McCartney, Max Lucado, and Jack Hayford.
The Clergy began on Tuesday evening, February 18, 2003 at 6 p.m. with the rock beat of the Maranatha!
Promise Band and Marcus Witt as the worship leader. For more than 30 minutes, the large group clapped,
cheered, raised their hands, and swayed back and forth to the pulsating music. Dr. Jack Hayford was the
moderator of the entire conference. He introduced the speakers and led the audience in joining him in
bringing their hands together to indicate praise to Jesus. [He set the tone early by misapplying Scripture and
confusing the church with Israel.] Hayford also led them several times to reach out and embrace several
sitting nearby, and to say to them, “It’s about Him and not us during these days.” Another time they were to
tell each other, “There is no God like Jehovah”.
The first keynote speaker was Dr. Max Lucado, pastor of the Oak Hills Church, San Antonio, Texas
[Church of Christ—baptismal regeneration], and the author of 12 books that have a combined 28 million
copies in print. His subject was, “Can You Imagine?” Using Isaiah 43:7, Lucado emphasized God’s great
glory and God’s great preeminence. He said, “God is not your co-pilot. You do not give Him orders. So

Page 103 of 176

why not declare right now, ‘I hereby resign from me running the universe.’ There is no hope when we say
it is about me and we must understand it does not matter about your denomination—it is all about God!”
Erwin McManus followed Dr. Lucado, pastor of the Mosaic Church in Los Angeles and lecturer for Bethel
Seminary. McManus said, “Nothing can stop the Church of Jesus Christ but the Church of Jesus Christ!
Since 99% of the churches in America are declining, it could be many have forsaken their calling and just
have a job. How many of you are willing to be a warrior shepherd? It could be you are longing for the good
old days which were never there.”
Various Messianic Jewish leaders then led the 9,000 in song and with traditional Hebrew dance. In a
climactic action, “shofars” (rams’ horns) were blown simultaneously in a call to worship. Phoenix-area
Messianic Rabbi Jonathan Bernis addressed the re-inclusion of Messianic Jews into the Christian family by
saying, “We ask you not to replace us, but to embrace us”.
The second day of the Conference, began with a half-hour, high-decibel, rousing Worship Time. Included
in this part was the request for all the participants to move around the arena and to greet one another by
saying, “I love God, and I love you!”
Coach Bill McCartney used Job 33:14 for his devotional. It says, “For God speaks once, yea twice, yet man
perceives it not”. He urged everyone not to miss the voice of God. He underlined how one player on his
football team in Colorado inspired the entire team to a great victory over a stronger Texas team. “We have
to be a team,” he said. “Just one guy can be the fresh fire taking the lead in becoming a real team that can
make differences in our world.”
Bishop Larry Jackson, senior pastor of Charlotte International Church (North Carolina) and founder of
Front liners men’s ministry, [mis]used John 17 as his text. He asked, “Do you want the glory of God to
come? We need the glory so we can be one body with one purpose. You are placed in your city to conquer,
not just to survive.” Then everyone was asked first to join raised hands and to call out, “LET THE GLORY
COME!” Encouraging individuals to move around and to lay hands on those who needed help making sure
they connect with other pastors followed this.
Jack Hayford admitted that some might feel uncomfortable in raising their hands, as is the practice in his
charismatic Four Square Church On The Way in California, but they could learn that the Bible teaches in II
Timothy 2:8 that men should pray “lifting up holy hands.”
Author Jim Burns gave the youth culture presentation. Native American Dobie Weasel followed this. Using
the acrostic WALK, Weasel spoke on Worship, Action, Listen, and Kinship. He also had several young
Native American pastors come forward and give gifts to the elder leaders who had been brought to the
platform. Grammy-winning musician Tom Bee (Oglala Sioux), a featured soloist, then sang several songs.
The first Hispanic speaker, Noel Castellanos, explained, “What is Fiesta?” It means a party so he
encouraged everyone to stand and dance! Danny DeLeon who has been the host on the Spanish version of
the television 700 Club followed him. He said there are 37 million Hispanics in the USA. Children carrying
the various flags of the countries represented by the 37 million ran around the large arena as he spoke, to
the delight of the participants.
A Media Roundtable with Dr. Bruce Wilkinson took place on February 19. Dr. Wilkinson is the author of
The Prayer of Jabez and founder of “Walk Thru the Bible”, and is now president of Global Vision
Resources based in Johannesburg, South Africa.
He has now entered into partnership with World Vision and issued appeals for the Church to be unified so
they can help in Africa. In South Africa, Wilkinson said, 8,000 people a day die of AIDS and 14,000
contract AIDS every day. He related how a group of Christians was able to raise $6 million in one day.
Since World Vision has 6,000 workers, they are the best ones to collaborate with to help to stem the tide in
Page 104 of 176
South Africa. He acknowledged that moral purity has not been taught or preached, as it should have been
by the National Pastors. [After the press conference, in private conversation, this reporter reminded Dr.
Wilkinson that he had spoken only a year before at the National Religious Broadcasters Convention in
Nashville, Tennessee. and told everyone he was selling his house in Atlanta and moving to Hollywood. He
said he was going to get involved with the directors, producers, and others to help them produce films that
included some moral values. He pled with those in attendance in Nashville at NRB to step out from where
they were seated in that plenary session and to come forward and kneel before the Lord and join him in this
great project of cleaning up Hollywood. A number of attendees in Nashville responded to that appeal.
However, in Phoenix Wilkinson told this reporter that he was unable to find a house in Hollywood and had
then received the invitation to move to South Africa and to get involved in this battle against AIDS.]
The next day, February 20, before the 9,000 in attendance, Wilkinson and others pled for thousands of the
pastors to go to South Africa and to find out how they could get involved with his organization and World
Vision. He wished that God would give them a Damascus Road experience and join him in this needy
crusade. (The fact that World Vision is a part of the apostate world council of churches was completely
ignored!)
Along with the Native American and Hispanic presentation, there was an Asian-American presentation
with seminary president, Dr. Bruce Fong. He told how Asians face prejudice. He then asked, “Who is going
to be the one guy who goes back to each area and charges up the community for God?”
After a film regarding African-Americans, Bishop Wellington Boone, Executive vice president of Global
Ministries for Promise Keepers, spent much time talking about the slave traders and said that it took a war
to end slavery. He then proceeded to criticize President Bush for his position regarding affirmative action.
Boone asked everyone to “commit to relationships, to open doors to affirmative action; to mentor other
races and to empower African-American Ministries”.
Dr. James Merritt, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention and senior pastor of the 12,000
member First Baptist Church, Snellville, Georgia, used Psalm 133:1 for his text on “Unity”. [In his highly
ecumenical message] he said God wants us to ADVERTISE our unity, ADVOCATE our unity, and
ADVANCE our unity. He said he had listened as each of the various race groups told of their problems.
Merritt declared, “At the cross God offers a new treaty and we are blood bought and need to move from the
reservation to the resurrection. Why not turn from the rearview mirror and look out the windshield? It is
time to forgive and to forget.”
The final day, Thursday, February 20, began with their “worship time” led by Israel Houghton. Many left
their seats to go down near the stage to sing, hop, skip, and dance.
Dr. Joe Stowell, Moody Bible Institute President, spoke on “The Challenging Response”. He used John 4
for his text. He said that Jesus went through Samaria for the disciples’ sake. “Jesus Christ leaped the
barriers and talked to a woman, who was a Samaritan and immoral too. Jesus knew He had to embrace
someone not like Him in order to embrace a village. If you love Jesus, you must celebrate diversity. If
someone’s choir sways, maybe yours puts folks to sleep. I have had it with Christians who are ticked off
about this generation. I’m starting to be part of the emerging church.” [Stowell’s message focused primarily
on the need for racial unity in the church, but he subtly belittled Fundamentalists who take a stand against
ecumenism and worldliness in the church.
Dr. Jack Hayford then stepped up, called Dr. Stowell back, and related that he used to be one of those who
as a Pentecostal had nothing to do with Moody Bible Institute. Dr. Hayford said, “I detest that and there is a
oneness between Joe Stowell and me. The walls are broken down.”
Dr. Tony Evans, Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship, Dallas, Texas spoke on “Bringing It Together”. He also used
John 4 as his text. He said that Jesus needed to go through Samaria “because it was a spiritual need. He met
the woman at a place of common ground—Jacob’s well. He put His lips to her cup and asked for a drink of
Page 105 of 176
water. Do not let your culture get in the way of your message. Denominationalism is a sin as Christian
leaders are divided. Unity is oneness of purpose. As a result Jesus even spent two days in their village.”
Bill McCartney concluded the conference as he spoke on “A Charge to Lead”. He said that pastors “are the
luckiest men on the face of the earth.” McCartney asked those present to make a public decision, to reach
out internationally, and to change the suburban and urban areas while even going global with the challenge
of South Africa.
Several thousand went forward and knelt in unified prayer for the churches and communities to which they
would return.

Observations by this reporter:

1. Since I attended at the first PK Clergy Conference in Atlanta in 1996 and the PK Assembly in
Washington, DC in 1997, I was able to compare those events with this Clergy Conference in Phoenix in
2003. Promise Keepers now claims to have reached more than 5,000,000 men during the past 12 years of
conferences. Even though they have 18 events planned for 2003, the attendance and interest has been
declining drastically. This is obvious when you recall nearly 40,000 clergy were present for Atlanta in 1996
and only 9,000 at Phoenix in 2003. In addition, pastors’ wives were invited to this particular conference
(not to Atlanta) and more than 900 wives attended a breakout session held elsewhere in Phoenix with
Cynthia Heald as their speaker. The press officer acknowledged that some women, who are clergy, refused
to go to that breakout session since they wanted to be present for the activities at the Bank One Ballpark.
2. The often-used phrase “If you love Jesus” is agreed upon by millions who never have been born again,
or remain a part of the apostate ecumenical movement. The fact is that one’s skin color, ethnic background,
or socio-economic status, should not play a part in the body of Christ. Among genuine believers, “There is
neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in
Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). However, PK, in their attempt to keep the appeal of their message as broad as
possible, have majored on the matter of racial discrimination and minimized other important Biblical truths.
Any attempt to bring everyone, liberal or conservative, Protestant or Catholic, charismatic or Mormon,
under the same umbrella is ecumenism no matter what else it may be called. Efforts to reconcile at the
expense of truth ought to be immediately rejected. [While we are instructed by Scripture to be of one mind,
the evangelical today scoffs at the idea of true Biblical unity based on complete agreement with, and
submission to, God’s holy Word. The only use of the word “unity" in the New Testament is found in
Ephesians chapter four. It is a “unity of the Spirit” (v. 3), not of men. It is a “unity of faith” (v. 13) based on
sound doctrine for which believers are to contend, not water down (Jude 3). No real spiritual unity can exist
apart from doctrinal unity, and we are to “mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the
doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” (Rom. 16:17). Biblical unity in Christ, the true fellowship
of brothers and sisters in Christ, can only come about by grace through faith (Eph 2:8). Anything added,
Paul tells us, is a rejection of the gospel. Jesus will deny ever knowing those who have come to Him on any
other terms but His own, even though they sincerely cry, “Lord, Lord...” (Mt 7:22, 23).]
3. The Catholic Church, along with thousands of liberal Protestant Churches, deny the doctrine of salvation
by grace plus absolutely nothing. Yet according to PK, that does not matter, and none is even remotely
encouraged to leave churches that espouse a sacramental salvation. The problem of ecumenism is also
evident in the individuals used on their platform. If you are well known and popular, you can be
highlighted at a PK activity. The speakers, for the most part, are among the best communicators available
today. With powerful delivery, they challenge their listeners and call for an immediate response to the
message. However, never are they urged to follow Ephesians 5:11, “And have no fellowship with the
unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them”.
4. the most popular use of tolerance shows up in accommodating non-biblical beliefs and practices not
biblical. How can one welcome as fellowshipping partners those who are greatly confused about the Holy
Page 106 of 176
Spirit and extra-biblical revelation, with visions and dreams along with speaking in tongues and healing
crusades?
5. No one should promote any ministry, which embraces leaders who identify with the National
Association of Evangelicals, the World Evangelical Association and the National and World Councils of
Churches. Truth is always absolute and absolutes are intolerant. It is strange to see Christian leaders so
tolerant they welcome error into their ministries and then defend that action as being Christ like. Some of
the strongest, yes, even the harshest, declarations in the Word of God came from the lips of our Blessed
Savior against religious leaders who tolerated religious error. Christ taught truth!
6. There are those who suggest that Fundamentalism has failed while New Evangelicalism is doing the job
and the proof is seen in the results of programs like Promise Keepers along with ecumenical evangelism.
We are not the first ones who have been called upon to stand in an evil day. The position of
Fundamentalism, with all of its shortcomings, is the correct one because of the Biblical position. A great
difference between Fundamentalism and New Evangelicalism, as evident in Promise Keepers, lies in the
matter of separation.
7. We need to make a choice between a limited message and a limited fellowship. It is either favor with
men or favor with God. May God give us the courage and rock-like conviction to stand no matter what the
cost may be?

The Masculine Journey

The Robert Hicks-Promise Keepers Connection*
The Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks is a classic example of what passes for Biblical teaching in many
circles today. Rather than turning to the Bible for truth, Hicks finds a concept in a secular book, then goes
to the Scriptures to see if he can find some way to support that concept. Failing at that, he forces the
Scriptures to mean whatever he wants in order to accomplish his purpose. He then passes off his views to
unsuspecting, and apparently ungrounded professing believers, who swallow every line.

Hicks' book is built on the premise (not found in Scripture and unproven in research) that men pass through
(or at least ought to) six stages of life. This theory did not emerge from the study of Scripture, but from
secular psychologist Daniel Levinson's book The Seasons of a Man's Life. Hicks then identifies six Hebrew
words that he believes dovetail with Levinson's teachings. No Bible scholar would agree with Hicks'
exegesis, but that does not stop Promise Keepers from endorsing his book. [See Editor's Note.] Hicks says
that males were meant to pass through the following stages: noble savage; phallic (sexual); warrior;
wounded; maturity; and mentor.

Since Hicks develops his thoughts through a combination of personal experience, psychological theories,
and Biblical principles. His views are a mixture of a great deal of error mixed with just enough truth to
deceive poorly taught professing Christians. Space does not permit a thorough critique of The Masculine
Journey (see BDM's report on Promise Keepers for more detail), but we will attempt to point out a few of
the more obvious areas of concern:
1) Hicks' primary resources are secular psychologists, etc. His book is full of references to Freud, Jung,
Levinson, Margaret Mead, Gail Sheehy, etc.

2) Hicks all but glorifies war and violence that is characteristic of his warrior stage. In addition, he does not
recognize the element of pride that is behind much of this conflict. For example, he says with approval, "To
be a male warrior is to be characterized by strength, competing to be superior, using one's energy to be
prominent, or vying to be important or to gain significance" (p. 77). The believer might think of James 4:1-
3 in light of such a statement.
Page 107 of 176
3) Borrowing from Robert Bly (secular men's movement leader) and Carl Jung (demon-possessed
contemporary of Freud), Hicks claims that, "In order for men to discover what manhood is all about, they
must descend into the deep places of their own souls and find their accumulated grief" (p. 99). Nowhere in
Scripture is anything like this taught, but it has become a fad, thanks to the writings of Larry Crabb (see
Inside Out).

4) Hicks clearly has a low view of Scripture. The most blatant example of this is found on page 114: "I call
the Psalms of David the musings of a manic-depressive."

5) Hicks also soft pedals sin. In an interesting paragraph concerning "Christian" homosexuals, Marxists,
and Catholics that he has known, rather than confronting such people, he confesses, "I have learned that the
way to look at God or the world is not necessarily through the lens or categories I currently believe are the
correct ones" (p. 134). In addition, in an incredible statement on page 177, Hicks says, "I'm sure many
would balk at my thought of celebrating the experience of sin. I am not sure how we could do it. However,
I do know we need to do it. For, example, we usually give the teenagers in our churches such a massive
dose of condemnation regarding their first experience with the police, or their first drunk, or their first
experience ... with sex or drugs. Maybe we could look upon this as a teachable moment and a rite of
passage. Is this putting a benediction on sin? Of course not, but perhaps at this point the true elders could
come forward and confess their own adolescent sins and congratulate the next generation for being human"
(p. 177). Can you imagine someone who claims to be a Christian suggesting that we should congratulate
the young person who has committed fornication or gotten drunk because he is simply being human?
Unbelievable!

6) Hicks writes, "If ever we needed to initiate the wounded in our midst it is now. We need to recognize a
man's divorce, or job firing, or major health problem, or culpability in some legal or sexual indiscretion, as
a wound to which we show deference as a part of the male journey" (p. 178). (Emphasis added.) The word
deference means "honor, reverence, veneration, acclaim, homage, and esteem, courtesy". Therefore, Hicks
is suggesting that we should honor reverence, venerate, and esteem, etc., the things he listed when they
happen in a man's life. Included in these things we should venerate, reverence, esteem, and pay homage to
be legal and sexual indiscretions. Rather than looking on them as sin, we should reverence them. We
should honor them. We should venerate them. We should esteem them. We should look on them as rites of
passage along the masculine journey. Incredible!

7) Hicks are obsessed by the male sex organ. He writes, "We are called and addressed by God in
terminology that describes who and what we are -- zakar, phallic males. Possessing a penis places unique
requirements upon men before God in how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as
phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of androgynous, neutered non-males, or the feminized males so
popular in many feminist-enlightened churches. We are told by God to worship Him in accordance with
what we are, phallic men" (p. 49). This is the language of pagan religionists, not the Bible!

8) Hicks makes numerous erroneous statements about male sexuality. Claiming that the second stage of
manhood is the phallus (penis) stage (p. 48), Hicks goes on to state, "The phallus has always been the
symbol of religious devotion and dedication" (p. 51). In addition, "Improper teaching on the phallus will
drive men into sexual sins because their spiritual God-hunger is not satisfied. Sexual energy is essentially
spiritual" (p. 55). (This is teaching from the demon worshipers in India; it is called TANTRA sex yoga.)
Again, "Our sexual problems only reveal how desperate we are to express, in some perverted form, the
deep compulsion to worship with our phallus" (p. 56).

9) Hicks claims that what keeps men moving along this "masculine" journey is having some other male
mentors in their lives and seeing Jesus as the primary voice of God in each stage. "Jesus ... was the second

Page 108 of 176

Adam ... was very much human ... was also very much zakar, phallic. ... I believe Jesus was phallic with all
the inherent phallic passions we experience as men" (pp. 180-181). [This seems to be either the result of
Freudian brainwashing or hanging out in locker rooms. Either way, it is blasphemous (4/94, The Berean
Call).]

10) Hicks has a blasphemous view of Christ. He claims that Jesus experienced homosexual temptation (p.
181)! Even a cursory study of Rom 1:18ff would reveal Hicks' abominable error.

11) More blasphemy -- the movie The Last Temptation of Christ is referred to in a positive light! Claiming
that Jesus is a "phallic male", Hicks says Jesus "may have thought about it as the movie ... portrays" (p.
181) -- referring to Jesus thinking about having sexual relations with a woman! However, doesn't Hicks'
suggestion make Jesus guilty of the sin of lust, thereby embracing the movie's blasphemy? In fact, the
movie portrayed graphic sexual desire, not merely temptation.

The Masculine Journey Study Guide

Hick's obsession with the phallus carries over to the Study Guide to be used in small group studies along
with The Masculine Journey. Here are a couple of "Bible" study activities that the groups are to enjoy as
they discuss their phallic or sexual side:
1) The leaders are first warned that if the men in the group are having problems talking openly and with
empathy to each other about their sex lives, they are to stop and talk about why they are having difficulty
(p. 32). (In addition, you wondered why so many men suddenly wanted to go to Bible studies.)

2) After the leaders get beyond that hurdle, here is one of the discussion questions: "Our culture has
presented many initiation rites, or passages to manhood, that are associated with the phallus. Which ones
have you experienced? Do you have a story to share with the other men about one such event? Some
examples are: When were you potty trained and when did you stop wetting the bed? Pubic hair and growth.
An unfortunate experience with pornography. My first dating experience. My first embarrassing moment
with a girl. The wedding night. Conceiving my first child."

3) Another activity starts out like this: "Man's primary fantasy is 'having access to as many beautiful
women as desired without risking rejection,'" says Warren Farrell, who polled 106,000 men and women
from all lifestyles. Farrell also tabulated many secondary fantasies, some of which are listed here. From
these options, choose the one that best completes the sentence for you: 'The daydream, wishful thinking, or
primary fantasy that recurs for me is. ...'"
Does this stuff sound like Bible study or Freudian psychology? Isn't it interesting that Christian men can be
united as they practice and apply godless theories from godless men, but they cannot discuss the Word of
God!
DISDAIN FOR DOCTRINE

Promise Keepers' stated purpose is to move men toward Christ-like masculinity. However, PK does not
understand how to do this. Maturity is not developed through pep rallies, psychological teachings, and
sharing. It is developed though the application of the truth of God's Word (i.e., doctrine). However, to PK,
doctrine divides, and should be shunned. Their philosophy is well stated by Robert Hicks: "I am often
amazed at how God sometimes uses secular sources to communicate His truth better than Christian ones"
(p. 162). However, you cannot create godliness by going around the Word of God and seeking out the latest
pop-wisdom of men. This is one of Promise Keepers greatest error.
BDM Note: The following is excerpted and/or adapted from the July-August 1996, Psycho Heresy
Awareness Letter:
Page 109 of 176
Is it true that Promise Keepers is backing away from an enthusiastic support of Robert Hicks' book, The
Masculine Journey? It may appear so at first glance. For an extended period, Promise Keepers provided a
seven-page letter supporting The Masculine Journey to those who requested it. However, shortly after our
article ("Promise Keepers Still Endorses The Masculine Journey) went to press in 3/96, they replaced the
seven-page support letter with a brief statement, which said: "Promise Keepers no longer distributes the
book The Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks, published in 1993 by NavPress."

After admitting that Promise Keepers distributed (gave) the book to every man who attended PK's 1993
national men's conference, the rest of that statement simply talked about Promise Keepers rather than about
The Masculine Journey. No warning, apology, or repudiation of the book could be seen.

As of 6/17/96, Promise Keepers has begun to supply yet another position statement regarding The
Masculine Journey. The current statement says:
"Several passages in The Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks (1993, NavPress) could be understood in
more than one way. Some of the content of the book has unfortunately lent itself to a wide range of
interpretations and responses involving theological issues which Promise Keepers does not feel called to
resolve."
The statement continues to say that they do not want these unforeseen controversies to detract from the
focus of Promise Keepers.

After again saying that they no longer distribute the book, they state:
"At the same time, we believe Mr. Hicks' core theology is consistent with orthodox evangelical
Christianity, and that The Masculine Journey was a forthright attempt on his part to deal with male issues
from a biblical context." (Emphasis added.)
Unfortunately, the organization only seems to be trying to avoid further controversy over the book. There is
still no hint of warning, apology, or repudiation. Any fair reader of Promise Keepers' present statement on
The Masculine Journey would have to conclude that Promise Keepers still supports The Masculine
Journey! The fact that leaders of Promise Keepers were involved in the development of the book, identified
it as a Promise Keepers book, and gave a copy to every man who attended the 1993 PK national men's
conference reveals the psychological foundations of the movement. Until Promise Keepers makes a
definitive statement confessing the error of being involved in the development of the book The Masculine
Journey, as well as of promoting and distributing it, they must be held culpable.

* Portions of this report have been excerpted and/or adapted from an article by Pastor Gary Gilley in the
2/95 Southern View Chapel (now Think on These Things) newsletter; and from an article in the June/July
1997 Think On These Things.

Promise Keepers Changes Doctrinal Statement to Appease

Catholics
July 18, 1997 (Adapted from: David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist News Service, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak
Harbor, WA 98277) -- The latest edition of Our Sunday Visitor, an influential conservative Catholic weekly
publication, contains an article entitled, "Making New Catholic Men: Promise Keepers 'gospel for guys': Is
it just the thing that Catholic Men need, or is it bound to loosen male bonds to the Church?" The article
Page 110 of 176
describes the efforts, which have been made by Promise Keepers leaders to make Catholics feel at home in
their organization. Note the following quotes (Mike Aquilina, Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, pp. 10,
11):
(a) "While there are no hard figures, some say that 10-20 percent of those men [attending Promise Keepers
conferences] are Catholic. And, recently, Promise Keepers, a largely evangelical movement, has taken
steps to attract even more Catholic men to its events and principles of discipleship."

(b) "At its March meeting, Promise Keepers' board of directors welcomed Mike Timmis as a new member.
A Detroit-area lawyer and businessman, Timmis is a longtime leader in the Catholic charismatic renewal."

(c) "At several rallies this year, PK has spotlighted Catholic evangelist Jim Berlucchi as a speaker."

(d) "In June, PK hosted a 'Catholic Summit' at its headquarters in Denver, sounding out Catholic volunteers
and leaders from around the country."

(e) "And EARLIER THIS YEAR, PROMISE KEEPERS AMENDED ITS STATEMENT OF FAITH,
REVISING THE LINES THAT CATHOLICS HAD FOUND OFFENSIVE.

(f) "PROMISE KEEPERS FOUNDER BILL MCCARTNEY TOLD OUR SUNDAY VISITOR RECENTLY
THAT FULL CATHOLIC PARTICIPATION WAS HIS INTENTION FROM THE START.' Back in
1992, at our first stadium event, we very clearly stated from the podium that we eagerly welcomed the
participation of Roman Catholics, and we've had scores of Roman Catholics attend and go back to their
churches excited.' ..."

(g) "As executive director of Christian outreach at Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio, [John]
Sengenberger cites Promise Keepers as the inspiration of the men's conferences his own office has
sponsored since 1995. ... Sengenberger invited representatives from Promise Keepers to visit the university.
'We had some frank discussions and told them we needed to see some Catholic involvement on the
leadership level.'... When Steubenville hosted its first men's conference in 1995, Sengenberger invited two
Promise Keepers officials to attend Dale Schlafer, who was at that time chairman of the board, and Glenn
Wagner, a vice president. 'It was their first time in a Catholic evangelistic setting,' Sengenberger said. 'They
were impressed. When they were leaving, we invited them to go through our bookstore and take out any
books they wanted. They went home with all kinds of theology books, Vatican II teachings. ... Dale took a
set of the Liturgy of the Hours. The following year, he told me he'd incorporated it into his daily prayer, so
Glenn asked for one, too.'"

(h) "Both men returned to Steubenville for the 1996 men's conference, where Sengenberger took them to a
Eucharistic holy hour.' I took them aside and explained what we were doing, how THIS ONLY MAKES
SENSE IF YOU BELIEVE IN THE REAL PRESENCE OF JESUS. That night we were down by the
stage, and I remember going down on my knees, then prostrate, down on my face-and right next to me was
Glenn Wagner, doing the same thing.'"

(i) "Yet profound differences remained between the evangelicals of Promise Keepers and Catholics who
were sympathetic. Last year, Promise Keepers published a 'statement of faith' with lines that seemed to be
crafted to exclude Catholics -- or force them to reject their Catholic faith. Section five of the Promise
Keepers credo read: 'We believe that man was created in the image of God, but because of sin, was
alienated from God. That alienation can be removed only by accepting, through faith alone, God's gift of
salvation, which was made possible by Christ's death.'"

(j) "'Faith alone' is a key doctrine of the Protestant Reformation. Though the phrase appears nowhere in
Scripture, it was inserted by Martin Luther into his German translation of the Bible. Concerned about this
Page 111 of 176
development at Promise Keepers, Sengenberger had several Catholic theologians review the statement and
present their objections to Wagner last summer."
(k) "EARLY THIS YEAR, PROMISE KEEPERS REVISED THE STATEMENT IN A WAY THAT
PASSED THEOLOGICAL MUSTER WITH THOSE CATHOLICS: 'Only through faith, trusting in Christ
alone for salvation, which was made possible by His death and resurrection, can that alienation be
removed.' Paul Edwards, Promise Keepers' vice president for advancement, explained that the statement of
faith is a 'dynamic' document, and that Promise Keepers is open to change.

COMMENTS BY FUNDAMENTAL BAPTIST INFORMATION SERVICE EDITOR -- DAVID

CLOUD
(<http://wayoflife.org/>):

We see in this article more evidence that Promise Keepers leadership is playing politics with their
ecumenical agenda. When questioned by "Protestants" about Catholic participation in Promise Keepers,
they claim they want Catholics to come simply because they want them to hear the Gospel and be saved.
On the other hand, when questioned by Catholics about Catholic participation in Promise Keepers, they
claim they want to receive Catholics as they are as brothers in Christ without any desire to evangelize them
away from their "church".
We see that Promise Keepers leadership is bending over backwards to increase Catholic participation in its
movement and to calm the fears of Catholic leaders about the prospect of Catholic men leaving Romanism
because of their participation at Promise Keepers events. They are not requiring that Roman Catholics
reject Rome's false doctrines. Promise Keepers leaders are not exposing Rome's blasphemous gospel and
doctrines, which have led multitudes to eternal damnation. PK leaders are faced with the same dilemma as
all ecumenists. If they were to preach the truth boldly and identify false doctrine plainly, it would destroy
their ecumenical agenda. The Apostles were not content merely to preach the Gospel in a positive manner;
they continually exposed false gospels and warred against doctrinal perversion. We are to follow their
example. Our commission is to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3). We are
to fight for the truth and AGAINST error. Promise Keepers leaders refuse to do this [because they are part
of that error].

