The Move is dead (almost)

In my last post I pondered what makes a Christian church part of the true Church. And in a previous post I have referred to the Move with which our church has been loosely connected. There are a number of preachers who get invited to visit Move groups and one of these "travelling ministry" has recently spoken in our church here. Chatting with him, it appears that Move groups the world over are in a state of flux: that it is not just in our own group that foundations we thought had been laid good and solid are now being questioned and often torn down. And so I suppose that the end-time Move of God (to give it a fuller title) is near its end.

Am I bothered? In one sense no, and neither am I surprised, because the true Church is built on a better foundation. But I grieve for its effect on folk who have grown up under its teachings and have invested all their life, energies and funds in an edifice which is now crumbling. Personally, I do have unanswered questions but I have few regrets: I think the experience has left me stronger, wiser.

Here's one of the early Move songs. Ironically the founder of the movement was killed in a plane crash.

People of God, it is time to arise

And proclaim to creation we're not going to die.

Let it ring from the valleys and the mountains so high,

God's people proclaiming we're not going to die;

All heaven's rejoicing, now hear them all sing,

Grave, where's thy victory? O death, where's thy sting?

The saints down the centuries have all come to pass,

Each one fulfilling his God-given task;

To His sons God has spoken, and witness His cry,

And proclaim to creation we're not going to die.

The prophets of the Lord had a line that they laid,

Though they were steadfast they all died in faith,

But they spoke of a people that would one day arise,

And proclaim to creation we're not going to die.

So take courage now, brethren, and close in your ranks,

Stand on the promises, giving God thanks;

For Satan will fight us, or surely he'll try,

But he can't beat a people that aren't going to die.

The Book of Mormon

Whilst at my son's I picked up a copy of the Book of Mormon. It is a substantial tome and has perhaps 15 million adherents so it should not be dismissed without argument. I grant that Mormons generally have high moral standards but some of their beliefs are whacky to say the least. And they claim to be the one true church which is somewhat of a challenge to mainstream Christianity. As their president Joseph Fielding Smith declared: "Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen". He goes on, of course, to rule out the latter with arguments like "No impostor could have accomplished so great and wonderful a work".

I've heard a similar argument applied to Jesus although in His case I say with more justification.

I'm neither a theologian nor do I claim in-depth knowledge of the Mormon beliefs, but I can make a judgement based on the little I do know, well summarised in this link which seems to me to be a fair criticism. In addition I have bitter experience of being deceived.

I tell my grandchildren stories about Sally-Anne and her adventures with Smokey the dragon. I make them up as I go along. One of my grandchildren has a particularly vivid imagination and will play and talk make-belief for hours at a time. I note that children can handle the conflict of reality versus fiction from an early age. Our ability to imagine is truly amazing. We use it equally to create artefacts like the cell-phone and fantastic worlds like in The Lord of the Rings complete with its fictional history and languages.

Soon after we got married we met a Christian leader whom we recognised back then as having a level of "spiritual" maturity far above our own and who in consequence we then followed like disciples. I use quotes because the term is ill defined. Due, I suppose, to inertia we continued to follow him even after we began to see serious flaws in his character. You will probably know of other strong and charismatic church leaders with strong followings. One we know by repute was Sam Fife on whose teaching the Move of God was conceived. In common in these cases is the ability to "talk the hind leg off a donkey" - they preach for hours at a time with their followers lapping it up, with most of what they say being challenging and credible, but inevitably mixed with error. The listeners ought, of course, to sift all of what they hear, but we thought - how could such a mature Christian leader be in error?  But then how can respected Christian leaders at the same time also secretly be active peadophiles, alcoholics, smokers, adulterers?  The fact that humans are fallible ought not to surprise us, given our own record, but somehow the position we adorn leaders with blinkers our discernment. Similarly I often hear folk using language like "the Lord told me to..." or "I felt led to...", or even claiming to see visions, and I wonder to what extent is this really the voice of Almighty God as opposed to just a fertile imagination coloured by what they think to be true?

Joseph Smith translates while Oliver Cowdery acts as scribe.

And so I do not find it incredulous that the Book of Mormon and the other two major documents he authored came out of Joseph Smith's imagination. Perhaps he was very sincere and with good intentions, but nevertheless deceived. Perhaps he really believed he was the voice of God for the hour. It seems that folk were even more superstitious back then than now-a-days.

The three, and then eight, witnesses of the origin of the Book of Mormon, whose statements are printed in the preface to every edition, were later excommunicated and appear to have been gullible. I too have known folk adopt another's belief against their better judgement, when under strong peer pressure. And the golden plates themselves were returned to the angel Moroni so we have no other means to justify the story apart from the fact of the staggering number of adherents world-wide.