SALVATION BY FAITH ALONE

Even the old PK statement was murky and insufficient. If they wanted to clarify the Gospel in the present
ecumenical climate, they would plainly state that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone because of
the atonement of Christ alone without works, sacraments, and priest craft. The old PK statement allowed
room for false gospels. The new statement is even worse, allowing more room for false gospels such as the
one preached by Rome. False gospels are not completely new gospels; they are the true gospel with a few
"minor" changes, with new definitions. Every false gospel redefines grace to somehow include works or
sacraments. This is what the Apostle Paul fought against in the book of Galatians.

When Promise Keepers first published its brief statement of faith, it did not include the phrase "through
faith alone". It was added because of the outcry of those who protested that the absence of this phrase
leaves room for false gospels, which mix grace and works, faith and sacraments. You see, false gospelers
do not deny that salvation is by faith and by grace. What they deny is that it is by grace ALONE through
faith ALONE without works and sacraments of any sort. Now we see that Promise Keepers has again
modified its statement to remove "through faith alone" to please the Catholic leaders with whom they are
fellowshipping. Promise Keepers vice president, Paul Edwards, tells us that PK's doctrinal statement is
"dynamic" and "open to change". This is typical of those with an ecumenical agenda. They claim that
Page 112 of 176
sound doctrine is precious to them, but in practice, they are incredibly flexible and nonchalant about the
most foundational of doctrines.

The article in Our Sunday Visitor claims that "through faith alone" is a doctrine devised by Martin Luther.
This is perfect nonsense. Salvation by grace alone through faith alone is precisely the Gospel preached by
the Apostles and given to us in the Word of God. Paul described this Gospel by revelation in Romans 3:23-
4:6. It is the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone without works of any kind. Paul also
carefully described the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Again, there is not one word about works or
sacraments. The Gospel is salvation through faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Period. It is Christ alone; grace alone, faith alone, no works, no sacraments. Praise the Lord!

When the Philippian jailer asked the Apostles, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" they said, "Believe on
the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou will be saved, and your house" (Acts 16:30, 31). Nothing here about works
or sacraments or church or priests.

The Lord Jesus Christ taught the same thing, of course. When the crowd asked Christ, "What shall we do,
that we might work the works of God?" he replied, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom
he hath sent" (John 6:28, 29). Again, nothing here about works or sacraments. John 3:16 says, "Whosoever
believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life". Faith alone. Faith in Christ, plus nothing and
minus nothing.

Biblical grace means the unmerited eternal salvation of God which comes freely and directly to the
believing sinner through the atonement of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:24 - 4:6; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:4-7). The
Roman Catholic Church has redefined grace to include sacraments. "Grace," by Rome's definition, means
Christ, by His death, has provided salvation to be distributed by the Catholic Church to those sinners who
adhere to its sacraments. The New Catholic Catechism states: "The Church affirms that for believers the
sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation" (1129). THESE WORDS COULD NOT BE
PLAINER.

Beware of Promise Keepers. Its leaders are either very ignorant, or they are very [deceptively]
clever. What are the predominate differences between the National Council of Churches, the World
Council of Churches, and the Apostate Promise Keepers Movement? There is only one difference –
SIZE!

Throw open the gates wide, for the Great Whore of Babylon is ready to
enter!

Page 113 of 176

 APOSTASY
The National Council of Churches
www.geocities.com/nccwatch/
reformed-theology.org/html/issue07/apostasy.htm
EXPOSING the Marxist kumbaya guitar strumming holier than thou PC brigade of the National Council of
Churches! Do not be fooled by the NCC –

They are not a church and they are not religious!

The beginning of true liberty is Jesus Christ. Therefore, the first and last target of all subversion is biblical
faith. Hence, it is that the Church has been the first target of infiltration and subversion; and is the most
subverted institution in the United States today.
Dr. R. J. Rushdoony
David Emerson Gumaer spent two years within the youth apparatus of the Communist Party as an
undercover operative for Chicago Police Intelligence. In December of 1967 he accepted the invitation of
the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee to testify in executive session regarding his knowledge of the

Page 114 of 176

activities and personnel of the W.E.B. DuBois Clubs and the Students for a Democratic Society. Mr.
Gumaer is currently a Contributing Editor to The Review of the News (an outstanding new national
newsweekly) and has lectured widely.

Claiming to speak with authority for some 42 million American Christians, the National Council of the
Churches of Christ (N.C.C.) includes thirty-three denominations representing most of the major Protestant
and Orthodox Churches in the United States. In addition, more than a score of denominations not actually
members of the N.C.C. have participated actively in its radical programs.
Headquartered at 475 Riverside Drive in New York City, the National Council functions through dozens of
interlocking departments, grouped under four major divisions, overseeing the N.C.C.'s international
operations. The program is of such magnitude that in 1968, alone, the National Council of Churches
expended over $19 million on a worldwide network of Leftist projects. In that year, however, the N.C.C.
collected $24,819,000 from gullible American Christians and tax-exempt Leftist foundations.
During the meeting of this group's General Assembly at San Diego in February of 1968, a presentation
titled "NCC Ministries and the Communist World" revealed that in 1967 over $1,584,000 had been given to
the Communist Government of Poland through an N.C.C. on-going ministry called Church World Service.
Although the aid was received in the name of the Polish Ecumenical Council, it was administered by the
Communists for their own purposes. During the period from 1952 until 1967, over $40 million worth of
food, clothing, and other material was give by the N.C.C.'s Church World Service to the Communist
Government of Yugoslavia. Even stranger was an admission in this N.C.C. report that the National Council
was operating a "refugee program" which picked up the tab for relocating Brazilian Communists in
Mexico.
To top it off, in 1968 the same U.S. Government which prohibits prayer in our schools donated $5 million
to the National Council of Churches through something called "(Ocean Freight Refunds." In fact, in its
1960 triennial report, the N.C.C. lists "Ocean Freight Refunds" from the federal government totaling more
than $23 million for the period 1957 to 1960.
The recipient of this federal largesse is the same National Council of Churches whose 1968 General
Assembly at San Diego demanded that America:
"Stop the bombing of North Vietnam as a prelude to seeking a negotiated peace"; "Avoid provocative
military actions against Communist China in the knowledge that it has a legitimate interest in Asia"; "Press
for the admission of the Peking government to the United Nations"; "Create conditions for cooperation
between the United States and the Communist countries of Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union and Cuba";
"Recognize the government of Cuba and acknowledge the existence of the East German Republic"; and,
"Remove restrictions on imports from Communist countries and on cultural exchanges between the U.S.
and the Soviet Union."
Other resolutions called for "increased support for poverty-rights action groups by Church Women United,"
and provided for financial backing of the subversive National Urban Coalition. The N.C.C. even directed
its member churches "to provide funds for local black groups to strategize for the summer and to support
inclusion of black power and black nationalist organizations in local task groups.... "In other words, the
resolutions of the National Council exactly followed the current Communist Line.
The N.C.C. has consistently propagandized for every conceivable Leftist program, from federally forced
integration to complete disarmament of the United States. From its office in Washington, D.C., the
National Council's spokesmen regularly appear before Committees of Congress to lobby for the causes of
the Far Left, though the National Council has never registered under the Lobbying Act of 1946. And,
despite its having been repeatedly exposed as a fraud the N.C.C. has somehow continued to maintain not

Page 115 of 176

only its reputation for legitimacy, but its tax-exempt status as well. It is very well shielded indeed, and
rooted in a conspiracy against Christianity in America which goes back more than eighty years.
A full decade before the turn of the century, the seeds of the Marxist "social gospel" were already being
planted within our major seminaries and divinity schools by returning American theologians who had
studied in England and Germany. There they had become infected with the virus of a Conspiracy which
had already changed much of the spiritual and moral structure of Europe. After awhile, of course, America
produced her own clergical conspirators. One of these was a man named Walter Rauschenbusch.
In 1885, Raushenbusch was graduated from the prestigious Rochester Theological Seminary, thoroughly
indoctrinated in the Socialist tenets of "Illuminism" — a philosophy calling itself a religion but substituting
faith in man for faith in God. As the atheist, Karl Marx noted: "Illuminism is really nothing else but
Marxism." Rauschenbusch was both a Illuminist and a Marxist. Thus, in 1892 he and a group of Comrades
organized "The Brotherhood of the Kingdom" to promote their radical beliefs along Fabian lines. Walter
Ranschenbusch declared: "If ever Socialism is to succeed, it cannot succeed in an irreligious country. It
must start in the churches."

And start in the churches it did.

In New York, the Reverend F.D. Huntington — another Marxist — was busy founding the American
branch of the Christian Socialist Movement. It was to be a religious arm of the infamous Fabian Socialist
Society which had been created some years earlier in London at the direction of Sidney and Beatrice Webb,
George Bernard Shaw, and a host of other prominent Marxists of the time. Indeed, the Webbs made a trip
to the United States in 1898 to review the success of Fabian infiltration of religion. By the turn of the
century, Marxist plans for the capture of our churches were proceeding apace.
In February of 1900 the first effort to create a National Federation of Churches resulted in a nationwide
committee of twenty-five leading churchmen, many of whom were devoted Fabians. One of those young
organizers was an English protégé of Walter Rauschenbusch named Harry F. Ward. Years later, in sworn
testimony before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, it would be revealed that Ward was not
only a secret Communist, but "the Red Dean of the Communist Party in the religious field."
By February 1901, delegates from local church federations met at Philadelphia and formed the National
Federation of Churches, forerunner of a larger, more powerful Fabian organization whose projects on
behalf of the Communist apparatus would radically alter the course of American history. The next year at
Chicago, during the national convention of the Socialist Party, a number of prominent N.F.C. clergymen
participated actively.
There followed a Committee on Correspondence, made up of the more radical ministers and laymen of the
day, which toured the nation's seminaries and church offices propagandizing for yet another Red project, an
Inter-Church Conference on Federation. Deliberations at that important Conference, held in New York on
November 15, 1905, would have a profound influence on the minds and actions of thousands of religious
leaders for many years to come. It was at that historic gathering that the first formal proposal was made
calling for the formation of the Federal Council of Churches, now the National Council of Churches.
In 1907 the Far Left created a supporting Front called the Methodist Federation for Social Service, a
"religious" organization found by the House Committee on Un-American Activities to have been a key
apparatus of the Communist Conspiracy since its very inception.1 In fact, when it was finally exposed
years later, it was cited as "Among the more Conspicuous fronts for Communist activity . . . "And, as you
might expect, one of the founding Methodist ministers was Harry F. Ward, the brilliant protégé of Walter
Rauscbenbusch. For the next thirty-five years this Communist Front was directed by Comrade Ward, and
staffed by numerous functionaries of the Communist Party.

Page 116 of 176

By this time the groundwork had been laid and Dr. Rauschenbusch paid a return visit to Sidney and
Beatrice Webb in England, fully committing himself to Fabian designs for subversion of the Christian
church in America. The following year, on December 2, 1908, Waller Rauschenbusch and Harry Ward set
up a nine-day conference at Philadelphia during which the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in
America (F.C.C.) was officially formed by representatives of twenty-nine Protestant and Eastern Orthodox
denominations. The F.C.C. then chose as its constitution the same plan of federation that had earlier been
adopted by the Socialists attending the 1905 Inter-Church Conference on Federation. They also adopted
"The Social Creed of the Churches" written by English Communist Harry F. Ward, who had earlier
submitted his Plan to Nikolai Lenin for approval.
By 1914 the Federal Council of Churches had become one of the major outlets in America for Marxist
propaganda. On February tenth of that year a group of conspirators met in the home of millionaire
industrialist Andrew Carnegie and laid plans for something called the Church Peace Union. In Pioneers
For Peach Through Religion, Charles S. Macfarland (at the time General Secretary of the F.C.C.) reveals
that this group included only those religious leaders who were in some way connected with the Federal
Council of Churches. This newly formed organization was the brainchild of top conspirator Andrew
Carnegie, who used it to capture for the Insiders the controlling clique of the Federal Council by
subsidizing the Church Peace Union to the tune of $2 million.
Shortly after the meeting with Carnegie, two international church conferences were promoted by the
F.C.C.'s Church Peace Union — one for Roman Catholics, to be held at Liegé, Belgium, and the other for
Protestants at Constance, Germany. Both were scheduled to convene on August 1, 1914. Which, by an odd
"coincidence," was the very day that war was declared between Germany and Russia.
Several months later, at Cambridge in England, the Fabian Socialists set up an International Fellowship of
Reconciliation to protest the War while propagandizing for Socialism. This was followed a year later on
November 11, 1915, by the formation of an American Branch of F.O.R., organized by such stalwarts of the
Federal Council of Churches as Harry F. Ward and Walter Rauschenbush. They were aided in this project
by leading Socialists Norman Thomas, Oswald Garrison Viliard, and Jane Addams (at whose home in
Chicago the Webbs stayed during their visit to America). In April 1917, one month after the Czar had been
forced to surrender control of his government to Socialist Alexander Kerensky, The United States was
finally maneuvered into World War I, thus ending 141 years of neutrality. That fall, a relative handful of
bolsheviks led by Nikolai Lenin captured the Government of Russia, thereby establishing a base for the
Marxists' continuing world revolution.
By 1918, as its interlock with the Fellowship of Reconciliation became more pronounced, the Federal
Council of Churches stepped up its agitation against the War and became the major propagandist in
America for the Bolshevik Revolution. That year, too, with the passing of Walter Rauschenbush, the mantle
of the Marxist movement within the church passed to Comrade Harry Ward, who had by then begun
teaching the Red dialectic at Union Theological Seminary, where he was to remain for twenty-five years.
In early 1919 the Russian Communists issued a call for the founding of the Communist International,
resulting that September first in the formation of the American Communist Party from the Left wing of the
Socialist Party. Among the hundreds of delegates at the founding convention in Chicago were Comrades
John Keracher and Dennis Batt, representing the Michigan State organization of the Socialist Party. They
insisted "that the Communist Party should in its program adopt a plan calling for an all-out campaign
against religion as its main and immediate objective." Years later a charter member of the Party revealed:
The policy in those days was framed in such a way that the members of the Communist Party could
infiltrate church organizations for the purpose of conducting their propaganda among them, for enlisting
their support for Soviet Russia, and for the various campaigns in which the Communists were interested.

Page 117 of 176

In the early Twenties the Communist Party made considerable gains in its program to infiltrate the
churches. This effort was led by such prominent "American" clergymen as Harry F. Ward, Jerome Davis,
William B. Spofford, and Albert Rhys Williams. As former top Communist Benjamin Gitlow told the
House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1953: "This group wielded tremendous influence in the
religious field and did Trojan Horse work in advancing the Communist conspiracy in religion."
The most important Communist in the field of religion, said Gitlow, was Robert W. Dunn — who "served
as the Communist Party's liaison between its political committee and secretariat and the clergymen
operating under instructions of the Party." Comrade Dunn, an official with the American Civil Liberties
Union, carried his orders to Harry Ward and the others, who in turn issued directives of their own.
Comrades Ward, Spofford, Davis, and Williams were all leaders of the F.C.C. and all were members of the
Communist Party. Williams even worked in the Soviet Union as an assistant in the Commissariat of
Foreign Affairs.
In 1922 the American Communist Party, and all Communist Parties throughout the world, adopted the
"United Front" strategy ordered by Nikolai Lenin and the Communist International. This enabled the Reds
greatly to expand their infiltration of religion. As Ben Gitlow testified: "The number of clergymen who
followed the Communist Party line grew by leaps and bounds."
In 1924 (and again in 1929) Federal Council chieftain Harry Ward traveled to Moscow to discuss with
Stalin the use of the churches in furthering the goals of the International Communist Conspiracy. In early
1925, Ward was sent to China where he lectured widely among Christian clergymen. His lectures in China
were discussed at length at the Comintern, and it was agreed that "the missions and church institutions in
China could be used . . . to cover up Communist espionage activities. . . . "That was also the case in this
country, where the Federal Council already had a budget of $350,000 and an office in Washington from
which it promoted Communist interests.
In 1927 the F.C.C.'s lobbying for Communist causes became so flagrant that Congressman Arthur M. Free
introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives describing the Federal Council as "a communist
organization aimed at the establishment of a state-church .... "In that same year, a report issued by the
Military Intelligence Association branded the F.C.C. as subversive. Another denunciation appeared in the
Naval Institute Proceedings of 1928, which established that the Federal Council had been meddling in
defense matters and was "probably the most powerful propaganda organization in the country."
Testifying before the Senate Lobbying Investigating Committee, Congressman George Tinkham revealed
that he had received propaganda from the F.C.C. on fifteen different political issues. Tinkham later
revealed that Insider John D. Rockefeller Jr. had from 1926 to 1929 contributed over $137,000 to the
Federal Council of Churches — a sum equal to about ten percent of its total annual income from all
sources.
During 1932 the Federal Council suffered a series of setbacks. Congressional Committee Report Number
2290 formally branded the F.C.C. as subversive. And the Sunday School Times of August 13, 1932,
exposed an obscene F.C.C. sex manual entitled Young People's Relationships, described as "a crowning
achievement of the Federal Council controlling group along the line of preparing the way for atheistic
Communism." Also, Major Amos A. Fries produced documentation before a Hearing of the House
Immigration Committee in January 1932, proving that "There has been an interlocking board of
directorates all the way from the Federal Council of Churches to the most extreme Communists."
During this hectic period for the F.C.C., Harry Ward was graduating one of his more interesting proteges
from Union Theological Seminary in New York — an eager young Marxist who promptly began working
for the A.C.L.U. Ward's pupil was Arnold Johnson, now Public Relations Director for the Communist
Party, U.S.A. The following year Comrade Johnson served as Field Secretary for the Communists National
Religion and Labor Foundation, created in 1932 by Communist Sidney Hillman. Acting in the same

Page 118 of 176

capacity as Johnson in that effort was Willard E. Uphaus, a Federal Council official who has since affiliated
himself with ten other officially cited Communist projects. Other F.C.C. officials listed on the letterhead of
the Reds' National Religion and Labor Foundation include such members of its Executive Committee as
Communists Jerome Davis, A.J. Muste, and Charles C. Webber.
By 1935 Communist infiltration of religion in the Untied States was in full swing, presaging orders of the
Seventh World Conference of the Comintern at Moscow to maintain such subversion. On September 10,
1935, a Report on the F.C.C. from the Office of Naval Intelligence was read into the Congressional
Record, establishing that the Federal Council was one of several organizations which "give aid and comfort
to the Communist movement and Party." Its leadership, the Intelligence Report revealed, "consists of a
small radical group which dictates its policy," and "it is always extremely active in any matter against
national defense." In fact the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral William H. Standley, formally accused
the F.C.C. of collaborating with the Communists.
How far the Federal Council of Churches was prepared to go in pushing the Communist Line was revealed
in a special report issued by the Commission to Study the Bases of a Just and Durable Peace, at the 1942
convention of the F.C.C. It called for:
Ultimately, "a world government of delegated powers." Complete abandonment of U.S. isolationism.
Strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty. International control of all armies and navies. A
universal system of money.... Worldwide freedom of immigration. Progressive elimination of all tariff and
quota restrictions on world trade.... A "democratically controlled" international bank.... Chairman of the
Commission, which issued these proposals, was John Foster Dulles, an Insider who was a leader of the
Federal Council of Churches.
The F.C.C. conference concluded:
Many duties now performed by local and national governments "can now be effectively carried out only by
international authority." Individual nations . . . must give up their armed forces "except for preservation of
domestic order" and allow the world to be policed by an international army and navy . . . .
Three years later, in 1945, the Federal Council of Churches was one of only forty-two non-governmental
organizations invited to send delegates to the international conference at San Francisco which founded the
United Nations. Presiding over the U.N. conclave was Communist agent Alger Hiss, who like Dulles had
earlier served as Chairman of an important committee of the Federal Council of Churches. The Federal
Council even boasted that it had first conceived the idea of the United Nations, and noted that one of its
prominent officials, John Foster Dulles, had been responsible for incorporating the Federal Council's "Six
Pillars of Peace" into the U.N. Charter.
Nonetheless, the F.C.C. had taken quite a beating from Conservatives during the Forties. It was time for a
change of image if it was to survive. On November 29, 1950, the Federal Council held a convention at
Cleveland where it absorbed four additional agencies (the Church World Service, the Interseminary
Committee, the Protestant Film Commission, and the Protestant Radio Commission), and formally changed
its name to the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. Leaders of the old Marxist
organization became leaders in the new one. In fact, the F.C.C.'s Bulletin that December explained: "All the
work of the Federal Council will continue under new auspices....other divisions of the National Council and
the general administration of the Council will also draw upon the resources in both personnel and
finances."
In checking the quick-change artistry of the Federal Council of Churches, Dr. J.B. Mathews, who compiled
the voluminous Appendix IX of the Dies Committee on Un-American Activities, found:

Page 119 of 176

In the formal constitution of the National Council of Churches in Cleveland, one representative from each
of the participating denominations signed the official book which became the Document of Record. Eleven
of these 29 signers of the official book have public records of affiliation with pro-Communist enterprises....
There were 358 clergymen who were voting delegates to the constituting convention.... Of these clergymen,
123 (or 34 per cent) have had affiliations with Communist projects and enterprises. That represents a high
degree of Communist penetration.2
The overlap between the old Council and the new was almost complete. It included Edwin T. Dahlberg
who had been Chairman of the Department of Evangelism in the F.C.C. and later became President of the
"new" National Council of Churches. The public record shows that Dahlberg has affiliated himself with at
least twenty-seven officially cited Communist projects. Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam, who had been
President of the F.C.C. in 1948, became a member of the powerful N.C.C. General Board. Oxnam has a
record of affiliations with forty-one officially cited Communist Fronts and projects. Roswell P. Barnes, as
Associate General Secretary of the F.C.C. in 1940, and editor of the F.C.C. Bulletin in later years, turned up
as Executive Secretary of the N.C.C.'s Division of Christian Life and Work. Barnes has associated himself
with nine officially cited Communist Fronts. And then there was Walter W. Van Kirk, who had held the
identical title of Executive Director of both the F.C.C. and N.C.C. Department of International Justice and
Goodwill. The list, as one might expect, could go on and on.
What is most interesting about control of the National Council of Churches is that its hierarchy consists of a
General Assembly made up of 750 delegates who meet once every three years. From this group is chosen a
General Board of 275 members who meet every four months. The rules provide that a quorum must be
present to take any official action, and that a majority of those present must be in favor of said action for it
to be official. The fantastic thing about this is that it only lakes 20 of the 275 to constitute a quorum — and
a majority of that twenty is eleven. Therefore, the balance of power lies in the hands of just eleven men
who can issue a declaration on any political subject and promulgate that declaration in the name of thirty-
three denominations comprising over 42 million American Protestants. That, people, is just the way the
Communists want it.
In 1951, opposition to the N.C.C. came from both the House Committee on Un-American Activities (see its
investigation of the Communist Committee for Peaceful Alternatives to the Atlantic Pact), and from a
newly formed Methodist organization based in Cincinnati, the anti-Communist "Circuit Riders."
The year 1952 began with the H.C.U.A. exposing the Communists' Methodist Federation for Social Action,
which was found to be directly linked to both the F.C.C. and the successor N.C.C. The House Committee
also heard testimony from former Communist leader Joseph Kornfeder, who said there were at that time
somewhere in the neighborhood of 600 American clergymen who were members of the Communist Party.
Kornfeder had trained at the Lenin School of Political Warfare in Moscow from 1927 to 1930, been a top
aide of Josef Stalin, and spoke from experience.
When Dwight Eisenhower took office, Leftists in the National Council of Churches began to pop up in key
posts in the Administration. There was John Foster Dulles, who became Secretary of State; Harold Stassen,
who became Mutual Security Director (he had been Vice President of the N.C.C. and President of its
International Council of Religious Education); and, Arthur S. Flemming, who became head of the
manpower division of the Department of Defense and later Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare.3
President Eisenhower personally added prestige to the N.C.C. by speaking at its functions.
During 1953 the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and the House Committee on Un-American
Activities took thousands of pages of testimony on Communist penetration of all phases of American life.
In July of that year, H.C.U.A. heard testimony from such former leaders of the Communist Party as
Manning Johnson, Benjamin Gitlow, and Joseph Kornfeder, detailing Communist infiltration and
manipulation of our nation's churches. Supporting evidence was likewise given in sworn testimony by such

Page 120 of 176

experts as former Communists Paul Crouch, Karl Prussion, and Albert Vassart. The latter testified that "In
1936, Moscow sent out an order to have sure and carefully selected Communist youth enter the seminaries
and become priests." After all, Stalin had himself been a seminarian.
1953 was also the year of the famous G. Bromley Oxnam Hearing before the House Committee on Un-
American Activities, in which Oxnam admitted his participation in numerous Communist projects and
implicated his N.C.C. Comrades. During that year the American Legion launched a drive to block the
N.C.C. effort to bypass the McCarran Act in order to bring Communist clergymen to America from the
Soviet Bloc. Meanwhile, the National Council was attacking the Bricker Amendment and the McCarren-
Walter Internal Security Act of 1950.
The following year, while the National Council of Churches was pushing to abolish Bible reading in public
schools, Walter Reuther presented a check to the N.C.C. for $200,000 — a grant from the C.I.O.'s Philip
Murray Memorial Foundation. In the meantime, the Communist Daily Worker was devoting its space to
reporting the National Council's attacks on Senator Joseph McCarthy and on all Congressional Committees
investigating subversive activities.
In 1958 the National Council of Churches World Order Study Conference met at Cleveland, Ohio, from
November eighteenth through the twenty-first. As the Communist Worker reported, the Cleveland
delegates proposed:
Diplomatic recognition by the United States of Red China — and its admission to the United Nations; Co-
existence with "the Communist nations"; Avoidance of "the posture of general hostility" to "the Communist
nations"; Ratification of the genocide convention; Internationalism to supersede national patriotism;
"Disarmament by multilateral agreement" for "universal disarmament"; "The creation of a permanent
United Nations police force" and abolition of universal military training; "Abolition of the system of
military conscription" and of the Selective Service System; Extension of trade and travel without restriction
between the United States and Communist countries.
Of course, these N.C.C. proposals might just as well have come directly from Moscow. We are told,
however, that they emanated from a "Message to the Churches," prepared by a committee of twenty-three
N.C.C. laymen and clergy under the chairmanship of Dr. John C. Bennett, dean of the faculty at Union
Theological Seminary. As one would assume, Bennett had already affiliated himself with at least twenty-
seven officially cited Communist Fronts and projects.
What is most interesting about the Cleveland Conference is that, of the six hundred delegates, two-thirds
were lay-men. The Circuit Riders note in Recognize Red China? that one-half of the registered clergymen
at the conference, or 103, had public records of affiliation with Communist Fronts and causes.
The next major incident to jar the hierarchy of the National Council came on February 25, 1960, with the
publication of Issues Presented By Air Reserve Center Training Manual, a Report of the House Committee
on Un-American Activities. As the H.C.U.A. Report revealed, the Air Force had issued a training manual
for its officers which dealt at some length with Communist penetration of religion. Officials of the National
Council of Churches, learning of this, immediately contacted Secretary of the Air Force Dudley C. Sharp,
demanding that this "offensive" manual be removed and the chapter pertaining to subversion of religion be
rewritten to exclude any mention of Communist penetration. On the same day that the N.C.C. message was
received, February 11, 1960, General Lloyd P. Hopwood, Director of Personnel Procurement and Training
of the U.S. Air Force, ordered the manual withdrawn.
Some time thereafter, Secretary of Defense Thomas Gates told the Press: "in response to the letter of the
National Council of Churches...I have assured this fine organization of my very genuine regrets regarding
the statement that appeared in [the] Air Force Reserve Manual .... "

Page 121 of 176

Citing the "offensive" passage on page fifty-three of the Air Reserve Center Training Manual, H.C.U.A.
staff director Richard Arens quoted it as follows:
A while back Americans were shocked to find that Communists had infiltrated our churches....
The Communist Party, U.S.A., has instructed many of its members to join churches and church groups, to
lake control whenever possible, and to influence the thoughts and actions of as many church-goers as they
can .... The party tries to get leading church men to support Communist policies disguised as welfare work
for minorities. Earl Browder, former head of the American Communist party,, once admitted: "By going
among the religious masses, we are for the first time able to bring our anti-religious ideas to them."

Are there Communist Ministers? There Sure Are!

The manual then named two such identified Communist ministers — the Reverend Eliot While, and the
Reverend Claude C. Williams. It was Williams who once boasted: "Denominationally I am a Presbyterian,
religiously a Unitarian, and politically I am a Communist. I am not preaching to make people good or
anything of the sort, I'm in the church because I can reach people easier that way and get them organized
for Communism."
Defending the H.C.U.A. position favoring the unaltered Air Force Reserve Manual, staff director Arens
declared:
...in view of the Secretary's repudiation of the information conveyed respecting the National Council of
Churches of Christ in America, the chairman issued a statement to the effect that the leadership of the
[N.C.C.] had hundreds or at least over a hundred affiliations with Communist fronts and causes. Since then
we have made careful, but yet incomplete checks, and it is a complete understatement. Thus far of the
leadership of the National Council of Churches of Christ in America, we have found over 100 persons
leadership capacity with either Communist-front records or records of service to Communists causes. The
aggregate affiliations of the leadership, instead of being in the hundreds as the [H.C.U.A.] chairman. first
indicated, is now, according to our latest count, into the thousands, and we have yet to complete our
check....
Another matter raised by the Air Reserve Center Training Manual was the fact that on September 30, 1952,
the National Council of Churches had published a "Revised Standard Version" of the Bible in which many
beloved passages were altered, and adulterated phrases substituted to fit the social gospel of the N.C.C. Of
the ninety translators named in a brochure issued by the N.C.C. at least thirty have been affiliated with
ninety major Communist Fronts or projects.
Several months later, on April 20, 1960, Congressman Donald Jackson read into the Congressional Record
(Pages 7842-7846) a shocking exposé of the pamphlet The Negro American A Reading List, published in
1957 by the Department of Racial and Cultural Relations of the National Council of Churches. This
pamphlet was a bibliography of 260 books on "Negro history," many of which had been written by
identified Communists. The Foreword to that reading list, by Alfred S. Kramer, slated: "We of the National
Council . . . consider ... these books ... safe to recommend for children." Among the Communist authors
recommended were: Victor Perlo, former head of a Soviet espionage ring operating within the U.S.
government; Herbert Aptheker, chief theoretician for the Communist Party, U.S.A.; W.E.B. DuBois, an
admitted Communist in whose honor the Party later named its youth affiliate; Shirley Graham, DuBois'
Communist wife (who was in charge of all radio and television propaganda in Ghana when it was
controlled by the Communists); and, Langston Hughes, whose blasphemous poem, "Goodbye Christ,"
scrapes the bottom in Communist sacrilege (Hughes had nine books on that reading list). A committee of
ten clergy and laymen, headed by Dr. J. Oscar Lee (an N.C.C. Executive Director), had approved this
N.C.C. reading list.

Page 122 of 176

Obviously we will not be able to go into many more of the hundreds of subversive operations of the
National Council of Churches because of limitations on our space. But, ever so briefly, let us touch on a
few additional items of major importance.
On June 7, 1963, the N.C.C. created an Emergency Commission on Religion and Race headed by Dr.
Martin Luther King, Walter Reuther, and Eugene Carson Blake. It was a Major coalition of Leftist forces
run by Dr. Robert W. Spike, who after successfully leading the attack on the South during the N.C.C.'s
Delta Project was murdered at Columbus, Ohio, in 1966 in circumstances which led police to believe that
he had been a practicing pervert. Lewd pictures of homosexuals, names and addresses of known deviates,
and addresses of homosexual hangouts in several cities were found in his possession.
Working with Spike in that N.C.C. Delta Project (which included the Reds' march on Selma, Alabama, in
1965) were Bayard Rustin, a convicted sexual deviate and former organizer for the Young Communist
League; Myles Horton, Marxist director of the notorious Highlander Folk School; and, the Delta Ministry's
associate director, the Reverend Warren McKenna. The Reverend McKenna was photographed in 1957,
sitting during a visit to Red China with Communist Premier Chou En-lai, and has been referred to by
Herbert Philbrick (in a government document called Communist Passport Frauds) as "one of the leading
collaborators of, and apologists for, the Soviet Union."
In March and April of 1964 the Communist Worker announced an N.C.C. coalition to create a March on
Washington — a march officially designated as a project of the Communists Party.
Then there is the Sixth Triennial Conference of the National Council of Churches held at Detroit during the
first week in December 1969. On December fifth the Communist Daily World carried an article by
Communist William Allen reporting that:
By unanimous vote, the 790 delegates at the convention here of the National Council of Churches
condemned the massacre of Vietnamese civilians by U.S. troops.
On that same page, immediately following Comrade Allen's account, appeared a shorter item reporting yet
another N.C.C. resolution which recommended "that U.S. churches raise 'substantial' funds to support
60,000 American military deserters and draft resisters who have taken refuge in Canada."
The Daily World report also named Dr. Cynthia Wedel, "an outspoken advocate of women's rights," as
having just been elected the first woman President of the National Council of Churches. The New York
Times noted on December fifth that the new N.C.C. President now occupies the "highest symbolic post in
American Protestantism." Devoting a quarter of a page to the background of Mrs. Wedel, it revealed that
she maintains the position of Associate Director of the wildly Leftist Center for Voluntarism in the Institute
for Applied Behavioral Science in Washington, "the pioneering body in sensitivity training formerly known
as the National Training Laboratory." In addition, she is a leading member of the "Jeanette Rankin
Brigade" — a subversive group made up largely of the wives and daughters of Communists and fellow
travelers.
After receiving her doctorate in psychology from George Washington University in 1935, we are told, Mrs.
Wedel "took charge of youth work for the Episcopal Church in New York." There she met and married the
Reverend Theodore O. Wedel. The Times somehow failed to mention that the Reverend Theodore Wedel is
listed in Appendix IX of the Dies Committee on Un-American Activities as having begun his career of
support for Communist causes as early as 1940 by sponsoring a "Conference On Civil Rights" held under
the auspices of a Communist Front called the Washington Committee for Democratic Action. His wife,
Cynthia, was listed in the Communist Worker of July 14, 1957, as a signer of a Communist petition to
President Eisenhower calling for a ban on H-bomb testing.
What plans have Mrs. Wedel and the leaders of the National Council for rendering further aid to the
Communists? For one thing, they called on member churches at their Detroit conference to "organize the
Page 123 of 176
collection of funds in the churches over the Christmas season for distribution among the Committee of
Responsibility, the American Friends Service Committee, Vietnam Christian, Service and Caritas, for
emergency medical relief to civilian Vietnamese casualties....To participate in the continuation of the
March Against Death in communities around the country...." In short, the N.C.C. called for the collection of
money for subversive agencies which have given material aid to the Communist Vietcong, and for the
promotion of the Communists' continuing "Vietnam Moratorium" project.
During the course of the N.C.C.'s week-long conference, some three thousand "church leaders" were
treated to the stirring words of Marxist James Forman, militant leader of the Black Nationalist movement in
America. Referring to his "Black Manifesto," Forman called for "a transfer of power," asserting the hoary
Communist canard about the "right of self-determination" for blacks in America.
Commenting on Forman, syndicated columnist Tom Anderson has noted:
On May 2, 1969, Marxist-anarchist James Forman presented a list of demands, called a Black Manifesto, to
the General Board of the National Council of Churches. This manifesto demands that United States
churches pay 500 million dollars as "reparations" to Negroes for past "exploitation." The money would be
paid to Forman's National Black Economic Development Conference to help finance a nationwide guerrilla
war. The Manifesto clearly, expressed N.B.E.D.C.'s intention to overthrow the U.S. government by force
and violence.
And, believe it or not, the General Board of the N.C.C., after voting in favor of Foreman's plan, declared
that it desired "to record its deepest appreciation to Mr. James Forman for the presentation of, and
explanation concerning, the Black Manifesto...."
So you see, there is little wonder that in its issue of July 15, 1968, Approach magazine (a publication of the
National Council of Churches) devoted considerable space to an exclusive interview with Gus Hall,
General Secretary of the Communist Party, U.S.A. During that unprecedented interview, Comrade Hall
declared that Communism and the church share so many goals that "they ought to exist for one another."
Hall, said the N.C.C. article, "cited current red goals for America as being 'almost identical' to those
espoused by the liberal church....
'We can — we should — work together for the same things,'' he said." You see. Communist leader Gus
Hall concluded: "We can live together in a Socialist nation."

If the National Council of Churches has its way, that's just the way it will be!
Footnotes:
1
The Methodist Federation for Social Service, which later changed its name to become the Methodist
Federation for Social Action, admitted its cooperation with the Communists in its Bulletin number eight for
1932. It was subsequently cited as a Communist Front by the 1948 Report of the California Committee on
Un-American Activities. On February 17, 1952, the House Committee on Un-American Activities Issued
an 87-page document detailing the Red activities of the M.F.S.A. and its Communist personnel. Among
those in this Front cited as active Communists posing as church leaders was one Winifred Chappell, a
Soviet agent who was assigned by Harry Ward to do "youth work" for the Methodist Church. As Secretary
of M.F.S.S. for ten years, she counseled young draftees to commit wholesale sabotage and treason against
the United States. Writing in the Methodist weekly, Epworth Herald, Comrade Winifred advised youth to:
"Accept the draft, take the drill, go into the camps and onto the battlefield, or into the munitions factories
and transportation work — but sabotage war preparations and war. Be agitators for sabotage. . . ."

Page 124 of 176

Another Communist in this outfit was the Reverend Jack McMichael, the first clergyman ever subpoenaed
by the House Committee on Un-American Activities. He was Executive Secretary for the M.F.S.A. Then
there was Dr. Charles C. Webber, M.F.S.S. Co-Secretary, who told an audience at Rochester Divinity
School: "Capitalism is un-Christian and unethical, and must give way, to Socialism and Communism, and
the missionaries of the future must be social revolutionists." There was also Jerome Davis, identified twice
under oath as a Communist, with a record of Communist activities that takes eight full pages. The current
Executive Secretary of the Methodist Federation for Social Action is Communist Lee H. Ball of Chicago.
Communist Party founder Benjamin Gitlow revealed during testimony given in 1953 that the objective of
M.F.S.A. "was to transform the Methodist Church and Christianity into an instrument for the achievement
of Socialism." The Communists in this organization, said Gitlow, "posed as religious reformers fighting
orthodoxy and reaction in religion."
2
Approximately one-third of those elected to the General Board of the National Council of Churches have
had similar Communist records. while at least seven hundred officers, denominational representatives, and
other N.C.C. officials also have Communist Front records.
3
Dr. Arthur S. Flemming, currently President of the University of Oregon, served as N.C.C. President from
1966 to 1969. He was a U.S. Civil Service Commissioner in Washington during the Administration of
President Franklin Roosevelt. In that strategic position, Flemming had ruled that Soviet agent Nathan
Gregory Silvermaster, head of a Communist spy ring operating within our Government, was "eligible" to
retain his key post. Dr. Flemming ruled favorably in behalf of a number of such Communist agents.

WHAT ABOUT THE

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES?
(www.brfwitness.org/Articles/1967v2n1.htm)
Editorial
Volume 2, Number 1.
1967
Part of the controversy in the present day theological "swirl," centers around certain institutions. One of
these is the National Council of Churches of Christ in America. Perhaps a quick glance at this controversial
issue allows the casual observer to believe there are as many shades of belief as there are people ranging
from one side of the spectrum to the other. However, upon closer study, it soon becomes evident there are
some rather well-defined lines drawn. It is not popular to criticize or question the current trends of the day,
especially when to do so runs counter to the majority position. It must be recognized in all honesty that not
all critics of current trends in theology and church life are self-righteous bigots, just out to tear down and
wreck havoc in the kingdom. There are intelligent, Biblical, and even logical deductions that need to be
looked at by all ere we buy a bill of goods and later discover the "idealism" of the position will not stand up
under the judgment of God nor meet the needs of a dying humanity. This issue of THE WITNESS speaks to
this current problem facing Christians today. We believe the facts presented are basic in helping anyone to
make a proper appraisal of this controversial dilemma.
Why We Oppose Affiliation with the
National Council of Churches
by Harold S. Martin
Page 125 of 176
Many of us who are members of the Church of the Brethren, believe that it is unfortunate that our
denomination became affiliated with the National Council of Churches. We have a number of reasons for
this conviction and it is our purpose to point out some of these reasons. We intend to make no slurs. There
is to be no name-calling and no leveling of charges of "Communism." We do not charge that the NCC is a
Communist organization. While there are spies, subversives, and traitors in our country--we believe that the
majority of American people are honest, sincere, loyal citizens, earnestly seeking the best for their country.
Neither do we question all the activities of the NCC. There are very few who criticize the NCC's relief and
rehabilitation program, the ministry in national parks, and certain other projects that churches do together.
But there are a number of aspects of the NCC's program with which we sincerely disagree.
We want to present the facts and arguments courteously, without any intent to misrepresent, misinterpret,
or smear those who disagree with us. We hate sin, not sinners. We hate apostasy, not apostate leaders. We
hate Communism, not Communists. We acknowledge the sincerity of those who differ with us, and we ask
for ourselves the same consideration and courtesy which we gladly accord to those who disagree.

1. The NCC is not primarily a spiritual organization.

It is the primary business of the church to attend to spiritual matters, to present Jesus Christ as Lord and
Saviour that men and women will be converted and equipped by the Holy Spirit for every good work.
Those who are brought to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ then become "salt" in a decaying
society and "light" in a dark world. On the other hand, there are many--and they largely control the
philosophy of the Councils of Churches--who feel the Church is called to enter the world and exercise
political and other pressures to transform society without necessarily redeeming the men who compose the
social order.
We believe the primary concern of the Church should be the care of souls, not the winning of elections and
the implementation of social legislation. When certain men tried to "involve" Jesus in economic matters,
He said, "Who hath made me a judge and divider over you?" Jesus came for another purpose--to give His
life a ransom for many and to make atonement for sins. While He healed, comforted, rescued, and even
raised from the clutches of death--it is impossible to escape the obvious fact that His primary purpose had
to do with man in his relation to God. The implication that Jesus Christ supports Federal Aid to Education,
for example, approaches blasphemy. Jesus and His disciples did not seek to function as a pressure group for
political, social, and economic action.
Our Lord never commissioned the Church to improve the social order by leading social reforms,
conducting sit-ins, marching in the streets, launching emergency peace campaigns, equalizing wealth, or
eliminating poverty. Rather, He commissioned His disciples to preach the Gospel--and the Gospel message
is a message to the individual. The Parable of the Prodigal Son tells about the rejoicing of God over one
sinner that repents. The ethics of the New Testament are individual ethics, e.g., "Let every soul be subject
unto the higher powers." The Gospel invitation is given to the individual, e.g., "Behold I stand at the door
and knock, if any man open the door." Salvation is individual; the Holy Spirit does not inhabit a church or a
group, but the individual. Society will change only as its men are changed. We cannot change the social
order by changing its laws without changing its men.
The NCC is concerned primarily with seeking to mold and influence politics, education, and economics. Its
leaders advocate the passage of bills by Congress which have little if any religious content. One cannot
help wondering whether the NCC is a religious organization minoring in politics, or a political
organization minoring in religion. Anyone who desires, may obtain from the central office of the NCC, a
list of all pronouncements, statements of policy, and resolutions issued since the Council's organization
sixteen years ago. A quick glance at these will reveal the alarming extent to which they are weighted with
political, economic, and social issues--and how little there is of redemptive, evangelical content. The NCC
pronouncements differ very little from the statements of many secular organizations that speak in these

Page 126 of 176

fields, except of course that they bear a Christian label. This preoccupation with social relevance has led to
a serious neglect of the Gospel of salvation for the individual.
The NCC is the product of a legitimate movement which was originally intended to bring a united Christian
witness in the world. But the Council has become, not a group of churches working together to win men
and women to Jesus Christ, but rather it has become the most powerful political-action organization in the
United States, claiming to represent between thirty-five and forty million Protestants. The NCC promotes
programs dealing with affairs of this life (poverty programs, artificial birth control, socialized medicine,
etc.), while neglecting the weightier matters of the next life (sin, atonement, conversion, the new birth,
etc.).

2. The National Council of Churches' Activities and Publications Lean Toward the
Political Left
We recognize that the NCC has no "theology" of its own. But the basic principles and ideals held by its
advocates, and reflected in its literature, are a cause for concern. The general direction of the whole
movement is on the side of liberal (neo-liberal) theology, and is hostile to the evangelical faith. The NCC
supports causes and promotes purposes which are not in harmony with Biblical teachings. Apparently its
most influential leaders have strong convictions with reference to social action, but lack corresponding
convictions with reference to the essentials of the Christian faith itself. Note the following examples:
(1) The April 26, 1963 issue of Christianity Today says, "Meanwhile in New York, the NCC issued a press
release which concludes that in most people's minds there is no longer any conflict between the teachings
of the Bible and those of Charles Darwin on man's origin. The release cited weekly NCC telecasts 'which
accept and explain the theory of evolution.' It said that heavy mail from viewers shows that 'scarcely one in
a thousand still finds any conflict between the Darwinian theory and the Book of Genesis.'"
(2) The November 7, 1965 issue of National Radio Pulpit, produced by the Broadcasting and Film
Commission of the NCC, says: "What about hell? What's happened to the fires which preachers used to
threaten the wicked? What's happened is that most of us are now quite unwilling and unable to say that God
chooses to send of His creatures to a place of endless and limitless torture . . . So (hell) is not a place He
sends men to, but a condition that they choose."
(3) In a special issue of The International Journal of Religious Education, the official publication of the
Division of Christian Education, NCC, Gerald A. Larue says that the message of the Bible is merely "the
witness of a writer at some point in history. We need not agree with what he (the writer) says, but we can
appreciate his point of view."
(4) An editorial in the February 15, 1963 issue of Christianity Today reviews the pamphlet published by the
NCC for the United Christian Youth Movement. The booklet is entitled, Called to Responsible Freedom:
the Meaning of Sex in the Christian Life, by William Graham Cole. Editor Carl F.H. Henry says of this
pamphlet, "In some respects it might even be considered an invitation to sexual promiscuity . . . It deplores
as Pharisaic those who would impose any rules whatever upon sexual mores." The NCC-published
pamphlet says on page 10, "What justifies and sanctifies sexuality is not the external marital status of the
people before the law, but rather what they feel toward each other in their hearts." The implication is that
sex need not be controlled by divine laws, but that the only test for moral conduct is love.
While it is true that the above statements are not necessarily official doctrines of the NCC, it is equally true
that these teachings are unashamedly tolerated. This raises the question in the minds of many, "Is there any
such thing as heresy any more?" The NCC refuses to label as heresy the denial of many cardinal doctrines
of the Christian faith; in fact, it seems that the only belief now considered heresy, is nonecumenicity.

Page 127 of 176

 3. The NCC is an Organization Preparing the Way for a Super church,
The Whore of Babylon
The NCC (and the WCC) deny aspirations to become a world church, but certainly they are preparing the
way for this. We are not saying the WCC is a super church, but it will eventually lead to one. Many of its
leaders believe that when its work is done, it must disappear as a fellowship of churches, in the creation of
the one great world church.
Dr. Douglas Horton (chairman of the committee which drafted NCC's first official pronouncement back in
1950) said: "The members of the various groups . . . were actually, under the guidance of the Spirit,
becoming members of a world church, itself in process of formation" (The Coming World Church, by
James D. Murch, Back to the Bible Publishers, p. 16).
On page 58 of the official WCC publication, Jesus Christ, the Light of the World, prepared for study before
the New Delhi Assembly, we find these words: "The churches have created the WCC. They have created it
so that one day they might dispense with it. The WCC lives to die. If the Churches ever become content
with it, or concerned soley to perpetuate it, then they will be disobedient to the heavenly vision."
W.A. Visser 't Hooft says in the September 9, 1964 of The Christian Century, "The WCC as it is today is
only an instrument of Christian unity. It must disappear in its present form when the unity of the Church
becomes a reality. In the meantime much remains to be done. What else can one expect when one recalls
that the Council is not yet twenty years old? The time is hidden in the wisdom of God when the whole flock
will be gathered together under one Shepherd. All we need to know is which way we are going."
Statements like those just quoted concern us. The Archbishop of Canterbury, after the Second Session of
the Vatican Council, voiced what seems to be the feeling of many churchmen, when he said that the logical
head of the world church is the Pope of Rome (The Sword and Trumpet, 4th Quarter, 1965, p. 36). If the
WCC were able to attract the Roman Catholic Church into its fold, as it did the Russian Church, the stage
would be set for a world church. Those of us who read the Bible with a strong belief in its literal
interpretation, see just such a one-world-church predicted in Revelation 17. We also read in Revelation 18 a
strong appeal to come out of corrupt religious Babylon, to escape her doom and destruction.
There is peril in believing that there is strength in numbers. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Any
Sunday School pupil can tell us how God divided the troops of Gideon until He had only a handful left.
Then with that unimposing group, He won a great victory! Our world is not going to be changed by a
superchurch! It is going to be influenced, as it always has been, by ordinary men who are made
extraordinary by the Spirit of God.

4. The NCC Often Speaks "TO" The Churches And Not Necessarily "FOR" Them
The executives and staff members of the Council (along with certain chosen "experts") usually plan the
programs, pull the strings, and issue the directives that ultimately affect the lives of millions of people. And
in very few cases do the member denominations themselves have anything to say about the avalanche of
materials that are issued by its boards and agencies. Anyone familiar with the deliberative processes of
large assemblies, knows how much is prepared in advance, and how little is actually done on the floor of
the assembly. The actual control of the Council rests in the hands of a comparatively small group who work
between the meetings and behind the scenes.
Frequent pronouncements are made in the name of the affiliated churches, but such pronouncements often
reflect only a minority report. The Buck Hill Falls meeting (Christianity Today, June 6, 1965) supplies an
illustration of this: Dr. O. Frederick Nolde called for the cessation of bombing in Viet Nam as a calculated
Page 128 of 176
risk, and he also advocated the inclusion of Red China in the United Nations. This statement had already
been released to President Johnson and other high government officials before the Buck Hill Falls
Conference, with the intent of influencing United States policy. Behind the statement lay, supposedly, the
weight of many churches. But since no meeting of the WCC had take place since the statement was
formulated, and since the statement had not been officially adopted, it could hardly be called representative
of the opinion of the churches constituting the WCC. Indeed it was nothing more than a committee
speaking for itself in the name of churches that had no chance to vote on the statement.
Furthermore, the NCC increasingly provides leadership which the churches follow. Comprehensive
planning is often done on behalf of the churches, in such areas as curriculum development and lesson
programming. The NCC (instead of being merely "an agency through which the Churches can accomplish
that which they can do better together than alone") is becoming a policy-making and program-planning
source of guidance, information, and leadership--and thus it often determines important matters on behalf
of the churches.
The laity in the American churches are not asked for opinions in most matters. They are precommitted by
powerful ecclesiastical leaders, operating in overlapping committees at an ecumenical level, and church-
members often learn of such ecclesiastical involvement after commitments have been made, and can no
longer be easily reversed. The NCC pronouncements are not submitted to the members of the constituent
churches for approval before being announced to the public. Therefore these views cannot possibly express
the views of millions of members who are given no opportunity to express their opinion. Many of us are
convinced that the overwhelming majority of Christians in America do not approve of the NCC leadership's
proposals to get the Church involved in political, economic, and social issues, in the name of the Church.
The work of the Councils of Churches is, to a great extent, the business of theologians and church leaders.
As one Finnish ecumenical spokesman said recently, "The ecumenical leaders are generals without armies."
There seems to be a great divorce between the thinking of many of our ecclesiastical leaders, and the
believer in the pew.

5. The NCC Is Not Really A Cohesive Power Within Christendom

There is much dissension in the Church because of the Councils of Churches, and sometimes life-long
friendships have be wrecked. Some are withdrawing from their local congregations; many are withholding
funds; others are seriously considering what they ought to do. The Church of the Brethren's membership in
the Council of Churches has precipitated discord and dissatisfaction throughout the Brotherhood. When one
District of the Brotherhood came to the 1965 Standing Committee at Ocean Grove, NJ, for advice and
counsel in dealing with a congregation that objected to our membership in the NCC, a number of Standing
Committee members indicated there was a degree of dissatisfaction in their areas about this same
relationship.
When the NCC makes pronouncements on current secular affairs, and urges churchmen to become
involved in political matters, it becomes embroiled in economic and political controversy, promoting
division where unite of purpose should obtain. The Messenger (June 9, 1966) says concerning the bitter
fight between California grape-growers and migrant workers, "Last fall two visiting Catholic priests flew
low over Delano vineyards, calling to workers to strike. The NCC formally endorsed the strike and
telegraphed plans to member denominations to join in the pilgrimage to Sacramento." In giving the
reactions of members of the Church of the Brethren to this situation, the Messenger quotes Isaac Bashor
saying, "Our congregation, the Waterford Church of the Brethren, passed a resolution at the last council
meeting which stated, 'Unless the Council of Churches cease using their influence in favor of unions, we
would ask to be relieved of membership in the Council.' The Church has obligations to the moral and
spiritual standards of our nation, rather than aiding the union to become more powerful." Don C. Miller is
quoted as saying, "I am so overwrought by the actions of the Migrant Ministry and the NCC and the
California Council of Churches in regard to Delano, that I truly feel they are leading people down the road
Page 129 of 176
to hell . . . As for the whole community of Delano, and for that matter the whole San Joaquin Valley, a
spirit of distrust, animosity, and disrespect has been engendered. . . . certainly all the churches in this area
will pay dearly, and some will close."
The November 25, 1964 issue of The Christian Century carried an article entitled "The Clergy-Laity
Schism." The writer says, "The political campaign of 1964 has seen the emergence of a fundamental split
between many clergy, and many lay men and women . . . Among the laity in several quarters there has been
a growing discontent about the clergy's involvement in some of the social issues of our time." The article
later points out that the small vocal minority (those laymen who speak out on their convictions against
clergy involvement), more than likely speak for a silent majority." This is an admission that a majority of
church members (though silent) are not in harmony with the affairs of the NCC and other similar
organizations.
The NCC is not really a cohesive force within Christendom. It speaks out most frequently on secular
affairs, about which there are many individual opinions, and thus it promotes disunity.
The foregoing pages explain some reasons why many within the Church of the Brethren are opposed to
affiliation with the National Council of Churches. We grow increasingly impatient over the NCC's political
involvement, theological looseness, and evangelistic indifference. We crave clear-cut unambiguous
answers to many questions. Is the Church's primary task not that of proclaiming the Gospel so "That the
world may believe"? Why do so many in the NCC stress social service, and leave men to die in their sins?
Why do Churches within the ecumenical movement do nothing to silence the spokesmen for unbelief in
their midst? Why are these men often granted places of leadership in the Councils of Churches?
The conservative has been written off as one who has no social conscience. He is sometimes labeled
divisive because he opposes ecclesiastical leaders who think denominations are intrinsically evil. He is
characterized as loveless. He is called a champion of the status quo because he fears that change in the
direction NCC leaders are going, will lead to socialism. In the minds of some, we are like Brother I.N.H.
Beahm used to say, "antiquated, dilapidated, and fossilized." These convictions are very deep-seated and
very real. To many of us this is a moral issue. We cannot contribute to a work we believe is contrary tot he
spiritual mission of the Church, and detrimental to the cause of Christ.
The question is asked of us who hold these concerns, "Why then if you believe these things about the
National Council, do you stay in the Church of the Brethren; why don't you get out?" While it is true that
those who object to our affiliation in the NCC are not agreed about what to do, many of as of now believe
the following reasons are valid for trying to maintain a witness within the Church of the Brethren:
(1) I do not really consider myself a member of the NCC. I was forced into it. I had no chance to vote to get
in. I had no chance to vote to get out. Suppose we take an unconverted man (one who has no interest in the
Church, and no interest in the things of God) -- but we drag him down to the river and force him to become
baptized, and enroll him as a member of the Church. Is he a member of the Body of Christ? Is he a
Christian? His name is included on the Church-roll, but is he really a Christian? Just so when we're forced
into NCC membership (but our hearts are not in it, and we vigorously object to it), I'm not too sure that we
are really members of it.
(2) I have preached in Churches of the Brethren in many, many places. And all the way from Pennsylvania
and New Jersey (to Florida and Tennessee) -- in all these places, I never once was told what I must preach
in the Church of the Brethren. Everywhere I went, I was at liberty to preach as the Spirit directed. We
appreciate this great privilege and are grateful for it.
(3) The third reason has to do with giving. If we designate where our contributions are to be used, our
designated wishes are always honored. I have met and talked with our Brotherhood administrators of
finance (and although I disagree with them theologically), I'm thoroughly convinced that every cent you
designate, goes to the place you assign it.
Page 130 of 176
(4) The Old Testament prophets lived in a time similar to ours. Israel had strayed from the faith of their
fathers; they aligned themselves with pagan nations around them; they adopted the idolatrous practices of
heathen peoples -- but God commanded the prophets not to withdraw -- but to go to Israel and fearlessly
preach to them (even though they were stubborn and not eager to hear). After all, these are the people that
need to hear the Gospel.
(5) Revelation 2 and 3 give a brief history of the entire Church period. These chapters tell of the apostasy
within the Church, and at least twice in these chapters we're reminded that some inside the apostate
Church, had not compromised their convictions. John says in Revelation 2:24 that some in Thyatira "have
not this doctrine," and "have not known the depths of Satan" (even though they were inside the wicked
church). In Revelation 3:4, he speaks of those in Sardis. He says, "Thou hast a few names even in Sardis
(even inside this wicked church which he had condemned) which have not defiled their garments; and they
shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy."

WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES

The Cup of the Lord or the Cup of Devils?