Perhaps the dividing line between reality and fantasy is rather thin in places. After all we are told that God spoke and the world came into existence: perhaps what we call reality is no more (or less) than thoughts in the mind of God.  Which would kind of explain the idea that God is outside of time.

One man ministry

This post was prompted by reading about another doomsday cult exposed. Not all cults or radical Christian groups are that extreme but perhaps they share a theme.

I've commented previously about the huge number of "Christian" denominations. A common pattern is that a naturally charismatic person gets a radical idea which he or she reckons is a divine "revelation", and attracts a number of followers who are already disillusioned with their own faith or lack of it and are looking for meaning in life. Feeling they have been helped by this one person's ministry, after a while they become so blinkered that they fail to take appropriate action when they detect error. At the early stage the group claims that they have revelation beyond any other group. If they are to remain loyal, members are told they must take radical steps like setting up a wilderness community. The group adamantly denies being elitist or being "another denomination" and decries the idea of a "one man ministry" but time proves otherwise. Eventually the main leader is recognised for what he or she is, or is superseded or dies and thereafter the movement's teaching dissipates or gradually declines and resolves into "mainstream Christianity" but we are left with yet another denomination.

Here are some examples:

Methodist (John Wesley),
The Peculiar People (James Banyard),
Quakers (George Fox),
Shakers (Ann Lee),
The Move (Sam Fife),
Mormons (Joseph Smith),
Plymouth Brethren (John Darby).

You might disagree with some of my examples or you might think of others but my point is the common theme.  And we know this theme, because we have been there, done that - under a particular "ministry" but, mercifully, we escaped relatively unharmed. But we hear rumours of those who were physically abused or were forced into debt not of their own making. I do not think in our case that the leading ministry was intentionally manipulative: it was just the way he was, and we weaklings followed as the lamb to the slaughter. One lesson to be learned is to take off the blinkers.

What movement are we a part of, exactly?

In our preachings some of us still talk about being a part of The Move but I wonder to what extent this can be true. It seems to me that either we are not, or else The Move has moved as far as its doctrine is concerned. In discussing such things I have heard several people, like (somewhat dismissively) "oh, but we don't believe in that any more".

Not that the group of which I am a member has ever been hard-core Move, and of the group I suppose I am the least inclined to go along with all aspects of its teaching. Like being able to live without sin (if you can do it for a minute, surely you can for an hour, etc.) or a people that would not physically die. My mother taught me from an early age to be slow to form an opinion and not to take everything I heard as gospel. I only wish I could follow her advice more than I do.

Case in point that arose today - in Sam Fife's teaching Mystery of a man and a maid, he likens the physical union of man and woman to Christ and the church (as does the apostle Paul) but also to the "husband ministry" (elder, pastor, etc.) and the "bride" congregation, and here I quote (my emphasis):

Then going on, line upon line, and precept upon precept, until the time of the entering into the spiritual marriage chamber, and the time of entering into the spiritual marriage bed, until the time of the entering into the Holy, God ordained, sanctified, spiritual marriage bed union. Where the husband ministry and the bride congregation’s loving, unreserved, unsuspicious submission to her husband ministry, yielding up of her whole being to her husband ministry as he overshadows her, in that spiritual marriage bed union. By which the bride’s loving submission to her husband literally draws out of his spiritual loins, that seed of life, those final revelations which will enable us to overcome death itself, and corruptible shall put on incorruptible and mortality shall put on immortality and she will be changed and a manchild shall be born.

Of "unsuspicious submission" I've been there, done that, and it wasn't good. Later I got suspicious (or was it jealousy?) when I saw his car and the holidays he took. But that was many years ago and my teeth are longer now.

Some of us were talking about such things tonight and I read the above quote from Sam Fife: the immediate response was that Sam was wrong and that we don't believe that any more. But folk still speak highly of his ministry. So what exactly do we believe that sets us apart from other Christian groups? And set apart some certainly think we are, although I am not so sure.

Having mentioned it perhaps I should try to explain the manchild bit. This is based on Revelation 12 a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet... And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron...  Here's Sam again:

Coming together in meetings again, and again, and again, receiving the seed of life which shall birth his manchild, and receiving those revelations which shall catch them up to the throne, and grow him up to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, then in a few years the door will open again, three, four, five who knows, and they will come out again. But two went in, but three will not come out, for there in the marriage chamber the two will have become one in a manchild that has been born of their union, one who is as it were, as the company of two armies, who shall go forth in a mighty move of the spirit of God that the whole creation has been groaning and travailing for until now. The manifestation of the sons of God that shall deliver the earth from the bondage of corruption [this was spoken about 40 years ago and no signs of the earth being delivered yet].