By M. H. Reynolds, Editor, FOUNDATION Magazine

Fundamental Evangelistic Association
1476 W. Herndon, Suite 104
Los Osos, California 93402
U.S.A.
©Copyright 1986 by the Fundamental Evangelistic Association
Printed in the United States of America by FEA Press

CONTENTS

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

The WCC and Theological Liberation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The WCC and the Shocking Evangelical "Sell-out" . . . . . . . . . . 13

The WCC and Communism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

The WCC and Socio-political Radicalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

The WCC and Pseudo-spirituality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Page 131 of 176

 A List of WCC Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

What Should Christians Expect In These Last Days? The Bible Gives a Very Clear Answer.
NOTE THE FOLLOWING SCRIPTURES:
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own
selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural
affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady,
highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the
power thereof: FROM SUCH TURN AWAY." 2 Timothy 3:5.
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they
heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall
be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3,4.
"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you,
who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon
themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of
truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of
you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not" 2 Peter 2:1-3.
What Is the Responsibility of True Believers In These Last Days? God Says:
"Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering
and doctrine. ...But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full
proof of thy ministry." 2 Timothy 4:2,5.
"Whosoever transgresses, and abides not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abides in the
doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you and bring not this
doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that bids him God speed is
partaker of his evil deeds." 2 John 9-11.
Preface
THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES was organized in 1948 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
One hundred, forty-seven denominations with a total membership of 293 million individuals were its
charter members. Presently, the WCC represents over 300 denominations with a membership of over 400
million people, making it by far the largest and most influential ecumenical body in the world. Because of
its tremendous size and because it so often appears to speak for the "Church," the WCC exercises a great
deal of influence both religiously and politically. However, most of the WCC's power and influence
involves only those in the top echelons of religion and politics. Most church members at the local level are
not even aware that they are a part of the World Council of Churches. Many would certainly be shocked if
they only knew what the WCC is doing and saying as their representative.
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR GOD'S PEOPLE TO KNOW WHAT THE WORLD COUNCIL IS
SAYING AND DOING NOW as well as what it has done and said in the past. Throughout the entire 38-
year history of the WCC we have closely followed its activities and actions, reviewing most of its
publications and attending many WCC Assemblies and other major meetings to obtain firsthand
information We have shared this important information with fellow-believers through our radio broadcasts
and the publication of numerous articles and special reports. Two of these articles, "The Truth About the
World Council of Churches" and "The World Council of Churches-An Ecumenical Tower of Babel," are
still being widely circulated because of the important documentation they contain. But we believe the time
has come to provide the far more extensive and intensive documentation which is printed in this booklet.
THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES  CUP OF THE LORD OR THE CUP OF DEVILS? is an
Page 132 of 176
edited compilation of several articles which were originally printed separately in recent issues of
FOUNDATION Magazine. It is being rushed into print now at the urging of several Christian leaders who
are as concerned as we are about the manner in which the WCC is deceiving many true believers by putting
on a new face of "spirituality" and "evangelicalism" calculated to camouflage its continuing religious and
political radicalism.
THE LEADERSHIP OF THE WORLD COUNCIL HAS BEEN AND IS NOW PREDOMINANTLY
LIBERAL AND RADICAL TO THE CORE. It is the voice of Liberalism NOT Evangelicalism which has
been heard and seen loud and clear in WCC pronouncements and programs. For many years, the "voice of
evangelicalism" within the Council was non-existent or so faint it could scarcely be recognized. Now, some
compromising evangelical leaders would like us to believe that their voice is being heard and warmly
welcomed within the WCC. But in fact, the liberal leaders of the WCC welcome the "evangelical voice"
only because those who raise such a voice within the Council are satisfied with just being heard. These
"evangelicals" have forgotten the Satanic manner in which the WCC quite willingly accepts all different
points of view theologically, morally and politically, knowing that their ecumenical homogenization
process (blending truth and error) will provide a mixture that makes error seem more attractive and less
dangerous to those who are unaware of what is actually taking place.
WCC GENERAL SECRETARY, EMILIO CASTRO, SAYS THE WCC HAS "OVERCOME THE
SO-CALLED CONFRONTATION STAGE" in its present relationships with evangelicals. In the WCC
publication, One World, for January-February 1986, Dr. Castro says, "...a substantial number of Christian
brothers and sisters of evangelical persuasion are open to the ecumenical movement and willing to
participate in it with their testimony. ...I see signs everywhere of a wider participation of evangelicals in the
forum that is the World Council of Churches. I'd like to believe that the perspectives and experiences of the
ecumenical movement are also common riches for our evangelical brothers and sisters. I see many
evangelical writers quoting, without apology, persons who could be considered pillars in the ecumenical
movement I think we have overcome the so-called confrontation stage; now the challenge is to make the
best of the evangelical contribution to the total work of the WCC."
IT IS OUR HOPE AND PRAYER that this booklet will provide true believers with sufficient
documented information to enable them to take their stand for the truth of the Word of God, and against the
errors of the World Council of Churches, and to separate from any relationship with or support of the
WCC. The World Council of Churches, in the name of "Christian Unity," is paving the way for Satan's One
World Church and One World Government. God says, "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not
partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18:4.
Introduction
God says, "Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the
Lord's table and of the table of devils." 1 Corinthians 10:21. The command is very clear! God says, "YE
CANNOT" - but the World Council of Churches says, "WE MUST AND WE WILL!"
The World Council of Churches held its Sixth Assembly in Vancouver, B.C., Canada, July24 - August
10, 1983. From start to finish this major ecumenical gathering provided abundant evidence that the WCC
makes no distinction between the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils. In fact, one of their major goals
continues to be the visible unity of the church – just one cup – into which would be poured heathen
paganism and devilish heresies, disguised by evangelical verbiage and scripture taken out of context. The
continual mixing of truth and error which characterized the Vancouver Assembly clearly revealed that the
WCC is drinking heavily from the "cup of devils" although they call it the "cup of the Lord."
Accurate reporting of a World Council Assembly is difficult for several reasons. First, there is so
much going on every day from early morning until late at night; it might be likened to trying to take in
everything in an old-fashioned three-ring circus complete with its many sideshows. Then, there is the
complication caused by differences in language. Even though translation was provided in several languages
at most major sessions by use of ear phones, etc., it was often frustrating to speaker and listener alike at
those times when it became obvious that the proper meaning was not being conveyed. To further
complicate the reporting process, some of the section meetings were open to the Press – but no direct
Page 133 of 176
quotations were permitted. It was often difficult at the end of a day to sort out which statements heard or
read were official, unofficial, provisional, or confidential. Complicating matters even further was the
endless squabbling over procedural rules. It soon became clear that many of the delegates, most of whom
(80%) were attending a WCC Assembly for the first time, could not fully comprehend all that was going on
either! ONE FACT DID COME THROUGH LOUD AND CLEAR – THE WCC IS JUST AS RADICAL
AS EVER. THE LEOPARD HAS NOT AND CANNOT CHANGE ITS SPOTS! IT IS ONLY PAINTING
THEM DIFFERENT COLORS!
This eye-witness report of the WCC Sixth Assembly in Vancouver covers some of the most significant
aspects of this major ecumenical event viewed from the perspective of Scriptural principles. Many reports
have been and will be written by others from the perspective of theological liberalism or evangelical
compromise. Such reports paint a rosy picture of what took place in Vancouver. Liberals saw it as a great
step forward toward the goal of "one visible church" The majority of evangelicals were lavish in their
praise of what they considered to be "greater emphasis on evangelical concerns." However, seen in the pure
light of God's Holy Word, this WCC Assembly was not only the most deceptive of all the assemblies thus
far, but represented the most brazen attempt ever to unite the "cup of the Lord and the cup of devils" in
their continuing obsession for visible unity at the expense of doctrinal purity.

True Believers Will Want to Heed God's Warnings, Obey God's Commands, and Rest
in God's Promises
1 PETER 2:1,2. "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers
among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them and
bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom
the way of truth shall be evil spoken of."
2 CORINTHIANS 6:14-18. "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship
hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what
concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement
hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in
them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. WHEREFORE COME OUT
FROM AMONG THEM, and be ye separate, SAITH THE LORD, and touch not the unclean thing; and I
WILL RECEIVE YOU, AND WILL BE A FATHER UNTO YOU, AND YE SHALL BE MY SONS
AND DAUGHTERS, SAITH THE LORD ALMIGHTY."
LUKE 12:32. "Fear not, little flock; for it is the Father's good pleasure to GIVE YOU THE KINGDOM."
MATTHEW 6:33. "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall
be added unto you."

The WCC and Theological Liberalism

Before proceeding with documentation to substantiate the preceding statements, we remind our
readers that the reason God gives such a strong warning about not drinking from the cup of the Lord and
the cup of devils is that the cup of the Lord is absolutely pure based entirely on the eternal, infallible,
inerrant, unchangeable Word of the Living God. By contrast, the cup of devils is characterized by the fact
that it contains deadly theological poisons, even though a modicum of truth is added to deceive the unwary.
At Vancouver the WCC made another attempt to dignify and legitimatize heathen paganism and
theological heresies as though they were an acceptable part of the cup of the Lord. Far from becoming more
"evangelical," the World Council of Churches has only become more skillful in the area of semantic
deception! It is also essential to realize that in order for the WCC to arrive at its unscriptural goal of "one
visible church" it must insist that there is only one cup – the cup of the Lord – no matter how much error it
Page 134 of 176
may contain!
At Vancouver, great emphasis was placed on "worship." But what kind of worship took place? Was it
the worship of God "in spirit and in truth"? Or, was it worship based upon the traditions of men? Was it the
kind of worship which pleased God or was it the kind of worship condemned by our Lord Jesus Christ
when He said, "Howbeit, in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men"?
See Mark 7:6-13.
The ecumenical viewpoint of the "worship" at Vancouver is perhaps best summed up by an editorial in
the Christian Century which said, "The Worship Services saw the Assembly at its best." The majority
evangelical view was summed up in an open letter, "Evangelicals at Vancouver" which declared: "The
dimension of worship was both central and spiritually refreshing. At plenary sessions and in the daily
worship services, we enjoyed warm communal fellowship as we reached out to God in prayer and praise."
Both of these views completely ignore the fact that all kinds of "worship" took place at Vancouver
including pagan Canadian Indian worship and the new liturgy based on the WCC's "Lima–B.E.M.
Document" which is being hailed as a breakthrough in doctrinal convergence and another step toward
eventual doctrinal consensus among Protestants, Orthodox and Roman Catholics. It was also highly
significant that whereas in the past, the various groups in the WCC merely witnessed each other's worship,
this time there was participation in that worship.

Pagan Indian Sacred Flame Heralds Start of Vancouver Assembly

The World Council of Churches deliberately chose to begin their Sixth Assembly at Vancouver with a
special Native Canadian Indian ceremony in which a "sacred flame" was kindled in the center of the
University Campus by Indian leaders who "added offerings of dried fish and tobacco to the flame" to
symbolize "their participation in the WCC Assembly." This flame was kept continually burning throughout
the 18-day WCC Assembly and was "used as a source for candles lit during other worship services." A
Native Indian Sweat Lodge, used in their heathen "purification" rites, was also featured and one of the
evening worship services consisted of Native Indian dancing, chanting, singing and drum beating. Could
things like this be "the cup of the Lord" or was it "the cup of devils?"
The answer to such a question should be obvious. But remember that these pagan worship rituals were
included in the WCC program deliberately, and no attempt was made to keep this heathen participation
hidden. Anglican Church of Canada Archbishop Ted Scott, moderator of the WCC Central Committee, said
that this opening ceremony "represents a recognition that has been growing on the part of the Canadian
people, and the Christian people in Canada, of the deep religious conviction of Native people. They focus
their attention on the Creator, and that creation is unified. We have to learn something of that reality in our
world today."
Indian leaders were quick to note and comment on the changed attitude of "Christians" toward them
and their beliefs. One of their spokesmen, Art Solomon, astutely observed: "Just as a tide goes out, it comes
back in. Native North Americans once were taught they were savages; we were dismissed as pagans. Now
it has turned around and some say we come from one of the great spiritual traditions." Since the Word of
God has not changed and since the Indian beliefs still fit the description given in Romans 1:25 of those who
change the truth of God into a lie, only the apostasy of the WCC can account for this "changing tide" which
now calls the "cup of devils" the "cup of the Lord."

WCC Affirms "Presence of God" in People of Other Faiths

WCC leaders were proud of the fact that for the very first time, "three Hindus, four Buddhists, two
Jews, four Muslims, a Sikh and an adherent of Native Canadian spirituality" were in attendance as
officially invited guests. Many Christians do not yet seem to realize that WCC leaders have long since
moved beyond their original goal of "Christian unity." They now have their sight set on the "unity of all
Page 135 of 176
faiths" or even the "unity of all mankind." Dr. Philip Potter spelled out this principle in his General
Secretary's Report. We quote: "...believers, as living stones, overcome the separations of racism and are in
process of becoming the true human race made in the image of God; that all, both women and men, who
believe are the priests of the King and Ruler of their lives, offering themselves and the world to God
through their worship and their witness; that nationalism, with all its excluding attitudes, gives place to a
community which is consecrated to God and his purpose to unite all nations in their diversity into one
house, oikos; and that all are the people of God as a sign of God's plan (oikonimia–the management of the
house) to unite all people into one human family in justice and peace."
Pauline Webb, a woman British socialist who serves on the WCC executive committee, brought the
sermon at the opening Sunday morning worship service. She referred especially to the "members of other
faiths" (actually they were representatives of false religions), giving them a warm welcome as follows:
"Especially do we welcome among us at this Assembly our guests from other faiths, for we are discovering
that in the dialogue with fellow seekers after truth our hearts are opened to receive new insights from the
One who is the Source of all truth. Let us meet as those who have nothing to defend and everything to
share." Such Satanic reasoning flatly contradicts the words of our Lord Jesus Christ who said, "I am the
way, the TRUTH and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me." John 14:6. Heathen religions are
still heathen religions. Calling them "living faiths" instead of "false religions" makes them more deceptive
but no less dangerous. Yet, an official WCC report stated: "We witness to the uniqueness of the birth, life,
death and resurrection of Jesus and precisely because of that WE RECOGNIZE AND AFFIRM THE
PRESENCE OF GOD IN THE RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE OF PEOPLE OF OTHER FAITHS." Such
heresy is clearly from the cup of devils – not the cup of the Lord1.

Pagan Sikh Leader Responds to WCC Welcome

Spokesman for the "non- Christian faiths" represented at the WCC was Dr. Gopal Singh, a leader from
the pagan Sikh religion. He began his address, "Mr. Moderator, sisters and brothers: We are deeply
beholden to you for inviting us to this august Assembly from long, long distances – Hindus and Muslims,
Sikhs and Jews, Buddhists and Zoroastrians – from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Japan and Thailand
and even the Soviet Union. We thank you from the bottom of our heart, especially the WCC which has
made this possible." Later in his address Dr. Singh said, "Most of the world religions – like Hinduism,
Islam, Sikhism and Judaism – believe in one God. ...They also believe in the soul and in the hereafter,
heaven and hell. And, those like the Buddhists who do not, believe in Compassion to all life. Those who
worship the objects of nature like the American Indians and our own aborigines, only worship life and life-
giving elements, the greatest gifts of God." Now, listen carefully to the concluding sentence of this
paragraph. Singh said, "LET US THEREFORE NOT QUARREL OVER THE FORMS AND THE
RITUALS BUT THE ATTITUDE AND THE SPIRIT BEHIND THEM." Here was an unquestioned
presentation of the "cup of devils" philosophy presented on the WCC Vancouver platform without any
attempt at refutation or rebuke of error. How any true believer could remain silent while such outright
Satanism is given a platform by the WCC defies rational explanation. The fact that those who claim to be
true Christians and even evangelical believers tolerate such public promotion of the cup of devils simply
reveals the fact that failure to practice Biblical separation from false teachers results in loss of spiritual
discernment.

WCC Interfaith Dialogue Moderator Questions "Evangelism"

Dr. Dirk Mulder, moderator of the WCC interfaith dialogue program, raised some theological
eyebrows when he expressed his views concerning what he considers to be a threat to the on going
interfaith dialogue posed by "evangelism." Mulder "affirmed the importance of the life and work of Christ"
but went on to say that he "does not believe people are lost forever if they are not evangelized." Mulder
conceded that this raises questions about evangelism but he said, "that if non-Christians are all lost souls,
God has little connection with the life and proclamation of Jesus." In a personal interview later with Dr.
Mulder, I asked him specifically, "Would you feel that a Buddhist or Hindu could be saved without
Page 136 of 176
believing in Christ?" His answer was, "Sure, sure!" The WCC proudly pushes its dialogue programs but
they are clearly from the "cup of devils."
I personally interviewed another of the WCC dialogue leaders following an "interfaith seminar." I
asked him if he thought it was possible for people to be saved who do not accept Christ as Saviour. He
replied, "Yes, I would say indeed there is that possibility." He went on to say that "God only knows who
His own are. They may be parking under the name of Hindus, Buddhists, agnostics, whatever – He knows
His own." When I asked if he believed in a universal salvation – that all would be saved, he replied, "On
that I'd have to say, 'I don't know I'm not sure.' " These and similar statements which regularly appear in
WCC publications make it clear that the WCC interfaith dialogue program is not a witness for Christ but a
tool of Satan.

"Tentative" Worship in a Candy-Striped Circus Tent

WCC officials and staff have always placed a great emphasis on symbolism. Instead of using one of
the large meeting rooms on the campus for their worship services, they pitched a candy-striped circus tent
in the very center of the campus. This was to symbolize two things: their desire that "worship" be central in
this Assembly, and that the tent would be a reminder that they were a "pilgrim people – people on the way."
In official document ME-1, it was explained that "Our worship in a great tent which reminds us of the
pilgrim people; the presence of Canadian Indians which has challenged us; our moving prayer and praise in
many languages but one spirit of devotion; our struggles to face divisive issues, the songs of the children -
all are part of life together in the Christian family." The Canadian Indians referred to were not Christians
but pagans. Yet, they were counted as being part of the "Christian family."
As for the appropriateness of the WCC being likened to "God's people 'on the way’" it should be
remembered that the "strangers and pilgrims mentioned in Hebrews 11:13 were an entirely different breed
of pilgrims than those who compose the WCC today. The WCC is trying to build a new "Kingdom of God
Society" on earth, whereas men and women of faith look for "a city which hath foundations, whose builder
and maker is God." Because the WCC has made room in its fellowship for those with all kinds of views
about the Bible, they can only have a tentative worship – a tentative theology. Indeed, everything about the
World Council of Churches is "tentative," except its determination to attain an unscriptural religious unity;
a peace without God and a humanist-based political and economic system. Because they have rejected the
Word of the Lord, there is no light in them and therefore their worship, their theology, their message, their
fellowship, their plans and programs must always be tentative and uncertain.
The WCC worship program at Vancouver, far from being an inspiration and blessing, was a stench in
the nostrils of a Holy God. The Scripture in Matthew 15:8 immediately comes to mind where God says,
"This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honored me with their lips; but their heart is far
from me." God says, "Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of
the Lord's table and of the table of devils." But the World Council said, "WE MUST — WE WILL" —
AND THEY DID!

Ecumenical Worship with a New Eucharistic Liturgy

One of the great concerns of the WCC leaders through the years has been the fact that they could not
participate in the eucharist together. At Vancouver a major step was taken to break that barrier! On Sunday,
July 31st, nearly 4000 people gathered in the WCC worship tent to participate in a brand new eucharistic
liturgy which was unique because of the inclusiveness of its participants. As one ecumenical leader
observed: "Consider that a Russian Orthodox archbishop led prayers; a German Catholic bishop read the
lesson; a bishop of the Church of South India preached; and Robert Runcie, the archbishop of Canterbury,
con-celebrated with a Danish Lutheran, an Indonesian Reformed, an African Methodist, a Hungarian
Baptist, a Moravian from Jamaica and a pastor of the United Church of Canada – two of which ministers
were women." Yes, inclusiveness is the name of the game for the ecumenical movement both in doctrine
and in worship.
When the World Council's Commission on Faith and Order produced its unprecedented "convergence"
Page 137 of 176
document on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry in Lima, Peru, in January 1982, it was widely heralded as
one of the most significant events in the history of the ecumenical movement. This new eucharistic liturgy,
based upon the Lima- B.E.M. document, is likewise considered a major breakthrough in the ecumenical
goal of "visible unity in one faith and one Eucharistic fellowship, expressed in worship and in common life
in Christ." Viewed in the light of Scripture, however, both the Lima - B.E.M. document and its resultant
eucharistic liturgy provide further proof that the World Council of Churches offers the "cup of devils" in
the name of "the cup of the Lord."

Does the World Council of Churches Have Any Official Theology?

THE ANSWER IS, NO! Dr. Emilio Castro, WCC General Secretary, makes this very clear in the
WCC publication One World for January-February 1986. We quote: "THERE IS NO 'OFFICIAL
THEOLOGY' OF THE WCC. THERE NEVER COULD BE. We are not one church – and even inside the
churches THERE IS A PLURALITY OF THEOLOGIES." At Vancouver there was talk of the need for the
WCC to search for" a vital and COHERENT THEOLOGY" but Castro, the top elected official of the WCC
explains: "Perhaps WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DETECT A COHERENT THEOLOGY in the WCC.
After all, we are the meeting place of more than 300 churches." WHAT MORE CONVINCING
EVIDENCE COULD BE FOUND TO SUPPORT THE FACT THAT THE WORLD COUNCIL OF
CHURCHES IS INDEED CONTENT WITH A MIXTURE OF THE CUP OF THE LORD AND THE
CUP OF DEVILS!
ECUMENISM MEANS SOLIDARITY, according to Dr. Emilio Castro, WCC General Secretary. But
just what kind of SOLIDARITY is implied? Certainly it is not doctrinal or theological solidarity that is in
view since, to Castro and other WCC leaders, a PLURALITY of theologies is not only acceptable but
necessary. But when it comes to radical social, economic and political programs, SOLIDARITY is a must!
The WCC gladly tolerates a PLURALITY of gospels where the souls of men are concerned but they
demand SOLIDARITY in their effort to destroy the free enterprise system and further the cause of a
worldwide socialist-communist revolution.
TO SUPPORT THEIR GOAL OF "ONE VISIBLE CHURCH," the WCC frequently quotes John
17:21, "THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be
one in us: THAT THE WORLD MAY BELIEVE THAT THOU HAST SENT ME" Claiming that the
Church has been ineffective because of its disunity, WCC and other ecumenical leaders seek to forge a
SATANIC UNITY BASED ON COMMON GOALS rather than a GODLY UNITY BASED ON
SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE. The WCC is actually promoting the cause of atheistic communism around the
world and getting away with this diabolical effort by calling it the Kingdom of God society. The UNITY
and SOLIDARITY so earnestly sought by the WCC "that the world might believe" is a tragic farce. What
do they think the world will believe when they themselves are content with such a plurality of theologies
(beliefs)? THE ONE VISIBLE CHURCH THE WCC SEEKS CAN ONLY BE THE CHURCH OF THE
ANTI-CHRIST WHICH GOD WILL EVENTUALLY DESTROY Read carefully Revelation 17,18.

The Fantasy of Compromising Evangelicals

In recent years, compromising evangelicals increasingly fantasize about how the "WCC is becoming
more conservative" and "returning to its evangelical roots." Such evangelicals are deceived and are
deceiving others. They have forgotten the specific warning God gave in 2 Peter 2:1-3 concerning the "false
teachers" who would come into he Church and use "feigned words" to deceive God's people. Ecumenical
apostates of the WCC do indeed use much more evangelical, biblical verbiage than they formerly did, but
these words, as they interpret them, are stripped of their original, true meanings and twisted to provide a
deceptive cloak for their theological apostasy and political radicalism!

The "Voice of Evangelicalism" in the WCC

Page 138 of 176

 While it is true that the WCC "allows" the so-called "Voice of Evangelicalism – the Voice of
Conservatism" to be heard in its assemblies, that voice carries little weight. Alas, the presumed "voice of
evangelicalism" which is heard in WCC gatherings is usually the apologetic, soft voice of those who try to
add a few ounces of truth to the WCC's overflowing "cup of devils." Seldom is a strong, biblical voice ever
heard in the WCC – the kind of voice which strongly proclaims the truth and just as strongly cries out
against error! Evangelicals in the WCC are not changing it for the better – they are simply providing a
defensive armor for the WCC to use against its critics.

Is the WCC Really Becoming More Conservative?

Evangelical leaders are now claiming that the Vancouver WCC Assembly marked another big shift
from liberalism toward conservatism. However, after sitting through 18 days of deliberative and legislative
sessions of the World Council of Churches in Vancouver, there is ample evidence to prove that exactly the
opposite is true. While it is true that conservative voices were heard at Vancouver, resulting in some
changes in resolutions or statements, such verbal changes mean very little to the radical leadership of the
WCC since there is no corresponding change in philosophy or direction. The WCC is still soft toward
communism and a bitter foe of capitalism. The WCC emphasis on the social needs of mankind continues to
obscure man's spiritual needs. Unity is given top priority at the expense of purity. Peace through surrender
– peace through a covenant with the wicked – is a major concern. There is abundant documentation to
prove conclusively that the World Council of Churches continues to be a major vehicle of religious
liberalism and political radicalism – and that any supposed trend toward conservatism is, in reality, only a
subterfuge to deceive wishful-thinking evangelicals.
EVANGELICALS WHO STAY IN THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES ARE DISOBEYING
GOD'S WORD. The fact that there are some true believers in the WCC provides no justification whatever
for God's obedient children to continue their membership in and sup port of the WCC which is led by false
teachers and false prophets.

The WCC and the Shocking Evangelical "Sell-out"

When the World Council of Churches held its Sixth Assembly in Vancouver, B.C., July 14 - August 10,
1983, it was reeling under the cumulative effects of the recent unprecedented news media revelations of its
political radicalism. The WCC desperately needed help to offset the growing tide of criticism which was
coming from lay people, many of whom seemed to be realizing for the first time that the warnings
concerning the WCC's radicalism, given for years by conservatives and fundamentalists, were real and not
imaginary. At Vancouver, the WCC received just the kind of help they needed- repeated favorable
testimonials from evangelical leaders in various WCC sessions, seminars and press conferences,
culminating in an open letter which was signed by the majority of evangelicals present. This open letter,
"EVANGELICALS AT VANCOUVER" amounts to an outright evangelical endorsement of the
ecumenical movement in general and the World Council of Churches in particular. We believe the
implications of this letter make it one of the most significant developments of the entire Assembly. In fact,
WCC official, Dr. Emilio Castro, who was the head of the WCC's Division of Mission and Evangelism at
the time, went even further. He was publicly quoted as predicting that this open letter would turn out to be
THE MOST IMPORTANT EVENT at the Sixth Assembly. Dr. Castro is very likely correct in his
prediction. As far as we know, this is the first time any considerable number of recognized evangelical
leaders has publicly voiced such a complete repudiation of the Biblical teaching of separation from
apostasy. Although the evangelical leaders who signed this open letter made it clear that they did not speak
officially for groups from which they came, it will be very interesting to see what reaction, if any, comes
from their own groups as well as from other evangelical organizations and individuals – especially from
men like Dr. Billy Graham and Dr. Bill Bright who have such wide followings.

The Blind Leading the Blind at Vancouver

Page 139 of 176
Before taking a close look at the actual text of the open letter, EVANGELICALS AT VANCOUVER, we
felt it would be helpful to our readers to know something of the history of the evangelical movement As
shocking as the reading of this letter will be to many Christians, it is simply the result of several decades of
evangelical compromise and failure to obey the Word of God in fellowship as well as doctrine. The
evangelical movement today is living proof of the disastrous results which come from ignoring God's
instructions to "Come out and be separate" from unscriptural relationships. God says to His children, "Be
not deceived: evil communications [fellowship] corrupt good manners." 1 Corinthians 15:33.
Evangelicalism has long ignored God's warning. It has been corrupted. It is now blinded to its sin and the
inevitable consequences of its disobedience. Evangelical leaders have become "blind leaders of the blind."

The Conflict Between Truth and Error

When religious liberalism reared its ugly head through the seminaries and in the churches of America
during the first three decades of this century, godly pastors and Christian leaders from almost every major
protestant denomination lifted their voices in protest At this early date, religious liberalism was often
referred to as "modernism." By contrast, those who held firm to the Word of God and the basic tenets of the
Christian faith became known as "fundamentalists." As this modernist-fundamentalist conflict grew in
intensity; and, as modernism (now more commonly known as liberalism or ecumenism) gained effective
control of most denominations, many fundamentalist leaders recognized that they could not continue in
fellowship with false prophets nor support unscriptural denominational programs any longer. They properly
recognized that God's order in such situations is quite clear - "Wherefore come out from among them, and
be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." 2 Corinthians 6:17.
Thus the present day "separatist movement" was born as faithful fundamentalist leaders in various
denominations obeyed God; came out; and began new churches and denominations which would be true to
the Word and free from the poison of religious liberalism and apostasy.

Tiring of the Battle

At this point in time (1940's and 1950's), a considerable number of leaders who had formerly been
considered to be fundamentalists and who were certainly not liberal in their theology, began to tire of the
theological battle. They also began to feel that some of the fundamentalist leaders were "too belligerent, too
critical, too unloving" and, in increasing numbers they wanted to be freed from the "fundamentalist label"
Thus, a new movement was born called evangelicalism. Although professing to be just as fundamental as
ever in doctrine, these evangelicals for the most part rejected God's command to "Come out" and opted for
a policy of inclusivism and cooperation in spite of the fact that liberalism was continuing to grow in their
own denominations. For a time, some of these non-separatist evangelicals continued to make an occasional
protest against blatant heresies promoted by their own denominational leaders – in their own churches as
well as in the National and World Councils of Churches. But as continuing years of unscriptural fellowship
took their toll, evangelical voices of protest became weaker and less frequent Furthermore, even the
doctrinal position of evangelicalism suffered the inevitable erosion which results from continual
compromise. It wasn't long until some evangelicals were calling for a "re-investigation of the inspiration
and inerrancy of Scripture" while others were raising questions .about whether or not man was the product
of direct creation by God or the result of theistic evolution. In the 1960's, the term "new-evangelicalism"
was coined to distinguish between the older brand of evangelicalism and the newer and rapidly
deteriorating kind. At first, some of the older evangelicals protested "new-evangelicalism" But with the
addition of the charismatic movement into the picture and the continued compromises of all evangelicals,
confusion now reigns supreme. Today's evangelicals can swallow almost everything without too much
trouble and with very little protest Evangelicalism has now arrived at the point where the only loud protest
they can and will raise is a protest against the fundamentalist who continues to call for full obedience to the
Word of God both as to doctrine and fellowship.

Who was Responsible for the "Evangelicals at Vancouver"?

Page 140 of 176
 Although the open letter, "Evangelicals at Vancouver," is somewhat self-explanatory, a few words
concerning those who actually produced it would seem to be in order. As the open letter states, there were
many evangelicals present at the WCC Assembly in various categories – delegates, observers, advisers,
speakers, press representatives and visitors. Some forty to fifty of these evangelicals met informally several
times during the Assembly during which it was decided to draft and publish this open letter. Participants
included men like Dr. Waldron Scott, former General Director of the World Evangelical Fellowship;
Robert Youngblood, currently an official in the WEF; Dr. Richard Lovelace of Gordon-Conwell
Theological Seminary; Dr. Orlando Costas of Eastern Baptist Seminary; Dr. Paul Schrotenboer, general
secretary of the Reformed Ecumenical Synod; Dr. David duPlessis, long-time charismatic leader; and
others. Dr. Arthur Glasser of Fuller Theological Seminary, a long-time defender of the ecumenical
movement, was the main drafter of the letter. During the 18-day Assembly at Vancouver, many of these
evangelical leaders went out of their way to heap praise upon the ecumenical movement. In the various
sessions, seminars and press conferences, these evangelicals defended the WCC against its critics but came
down hard upon fundamentalists and the Biblical doctrine of separation from apostasy. At Vancouver, the
WCC had no better "salesmen" than these outspoken evangelical leaders. The drafting and publication of
their open letter simply documents their complete "sell-out" to the apostate World Council of Churches.
So that God's people may have the complete story of the evangelical capitulation to the ecumenical
movement, we are reprinting the evangelical open letter in full. It clearly reveals that these evangelical
leaders have lost their spiritual discernment. Ignoring the pagan worship which was incorporated into the
Assembly program, they spoke of the "warm communal fellowship" they had enjoyed in the ecumenical
worship services. Instead of protesting the participation of heathen religious leaders, they said they were
impressed with the "rich diversity and complexity" of the WCC Although they admitted they were
"troubled" by occasional questionable statements heard in the Assembly and were "disappointed" by the
lack of emphasis upon Mission and Evangelism, their strongest words were reserved to denounce those
faithful believers who were exposing the deceit of the ecumenical movement and urging believers to
separate from it. Although the evangelical leaders sat through 18 days of WCC sessions during which many
heresies were publicly proclaimed, the only time they could bring themselves to use the word heresy in
their letter was to call the Biblical doctrine of separation from apostasy an "evangelical heresy." Those who
follow these blind evangelical leaders will most certainly "fall in the ditch."

EVANGELICALS AT VANCOUVER
An Open Letter
Many evangelicals from all over the world are present at the 6th Assembly of the World Council of
Churches as delegates and observers, advisers and visitors, speakers and press representatives. Many are
members of churches within the WCC framework A number gravitated together and frequently shared
impressions and matters of common concern during these days. This statement represents our deep desire
to bear witness to what we believe God sought to say to us through the Christians we encountered, the
words we heard and the official actions taken at Vancouver. We do not claim to speak on behalf of our
churches or of all the evangelicals at the Assembly.
The theme of Vancouver is "Jesus Christ - the Life of the World." We are impressed anew with the
rich diversity and complexity of the worldwide Christian movement. We found the exploration of this
theme a stimulating experience, especially because the Assembly sought to call Christians everywhere to be
more faithful to their threefold task - the pastoral, the prophetic and the apostolic. As a result, its on going
concern is that the churches be spiritually renewed (the pastoral), that they become socially responsible (the
prophetic) and that they display diligence in their holistic witness to the Gospel (the apostolic).
As we pressed deeper into days crowded with presentations, reflection and interaction, it became
apparent that Vancouver 1983 marks significant progress over the last two Assemblies (Uppsala 1968 and
Nairobi 1975) in its overarching spiritual and Biblical orientation.
This was apparent in the following ways:
1. The dimension of worship was both central and spiritually refreshing. At plenary sessions and in the
daily worship services, we enjoyed warm communal fellowship as we reached out to God in prayer and
Page 141 of 176
praise.
2. The wider space given to Bible exposition and the affirmation of basic Biblical themes in plenary
sessions represent unmistakable loyalty to the historic rootage of our Christian faith.
3. Biblical messages on the nature and mission of the church under such key themes as Jesus Christ,
life and the world, prepared the way for earnest efforts to relate these truths to the problems facing
Christians today.
4. The Orthodox with their trinitarianism, their spirituality, and their participation in group discussions
at all levels reminded us of some of the church's non-negotiable treasures, while other segments of the
worldwide church called us to face the urgencies of today.
5. We entered into deeper anguish over the terrible injustices currently perpetrated against the poor,
the powerless and the oppressed throughout the world. We perceived anew that the issues of nuclear
disarmament and peace could become a preoccupation and divert attention from the equally urgent issues
of deprivation, injustice, human rights and liberation.
6. We found ourselves standing with the many who refused to believe that the powers of oppression,
death and destruction will have the last word on human existence.
7. Finally, and most important of all, representatives from all segments of the church called the
Assembly to accept the reality that Jesus Christ is indeed the life of the world. Women spoke alongside
men. The youth and the disadvantaged were heard. Even the children. And the ordained clergy made no
attempt to dominate the ministry of the Word of God.
Ever since the WCC was formed in 1948 at Amsterdam, each successive Assembly has been unique.
Vancouver was no exception. In its study papers, group discussions and personal conversations, we could
readily discern several concerns:
1. That Christians must rigorously eschew any docetic understanding of the Gospel. The church can
only be renewed today if it faces courageously the relation of Jesus Christ to the totality of human need and
experience. We see one-sidedness in a preoccupation with "contending for the faith" while ignoring a world
going up in flames.
2. That as the church presses deeper into the '80's, all agreed that Christians shall increasingly be
drawn in their Biblical reflection and theologizing to focus on the plight of the poor - those whom Christ
particularly singled out as the ones to hear the good news of the kingdom (Luke 4:18,19).
3. That increasingly, the church is being reinforced in its perception of the demonic dimensions of
structural evil. They are as offensive to God and as destructive to people as any personal evil. One WCC
official spoke for many when he related the poor to "the church's most important missiological issue - the
centrality of Jesus Christ" Christ alone is the life of the world and He alone can deal with the problem of
evil. But He must be proclaimed to all peoples. And the majority of those who have not heard the Gospel
are the poor.
4. That the dominant issue before the church today is the inter-relation of its concerns for justice and
peace. They cannot be separated. We note that this issue has both vertical and horizontal implications.
Moreover, the Biblical vision of justice with peace through Jesus Christ, the life of the world, was not
posed as one of several options for those who could follow Him, but the only option.
We were moved to join hundreds from the United States and Central America who covenated together
to seek a better understanding of the issues involved in the present conflict in Central America as a positive
step toward the achievement of peace with justice throughout the area.
As evangelicals we rejoiced that the Assembly did not simply confine itself to the prophetic task of the
church. The nurture of Christians and their witness to the unbelieving world were also included. But we
could not be true to our evangelical convictions were we merely to endorse the positive affirmations made
at Vancouver. We were troubled by occasional statements which implied that apart from Jesus Christ the
world can have life. Not every address reflected high Christological and soteriological perspectives. On
occasion we wanted to rise up and call the WCC to be consistent with its own basis: "A fellowship of
churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior according to the Scriptures and therefore
seek to fulfill together their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit" We
would assert that WCC leadership has the solemn responsibility to uphold this confession in all its public

Page 142 of 176

programs.
True, none of us wants to judge the Assembly by the input of some of the speakers. Nevertheless, at
the end of the second week of deliberations we would like to make the following observations:
1. Although the WCC Central Committee had approved (1 982) an illuminating and thoroughly
evangelical study: Mission and Evangelism- an Ecumenical Affirmation, we were disappointed that it
wasn't referred to in any plenary address. We were gratified that the Affirmation received strong support in
the Assembly's Message to the Churches. No ecumenical document has been so welcomed by evangelicals.
Actually, the evangelical counsel was widely sought in its preparation. Furthermore, the Assembly did not
give central place to the shameful fact that at this late hour in the history of the church, more than three
billion have yet to hear the Gospel of Christ- despite Christ's mandate that it be proclaimed to all peoples.
We did not feel that the Assembly adequately treated either Gospel proclamation or the invitational
dimensions of evangelism.
2. On occasion terminology became fuzzy and theology worse. For example, while the Assembly
frequently heard that sin brings social alienation, little was said about spiritual alienation - from God
Himself. As a result, the redemptive dimension of Christ's suffering on the Cross was not particularly
stressed. Moreover, while larger issues of social ethics were frequently treated, more personal ethical
concerns rarely surfaced. In sum, there were times when we wished that evangelical voices in the churches
were given the prominence accorded some theological mavericks. Fortunately, in the issue and discussion
groups, we heard evangelical men and women participate whose evident concern was to remind fellow
delegates of the Biblical authority and witness to the issues under review. Evangelicals are convinced that if
Jesus Christ is the life of the world, His claim that his words are spirit and life (John 6:63) should not be
downplayed.
All of which brings us to raise the crucial question: What should be the evangelical response to the
many signs of growth and renewal we discerned in the Assembly? Should evangelicals seek more direct
involvement in the ecumenical process?
At Vancouver, some evangelicals were adamant in their stand against any participation in the WCC.
We were saddened to come upon a few zealous Christians distributing scurrilous anti-WCC literature. We
deplored their tactics and hung our heads in shame over their sweeping denunciations. Their actions, in our
judgment, constituted false witness against their neighbors.
At the same time, should evangelicals see significance in the growing effectiveness of the Orthodox
contribution to the WCC alongside the growing WCC challenge to the Orthodox to extend their mission
into the world? Is there not the possibility that evangelicals have not only much to contribute but something
to receive through ecumenical involvement?
Do evangelicals not also have the obligation along with other Christians to seek to overcome the
scandal of the disunity and disobedience of the churches that the world might believe (John 17:21)? Should
evangelicals not seek to receive all who confess Jesus Christ as lord, even though they may seriously
disagree on theological issues apart from the core of the Gospel? There is no Biblical mandate to withdraw
from those who have not withdrawn from Christ. Should not Christians gladly receive all those whom God
has manifestly received? Are not the alternatives – religion or indifference – totally incompatible with the
Apostle Paul's affirmation that Christ is not divided (1 Cor. 1:13)?
Our experience at Vancouver challenged stereotypes some of us have had of the WCC. And our
involvement in WCC processes and programs made us realize anew the distortions in the popular
evangelical understanding of them. Hence, we felt pressed to declare publicly our determination to be more
actively involved in all efforts seeking the unity and renewal of the church. Because we have seen evidence
of God at work here, we cannot but share our growing conviction that evangelicals should question
Biblically the easy acceptance of withdrawal, fragmentation and parochial isolation that tends to
characterize many of us. Should we not be more trustful of those who profess Christ's lordship? Should we
not be more concerned with the peace, purity and unity of the people of God in our day? And if God
thereby grants the church renewal for which many pray, shall this not forever demolish that all too popular
evangelical heresy – that the way to renew the body of Christ is to separate from it and relentlessly criticize
it?

Page 143 of 176

 Another View - Another Voice
Thank God, He always raises up a "remnant" to raise high the banner of truth, even when that banner
has been trampled underfoot by its supposed friends. Thank God, not all evangelicals at Vancouver were
deceived by the Devil's three- ring religious circus. Among those evangelicals who met together at
Vancouver, three men refused to sign the evangelical open letter. They refused to become a party to its
whitewash of the WCC. But they also did another very courageous thing- they issued a second statement
titled, "An Evangelical Evaluation of the WCC's Sixth Assembly in Vancouver" This tiny minority of three
men wanted the Christian world to have "another view" - an entirely different voice! This second
"evangelical" open letter is probably destined to become known as the "EVANGELICAL MINORITY
REPORT." Drafted by Dr. Peter Beyerhaus, chairman of the International Christian Network and professor
at the University of Tubingen, West Germany, this minority report, as far as we have been able to
determine, was signed by only two other men, Dr. Arthur Johnston of the USA and Dr. Myung Yuk Kim of
Seoul, Korea. A small minority indeed. These men actually belong in the fundamentalist camp since they
will not remain silent about the WCC apostasy and urge fellow-believers not to participate in it. They do
need to realize, however, that as long as they remain in fellowship with evangelicals who have sold out to
the ecumenical movement, they themselves run the risk of future slippages in their own position and
doctrine.

Why Two Evangelical Open Letters at Vancouver?

Dr. Peter Beyerhaus explains:
A discussion group of evangelicals at the Sixth Assembly of the World Council of Churches by
majority vote decided to send an open letter to evangelicals all over the world, sharing with them their
basically positive impressions and charging them to drop their previous theological reservations about the
WCC and get actively involved in it. Some of us felt alarmed by this sudden shift of opinion. We could
neither share the optimistic assessment on the Vancouver event nor the far-reaching consequences that
were drawn from it. When it became clear that the majority insisted on going ahead with the plan and even
managed to obtain the support of the assembly's steering committee to broadcast its statement as the
evangelical reaction to all participants, we decided to draw up an alternative statement.
We did not feel happy about this public appearance of a theological rift within the evangelical camp.
But we thought this to be a far lesser evil than the danger that, through the impact of that open letter,
Christianity at large might mistakenly come to believe that most of the serious doctrinal issues that have
divided the evangelical from the conciliar movement, at least since Uppsala 1968, had now been settled,
and that the WCC in Vancouver had moved to a basically Biblical position. Our careful analysis of the
speeches and worship at the assembly revealed that the opposite was true, in spite of an apparent new
Biblical orthodoxy on the surface. After all, this assembly was the first in the history of the ecumenical
movement in which theological atheist - Dorothee Solle - and leading representatives of non-Christian
religions were invited to address the audience on its central theme, "Jesus Christ the Life of the World." We
also felt that the supporters of the open letter had no mandate for sending such a weighty message to all our
fellow evangelicals throughout the world. They did not participate in the name of their respective
evangelical denominations and world bodies - who wisely had decided to stay outside. Second, it is far too
early to come to such a revolutionary conclusion concerning the WCC's stance and direction.
Our own discussion group is aware that technically ours is a minority statement But the evangelical
representation in Vancouver was very fragmentary, and the fact that our three members have been students
of the ecumenical movement for many years, attending ecumenical and evangelical conferences and
publishing books and articles about it, made us confident to share our views with our fellow Christians in
and outside Vancouver.
Page 144 of 176
 We were afraid the open letter could mark a fatal turning point in the history of evangelical
Christianity and lead to doctrinal alienation or a new split. Evangelical leaders should take the initiative to
encourage serious local evaluation of present-day ecumenicity and convene international consultations
about it.

The Evangelical Minority Report at Vancouver

Although we feel that certain parts of the following "minority report" do reflect elements of
evangelicalism's lack of spiritual discernment with regard to WCC documents like "Baptism, Eucharist,
Ministry" etc., the basic thrust does follow the Biblical imperative to expose error wherever it may be
found and to separate from it! We are reprinting the full text so that our readers may be able to have all the
facts before them:

An Evangelical Evaluation of the WCC's Sixth Assembly in Vancouver

This statement comes from an international group of evangelicals who are dedicated to the authority of
the Bible, the urgency of evangelization and to the true unity of all who believe in Jesus Christ. During the
Assembly we met daily to share our impressions. The following does not offer our final judgment, which
must wait until the publication of the official Assembly Report. Neither does it claim to represent the views
of the entire evangelical movement, since all evangelicals who participated in the Assembly did so as
private individuals rather than as representatives of specific groups. Thus there is no official involvement of
this Assembly of any evangelical organization.
Our positive observations include:
1. The serious efforts made prior to the Assembly to provide two important documents which take into
account also some evangelical points of view, viz the Lima statement on "Baptism, Eucharist,
Ministry" and the Ecumenical Affirmation on "Missions and Evangelization."
2. A wider space given to conservative Biblical beliefs which were upheld to the assembly partly due
to the influence of the strong Orthodox participation.
3. The presentations of human suffering through the violations of basic rights and the disregard for our
God-given environment. The report of the Grand Rapids Consulation on the Relationship between
Evangelism and Social Responsibility (1982) shows that evangelicals are no less concerned for
welfare, justice and peace than other Christians, although we might differ in our analyses, in our
proposals for solutions and in the theological motivation of our Christian task to help the poor and
oppressed.
We must, however, state that our previous reservations concerning the W.C.C.'s course since Uppsala
1968 are by no means overcome, but rather reinforced by the following observations.
1. The meaning of the Assembly theme "Jesus Christ - The Life of the World" remained ambiguous
due to the tendency to revert the order between subject and predicate and to equate Christ with
anything which seems to satisfy the human craving for a richer life. Statements like "Life is the
divine predicate; to choose life means choosing God..." (Konrad Raiser) clearly opened the way to
Christ also to atheists and members of other religions without an explicit confession to him as God
and Saviour according to the Scripture.
2. History was often presented as a product of a power struggle between those who benefit from the
preservation of the existing order and the newly emerging forces that attempt to overthrow this
order. To see history in a materialistic context is the chief characteristic of Marxist ideology which
in the form of the "Theology of the Poor" has found entrance even into the mission documents of
Vancouver.
Page 145 of 176
3. The very words of the Bible, although used more lavishly than at previous conferences, often
seemed to assume another meaning. We sensed a general trend to mis-use the Christian heritage as a
forum and language for social-political ideologies. Under the disguise of a Biblical and Trinitarian
terminology, supported by dramatic illustrations of a threatening nuclear holocaust and by
communicating fascinating human dreams of peace in speeches, worship services and audiovisual
presentations, a pseudo-Christian view of salvation which equates God with the driving forces
within the process of history, is developed.
4. Only this ambiguity can explain the seeming inconsistency of speakers who represented traditional
Christian doctrines featuring side by side with others who expounded radical beliefs incompatible
with orthodox Biblical convictions. One outstanding example was Dr. Dorothy Solle. She
denounced the Biblical concept of God and His Lordship, speaking of a "god-movement," and even
encouraged her listeners to write "new bibles."
5. Other speakers encouraged women to make their female experience the starting point of developing
a profoundly new theology in which the reverence for the Biblically revealed God as our Father is
changed into the cult of god mother.
6. In all lectures, including the reports of the Moderator of the Central Committee and the General
Secretary, we missed an articulate emphasis on world evangelization as Christ's central commission
to His Church and the suggestion of an adequate strategy to reach the three billion who still are
without the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ
7. Non-Christian religions are presented as ways through which Christ Himself gives life to their
followers and also speaks to us as Christians. The fear of many that the W.C.C. could move into an
increasing syncretism is confirmed by the inclusion of Indian mythology in the worship program, by
the invitations to leaders of other religions to address the Assembly, even on its central theme, and
by the explicit statement of a leading W.C.C. official, Professor Dr. D. C. Mulder that an
evangelistic revival endangers our dialogue with other religions.
8. The credibility of the W.C.C.'s claim to be a prophetic voice decrying the oppression of human
rights is damaged once again by the political one-sidedness in which such violations are pointed out
only in the non-Marxist world, while serious offenses by socialist states, whose ecumenical
representatives are applauded by the Assembly as passionate advocates for peace and justice, are
dealt with mildly or passed over in silence. This applies particularly to the harassment of the
churches and the persecution of confessing Christians in these areas. This retreat from a position of
public debate to one of occasional private diplomatic interventions is all the more inexcusable since
ample evidence was supplied to the W.C.C. subsequent to the famous letter of Father Gleb Yakunin
and Lev Regelson to the previous Fifth Assembly in Nairobi in 1975. As it was pointed out in the
Yakunin Hearing, held parallel to the Vancouver W.C.C. Assembly, (July 22-27) "A church who
willfully neglects her martyrs is separating herself from Christ who suffers in the afflicted members
of His body."
9. The Assembly's strong warnings against the nuclear threat to human life is inconsistent with the
apparent negligence of the millions of human lives sacrificed yearly through the toleration of legal
abortion, and of the many other lives which will be sacrificed as the consequence of the increasing
demand to introduce euthanasia.
10. The decisive shortcoming of the Assembly is the lack of a truly Biblical diagnosis of mankind's
basic predicament: our separation from God through our sin, and of the Biblical remedy, our
regeneration by the Holy Spirit through repentance and personal faith in Jesus Christ resulting in the
transformation of our present life and in our everlasting fellowship with God. A rather optimistic
view of the human nature and our capability to help ourselves is once again leading to a

Page 146 of 176

 universalistic view of redemption. The ecumenical vision of a totally united mankind in a restored
cosmos runs right against the prophetic message, that such expectation will not come true before the
visible return of Jesus Christ to Judge the living and the dead, and before the creation of a new
heaven and a new earth by God Himself. We noticed the omission of these eschatological key
concepts in most speeches at this conference.
All these observations contribute to our apprehension that the W.C.C. is in danger of becoming a
mouth-piece of false prophecy to Christianity. Until these shortcomings and distortions are recognized and
disavowed publicly in favor of a new affirmation of the Bible as God's infallible revelation, we cannot, with
good conscience, encourage our fellow evangelicals to actively participate in the structures and programs of
the W.C.C. Rather we should channel our contributions through truly Christian alternative organizations.
Otherwise, we would become responsible for bringing evangelical believers and churches under the
influence of such deceptive ideas as we encounter them at this Assembly. We do not state this in a
judgmental spirit nor with a divisive attitude, but out of our loving concern for the maintenance of Biblical
truth in all churches inside and outside the W.C.C., that truth' without which the world cannot find the life
which is in Jesus Christ.
The good intentions and human efforts made under the W.C.C.'s Assembly theme "Jesus Christ - The
Life of the World" towards peace and justice and nuclear disarmament and unity exclude the central gospel
truth and create a false salvation for the world. We as Christ's followers have access to the only power that
is greater than nuclear weapons, the power of God - available to us through Jesus Christ alone
2 Chron. 7:14 "If my people who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek
my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will
heal their land."
Let us call "together" Christians world-wide to prayer and obedience to the word of God.

Bangkok '73 - Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives the Beginning or End of World

Mission?
Dr. Peter Beyerhaus also wrote a devastating exposure of WCC theological liberalism and political
radicalism following the WCC's Eighth Conference on World Mission held in Bangkok, Thailand, in 1973
with the deceptive theme: SALVATION TODAY. Dr. Beyerhaus wrote: "It is rather my concern to share
with the reader A PROFOUND UNEASINESS about certain pervasive signs in this ecumenical event
which could be of DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCE for the future of missions, for Christianity, and
probably even for all mankind.
Dr. Beyerhaus described the contents of the final documents produced by this WCC Conference as
"AN ECUMENICAL TOSSED SALAD." He clearly saw and warned that some evangelicals at Bangkok
who came away rejoicing that their "evangelical viewpoints" had been included in some WCC documents
had been taken in by ecumenical experts using the psychological techniques of sensitivity training.
"Bangkok's understanding of salvation and missions was not the biblical one but rather A
SYNCRETISTIC AND SOCIAL- POLITICAL ONE; and further, where the Bible was apparently used,
Christian assertions were ideologically undermined," wrote Dr. Beyerhaus. "I am indeed convinced that
these conservative-evangelical notes in the Bangkok concert do not alter the nature of this ecumenical
composition, but can at the most give it an APPARENT RESPECTABILITY before an evangelical public.
And for that reason the whole matter is even more dangerous. ...For in a situation like this the Church of
Christ takes on a PLURALISTIC ASPECT: THEOLOGICAL HERESIES AND NON-CHRISTIAN
IDEOLOGIES ARE GRANTED EQUAL RIGHT TO STAND BESIDE BIBLICAL TRUTH, or
sometimes every-thing is jumbled together into AN ECUMENICAL TOSSED SALAD. And that is much

Page 147 of 176

worse than a massive attack by an opponent openly combating biblical truth. If there is one rotten egg, the
whole cake will be inedible, even if the other nine eggs are fresh."

The WCC and Communism

Which cup is it that the World Council of Churches offers to the Church and to the World? The correct
answer to that question is very important. In this section of our report, the relationship between the WCC
and Communism will be explored, revealing beyond any question of doubt, that the WCC is offering the
Church and the World "The Cup of Devils" - not "The Cup of the Lord." The WCC is actually aiding and
abetting the world-wide communist revolution - a revolution which could conceivably cost America her
cherished freedoms. Most people seem oblivious to the fact that social and political revolution are the
inevitable results of theological liberalism. God warns that when men turn away their ears from the truth,
they will be turned unto fables – and Communism is surely one of Satan's most successful "fables." Those
who reject God's truth fall easy prey to Satan's lies!

What About the WCC and Communism?

Over the years, many accusations have been leveled against the WCC concerning its relationship to or
involvement with Communism. Often, the WCC has been called "Red infiltrated" or even "Red
dominated." In the 1940's and 50's, some ecumenical leaders were accused of actually being "CARD
CARRYING COMMUNISTS." Although such charges were difficult to substantiate, it must be admitted
that some of the accused certainly sounded and acted like communists whether or not they really were
members of the party. Many ecumenical leaders joined a wide variety of organizations which were
subsequently identified by Congressional investigative committees as being "COMMUNIST FRONT
GROUPS." After the reception of churches from the communist nations, several of their delegates were
identified as actual members of the Soviet Secret Police (KGB), such identification coming from refugees,
exiles and Soviet underground church leaders. Of course, all such charges have been denied by the WCC
and attributed to the "lies of right-wing extremists." So, what are we to believe? A close look at some basic
facts will be very revealing!

Is the WCC Anti-Communist, Pro-Communist, or Neutral?

When the WCC was organized in 1948, the communists would not permit any of their churches to
join. This was understandable since most churches from the free world at that time had the reputation of
being anti-communist. However, from the very beginning, it was clear that the WCC was not going to be
anti-communist or even neutral. To the contrary, most of its actions and pronouncements revealed a distinct
pro-communist bias. Even so, it took the ecumenical leaders 13 years to convince the communists that the
WCC was a friend, not a foe. And so it was, that at New Delhi, India, in 1961, the Third Assembly of the
WCC received several Iron Curtain churches into membership, including the Russian Orthodox Church and
the Russian Baptists. The WCC hailed this as a great step forward in their quest for the "visible unity of the
Church." Without doubt, the Kremlin looked upon it as a wonderful new opportunity to spread their
diabolical propaganda, deceptively cloaked in the robes of the Church.

The Communist "Use" of Religion

Communism has a master plan to conquer the world. An integral part of that plan is to destroy
Christianity and all religion. Atheism is a pillar of communist philosophy. There is no place for God in a
system which exalts man, preaches evolution and practices revolution. Thousands of Christians became
martyrs in the early days of communism's efforts to eradicate all religion. In time, however, the Red
dictators discovered that many church leaders and their followers were willing to "sell out" in exchange for
the privilege of continuing their religious worship and ceremonies, even on a limited, restricted basis.
Using one of communism's basic precepts – "the end justifies the means" – communist leaders decided that
religion could be tolerated a little longer. They discovered that religion could be used to promote raw
Page 148 of 176
communist propaganda in the name of the church and, at the same time, present communism to the rest of
the world in a more favorable light. The success of this communist duplicity is all too obvious. Many
people in the free world now believe the lie that communism has changed and is continuing to change for
the better. The WCC is one of the chief promoters of that lie. The truth of the matter is that communism is
still a deadly enemy of all religion, especially biblical Christianity. Communism is still anti-God, anti-
Christ, anti-Bible, anti-Church, anti-Christian, and anti-man. It is the enemy of Christ and the Gospel. The
goal of communism is still to destroy all religion! To ignore these facts is to invite further deception and
ultimate disaster!

What Difference Does It Really Make?

Most people have completely overlooked a very important question. How much difference does it
really make whether a person is a member of the communist party; has been duped by communism; or, is a
theological liberal, blinded by Satan? In each case, if they are saying the same thing and walking along the
same path, will not the end results be the same? Personally, I have no doubt that the communists have their
"plants" in the churches of the free world right now – agents whose identity may one day be revealed.
There is hardly any reason to believe otherwise since the communist plan for world conquest calls for
infiltration of every strata of society. But the fact remains that the communists today are using religion and
especially the World Council of Churches in pursuit of their goal of world domination. This is true whether
the WCC recognizes it or not! It is true whether the WCC has any actual communist agents in its
membership or not!