I'm all for delivering anyone from bondage, but not so sure about meetings again, again and again (in our group meetings are venerated, the longer the "word" the better, apparently, so if it were to be done that way we would surely qualify). I don't decry the results, but the mechanism...?  All I can say is that if I am going to be of any use in the Kingdom of God, it will only be by some mighty intervention by God. But I'm in good company in this respect for didn't Jesus say that he did nothing apart from his Father?

On the fringe - or - never able to arrive at the truth

It is a universal truth - though largely ignored by some die-hard archaeologists - that there is no known culture in the world without religious beliefs (Terence Meaden, Archaeologist, Oxon). An interesting observation - some would say it is because there is a "God shaped hole" in everyone.

I have a rich Christian heritage but more to the point where am I now? Like in "But whom do you say that I am?".

I remember cringing when someone we used to visit would ask me "and what has God being doing in your life?" - because I could never think that there was anything in particular.

My earliest church memories were of Alresford Congregational church. Later we went by train to Winchester Baptist Church where I, tacet, would sometimes sit beside my father on the polished organ bench. His own folk were at various times nonconformist evangelical, Baptist and Peculiar and his father was at one time a reverend.

Winchester Baptist Church

Speaking of which, the ‘The Peculiar People’ were initially quite a fiery bunch but, doubtless after a generation, their zeal diminished. They later changed their name to the ‘Union of Evangelical Churches’ and their web site now says "divine healing does not now have such prominence..." If folk really were healed once, this seems a strange statement to make. Like, we don't want any of this getting better stuff.

My parents then joined NFC from whence stem most of my childhood church memories. Here I went to Sunday School and later the Adventurer's Club, was baptised, and first spoke (briefly and timidly) in public. Open Brethren based, I am thankful for the good knowledge of the Bible that NFC instilled in me, but I must have been suitably indoctrinated because, when I left home for college, I naively considered all other churches inferior and probably heretical and was surprised when I discovered committed Christians from other persuasions. In my final year I agreed to become the OICCU "Rep" for my college and, under considerable duress, was obliged to sign a statement of doctrine. It wasn't that I had a problem with anything there but I disagreed strongly (and still do) with the need to sign.

Whilst in Oxford I tried various church flavours including the James Street brethren assembly (now re-branded "evangelical") - the folk there were very friendly but I didn't fit in. Plain contrary to my upbringing I ended up most at home in the reasonably high Anglican college chapel - because the chaplain cared about my well being, because it was local and because I found I could worship God there. Despite the occasional smells and bells.

On finding my feet in my first job I started to attend CBC where I met and married Ali, and when we both wanted to be involved in young people's work we first had to become church members which implied signing up to their doctrine, which I once again did under much duress.

Both Ali and I wanted more than CBC appeared to offer and thus we met together with like-minded folk of similar age. One year the group had a holiday-cum-conference hosted by a Christian community in Eastleigh and this was our first introduction to communal living and The Move.

You can Google The Move and its founding leader Sam Fife and you'll find a lot of nonsense as well as some truth. And sure there was some nonsense, doubtless because of People. We had our share of this nonsense but thankfully nothing serious - because we were on the fringe.  The Wikipedia link is rather dated and things have changed, mellowed - a bit like the Peculiar People I wonder?

That Sam Fife (who I never met) was a "one man ministry", or at least the dominant leader, did raise warning bells in me but, hang it all, wasn't Jesus also a "one man ministry"? The thing is, some of what Fife preached his followers now don't go along with - at least they no longer emphasise - like "people of God we are not going to die" and the "wilderness message". If those radical areas that so intrigued his followers are now mellowed, do we revert to being plain evangelicals?

Probably not - Ali's parents were, for a time, Exclusive Brethren. When they left, not being able to stomach some of the more radical and intrusive teachings, her father could never feel at home in any other church flavour, none of which had the same sense of family and depth of conservative doctrine, so ended up without christian fellowship for the rest of his life.  I think I might have done similarly.

Seen in Texas 3 days ago

A recent guest on the Ryan Tubridy Show on RTE-radio-1 told how, when he was about six, he saw an angel standing beside his bed.  He hadn't told anyone else for years but much later his younger brother (who had shared the bedroom and would have been less than two at the time) asked him if he remembered the angel. So did that really happen?

I once saw an angel. I was a child sitting up in my bed at home. The angel was standing on top of a chimney stack on a building opposite my bedroom window: much taller than a human, with wings and shining white. Certainly not a cloud formation! But it might have been a dream - I cannot remember clearly: did that really happen?

My Aunt Mary claimed she had seen angels. She claimed all manner of things, mind you, but it would be wrong to discredit her experiences just for that reason.

If we cannot confirm whether recent extraordinary things like these really happened, what chance have we of confirming stories about a man who lived 2,000 years ago?  Most historians concede that the man Jesus existed - but they get woolly about the miracles. Did they really happen?  On the other hand why would anyone writing a Gospel account chose to blatantly lie?