Theoretically, the WCC is a "Free" Religious Body...Actually, the WCC Is Now A

"Captive" Political Body
From the moment the Iron Curtain Churches came into the WCC, it was clear that an entirely new
situation was created in the ecumenical movement. The Orthodox Churches behind the iron Curtain
claimed a huge but unverifiable constituency on the basis of which a new "balance of power" was created
within the WCC. Succeeding WCC Assemblies were to discover that many proposed actions had to be
modified or scrapped under threat of a "communist walk-out." I have personally observed such pressures in
reporting numerous official gatherings since the communist churches entered the WCC in 1961. At the
1975 WCC Nairobi Assembly, a real crisis was precipitated when an attempt was made to present
documented evidence of Soviet persecution of religion to the Assembly with a plea for the WCC to issue a
public protest. Iron Curtain Church leaders threatened a walk-out. As usual, compromises were found; a
"committee" was appointed to "investigate these charges"; and the Soviets escaped unscathed!

What Would the WCC Say at Vancouver Concerning the Brutal Communist Takeover
of Afghanistan?
The facts concerning the unabashed USSR rape of its neighbor, Afghanistan, were so widely known
around the world that everyone knew the WCC could not completely sidestep this issue at Vancouver.
WCC officials realized in advance that this would be a "hot potato" and every effort was made to present a
resolution to the floor which could have the support of delegates from churches in the Soviet Union as well
as those from non-communist countries. The resolution presented to the delegates by the drafting
committee was very mildly worded and followed the "initiatives taken by the Secretary General of the
United Nations." Some delegates demanded an outright condemnation of the USSR and the immediate
withdrawal of its troops, thus precipitating a heated floor debate. Alexander J. Malik of the Church of
Pakistan complained that "the drafters have selected the weakest possible language." He said: "If it were
any western country, the WCC would have jumped on it and denounced the country in the strongest
possible language. Here, it only expresses its concerns and nothing is said about Soviet atrocities in
Afghanistan."

Page 149 of 176

 Delegates from Iron Curtain Churches "Flexed Their Muscles" in this Debate
When an amendment to the resolution on Afghanistan was proposed, condemning the USSR invasion
of Afghanistan and calling for the immediate withdrawal of their troops, Soviet Church leaders became
greatly disturbed and they made their protests with a great display of heated emotion. Soviet Baptist
Nikolai Zverev objected strenuously to the amendment, claiming that the original resolution was "well
thought through and reflects the state of things." He said, "We know very well the point of view of Western
delegates but the information available to us is of a different nature." Russian Orthodox Archbishop Kirill
said: "This is a challenge to our loyalty to the ecumenical movement At least accept this [original
resolution] in the name of the effectiveness of our joint ecumenical effort for peace and justice." The
implication of the Soviets was clear – vote our way, or else!

USA Leader Helps Soviets Win Another Victory

Mr. William P. Thompson is one of the outstanding ecumenical leaders in the world. He is a past
president of the National Council of Churches (USA). He has been a key figure in the WCC's relationships
with Communist-country churches. He is a master parliamentarian and, at Vancouver, was moderator of the
drafting committee which hammered out the Afghanistan resolution after long hours at the "bargaining
table." In the debate on the Afghanistan resolution, he used all his experience, skills and power to prevent
any strengthening of the original resolution. When the suggestion was made that the resolution be referred
back to the committee for further work, Thompson flatly refused, saying that they had already reached a
position where "it was the least that can be accepted by one side, and the most that can be accepted by the
other." When the final vote was taken, the original mildly-worded, compromise resolution was approved by
an overwhelming vote of 479 to 21. Communist pressure and USA compromise had handed the Reds
another victory!

WCC Again Refuses to Consider Complaints of Soviet Religious Persecution

Two well-documented appeals for help from persecuted Christians behind the Iron Curtain were sent
to the WCC at Vancouver but were never presented to the delegates. WCC leaders explained to news
reporters that these complaints had not been presented through proper channels- i.e., through WCC member
churches. Quite clearly, it would be impossible to present such complaints through WCC member churches
since, without exception, all the churches from communist nations deny that there is any persecution of
religion whatever. Over and over again the communist church leaders repeat the lie that there is full
religious freedom under communism. The WCC not only accepts this lie but helps to promote it!

WCC Leaders and the Communists Have Much In Common

During the WCC Assembly in Vancouver, Soviet church delegates did not have to say "Nyet" (NO)
very often. Most actions, resolutions and statements suited them quite well. Repeated calls for a new
economic order coupled with scathing attacks upon capitalism couldn't have suited them better. They were
delighted to participate in actions condemning nations of the free world while their own countries went
practically untouched. Communism has a good friend in the World Council of Churches. You may be sure
that communism always does its best not to disturb the WCC; in turn, the WCC always goes out of its way
not to disturb the communists. Until Christians and patriotic Americans wake up to the fact that the WCC
and communism are both moving in the same direction and sharing many of the same goals, the
communists will keep winning. We urge God's people everywhere to separate from all connections with
and support for the World Council of Churches – and to join us in sounding an alarm as to the WCC's
continuing – yes, increasing religious and political radicalism! God's Word says, "COME OUT FROM
AMONG THEM AND BE YE SEPARATE"! What is YOUR response going to be?

The World Council of Churches As Seen Through the Eyes of A Secular Editor

Page 150 of 176

 "A WHIFF OF FANATICISM" was the title of an editorial which appeared in the Buenos Aires
Herald August 2, 1985, during the WCC's Central Committee meeting. We quote the following opening
paragraphs as follows:
"CHRISTIAN DELEGATES attending the World Council of Churches get-together here may disagree
with the Ayatollah Khomeini on some of the finer theological points, but they seem to be in full agreement
with him on one thing: the United States is the 'Great Satan' and US President Ronald Reagan is the
wickedest man on the entire planet. If the statements made by some of the hundreds of delegates who have
turned up in Buenos Aires to discuss the problems besetting mankind are anything to go by, this is now the
Christian consensus. Most of these delegates are, of course, Protestants of one kind or another, but there are
also many people from the government controlled churches of the Soviet bloc as well as a Roman Catholic
observer who complained about interference in the 'internal affairs' of his church.
"That the US and its government have a great many faults cannot be doubted, US citizens being as
human as the rest of us. But while there is nothing wrong with religious leaders on occasion chiding the US
and its government for their shortcomings, it is disgraceful that they cannot spare more time to deplore the
fate of the hundreds of millions of victims of Communist barbarity, whether they are the hapless citizens of
Eastern European countries occupied by the Red Army, Cubans suffering under Fidel Castro's slovenly but
ferocious dictatorship, Central Americans who detest the Marxist left as much as the medieval right, or
Afghans being slaughtered by Soviet troops for seeking national independence and, of course, religious
freedom Needless to say, none of the visitors from the Soviet bloc have had a word to say against the brutal
-–and anti-religious tyrannies back home."

Religious Liberalism Produces Political Radicalism and Spiritual Blindness!

The WCC and Socio-political Radicalism
In this concluding portion of our comprehensive report of the Sixth General Assembly of the World
Council of Churches, held July 24 - August10, 1983, in Vancouver, B.C., we emphatically restate our belief
that the WCC is offering to the Church and to the World "the cup of devils" in the name of the Lord. In the
previous sections, we dealt in depth with the WCC's theological liberalism; their collaboration with
Communism; and the shocking Evangelical sell-out which took place in Vancouver We conclude our report
with information documenting the socio-political radicalism of the WCC and some very significant and
revealing quotes from several of its participants

A Great and Glorious Patchwork?

The September 1983 issue of the WCC's publication, One World, reported that one observer of the
Vancouver Assembly called it "A great and glorious patchwork of people, ideas, issues, events, songs,
worship and confession." It was a patchwork alright, but it was not great and glorious except from the
viewpoint of those who think it's wonderful to mix the cup of the Lord and the cup of the devil together.
The statistics were impressive and very revealing. An average of 4500 people participated each day in one
way or another including 847 voting delegates, 142 of which were from the communist nations of Eastern
Europe; 32 delegated observers from the Roman Catholic Church; and "Fifteen guests of other faiths who
were active participants." Nearly 850 members of the press provided extensive coverage. Of the
participants, 30.46% were women; 13.46% were youth under 30; 46.3% were lay people; only 20% had
ever been to a WCC Assembly before. Listed in numerical order, delegates represented Reformed (176),
Lutheran (122), Eastern Orthodox (125), Methodist (95), Anglican (89), United (82), Oriental Orthodox
(44), Baptist (38), Disciples (13), Moravian (11), Pentecostal (11), and 41 other denominations. The WCC
Vancouver Assembly was indeed a "patchwork" which pleased men but which is condemned by the Word
of God!

Radical Youth Were at Vancouver!

Page 151 of 176

 Some 200 WCC youth participated in a pre-Assembly Youth meeting, their official statement was
every bit as radical as those later issued by their elders and included statements such as the following: "We
come from Nicaragua, where we struggle for survival and for freedom from United States intervention."
"We come from North America, where we are burdened by capitalistic ideals of consumerism and
militarism." "We therefore commit ourselves to participate with the poor and oppressed in their struggle for
justice in order to live in peace. To this end we commit ourselves to go beyond mere proclamations and to
search with determination for the means of concrete action in our own situations." Significantly missing
from the youth statement was any mention or condemnation of communism. Ecumenists give high priority
to ecumenical education in which today's religious youth are given a thorough brainwashing in radical
"One-worldism." At Vancouver, the results of ecumenical education were clearly in evidence!

Ecumenical Indoctrination for Children At Vancouver!

For the first time at any WCC Assembly, a special program was conducted for children at Vancouver
called The Ecumenical Youth Camp. It didn't take long to discover that these little children were being
given radical, ecumenical indoctrination suited to their age. Some of these children participated in the
Public Witness for Peace and Justice where the adult participants included a Buddhist, a Hindu and a
Native Canadian Indian in addition to representatives of WCC member churches. The children participated
in releasing the "peace balloons" and in recitations spoken by two children which explained some things
they had learned at Vancouver. One child said, "When we watch TV we see that there are enemies; in the
comics we read there are enemies and the world is divided into goodies and baddies." A second child
added, "We have now been together in an international children's camp for ten days. We have played a lot
together; we have had fun. Sometimes we also quarreled but we have not found any enemies. ...let us not
become enemies when we grow up...peace is possible." Such ecumenical idealism, planted in the minds and
hearts of little children, will make them easy prey for the many enemies of faith and freedom which await
them in the world of reality. The idea that there are "no enemies" in the world is one of Satan's lies
calculated to disarm the uninformed and misinformed, thus helping to pave the way for the further
advances of evil.

Radical Women At Vancouver

Some of the most radical statements at Vancouver came from the lips of women delegates and
speakers. As previously noted, 30.46% of the voting delegates were women – the highest percentage ever at
a WCC Assembly. A woman brought the opening message of this Assembly, Pauline Webb, a socialist,
Methodist lay preacher who was moderator of the Assembly's preparatory committee. Her socialist
philosophy was expressed in these words: "The litmus test of our love for God is our love for others, our
love expressed not only in the giving of our lives but in the sharing of our goods, our livelihood, with the
poor of the world." Her ecumenical apostasy was set forth in her statement: Especially do we welcome
among us at this Assembly our guests from other faiths, for we are discovering that in the dialogue with
fellow seekers after truth our hearts are opened to receive new insights from the One who is the source of
all truth. Let us meet as those who have nothing to defend and everything to share." At the close of the
Assembly, Webb said, "The Spirit has taken possession of a large part of this Assembly – not all of it, I
confess, but a sufficient slice of it to have infected a new generation of ecumenical enthusiasts...." But, it
was not the Holy Spirit who took possession of the WCC at Vancouver; it was a false spirit of religious and
political radicalism!

Award Winning Humanist Speaks At Vancouver!

In 1982, Dr. Helen Caldicott of Australia was named "Humanist of the Year" by the American
Humanist Association. In 1983, she used the WCC platform to promote her humanistic philosophy as
though it were Christianity. Dr. Caldicott said, "Women are the nurturers and civilizers. They understand
Page 152 of 176
the genesis of life because they have the babies. They must lead the world to survival. ...We hold God's
creation in the palm of our hands. We are in a race against time. This generation will either decide actively
to save it or by passive complicity destroy it. The World Council of Churches should take over the United
Nations and, with the foundation in God and the eternal love of Jesus Christ, the WCC could save God's
creation." Dr. Caldicott showed her contempt for America by saying that "President Reagan is not very
bright," and that the USA is "in the hands of incompetent." But there was no criticism of the communist
nations and their leaders!

Capitalism - A Thief that Comes to Plunder the Poor?

Another woman speaker who bombarded the WCC delegates and visitors at Vancouver with socialist,
humanistic propaganda, was Professor Dorothee Solle, a native of Germany who now teaches at Union
Theological Seminary in New York. She was particularly vitriolic against capitalism whereas there was no
criticism of soc1alism or communism. Dr. Solle denounced capitalism in no uncertain terms, calling it "a
thief that comes to plunder the poor," adding that "While Christ came that we might have fulness of life,
capitalism came to turn everything into money." Dr. Solle said flatly: "Material wealth and fulness of life
cannot co-exist. The capitalistic quest for material wealth must be surrendered before people can find
fulness of life." Then she asked, "How long will you continue to go along with a world order which is
based on exploitation and oppression?" Dr. Solle called the delegates "to fight for peace and against
militarism," and talked about the need of "conversion away from money and violence to justice and peace."
Dr. Peter Beyerhaus, in his evaluation of the WCC Vancouver Assembly, reported that "Dr. Solle
denounced the Biblical concept of God and His Lordship, speaking of a 'god-movement,' and even
encouraged her listeners to write 'new bibles."' Yes, women played a prominent part in the WCC program
at Vancouver, and their voices were generally united in favor of religious liberalism and political
radicalism!

The Unscriptural Theme of the WCC Vancouver Assembly!

The theme of the WCC Vancouver Assembly was: "Jesus Christ the Life of the World." This sounds
good at first glance, but it simply is not scriptural. Jesus Christ is not the "life" of the world; He is the
"light" of the world. (John 8:12). Jesus Christ is the "life" of believers only. (1 John 5:11-13). To hold that
Jesus Christ is the "life" of the world is to open the door for the heresy of universalism (that all people will
ultimately be saved). Of course, this heretical theme of universalism is heard over and over again in WCC
assemblies and forms the basis of their totally unscriptural goal of the unity of all mankind!

The Radical Development of an Unscriptural Theme!

The theme, "Jesus Christ- the Life of the World," was developed by the presentation of four Sub-
themes: (1) "Life, a Gift of God"; (2) "Life Confronting and Overcoming Death"; (3) "Life in its Fullness";
(4) "Life in Unity." These four sub-themes were further developed by statements from eight separate "Issue
Groups" as follows:
(1) "Witnessing in a Divided World"; (2) "Taking Steps Towards Unity"; (3) "Moving Towards
Participation"; (4) "Healing and Sharing Life in Community"; (5) "Confronting Threats to Peace and
Survival"; (6) "Struggling for Justice and Human Dignity"; (7) "Learning in Community"; (8)
"Communicating Credibly." The four sub-themes were presented and developed by speakers who had been
selected in advance and they gave those present a heavy dose of religious liberalism and political
radicalism.

The Radical Words of a Finnish Archbishop!

Archbishop John Vikstrom of the Church of Finland supposedly provided a biblical context in support
of the first sub-theme: "Life, a Gift of God." But, listen to Vikstrom's own words: "The revolutionary news
of Christianity is that Jesus Christ, the lawful king, has come, incognito, to this occupied world. ...We who
Page 153 of 176
have gathered at this Assembly are members of this resistance movement. At times we may find it hard to
recognize both ourselves and others as Christians– and sometimes we may have difficulty in recognizing
our disguised King, Jesus Christ." What blasphemy!

A Heathen Dance and False Religions!

In further developing the sub-theme, "Life, a Gift of God," the WCC chose a "classical
Bharathanatyam dance from South India" to dramatize Jesus' meeting with the woman at the well. The
presentation of this heathen dance is in keeping with the WC C's desire to give "recognition to differing
cultures," but it has heathen connotations and meanings. Furthermore, in presenting this sub-theme, the
WCC called upon "guests of other faiths" (actually, leaders of false religions) to make their contributions to
this theme. These included a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Muslim, a Sikh and a Jew! But those who are dead in
trespasses and sins cannot scripturally talk about "Life, a Gift of God" until they have received that life –
that gift which comes only through faith in Jesus Christ!

The Blind Leading the Blind At Vancouver!

Jesus Christ warned that "If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." Matthew 15:14. As
one radical speaker after another attempted to develop the theme and sub-themes, anyone viewing the
WCC Assembly from a biblical perspective would see clearly that most of the speakers and listeners were
spiritually blind and were thus headed for the "ditch." Space limitations prevent extensive quotes from
speakers who presented a wide variety of the philosophies of men. When the Bible was quoted, it was
twisted in an attempt to make it appear that Satan's programs can have God's blessing. Speakers from
communist countries repeatedly presented communist philosophy and propaganda with a thin veneer of
Christian terminology. Several Roman Catholics spoke even though Roman Catholicism continues to
preach a false gospel and are themselves "blind leaders of the blind." The veteran Pentecostal, Charismatic,
ecumenist, Dr. David duPlessis led a panel of responders to the sub-theme, "Life in Unity." DuPlessis'
noting that all Bible-believing churches accept Jesus Christ as the head, stated: "If there is only one head,
there can be only one body. Clearly the salvation of humanity depends on our unity." A statement such as
this from the platform of the apostate World Council of Churches identifies duPlessis as another of the
"blind leaders of the blind." The unity taught in the Scriptures is the exact opposite of that which the World
Council is seeking!

What Did the WCC Really Say At the Vancouver Assembly?

Each of the eight issue groups previously mentioned drafted a statement which was then presented to
the Assembly for action (approval, amendment or referral). In addition there were six general statements,
four resolutions and four minutes adopted. The six statements were on the following subjects: (1) "Peace
and Justice"; (2) "Human Rights"; (3) "International Food Disorder"; (4) "The Middle East"; (5) "Southern
Africa"; (6) "Central America." Resolutions were adopted on: (1) "Afghanistan"; (2) "Cyprus"; (3) "The
Pacific"; (4) "The Rights of Aboriginal Peoples of Canada" The four "Minutes on Public Issues of
Continuing Concern" were (1) "Armenian Genocide"; (2) " U. S. Military Bases in the Philippines"; (3)
"The Situation in Sri Lanka"; (4) "The Situation in Lesotho." Statistical figures revealed that the Vancouver
Assembly consumed 14 tons of paper in its deliberations and proclamations. Thousands of hours went into
preparations for this Assembly and hundreds of hours were spent by WCC delegates trying to decide what
to say and what to leave unsaid. Over three million dollars were spent by the WCC with perhaps an equal
amount contributed by member denominations in donated staff time and the cost of bringing delegates to
Vancouver from around the world And when the Assembly ended, it was the cause of religious liberalism
and political radicalism that had been furthered – not the cause of Jesus Christ and the proclamation of the
Gospel!

"No Peace Without Justice" -A Dominant Theme At Vancouver!

Page 154 of 176

 The WCC's officially adopted Statement on Peace and Justice spelled out their humanistic approach to
solving the world's major problems. This statement says: "The peoples of the world stand in need of peace
and justice. Peace is not just the absence of war. Peace cannot be built on foundations of injustice. Peace
requires a new international order based on justice for and within all nations, and respect for the God-given
humanity and dignity of every person. Peace is, as the Prophet Isaiah has taught us, the effect of
righteousness." This theme was heard over and over again in various speeches and WCC documents. Many
diverse opinions were expressed which attempted to set forth specific situations without which peace with
justice is impossible. Of course, the WCC, having rejected the authority of God's Word and His standards
of righteousness, has substituted its own standards of righteousness and even these are only tentative and
always subject to further change!

What Are the Requirements for Peace and Justice?

Bishop Henry Okullu of Kenya said, "There can be no peace while white people go around the world
collecting wealth." Most WCC women held the view that there could be no justice or peace without
absolute equality of the sexes. The WCC Statement, "Witnessing in a Divided World" stated: "The
churches must struggle to put in place a new international order for a more just world and be willing to
change their own structures in response." "Life in unity means work and bread for all. That requires a fair
distribution of scarce resources and this, in turn, a fair distribution of political power. Life in unity is an
ecumenical mandate of major economic significance, to be realized in political terms. ...So the only
promising option is one which would enable us to cope with the problems of the 1980's. You may call it a
new real international economic order, or international democratic socialism, or life in unity, or a just,
participatory and sustainable society." These words from Mr. Jan Pronk's WCC address are highly
significant and very revealing. Pronk is Deputy General Secretary of the United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development and is a World Council member. What the ecumenical movement is really after is
a one-world church and a one-world government in which religion and politics combine ideas, power,
funds, and talents to produce the harlot church and pave the way for the "man of sin" - the Antichrist

WCC Accuses Secular Press of False Reporting!

WCC officials were wringing their hands in despair because they claimed the press was featuring
some of their "controversial" statements and actions while neglecting to report many of the WCC activities
designed to help the needy around the world. What the WCC leaders fail to recognize is that they have
moved so far away from historic Christian positions and have gone so far into the liberal, radical
theological and political camp that even the secular press is astounded at some of the things the WCC says
and does. Surely no one would deny that the WCC does conduct some projects which are commendable.
Even so, upon close examination many of these "worthwhile" programs turn out to be projects which
actually aid and abet those who are fully committed to bringing about a world-wide communist revolution.
Having turned their ears away from God's truth, WCC leaders have turned unto fables– fables which lead
them to call good, evil and evil, good!

WCC Documents Its Own Radicalism!

The official report of the Vancouver Assembly is now available. Titled, "Gathered for Life," it
contains copies of actual reports, resolutions and statements adopted together with much additional
information, statistics and quotations, providing self-incriminating proof of its radicalism! Those who
examine this official report discerningly will recognize at once how truth is mixed with error over and over
again. Some sentences or paragraphs in the various reports and messages certainly sound "evangelical" or
even "fundamental." But none of these statements alter the basic liberal thrust or radical conclusions.
Instead, they are included only to pacify the evangelicals and hold them in a movement they really should
repudiate and separate from!

Downplaying the Deity and Atoning Work of Christ

Page 155 of 176
 "While affirming the uniqueness of the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, to which we bear
witness, we recognize God's creative work in the seeking for religious truth among people of other faiths."
Gathered for Life, page 40.

Promoting Socialism In the Name of Christianity

"The sharing of material resources must be seen in its proper context, that of Christian stewardship.
ALL CHURCHES HAVE A CLAIM ON EACH OTHER'S RESOURCES, and a responsibility to
challenge and help one another to use each other's resources properly. ...There is a great need for a new
theological understanding of sharing material resources based on justice and solidarity with the poor."
Gathered for Life, page 64. This is communist-socialist propaganda pure and simple, yet expressed in
Christian terminology. DO ALL CHURCHES HAVE A SCRIPTURAL CLAIM ON EACH OTHER'S
RESOURCES? Of course not–especially in view of the fact that many churches today are false churches -
strongholds of Satan's angels of light.

WCC Recommendations - New Symbols

"Churches are encouraged to experiment with alternative forms of communication. ...Other
alternatives involve the search for new symbols in order to make ecumenical communication more
effective. In recent years, the WCC has made use of team visits, GIVEN GRANTS TO OPPRESSED
GROUPS, and made use of new symbols. From Vancouver we will remember the tent, the baby at the
communion table, the wisp of smoke rising from a sacred fire and the many symbolic acts of worship that
have deepened our understanding of the faith." Gathered for Life, page 109,110. THE WCC HAS
SUBSTITUTED SYMBOLS FOR SUBSTANCE. HAVING TURNED AWAY THEIR EARS FROM
THE TRUTH, THEY HAVE TURNED UNTO FABLES." 2 Timothy 4:4.

An Inescapable Question!
In retrospect – and after reviewing the official report of the WCC's Sixth Assembly in Vancouver – an
inescapable question arises: "How can the WCC possibly justify its pronouncements on so many extremely
complex issues?" Even if every voting delegate were an expert in some field where their experience and
knowledge would enable them to compose a helpful statement, given the factor of time and language
barriers alone, producing something worthwhile would be out of the question. Then, think for a moment
about the brazenness of the WCC in putting together documents on such a wide variety of complex issues
when 80% of the voting delegates had never attended a WCC Assembly before; knew nothing of the
complicated parliamentary procedures involved; and were expected to cast their votes when they had only
minutes or hours to review the final documents? Some delegates complained that they had not even seen
the final draft of the statement their group had been working on. Some of the statements could only be
completed by granting the group chairman or the WCC Central Committee the privilege to incorporate
certain changes suggested from the floor after the Assembly ended. Many WCC delegates did not actually
know until much later the final wording of the statements they had voted for or against! Some delegates
were incensed at such a procedure and expressed their displeasure by refusing to vote at all!

Who Controls the WCC?

Technically, the control of the WCC lies in the hands of its 301 member denominations, composed of
nearly 400,000,000 individual members. Actually, the WCC is controlled by a 147-member Central
Committee; a sixteen-member Executive Committee; and four officers–a moderator, two vice-moderators
and a General Secretary. There are also seven presidents whose role is largely honorary and ceremonial.
The most powerful person in the WCC hierarchy is the General Secretary. The WCC staff and all three of
the WCC Program Units are under his supervision. As a result, the real control lies in the hands of a
Page 156 of 176
comparatively few people, most of whom are extremely liberal both theologically and politically. And it is
this small group, augmented by a staff which is also fully committed to radicalism, that speaks for the
WCC constituency of four hundred million people – including YOU if you belong to a WCC-affiliated
denomination! It is this hard-core, radical cadre which is using the name, prestige, power and finances of
the churches to fan the flames of revolution around the world!

Who Finances the WCC?

The World Council of Churches says approximately 95% of its 85 million dollar yearly income is
from member denominations with the remaining 5% coming from foundations and secular and government
organizations. At Vancouver, it was revealed that 113 (38%) of the 301 member denominations make no
contributions at all. Churches from communist countries cannot export hard currency, so their contributions
to the WCC are limited to providing some travel assistance for their attendance at WCC meetings. The
result is that churches from America and the non-communist countries pay most of the bills which enable
the pro-socialists and pro-communists to use an international church platform from which to attack
capitalism and undermine the true Christian faith while at the same time promoting humanism and
communism in the name of Christ. As one communist leader predicted years ago, "The time will come
when America will rejoice to cooperate in its own destruction." The World Council is a practical, close-to-
home example of that communist thesis at work today!

Where Does WCC Money Go?

The simple answer is that, after the deduction of about 27% for administration, communication,
reserves, library and the general secretariat, most of the WCC money goes to further the cause of religious
liberalism and political radicalism. Even the disbursement of relief funds strengthens the hands of
revolutionaries with surprising regularity. At Vancouver, the WCC gave strong approval of the
controversial Programme to Combat Racism (PCR) fund through which over five million dollars has gone
into the hands of various revolutionary groups, mainly in Africa and Latin America but also right here in
the USA. Not all of the assistance given to radical groups is easily traceable since such funds are disbursed
through the three main programmatic units of the WCC and do not appear as separate items in the WCC
financial report. There are dozens of underground pipelines through which WCC money flows into the
hands of revolutionaries. Several references were made at Vancouver to the various "networking groups"
with which the WCC was in touch. Actually, it is WCC money that is helping to finance some of these
"networks" which are nothing more or less than trained agitators in the areas of women, youth, peace,
social reform and political revolution. Dear reader, if you are a member of any denomination holding
membership in the WCC, it is your money they are spending to destroy the very things you hold dear! It
does no good to complain about the radicalism of the WCC as long as you are helping to support it!

Where Is the WCC Headed?

The World Council of Churches is the major ecumenical (one-world church) organization in existence
today. It has become so radical theologically that there would be no way of reforming it without destroying
its basis. It has become so radical politically, economically and socially that it could not survive major
changes without losing its leadership and much of its present constituency. Conservative evangelicals
within the WCC are kidding themselves and deceiving others when they express the idea that the WCC is
changing for the better. It is the WCC which already includes as members the Orthodox Church which
teaches a false gospel of salvation by works and sacraments. It is the WCC which is seeking reunion with
Roman Catholicism which, in spite of its widely heralded "renewal," continues to preach a false gospel,
very much like that of the Orthodox Church. It is the WCC which is reaching out to heathen religions in
discussion and dialogue, giving the impression that these Satanic deceptions have much to contribute to
Christianity in the "continuing search for truth." It is the WCC which tolerates and encourages the
unscriptural philosophy that Christians must move beyond the search for "christian unity" or even
"religious unity" to an ultimate goal of the "unity of all mankind." And, it is the WCC which keeps up a
Page 157 of 176
constant drumbeat against the free-enterprise system, and demands a society and a world which embraces
an anti-biblical, humanistic socialism!

God Says, "Come Out!"

In this report of the Sixth Assembly of the WCC we have presented ample, irrefutable evidence to
support our original statement – the WCC is offering the "CUP OF DEVILS" rather than the "CUP OF
THE LORD" to the Church and to the World. Yet, we have only begun to scratch the surface of the
evidence available. The Bible makes it clear that the true believer should separate completely from ungodly
relationships. God says, "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove
them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret" Ephesians 5:11.
God's command to every one of His children is: "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye
separate, says the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing: and I will receive you" 2 Corinthians 6:17.

The Battle Continues - Where Do You Stand?

In closing this very important report of the Sixth Assembly of the World Council of Churches, we
believe it essential to point out that no matter how much a believer may be shocked by evangelical
compromise and ecumenical apostasy, unless you personally withdraw membership and discontinue
financial support of such individuals and organizations, you must accept part of the blame for the rapid
deterioration of churches and organizations which once were true to the faith. We receive many
communications from believers who are thankful we are revealing the truth and taking a public stand
against error. But all too often, we discover that even those who commend us for our stand are still
contributing to the enemy cause rather than giving us the help we need to increase the volume of the
warning trumpet. God helping us, we will not compromise nor remain silent to please people and increase
financial support. But what about you? After reading this article and the first part of our report on the WCC
Assembly at Vancouver, are you shocked? Are you concerned? Will you remain in the camp of the enemy?
Will you support evangelical compromise? Or, will you come to the help of the Lord against the mighty?
The time for decision and action is now! WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO?

The WCC and Pseudo-Spirituality

Since the Sixth Assembly of the World Council of Churches was held in Vancouver in 1983, has there
been any change for the better in WCC actions and pronouncements which led us to conclude in our report
of this Assembly that the WCC was offering the CUP OF DEVILS to the church and to the world as though
it were the CUP OF THE LORD?
THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION IS A VERY DEFINITE "NO!"
During the past two years, the theological and socio-political radicalism of the WCC has intensified
and become even more deceptive because this "RADICALISM" is now being promoted in the name of
"SPIRITUALITY." WCC liberals obviously see the advantage of seeking to ride the current wave of
"evangelical" and "conservative" popularity. The success of such deception is increasingly evident as new-
evangelical and charismatic leaders join hands with and speak favorably of WCC leaders and programs.
But, true believers will not be deceived by the "feigned words" of the "false prophets" and "false teachers"
of the WCC. 2 Peter 2:1-3.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT is to give God's people an accurate "update" on the World
Council since 1983. WCC Assemblies are held every seven years, but all the business of the World Council
between assemblies is carried on by its 30-member Executive Committee (which meets every six months);
and the 150-member Central Committee (which meets annually).

Page 158 of 176

 Liberals are at the Helm of the World Council of Churches
The person exercising the greatest influence and power is the General Secretary who is elected by the
WCC Central Committee for a five-year term The staff and directors of WCC units and divisions operate
from the WCC headquarters in Geneva Switzerland, and are under the supervision of the General Secretary.
There can be no doubt that the great majority of those who wield the real power in the WCC are liberals in
every sense of that word.
THE PRESENT WCC GENERAL SECRETARY IS DR. EMILIO CASTRO. Prior to his 1984
election to this highest and most important office in the WCC, Dr. Castro served for more than a decade as
director of the WCC Commission on World Mission and Evangelism, another key post in the WCC
organization. Dr. Castro's position as a confirmed ecumenist in theology, philosophy and goals is firmly
established and is a matter of public record. But, he also knows how and when to use evangelical
terminology to hide his true aims. Castro is a very gracious and gifted man and especially suited to his high
office in the WCC, not only because he is fluent in several different languages but also because of his
ability to mix liberalism, neo-orthodoxy, evangelicalism and universalism so cleverly that all these diverse
groups are able to find something to praise in his words and actions. Castro disarms his critics by finding
something good to say about all of them. He is ideally suited to help move the WCC toward its goal of a
one-world church and a one-world government.

"God's Justice, Promise, and Challenge"

THE 37TH CENTRAL COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE WCC WAS HELD IN BUENOS AIRES,
ARGENTINA, July 28- August 8, 1985. Our press correspondent for this meeting was our long-time friend
and brother in Christ, Mr. Walter Wright. This dear brother is a very knowledgeable Christian businessman
who resides in Buenos Aires. His fluency in both English and Spanish and his years of active participation
in the separatist, fundamental testimony made him the ideal person to provide the first-hand, eye witness
reports and documents from which this article is composed. We thank God that He has His faithful ones
throughout the world – men who have not "bowed the knee to Baal" nor followed the crowd along the
broad way!
THE THEME OF THIS WCC CENTRAL COMMITTEE MEETING was "GOD'S JUSTICE,
PROMISE, AND CHALLENGE." WCC officials said it was "Chosen to bring together the Biblical
dimensions of God's justice with the SPIRITUAL AND SOCIO-POLITICAL realities of our world today."
This explanation makes it clear that the very planning of this meeting was designed to promote SOCIO-
POLITICAL RADICALISM in the name of SPIRITUALITY.
IS THERE A NEW EMPHASIS ON SPIRITUALITY IN THE WCC? The World Council of
Churches leaders at Buenos Aires claimed that such is the case, but their statements make it clear that their
idea of SPIRITUALITY is entirely different than that which God sets forth in His Word. The Word of God
says, "For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace." Romans 8:6. The
emphasis in the WCC is almost entirely carnal (fleshly), with little concern about anything truly spiritual.
Their efforts to find "life" and "peace" are futile because they operate on the basis of the carnal mind.

What Is Truth?
The true children of God accept the testimony of the written and living Word. The Bible says, "Thy
Word is TRUTH." John 17:17. Jesus Christ said, "I am the way, the TRUTH and the LIFE: no man cometh
unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6.
Contrast this with what WCC leader, Diana Eck Moderator of the WCC Summit on Dialogue with
People of Living Faiths, said at a press conference: "The return of religion, the return of the sacred, or at
least a heightened sense that the SEARCH FOR SPIRITUAL IDENTITY and SPIRITUAL MEANING is
somehow more urgent now than ever before." She took particular pains to distinguish between what she
considered to be two opposite approaches in that search, repudiating that which emphasizes "building
walls" but advocating what she called "a process of sinking roots." According to Ms. Eck, this preferred

Page 159 of 176

approach involves "affirming one's own identity in a deeper understanding of ONE'S OWN RELIGIOUS
TRADITION, without DENYNG OTHERS A RIGHT TO THEIR RELIGIOUS IDENTITY, or
THINKING THAT ONE HAS 'ALL THE TRUTH.’"

Interweaving Different Approaches to the Faith

Gwen Cashmore, WCC Director for Renewal and Congregational Life, stated that the last WCC
Assembly in Vancouver, 1983, "tried to INTERWEAVE DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE FAITH
which have sometimes been separated." As an example of this, she pointed out the increasing WCC
EMPHASIS ON WORSHIP and SOCIAL ACTION. She said' "We all felt that the Holy Spirit was
bringing to birth in the churches around the world a NEW AND DEEPER COMMITMENT TO THE
GOSPEL, a NEW WAY OF LIVING OUT OUR FAITH." This WCC leader said that one result of that
perception is the NEW WCC-WIDE EMPHASIS ON SPIRITUALITY and she called attention to a WCC
Consultation held in December 1984, which led to the publication of a booklet titled, "A Spirituality for
Our Times."

Spirituality or the Spirit of Humanism?

THE SPIRIT OF HUMANISM PREVAILED AT BUENOS AIRES JUST AS IT HAD TWO YEARS
EARLIER IN VANCOUVER From the opening "worship" to the closing "benediction," it was the CUP OF
DEVILS - NOT the CUP OF THE LORD that was offered to the churches and to the world. Whenever
TRUTH WAS SPOKEN, it was so THOROUGHLY MIXED WITH ERROR that it amounted to
TWISTING and PERVERTING THE TRUTH so that it produced darkness rather than light. Evangelical
leaders who continue to commend the WCC for "its increasing inclusion of evangelical viewpoints" in its
pronouncements are deceiving themselves and their followers. The more "evangelicalism" the WCC puts
into the CUP OF DEVILS, the more deceptive it becomes. The more a counterfeit bill "looks like the real
thing," the greater the possibility that it will bring loss to the unwary citizen The more the WCC puts on its
new cloak of SPIRITUALITY, the greater the possibility that immature, uninformed believers will be
misled. TRUTH MIXED WITH ERROR NEVER IMPROVES THE TRUTH - BUT IT DOES MAKE
ERROR DOUBLY DECEPTIVE.

"A Humanistic, Socio-Economic-Political Speech"

Those were the exact words used by our FOUNDATION correspondent, Mr. Walter Wright,
concerning the message given by WCC General Secretary, Dr. Emilio Castro, at the opening "worship"
service at Buenos Aires. Mr. Wright reports, "There were two processions. One was at the early
commencement when the WCC executives walked in - quite a colorful spectacle with robes, beards,
crucifixes, etc. The other was when the Bible was brought in and up to the pulpit by a procession of
children. The Scriptures were read in about 8 languages. Castro's sermon, in brilliant style, in Spanish, was
A HUMANISTIC SOCIO-ECONOMIC-POLITICAL SPEECH." Brother Wright sent us a copy of that
message in English and we fully concur in his analysis.

The Call for A New International Economic Order

DR. CASTRO USED HIS OPENING SERMON TO CALL FOR A "NEW INTERNATIONAL
ECONOMIC ORDER." He said, "How are we to set about tackling the problem of the DISTRIBUTION
OF WEALTH within our countries and, internationally, between our countries? For many years now the
UNITED NATIONS have been urging governments around the world to work together for a NEW
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER to overcome the present unjust relations." Later in his message,
Dr. Castro revealed his commitment to socialistic principles when he said, "It only makes sense to proclaim
Jesus Christ as the bread of life, the word of life, IF OUR PREACHING IS COUPLED WITH A
MILITANT STANCE WHICH STRIVES TO OVERCOME ALL INJUSTICE, QUESTIONS THE
STRUCTURES OF SOCIETY, THE DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME, and seeks solutions to the
Page 160 of 176
fundamental problems of every human being." One will search the Bible in vain to find support for Castro's
contention that the preaching of the Gospel is conditional upon militancy with regard to socio-economic-
political issues!

President of Argentina Calls for A New International Economic Order

THE PRESIDENT OF ARGENTINA, RAUL ALFONSIN, brought a 50-minute address to the WCC
Central Committee, in which HE ALSO URGED THE WCC TO WORK FOR A NEW WORLD
ECONOMIC ORDER. Our FOUNDATION correspondent commented that Alfonsin's address sounded as
if it might have been written by Castro himself Certainly it struck a familiar chord with the WCC liberals
who gave President Alfonsin a standing ovation at the conclusion of his address. Of course, the WCC is so
politically oriented that it finds far more in common with politicians than with true believers. More and
more, the WCC is seeking solutions to the world's problems through social, economic and political change.
For most WCC leaders, EVANGELISM is not the preaching of the one true Gospel of salvation by grace
through faith alone, but rather engaging in radical p6litical action. SPIRITUALITY, FOR MOST WCC
LEADERS, IS NOT SPIRITUALITY AT ALL BUT CARNALITY! Those who follow the WCC are
doomed to disappointment and ultimate disaster.

Dr. Castro Gave A Strong Boost for Radical Liberation Theology

In his General Secretary's report he said, "One emphasis in particular which has now been generally
accepted in the Ecumenical Movement as one of the fundamental elements in all responsible theology
today is the priority given to the poor in pastoral ministry in Latin America. This was explicitly stated by
the Catholic Church at the Bishops' Conferences at Medillin and Puebla, and by the Latin American
Conference of Churches at its meetings in Oaxtepec, Mexico and Huampani, Peru. One of the forms in
which this priority has been expressed is in the THEOLOGY OF LIBERATION which AFFIRMS THE
WHOLENESS OF THE GOSPEL and is concerned with all the material and spiritual aspects of the human
person and society...there is no question of treating the Theology of Liberation as sacred, but we do have to
recognize that it represents a serious and responsible challenge to us and our methods of doing theology.
The need to read the Bible in the context of practical SOLIDARITY WITH THE POOR is fundamental,
whatever the situation we may find ourselves in." Those who have investigated LIBERATION
THEOLOGY carefully recognize it to be a very deceptive attempt to promote socialism and communism in
the name of Christianity. The WCC's many attempts to blend Christianity with Communism only prove that
they are offering THE CUP OF DEVILS - NOT THE CUP OF THE LORD!

Radical Women Leaders Were Represented At Buenos Aires as They Had Been At
Vancouver
Some of these had been in attendance at the two global meetings the previous month in Nairobi
marking the end of the U.N. Decade for Women. Annie Jiagge, moderator of the WCC anti-racism program
(PCR), said that women in Nairobi affirmed that "structures that create over-affluence on the one side and
poverty on the other are as much a problem as sexism and racism and that the struggle against sexual
discrimination will not be complete unless these economic structures and racism are realistically tackled."
The biblical prohibition against the ordination of women is still maintained by a few WCC member
churches and these radical women consider this to be intolerable since it supposedly deprives them of full
freedom. They refuse to obey the Word of God, providing another example of how WCC liberals attempt to
give disobedience to the Scriptures a false mask, deceitfully calling it "SPIRITUALITY AND
FREEDOM".

Radical Youth Were Also Represented at Buenos Aires

OUR FOUNDATION MAGAZINE CORRESPONDENT REPORTED that the Youth had been well
indoctrinated by their WCC elders and were far more occupied with political action than in preaching the
Page 161 of 176
gospel. In all my years of covering ecumenical meetings, I have never met any WCC youth leader or young
person who by any stretch of the imagination or definition could be termed a conservative or an evangelical
like their elders, the WCC youth have plenty of time for marches and protests but I have never seen or
heard anything about a soul-winning effort being launched by either young or old within the WCC. The
stream has been poisoned at its source and separation is the only way to avoid further contamination!

The Agenda Reflected What Was Important to the WCC

IN ECUMENICAL MEETINGS, MOST OF THE TIME IS SPENT ON MATTERS INVOLVING
POLITICS OR ECONOMICS. This was true of the Buenos Aires meeting. There was much talk and
discussion about South Africa, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Korea and other
areas where the conflict between communism and freedom continues. A PASTORAL LETTER TO THE
PEOPLE OF THE CHURCHES OF CENTRAL AMERICA was adopted and sent by the WCC Central
Committee. There was much criticism of the United States but none for the Soviet Union nor was any
mention made of Afghanistan. A key part of this Pastoral Letter read, "We are convinced that the true
struggles in the area are not a result of the conflict between the East and the West as it has been
characterized, but rather between the North and the South. We shall commit ourselves to work with you
and others to discern a more just economic order for the whole world." In these two brief sentences, the
WCC dismisses the nature and threat of Communism and provides much needed assistance to the atheistic
Marxists in their worldwide revolutionary plans. To the ordinary citizen in the free world, it is unthinkable
that Church leaders could be aiding an eventual communist take-over, but that is exactly what WCC leaders
are doing. Unless true believers wake up to this fact soon, it will be too late to reverse the tide and preserve
the wonderful, God-given heritage of freedom which too many are taking for granted in our day.

One Visible Church!

This original goal of the WCC has now been expanded in its ultimate concept to include the UNITY
OF ALL MANKIND. Membership in the WCC at present is supposedly limited to those who subscribe to
its basis which states: "The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord
Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures, and therefore seek to fuffill together their
common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit." However, it is understood that
member churches are free to interpret this statement in accordance with their own beliefs and convictions.
And, operating under the current Satanic deception which makes it perfectly proper to replace the historic
meaning of theological words with new and often contradictory meanings, the WCC basis actually means
very little. It is becoming increasingly clear that many WCC leaders are working, not just for the unity of
Christians, but for the unity of all religions in a ONE-WORLD CHURCH and all mankind in a ONE
WORLD GOVERNMENT. Thus, the WCC is actually paving the way for the anti-christ!
The most significant WCC plans religiously centered around the reports and activities of two
commissions - the Commission on World Mission and Evangelism and the Commission on Faith and
Order. The work of both commissions clearly reveals how cleverly ecumenical liberals use every means
possible to promote unscriptural church unity.

The WCC Commission on World Mission and Evangelism

At Buenos Aires, a report was given by CWME of its first post-Vancouver meeting held in Limuni,
Kenya in January 1985 which focused on five central matters: (1) Gospel and Culture. (2) Good News to
the Poor (3) Relations with Evangelicals. (4) Ecumenical Sharing of Resources. (5) Plans for the 1988
World Mission Conference. Space limitations here prevent an exhaustive examination of these "five central
matters" but a brief look at them is certainly a must!

Gospel and Culture

Page 162 of 176

 "CULTURE" is a term which is increasingly being linked with either the "GOSPEL" or "FAITH" by
WCC liberals in their effort to legitimize unchristian, heathen beliefs, rituals and practices. The claim is
that Christians should not reject another person's "CULTURE" but rather accept such as TRUTH from
another source to be welcomed. This is why, at the Vancouver WCC Assembly, the heathen Indian "sacred
fire" and other rituals; and their worship of the earth, sun and moon (forbidden by the Word of God;
Romans 1:18-27) was accepted, praised and considered to be an acceptable form of worship. However, any
"CULTURE" which does not conform to the Bible is of the devil and any attempt to link such culture with
the Gospel is the CUP OF DEVILS, NOT THE CUP OF THE LORD.

Good News to the Poor

THIS IS SIMPLY ANOTHER WAY TO EXPRESS THE TENETS OF SATANIC LIBERATION
THEOLOGY which seeks to promote Communism in the name of Christianity. A basic thesis of WCC
leaders is that Christians must always identify with the poor and assist the poor even if this means joining
hands with atheistic communists to "relieve the poor" through militant economic and political changes
irrespective of their spiritual condition or need. According to WCC philosophy, Christians have no right to
"preach the gospel" to the poor without first using political means to accomplish redistribution of wealth.
Of course, giving the material needs of the poor priority over their spiritual needs is exactly the opposite of
what Jesus Christ taught when He said, "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the
soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28. Fellow
believer, will you obey Christ, or follow the advice of WCC apostates?

Relations With Evangelicals

THE WCC IS ANXIOUS TO CAPITALIZE ON THE CURRENT WAVE OF EVANGELICAL
POPULARITY. Therefore, they are doing everything possible to deceive evangelicals with "feigned",
"hypocritical" words. Evangelicals like Billy Graham and Bill Bright have been reaching millions with
their crusades, conferences and the use of TV, radio and special satellite communications systems.
Charismatic leaders like Pat Robertson, Jim Bakker, Oral Roberts, Rex Humbard and Jimmy Swaggart are
reaching additional millions with a supposedly "evangelical" message. WCC leaders are understandably
envious because of the ability of evangelicals and charismatics to raise millions of dollars for their
programs and ministries. Like the words of "the spider to the fly" in the old nursery rhyme, WCC leaders
are making every effort to entice evangelicals to participate in the ecumenical movement. The two top
evangelical leaders, Dr. Billy Graham and Dr. Bill Bright have been moving closer and closer into the
ecumenical orbit through the years. The Charismatic movement looks more and more like the "catalyst"
which can bring evangelicals, charismatics, liberals and Roman Catholics into one big happy religious
fellowship if not an actual organizational relationship.

Mission and Evangelism: An Ecumenical Affirmation

At this point, reference should be made to the above titled statement released by the WCC in 1983
after several years of study and published with the cooperation of the Division of Overseas Ministries of the
National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. We refer to this document here because, of all the
WCC documents we have ever read, this one contains more statements which are true to the Scriptures and
are expressed in historic biblical language than any other. And, WCC leaders are quick to hold up this
document as evidence to support their contention that the voice of evangelicalism is being heard and
respected in the ecumenical movement. However, even though compromising evangelicals widely hailed
this ECUMENICAL AFFIRMATION OF MISSION AND EVANGELISM, some of these evangelicals did
complain at Vancouver that this document "wasn't even referred to in any plenary address." Furthermore,
this document contains, not only evangelical truth but also ecumenical heresies. When will evangelicals
learn to recognize ecumenical "window dressing" which seems to conceal the fact that mixing truth and
Page 163 of 176
error is disobedience to the eternal Word of the living God? When will they obey God's Word and identify
such a mixture as THE CUP OF DEVILS and NOT THE CUP OF THE LORD?

Ecumenical Sharing of Resources

"SERVICE UNITES - DOCTRINE DIVIDES"- This has been a favorite ecumenical slogan for many
years. And, while they haven't given up completely on trying to find doctrinal unity, the WCC is working to
produce unity on the local level and especially in the area of service in their own organization and within
and between member denominations. This is difficult to achieve because of personal jealousies and the
desire to preserve individual church traditions, etc., but the WCC hopes to persuade its own member bodies
to "unite in service" now and wait for doctrinal agreement later. Humanly speaking, these WCC leaders are
probably correct in their assumption, but from the biblical standpoint they are dead wrong! Doctrinal truth
is the only basis for both service and fellowship. Any deviation from that principle proves that one is
drinking from THE CUP OF DEVILS and NOT FROM THE CUP OF THE LORD.

Plans for the 1988 World Mission Conference

"YOUR WILL BE DONE: MISSION IN CHRIST'S WAY." This is the theme selected for the 1988
World Mission Conference to be sponsored by the WCC Commission on World Mission and Evangelism.
Four possible sites are under consideration (Cyprus, Brazil Greece and COMMUNIST CHINA). The last
big CWME Conference was held in 1980 in Melbourne, Australia, and proved to be one of the most radical
in the history of WCC conferences. Dr. Emilio Castro, present general secretary of the WCC was the head
of CWME at that time and was the chief architect of this conference which, under the false theme of
"YOUR KINGDOM COME," presented many heresies including the false teaching that Christ's Kingdom
is already here. Communism was proposed as the answer to helping the poor since Christianity had failed.
Our readers may want to refer to our full report of this 1980 CWME meeting in FOUNDATION Magazine
for September-October 1980. We are reprinting here the following shocking but highly significant
quotations taken from the report of that meeting:

Is The Kingdom of Christ Already Here?

"WHY KEEP PRAYING FOR THE COMING OF GOD'S KINGDOM, WHEN SURELY IT IS
HERE, IN OUR MIDST." This heresy was contained in the CWME pre-conference source book and
continued as follows, "Turning to the future in the expectation that it will bring the Kingdom of God could
actually be the expression of turning against God, an attempt to escape from the sovereignty of God in the
desire for self-assertion....We shall learn to pray properly, ‘Thy Kingdom Come,’ only when we rule out
any idea of having to wait, or being permitted to wait, for some more or less distant day, for a new era of
history, or for what comes after this temporal life – and instead make our thankful adoring affirmation of
the KINGDOM OF GOD WHICH HAS COME."

The Cross? Or the Hammer and the Sickle?

"THE POOR CAN NEVER BECOME RICHER UNLESS THE RICH BECOME POORER, EITHER
VOLUNTARILY, OR BY THE FORCE OF TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT." This statement was
made by Metropolitan Geeverghese Mar Osthathios of the Orthodox Syrian Church, Kerala, South India
who went on to say, 'The way for the first alternative is the cross and the way for the second the sickle and
hammer. If the cross-bearing of the Christians will not bring about a just classless society by the force of
Christian love, God may permit the sickle and hammer to do so even as he chose Cyrus the heathen to
fulfill His purpose once. In any case, the Nazarene is bound to win ultimately."

"As For Me, I Am Not Afraid of the Revolution, for It Is the Power of the People Unto
Salvation"

Page 164 of 176

 THESE BLASPHEMOUS WORDS CAME FROM THE PEN OF REV. CAANAN BANANA,
METHODIST MINISTER WHO BECAME PRESIDENT OF THE REVOLUTIONARY
GOVERNMENT OF ZIMBABWE (formerly Rhodesia). They were part of a text which had been prepared
for delivery at the CWME 1980 meeting in Melbourne. Banana was unable to attend in person but the text
of his message was released at Melbourne. In this prepared text, Banana made many other very radical
statements but we quote the following in case there is any doubt about the real attitude of WCC liberals
who are "using" mission and evangelism to promote socialism.

Outright Denunciation and Overthrow of Capitalism Demanded

REV. CAANAN BANANA WROTE: "What is wanted today is an outright clear denunciation of
capitalistic exploitation and dynamic action to overthrow it. It seems that institutionalized religion is not
capable of effecting this."
When the next CWME meeting is held in 1988, they will have had eight years in which to soften some
of their harsh language and use a "CLOAK OF SPIRITUALITY" to disguise their continuing efforts to
undermine the principles of biblical faith and human freedom in the name of "Evangelism and Mission"
But we trust these words of warning may cause true believers to be on guard and not permit themselves to
be cajoled into drinking from THE CUP OF DEVILS no matter how much evangelical verbiage may be
included in the cup!

The WCC Commission on Faith and Order

THEOLOGICALLY, THIS COMMISSION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL WCC UNITS,
tracing its roots back to a FAITH AND ORDER conference held at Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1927 - 21 ye
ars before the WCC came into being. The most important product of its work to date was the publication in
1982 of an ecumenical statement titled, "BAPTISM, EUCHARIST AND MINISTRY." This document is
often referred to now with either the abbreviation, "BEM STATEMENT," or the "LIMA STATEMENT"
since it was adopted at a meeting of the Commission in lima, Peru. The importance of this document for the
ecumenical movement is stated in its preface as follows: "IF the DIVIDED CHURCHES are to ACHIEVE
the VlSIBLE UNITY they seek, one of the ESSENTIAL PREREQUISITES is that they should be in
BASIC AGREEMENT on BAPTISM, EUCHARIST AND MINISTRY." Before giving significant
quotations from the Lima-B.E.M. document, it is important for true believers to know another significant
fact:

The WCC Commission on Faith and Order Is Broader than the World Council of
Churches Itself!
MEMBERSHIP IN THE WCC FAITH AND ORDER COMMISSION INCLUDES NOT ONLY
THOSE FROM WCC MEMBER DENOMINATIONS BUT ALSO SOUTHERN BAPTISTS, ROMAN
CATHOLICS, PENTECOSTALS AND SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS. The following quote is from the
preface, page ix: "This Lima text represents the SIGNIFICANT THEOLOGICAL CONVERGENCE which
Faith and Order has discerned and formulated. Those who know how widely the churches have differed in
doctrine and practice on BAPTISM, EUCHARIST AND MINISTRY, will appreciate the importance of the
large measure of agreement registered here. VIRTUALLY ALL THE CONFESSIONAL TRADITIONS
ARE INCLUDED IN THE COMMISSION'S MEMBERSHIP. That theologians of SUCH WIDELY
DIFFERENT TRADITIONS should be able to speak so harmoniously about baptism, Eucharist

and ministry is UNPRECEDENTED IN THE MODERN ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT. Particularly

noteworthy is the fact that the Commission ALSO INCLUDES AMONG ITS FULL MEMBERS
THEOLOGIANS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC AND OTHER CHURCHES WHICH DO NOT
BELONG TO THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES ITSELF."
Page 165 of 176
 Convergence Now - Consensus Later?
"WE HAVE ALREADY ACHIEVED A REMARKABLE DEGREE OF AGREEMENT.
CERTAINLY WE HAVE NOT YET FULLY REACHED 'CONSENSUS.' ...In leaving behind the
hostilities of the past, the churches have begun to discover many promising CONVERGENCES in their
shared convictions and perspectives. THESE CONVERGENCES GIVE ASSURANCE THAT DESPITE
MUCH DIVERSITY IN THEOLOGICAL EXPRESSION THE CHURCHES HAVE MUCH IN
COMMON in their understanding of the faith. ...In the process of growing together in mutual trust, the
churches MUST DEVELOP THESE DOCTRINAL CONVERGENCES step by step, until they are finally
able to declare together that they are living in communion with one another in continuity with the apostles
and the teachings of the universal Church." [BEM Statement, preface page ix]

"Spirituality" Claimed for BEM Statement

"WE BELIEVE THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT HAS LEAD US to this time, a kairos of the ecumenical
movement when sadly divided churches have been enabled TO ARRIVE AT SUBSTANTIAL
THEOLOGICAL AGREEMENTS. We believe that many significant advances are possible if in our
churches WE ARE SUFFICIENTLY COURAGEOUS AND IMAGINATIVE to embrace God's gift of
Church unity." [BEM Statement, preface page x]

Suggested Steps Towards Doctrinal Consensus

"THE FAITH AND ORDER COMMISSION NOW RESPECTFULLY INVITES ALL CHURCHES
to prepare an official response to this text at the highest appropriate level of authority, whether it be a
council, synod, conference, assembly or other body." [BEM Statement, preface page x] At Buenos Aires,
the Faith and Order Commission reported as follows: "We can already say that BEM has become an
ecumenical event in this deeper sense of the term. The distribution and attention which this document finds
in churches all over the world is WITHOUT PRECEDENT IN ECUMENICAL HISTORY. ...The very fact
that such a demanding doctrinal text has been SO QUICKLY AND WIDELY WELCOMED indicates that
it undoubtedly meets a need felt by the churches." It was reported that as of June 1985, twenty official
responses had been received from major church bodies.