Along with many others, I have a burden for a child with leukaemia and have earnestly prayed for his complete healing. His father is a Methodist minister and he also is praying for total healing: I would interpret this as "faith". But whilst there has been good medical progress, currently there has been a relapse. I am at least encouraged when I read "See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven". It's not the end of the story, of course, but I had hoped... But maybe I am missing something, maybe his being healed now would spoil some vast eternal plan?

We humans are rum creatures. We think we know so much and yet we know so little. Our understanding of science, when descriptive and thus concerning things we can measure now, is all very well. But when it becomes inferential, concerning things long ago or yet to come or far, far away or far too small, who knows whether we have it right? I sometimes wonder whether, if you look hard enough with a preconceived dogma, nature will oblige. Thus the double slit experiment which could be thought to answer to two apparently contradictory theories.

There's people who genuinely think the earth is flat. Or this guy who goes along with the electric sun hypothesis and writes:

Yet, here is an incredible thing. Even though the theories of Newton, Einstein, and Twentieth Century astronomy are blown to pieces on almost a daily basis by what is actually out there, yet modern man has refused absolutely to let go of those dis-proven ideas... And so to explain how "gravity" can do all these wondrous things, the mathematicians have pulled out of their hats such unprovable bits of nonsense as "dark matter," and "black holes," and "string theory," and "nuclear fusion," and so on. None of these fantastical ideas ever find their way into a practical laboratory because all engineers know they are complete fabrications. Governments have spent untold billions of dollars to duplicate "nuclear fusion" on earth to complete and continuing failure. Why? Because there is no such thing. That's why it takes government money to build the huge "super colliders." No private business would waste a penny on such nonsense. So, let's look at astronomy as it really is. The universe is electrical. The sun is a large solid ball of rock that sustains a vast and continual electrical arc lamp discharge above its surface exactly like the electrical arc used by welders. That electrical arc is fed by huge currents of electricity that flow down the arms of the Milky Way to its center.

His position is gently ameliorated here but, honestly, with things we can, at best, hardly detect, who can say whether our theories are correct?

In our early community years we were already convinced about home schooling our kids. We listened to a CLA teaching about legal cases where the US child protection authorities took kids from their parents and, on their advice, we decided to eschew child benefit to cut one possible hold the government might have on our kids. Years later I think of all that cash we didn't get and see all the young parents here taking child benefit without a thought. And yet I read the other day Norway's hidden scandal - so were we so stupid? I certainly have no regrets about home schooling. Our four children have not grown up with carbon copies of their parents strange beliefs as some think home schooled kids will, but each are now making their own choice as to how they should live and what they should belief, as is right and proper. And I am proud of them.

I like to think that I am searching for truth (though probably not nearly hard enough as in strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able).  But I am allergic to religious or hypocritical sort of "truth". Like in the parable of the leaven in all three measures of flour: I suppose the Kingdom of God must attract error.

In searching for truth I find myself coming back, again and again, to the gospel accounts of the life of Jesus. I try to read them without the preconceptions I grew up with, and I find a very human man with emotions and a sense of humour, who enjoys a good meal, who gets tired and thirsty after a long journey. Here I might add (though the accounts leave it out) that doubtless his body sweated and needed washing, that he had to go to the loo, cut his finger nails, and all the basic stuff we experience but don't generally advertise. But in this human frame he did only what he understood his Heavenly Father wanted, and thus he wrought amazing miracles, and he was crucified and died "to make us good".  And I get goose-bumps when I sing:

...Risen with healing in his wings 

Mild he lays his glory by, 

Born that man no more may die: 

Born to raise the son of earth, 

Born to give them second birth...
[Charles Wesley]

and

There is a green hill far away,

Without a city wall,

Where the dear Lord was crucified,

Who died to save us all

We may not know, we cannot tell,

What pains He had to bear;

But we believe it was for us

He hung and suffered there.

He died that we might be forgiven,

He died to make us good,

That we might go at last to heaven,

Saved by His precious blood.

There was no other good enough

To pay the price of sin;

He only could unlock the gate

Of heaven and let us in.

O dearly, dearly has He loved,

And we must love Him, too,

And trust in His redeeming blood,

And try His works to do.
[Cecil Frances Alexander]

Interestingly Cecil Frances Alexander, née Humphreys, second daughter of the late Major John Humphreys, Miltown House, co. Tyrone, Ireland, b. 1823, also author of All things bright and beautiful... The purple-headed mountain, the river running by might well have lived at or at least been associated with Humpreystown House, in which case those purple headed mountains are the ones we see across the lake at this time of the year, and the river might be the Liffey or Kings River.