World Conference on Faith and Order Planned for 1988

TO EVALUATE THE RESULTS AND RESPONSES FROM THE BAPTISM, EUCHARIST AND
MINISTRY STATEMENT and to further its other major long-range goal – "THE COMMON
EXPRESSION OF THE APOSTOLIC FAITH TODAY," the WCC Commission on Faith and Order is
planning a World Conference on Faith and Order to be held in either Africa or Asia in 1988. It is to be an
EXPANDED conference to include not only the 120 Commission members but an additional 180 official
participants. Meanwhile responses and reactions to the BEM Statement from both churches and individuals
are solicited for analysis and consideration.

Chicago Theologians on Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry (BEM)

Robert W. Bertram

[Address, December, 1983. Published in Journal of Ecumenical Studies 21 (1984): 64-70. Also published
in The Search for Visible Unity: Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry. Edited by J. Gros. New York: Pilgrim
Press, 1984. Reprinted with permission.] Seeing that the NCC's BEM conference in Chicago last October
was co-hosted by an ecumenical cooperative of Chicago-area theological schools, it was natural that these
Page 166 of 176
schools would contribute to the conference a public review of BEM's theology. This they did in two
successive panel discussions, each panel involving three Chicago faculty members: Lauree Hersch Meyer
of Bethany Theological Seminary, on "Baptism"; 0. C. Edwards of Seabury-Western Theological
Seminary, on "Eucharist"; Lewis Mudge of McCormick Theological Seminary, on "Ministry"; and Bernard
McGinn of the University of Chicago's Divinity School, on "Baptism"; Carolyn Osiek of Catholic
Theological Union, on "Ministry"; Robert Bertram of Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, on
"Eucharist".

Although the panelists were to address the substantive issues of Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, not the
conference theme of "reception" as such, what they said about BEM's theological substance had
implications for its reception process as well. Two implications in particular deserve notice. The two I have
in mind are not the obvious twosome, which every panelist also reflected: yes, BEM is already basically
receivable; no, it is not to be received uncritically or even without further rewrite. That much yes and-no
was reflected even by the two panelists from the Faith and Order Commission, Mudge and Bertram, who at
Lima had already gone on record in BEM's favor and so now leaned over backward to add what Moderator
Carl Braaten requested, a "critical response." However, beyond such general endorsement cum "critical
evaluation," which BEM's own preface invites, all six panelists surfaced two other, more nuanced, more
telling features of BEM's theology which in turn might foreshadow how the document will be received in
the churches: BEM's theological ambivalences or, better, its inconclusiveness, and second, its intimations
of something better still to come.

Inconclusive

First, in noting BEM's inconclusiveness I would not minimize that the document did evince definite
conclusions from our panelists. The conclusions they drew, however, all of them apparently warranted by
BEM itself, occasionally were not only different. They were at times markedly contrary, leaving the
audience in a quandary and the discussion as a whole undecided. That sort of irresolution may be a shadow
of things to come. All the more so if, as this conference recommended, a document like BEM which has
been ecumenically produced ought also, as in these Chicago panels, be ecumenically discussed and
received. The fallout from any reception process as multi-vocal as that may be a whole new range of
interesting theological impasses.

For instance, contrast the two presentations by Hersch Meyer and Edwards, she from Church of the
Brethren, he an Episcopalian. Both of them affirmed BEM for reasons of their own, but reasons not
evidently compatible with each other. Hersch Meyer explained that, for Brethren, "baptism was never
understood as a means of saving one's soul." Rather it functions as a rite of passage into the religious
group, thus fulfilling an important sociological need both of the person and of the community. It is only of
secondary importance that the "socio-ecclesial formation terrain" of the Brethren had traditionally limited
this rite to adults. For recently there has been a growing recognition that adolescents, too, need a rite of
passage. At that, "a meaningful adolescent rite need not be confirmation or baptism any more than a
meaningful infant rite needs to be baptism or infant dedication." What matters is "enrolling each new
generation meaningfully in the corporate identity."

Such a "free church" view of Baptism would seem to justify the misgivings voiced by Edwards. Not that he
had serious doubts about BEM. On the contrary, he could comfortably acknowledge that “the Lima
statement does presuppose a sacramental orientation that is reflexive to Anglicanism and the thought world

Page 167 of 176

of the statement feels like our native land.” No, he explained, my questions about this as an adequate basis
for reunion lie outside the document.

My question is whether many of the member churches of the World Council who have not been so
sacramental in their orientation throughout history as Anglicans have, are really this converted to a
sacramental point of view. As Edwards went on, his real question lay deeper. "The sacramentalism of the
Lima statement implies a Christology on a par with the classic Christological statements of the early
church.” Must not those creeds, therefore, be “an essential part of any discussion of reunion?” What he
wondered, not optimistically, was whether “all of the member churches are willing to ascribe such an
ultimacy to Christ.”

Hersch Meyer, on the other hand, whose Brethren obviously have “not been so sacramental in their
orientation throughout history as Anglicans have,” and maybe not so inclined “to ascribe such ultimacy to
Christ,” nevertheless argued from an explicitly Christological orientation of her own. The Christian
community into which Baptism provides a rite of passage is, after all, “the body of Christ” and membership
in it means “participation in Christ’s very life.” “What social scientists would call a sociological” event is
what “Brethren would understand as an incarnational” one. Indeed, Hersch Meyer’s single most theological
reason for approving BEM is its “Christological mode” of “Christian conversation.” But by that she meant,
“Christians today are learning to see in others who practice radically different forms of baptism...members
of Christ’s living body, incarnated in a social matrix sometimes painfully and astonishingly different from
our own.”

If that is what strikes Hersch Meyer as Christological significant about BEM, namely, its “openness to
expressions of God’s Spirit visibly different from our own," then she was being consistent in challenging
the way the BEM question is frequently posed, "the question to what degree the document adequately
represents the apostolic faith." "That very wording," she objected, "suggests to Brethren ... a view of
‘correspondence’ more than ‘relational’ truth." And Edwards' plea, by contrast, for "a Christology on a par
with the classic Christological statements of the early church" must then sound like the very thing Hersch
Meyer criticized as a "search for a particular deposit ... to rightly represent the faith." Still, BEM evidently
seems inclusive enough to embrace Brethren as well. Both their "faith and practice," says Hersch Meyer,
"is found within those descriptions the BEM document affirms."

Edwards, on the other hand, questions whether churches like Hersch Meyer's truly can find themselves
there. She, in turn, questions whether his sort of criterion is worthy of BEM, also Christological. "Its the
old question of the Council of. Florence," Mudge observed. "How do you know that when you use different
words you are speaking with the same intention?" (Or even, we might ask, when you use the same words?)
Edwards: "And the Catch-22 of all this is that in order to deal with the questions we're faced with we must
first reach some sort of methodological agreement so that we will know that we are talking about the same
thing . . . ." The discussion then digressed farther and farther from the theological issues at hand (Baptism,
Eucharist and Ministry) toward some elusive "hermeneutical" solution -- toward a solution, in other words,
outside BEM itself, though necessitated by BEM's own theological indeterminateness. BEM's
inconclusiveness did not need interdenominational give-and-take to reveal it, though that helped. It
surfaced right within panelists’ solo presentations, for instance, in McGinn’s and Osiek's, both of them
Roman Catholic lay theologians. McGinn was "puzzled . . . about the nature and content of [BEM's] new
ethical orientation granted in Baptism." Why "puzzled"? "Because the text says so little about what used to
be called original sin," upon which any such conclusions about baptismal renewal would presumably need

Page 168 of 176

to be premised. Other points of puzzlement for McGinn were the relation of Baptism to faith, also
Baptism's sacramental causality: "If there are still differences of theological interpretation under the fairly
calm surface of the document that imply real differences of belief, I do not think that the document itself
tells us how to deal with them."

On the other hand, Osiek, on BEM's treatment of Ministry: "The traditional tension remains between the
theology of charism and the act of ordination; the tension is not resolved by simply assuming as I Tim. 4:14
seems to that ordained ministry is a charism." As for the apostolicity of ordained ministries, she observed,
"There is no more obvious sign of compromise in the document than the conclusion of #10: ‘There is
therefore a difference between the apostles and the ordained ministers whose ministries are founded on
theirs.' That there is a difference no one would dispute. Apparently every attempt to articulate what kind of
difference was unsuccessful."

Mudge, similarly, called attention to BEM's unresolved tensions, including one which the document itself
acknowledges: "... the degree of the presbyter's participation in the Episcopal ministry is still for many an
unresolved question of far-reaching ecumenical importance" -- far-reaching enough, I might insert, to
exercise Lutherans. Recalling Lima, Mudge was inclined to trace some of BEM's lingering tensions back to
its prepublication "drafting process." He remembered how free-church and Reformed theologians "felt we
were always tugging at cassocks to get heard." "I do wonder sometimes whether our Orthodox friends,
particularly those who are resident in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and Greece, have any real
understanding of what Protestantism is ... and what we mean in the West by the critical method."

The critical method came up also in Bertram's challenge to BEM, specifically with respect to its chapter on
"the institution of the Eucharist.” Here again was a case where the document is "halting between two
opinions," needlessly so. For one example, (and there were several) BEM at first gives the appearance of
affirming the apostolic tradition that the sacrament was instituted by the historical Jesus. But then,
"needlessly cautious,"

BEM retreats from that doctrinally crucial claim, apparently fearing that a dominical institution may no
longer be tenable, which to say the least is a premature conclusion. As a result, rather than grapple with
"historical-critical evidence" which in this case might just have supported the apostolic tradition, BEM
"shifts the dominical origins of the Eucharist instead to Jesus' general practice throughout his ministry of
table fellowship." But at what a price, "thus obscuring precisely in his new Supper Jesus does not eat and
drink with his disciples, and obscuring why he does not."

Anticipatory

If BEM gives off mixed signals, especially when these are tricked out in mixed theological company, it
seems to do so in a ..ay that does not at all stultify further effort. On the contrary, if our panelists' reactions
were typical, BEM awakens expectations which point beyond the document in its present form, perhaps
beyond anything that so far is conceivable. In that sense BEM is proleptic, self-eclipsing, anticipatory of
better things to come, as the following excerpts illustrate.

McGinn. "The Lima Statement obviously is looking for something more than mutual toleration. It does say
that it intends to be an expression of the common faith of the Church and it asks for the explicit mutual
recognition of each other's baptism on the part of the churches. But each of these express intentions
contains hidden ambiguities that make the process of reception (or non-reception) at least as important as

Page 169 of 176

the document...." "The Lima document appears to have done as much as it could have within a particular
set of circumstances, but perhaps its real hope is that the discussion and debate over the meaning and the
reception of this document will create a new set of circumstances, a new reality which will eventually make
things that now seem difficult if not impossible to resolve far less problematic. I do not want to say that the
conversation we are engaged in is the reality we seek, but it is perhaps the best way open to us to move
forward so that we may be able to catch some glimpse of what that reality actually may be."

Osiek. "On the subject of the relationship of the ordained ministry to the apostles and of the ordained
priesthood to the priesthood of all believers, we still have some distance to go, both ecumenically and in
the theologizing of the more highly structured churches..... The greatest challenge for Roman Catholics, I
believe, will be to take this document seriously, not just as an ecumenical statement to tell us what others
are thinking, but as a document in which we see ourselves reflected and to which we look to guide our
reflections: “a statement to be not only informative but formative as well."

"A monumental step has been taken with the Lima document. Let us welcome it with appropriate joy as a
child born into the world who has thereby begun the long process toward maturity. There is a commonly
expressed opinion that the documents of Vatican II represented the state of the question at the time they
were written, but began to be obsolete as soon as the Council ended. Perhaps that would not be a bad way
to view the Lima document as well, so that we can receive it not as an achievement but rather as a call into
the future."

Hersch Meyer. "I think I would want to speak not so much trying to represent the document ... as trying to
find my way as a member of a free church tradition into the document, meaningfully. That is precisely the
reason why I ... was pressed to use incarnational and Christological language. I found no other way to make
coherent both my participation and also the limits where I felt participation simply couldn't occur . . . ." "I
would go past that, though .... That is to say, we have in our traditions, I think, an orthodoxy which trusts
formulations. . . . Some of us are organized more around orthopraxis than around orthodoxy. We trust that
as well. ... In ecumenical dialogue neither of these, when we actually are able to change, is the center of our
life. . . . Neither is orthodoxy nor orthopraxis a change of any transformation in our communion. Rather
that happens in the moment when we experience ourselves as made one ... by the Spirit in ways that allow
us to question very specific previous forms. To think only in terms of what we say and how we shall there
achieve unity or what we do and how we shall there achieve unity is not enough. Christological analysis is
not enough. Really a Trinitarian mode of reflecting on our life in communion together strikes me as utterly
basic. ..." Edwards. "I don't think that any Anglican could for a moment believe that the seamless robe of
Christ has been restored with the Quakers not in it. The Friends' spirituality is one that has borne an
effective witness to us, and in some ways we probably feel more commonality with you [Friends] than with
many of the people to whom we're closer in matters of polity. So I could never rest content until our
conversations had proceeded much farther along the road." "But finally, it may be that this ability to reach
across differences of tradition can only be done in stages. So conceivably only those who are able to live
with the kind of point of view of the [Lima] statement so far could participate in this first stage of
discovering what we have in common. But then when we are able to clarify that with one another, maybe
then a new stage of conversation could reach out to those who are in your [Friends'] tradition and others, to
find out what all of us have in common -- with the certainty that the things that unite us are far more
important than the things that separate us."

Page 170 of 176

Mudge. "I believe that what BEM says about the historic threefold ministry will be very helpful in the
negotiations between your [Edwards' Episcopal] church and mine. . . . Presbyterians are beginning to
realize that they have at the level of the local congregation what might be called a miniaturization of the
historic threefold ministry, in which a bishop or pastor is surrounded by presbyters, whom we call elders,
and assisted by deacons. That is, I believe, essentially the Ignatian form of the episcopacy, in which the
bishop was the pastor of a congregation.
It is a fact that in the nineteenth century, when you look at Presbyterian presbytery rolls, when the
attendance was taken, it said, 'The following bishops were present.' The reference was to pastors of
congregations. . . . That is an historical memory of our intention in constituting a diocese in each local
congregation. If we can see that the differences between our two churches have to do with scale -- larger
diocese, smaller diocese -- rather than with principle, and if we can see that the essential of the historic
threefold ministry can be expressed in varying constitutional or canonical forms, then we have the basis for
understanding each other.
Bertram. "While it is essential in The Holy Communion to stress its intercessory and its thanksgiving (that
is, its "Eucharistic") action, in short its action as one great prayer to the Father made possible by the joining
of our lowly prayers with the efficacious intercessions of our great High Priest, isn't it likewise a mark of
catholicity, indeed the very height of gratitude, when we the guests at The Lord's Supper finally accede to
what he has so generously invited us to do in the first place, namely, sup? Isn't that in fact the essence of
the anamnesis, that as he bids us to we eat and drink, believing, and thus in the most earthy and gustatory
way (as befits earthlings) we share in his selfsame cruciform and Eastered flesh? And isn't it true that we
do that supping explicitly "for the forgiveness of sin" and "for proclaiming the Lord's death till he comes,"
two powerfully anamnetic themes from The Great Tradition about which BEM says virtually nothing? But
it certainly could, and it could do so consistently with its own great starting point, in the Eucharist as
anamnesis.”
"This weakness, which appears [in BEM] appears only because at that very point the document is being
particularly strong and bold, raising the churches' highest expectations, but then, alas, slacks off and
shrinks from its full apostolic promise. So our 'critical evaluation' is really only a part of receiving BEM, a
way of cheering it on and saying, 'Yes, yes, go on, don’t stop now'."
Robert W. Bertram
December, 1983
Chicago

Is the BEM Statement True to Scripture?

OUR ANSWER IS A DEFINITELY "NO". Like all other WCC documents we have ever seen, it
mixes truth and error making it THE CUP OF DEVILS, not THE CUP OF THE LORD. God willing, we
plan to publish a complete analysis of this widely heralded ecumenical statement in the near future. Let it
be sufficient for the present to say that any true believer could never accept this BEM STATEMENT. It
bows to Roman Catholic heresy by calling BAPTISM AND THE EUCHARIST "SACRAMENTS" (a
means of Grace) and accepts the unscriptural teaching of liberal churches by approving the ordination of
women.

Unscriptural Teaching on Baptism

"BAPTISM IS THE SIGN OF NEW LIFE THROUGH JESUS CHRIST. IT UNITES THE ONE
BAPTIZED WITH CHRIST AND WITH HIS PEOPLE. ...THUS THOSE BAPTIZED ARE PARDONED,
CLEANSED AND SANCTIFIED BY CHRIST." [page 2] "THROUGH BAPTISM, Christians are brought

Page 171 of 176

into union with Christ, with each other and with the Church of every time and place. OUR COMMON
BAPTISM, WHICH UNITES US TO CHRIST IN FAITH, is thus a basic bond of unity." [page 10]

Unscriptural Teaching on the Eucharist

"CONSEQUENTLY THE EUCHARIST IS A SACRAMENTAL MEAL which by visible signs
communicates to us God's love in Jesus Christ ...It has acquired many names: for example, the Lord's
Supper, the breaking of bread, the holy communion, the divine liturgy, THE MASS. Its celebration
continues as the central act of the Church's worship. The EUCHARIST IS ESSENTIALLY THE
SACRAMENT of the gift which God makes to us in Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. EVERY
CHRISTIAN RECEIVES THIS GIFT OF SALVATION THROUGH COMMUNION IN THE BODY
AND BLOOD OF CHRIST." [page 10]

Such False Teachings Contradict God's Word and Negate the Principles of the
Protestant Reformation
There were many other indications at Buenos Aires that WCC SPIRITUALITY IS ONLY A
PSEUDO-SPIRITUALITY. True, there were "Bible Studies" on the program but they were taught by Dr
Kritster Stendahl, a "liberal of the liberals." There was an "ECUMENICAL WORSHIP FOR HOPE" led by
Bishop Jorge Novak of the Roman Catholic Church and Bishop Federico Pagura of the Methodist Church.
Roman Catholic Cardinal Juan Carlos Aramburu personally welcomed the WCC Committee members,
calling them "Dear Brethren in Christ" and saying, "We share the same faith in Jesus Christ ...We feel we
are very united with you in faith in Jesus Christ our Lord. " Although Roman Catholicism continues to
preach a false gospel and thus is under God's curse, the WCC leaders welcome them with open arms and
the feeling is mutual. TRUE SPIRITUALITY upholds the truth! It abhors and separates from error. TRUE
SPIRITUALITY crucifies the flesh with its lusts and walks in newness of life with Christ. But the WCC
continually joins hands with error and caters to the flesh. As but one further example of WCC carnality,
note carefully the following announcement which appeared in the WCC DAILY NEWS AND EVENTS,
issue number 1: "A reliable source has informed us that LIQUOR IS CHEAP AND PLENTIFUL at the
local supermarkets. Examples: Vermouth 50c; Gin 1.90; Vodka 95c." IT IS A SPIRIT OF CARNALITY,
NOT SPIRITUALITY, WHICH IS PLAINLY VISIBLE IN ALL WCC MEETINGS.

Dialogue with Heathen Religions Has Top Priority in the WCC

INSTEAD OF BIBLICAL, CHRISTIAN WITNESS TO THOSE WHO ARE BLINDED BY
HEATHEN RELIGIONS, THE WCC IS OCCUPIED WITH UNSCRIPTURAL DIALOGUE. Reports
given at Buenos Aires made this very plain as dialogues with Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, Marxists and
Jews were detailed. The Scripture-commanded proclamation of the Gospel has no place on the WCC
agenda. It has been replaced by a satanically inspired program of dialogue in which all parties to the
dialogue are seen as cooperating in the search for truth.
MUCH MORE COULD BE WRITTEN about the WCC Central Committee meeting in Buenos Aires
and the actions and reports of its various commissions and units but space limitations make that impossible.
ONE FACT STANDS OUT CLEAR AND PLAIN – THE WCC IS MORE RADICAL THAN EVER BUT
SEEKS TO MASK ITS RADICALISM IN A CLOAK OF SPIRITUALITY. At the conclusion of his very
first coverage of a WCC meeting, our Buenos Aires correspondent, brother Walter Wright, expressed his
own concern about the way in which the WCC attempted to clothe all its actions in a robe of"
SPIRITUALITY" in these words: "Everything which we were able to cover moved on in much the same
Page 172 of 176
way, right to the end including the press conferences where the supposed NEW SPIRITUALITY OF THE
WCC was stressed."

What's Ahead for the World Council of Churches?

THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS - MORE RADICALISM AND GREATER DECEIT! At
the conclusion of the 1983 WCC Assembly in Vancouver, WCC radicals were ecstatic over the supposed
NEW WCC "SPIRITUALITY" as indicated by the following quotes from the Official Report, page 9: Ms.
Jean Skuse, the very radical Vice Moderator, said, "I have never sung so many alleluias or kyries before in
my life!" Radical WCC woman socialist leader, Ms. Pauline Webb, said: "The Spirit has taken possession
of a large part of this Assembly. Not all of it, I confess, but a sufficient slice of it to have infected a new
generation of ecumenical enthusiasts for whom life after this Assembly will never be quite the same."
Msgr. Basil Meeking, of the Vatican's Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, called Vancouver "the
praying Assembly." The candy-striped tent where most of the WCC "Worship Services" were held was
called by Dr. David Gill, "The canvas Cathedral which became the abiding symbol of the Sixth Assembly."
BUT MUCH OF THE WORSHIP AT VANCOUVER WAS HEATHEN WORSHIP AND MOST OF IT
WAS NOT WORSHIP AT ALL IN THE SCRIPTURAL SENSE. CALLING "CARNALITY",
"SPIRITUALITY" does not change its real content.

Closing Words of Exhortation and Warning

FUNDAMENTALIST AND EVANGELICAL LEADERS NEED TO HEAR AND HEED THE
WORD OF GOD WHICH COMMANDS-"CRY ALOUD, SPARE NOT, LIFT UP THY VOICE LIKE A
TRUMPET!" Isaiah 58:1 - The silence of those who know the truth but refuse to warn others, sadly fits the
description given in Isaiah 56: l0 - "His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs,
they cannot bark: sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber."
THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES IS OFFERING THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD
THE CUP OF DEVILS - NOT THE CUP OF THE LORD. The WCC is promoting theological heresy in
the name of "spirituality." It is promoting socio-political radicalism in the name of the Kingdom of God. It
is promoting a world-wide socialist-communist revolution in the name of evangelism and mission!
THERE IS AN IMPERATIVE NEED FOR EVERY TRUE BELIEVER TO HEAR GOD'S
WARNING AND HEED GOD'S COMMAND:
"COME OUT OF HER, MY PEOPLE, THAT YE BE NOT PARTAKERS OF HER SINS, AND
THAT YE RECEIVE NOT OF HER PLAGUES." Revelation 18:4.
JUDGMENT IS FAST APPROACHING. OBEY GOD NOW!
Whether you know it or not, and whether you like it or not – YOU are part of the WCC if you belong to
any of the following member denominations!

WCC Member Churches in North America

The United States:
African Methodist Episcopal Church, African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, American Baptist
Churches in the USA, American Lutheran Church, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), Christian
Methodist Episcopal Church, Church of the Brethren, Episcopal Church, Hungarian Reformed
Church in America, International Council of Community Churches, International Evangelic~
Church, Lutheran Church in America, Moravian Church in America (Northern Province),
Moravian Church in America (Southern Province), National Baptist Convention of America,
National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc., Orthodox Church in America, Polish National Catholic

Page 173 of 176

Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), Progressive National Baptist Convention Inc., Reformed
Church in America, Religious Society of Friends: Friends General Conference and Friends United
Meeting, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church.

Canada:
Anglican Church of Canada, Canadian Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Christian
Church (Disciples of
Christ), Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, Evangelical Lutheran Church of Latvia in Exile,
Presbyterian Church in
Canada, United Church of Canada.

WCC Member Churches in Asia

Christian Conference of Asia (Singapore).
Bangladesh:
Bangladesh Baptist Sangha, Church of Bangladesh.
Burma:
Burma Baptist Convention, Church of the Province of Burma.
Hong Kong:
Church of Christ in China (the Hong Kong Council).
India:
Bengal-Orissa-Bihar Baptist Convention, Church of North India, Church of South India, United
Evangelical Lutheran Church in
India, Mar Thoma Syrian Church of Malabar, Malarikara Orthodox Syrian Church, Methodist Church in
India, Samavesam of Telugu Baptist Churches.
Indonesia:
Karo Batak Protestant Church, Batak Protestant Christian Church, Christian Protestant Church in
Indonesia, Evangelical Christian Church in Halmah era, The Indonesian Christian Church, Indonesian
Christian Church, Protestant Church in Indonesia, Evangelical Christian Church in West Irian, East Java
Christian Church, Javanese Christian Churches, Kalimantan Evangelical Church, Protestant Church in the
Moluccas, Christian Evangelical Church in Minahasa, Nias Protestant Christian Church, Pasundan
Christian Church, Evangelical Church of Sangir-Talaud, Simalungun Protestant Christian Church, Christian
Church in Central Sulawesi, Protestant Evangelical Church in Timor, Toraja Church, Protestant Christian
Church in Bali, Batak Christian Community Church.
Japan:
Japanese Orthodox Church, Korean Christian Church in Japan, United Church of Christ in Japan, Anglican
Church in Japan~
Korea:
Korean Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church in the Republic of Korea, Presbyterian Church of Korea.

Page 174 of 176

Malaysia:
Methodist Church in Malaysia, Protestant Church in Sabah.
Pakistan:
Church of Pakistan, United Presbyterian Church of Pakistan.
Philippines:
Philippine Independent Church, United Church of Christ in the Philippines, Evangelical Methodist Church
in the Philippines.
Singapore:
Methodist Church in Singapore.
Sri Lanka:
Church of Sri Lanka, Methodist Church in Sri Lanka.
Taiwan:
Presbyterian Church in Taiwan.
Thailand:
Church of Christ in Thailand

Attention Christians Throughout Asia!

You will be glad to know that a major effort to supply true believers with factual information about
the World Council of Churches and other ecumenical agencies and programs currently being promoted in
Asiatic nations has been launched by David Cloud, editor of the magazine O Timothy! This publication and
other important information concerning the apostate and compromising tendencies of our day are now
available to those who sincerely desire to know and obey the truth!
True believers have always recognized and identified Buddhism as a false religion whose followers
desperately need to hear and believe the one true gospel of salvation by grace through faith in our Lord
Jesus Christ With its idolatrous worship of many gods; its pagan rites, rituals and practices: and its rejection
of Jesus Christ as THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE, it continues to blind the hearts and bind the
souls of millions throughout Asia where Buddhism is a predominant religion.
In recent years, however, liberals in the ecumenical movement view Buddhists as "fellow pilgrims in
the search for truth" rather than those who need deliverance from the bondage of Satan and sin WCC
leaders increasingly speak of Buddhism as a "source of light and truth" instead of recognizing it as Satanic
deception.
In 1973, Dr. Emilio Castro, now serving as WCC General Secretary, was chairman of the WCC
C6mmission for World Mission and Evangelism and in this capacity presided over the Eighth WCC
Conference on World Mission held in Bangkok, Thailand, a predominantly Buddhist nation. Although the
theme of this Conference was SALVATION TODAY, it became obvious from the start that the emphasis
was not on biblical salvation but the new liberal, ecumenical concepts of salvation. In fact, perhaps for the
first time in the history of the church, a "Christian" conference was opened by a message from the head of a
non-Christian religion, Princess Poon Pismai Diskul, president of the World Fellowship of Buddhists. This
message closed with these words: "May I invoke the Grace of whatever is sacred and divine in the
universe: ..the Triple Gem, the Holy Trinity, or others, to give us their blessings for our success in the task
we are undertaking for other people...and happiness and peace and security, and most important of all,
SALVATION."
"WE ARE AT THE END OF A MISSIONARY ERA AND AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE

Page 175 of 176

WORLD MISSION." These were the words of Dr. Emilio Castro at the end of this "missionary?"
conference.

WHAT A SHAM! WHAT A SHAME!

Pure From the Blood of All Men!
Centuries ago, the Apostle Paul sounded forth a faithful warning to fellow-believers in his day
concerning the "grievous wolves" (fa1se teachers) who would enter into the flock If we are to be "pure
from the blood of all men" in our day, we must speak the truth in love even at the risk of being
misunderstood.
"Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I have not
shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the
flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God which he hath
purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in
among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to
draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased
not to warn every one night and day with tears. And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word
of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are
sanctified." Acts 20:26-32.
GOD'S WORD MUST BE OBEYED TO ENJOY GOD'S BLESSING. To remain silent about the
"wolves in sheep's clothing" is disobedience and receives God's rebuke. Isaiah 56:10,11. To remain in
fellowship with false teachers is disobedience which can produce disastrous results. 1 Corinthians 15:33.
THE BIBLE SAYS, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye
WITHDRAW YOURSELVES FROM EVERY BROTHER THAT WALKETH DISORDERLY, and not
after the tradition which he received of us. ...And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, NOTE
THAT MAN AND HAVE NO COMPANY WITH HIM that he may be ashamed." 2 Thessalonians 3:3,14.
WHAT EXCUSE COULD TRUE BELIEVERS POSSIBLY GIVE TO THE LORD FOR REFUSING
TO OBEY HIS COMMAND TO SEPARATE FROM FALSE TEACHERS AND DISOBEDIENT
BRETHREN?

Page 176 of 176