5.

Charismatic Ecclesiology

69

they had already adjusted some oftheir teachings." Notwithstanding these

factors, by 1975 there were several developing distinctives clearly shaping Ihe movement's ethos, and these distinctives would remain over the years. 5 The Kingdom of God The movement's ecclesiology was founded upon its view ofthe kingdom \)r God. 6 Though shepherding and covenant were the most visible distinclives, the kingdom of God was its central motif.' The five teachers shared I 'conviction that the Lord is doing something new-not new biblically, hill a new emphasis in restoration of the concepts of the Kingdom of God, wh ieh will result in the maturity of the believer'. 8 They believed this new emphasis on the kingdom of God was to take the Charismatic Renewal beyond the emphasis on Spirit baptism and spiritual gifts to a more funrlnmcntal dimension in which God established 'His love and authority in /11\.\ individual believer, and then through that believer to the nations of the world (Matt. 28.19)'.9 III their view, the kingdom of God spoke of the reign and rule of God. I'hey believed that the message of the kingdom of God was the primary Iheme of the Bible and ofJ esus' ministry. J'his message of God's rule neetrily raised the issue of authority. The-message of the kingdom was h01l1 God's 'authority coming into a time, space, world and bringing man 111111 willing obedience to the order of God'. 10 Baxter, speaking for the n
I I Lg., carlyon I h 111'15, hi Ie sti II w -1I1t'11one shepherd I lilliI'll', 14-18. 1,'01' picture H
"illl/lllltlille

Chapter 5
CHARISMA TIC ECCLESIOLOGY

Distinctives The controovesy of 1975 and 1976 was centered on the Shepherding movement's dis atnctive teachings, particularly on discipleship and Shepherding.' To heselpreaders understand the controversy, this chapter provides a descriptive;Jesummaryof what the movement was teaching at that time. 2 It is importarmtto recognize that the distinctive doctrines were never static and develooped and adjusted over the years. The description in this chapter is a picturese ofwhat they taught, drawn from materials in 1974 through 1976 as thee emerging movement was still trying to both understand and define itsel:lf. Itmust also be remembered that the movement's ecclesiolog was being Cdrivenby what the leaders thought was a God-directed response to the times <3 and, onsequently, was not systematic. Its public ecclesiologicnl c teachings \W'Vere sometimes a commentary on its actual developing practice with churcrrh structures.At other times, it seems its ecc1esiological practice resulted fro omconcepts the teachers taught. Further, the five teachers won' not always unitedin the way they taught or practiced discipleship, shop herding, aneiduanslocal relationships." Over the years from 1971 to 197,1,

\\ 'f

t \.1
,1".1

l"

~.,.

they all seem to have emphasized a plurality of elders/shepherds. teaching plurality, they emphasized the principle of headship in in a local congregation has final authority. Prince, 'The Local of its more developed theology and ecclesiology, see Mumford,

lilI' 111/11).11111Present Issues, 1-24; Simpson, Christian Life Seminar; Simpson, The Cove-

1. Chapt-aer ? discusses other factors that complicated the controversy. 2. The mraovement's teachings are complex and are a worthy topic for future NllId.~ The five leadllers developed a complicated, dynamic, and nuanced thcologtcnl 111111 ecclesiologicafal stance uncharacteristic of the theologically shallow stereotype 0111'11 ascribed to Perenccostals and Charismatics. These descriptions arc ns uccurutc UN Il'Oldd make, given tHhcnced for brevity since I am not attempting to make IIny dcrulled 1111'11 logical analysi:is.ln addition, I chose to define tho movement 's dist illctivllM hofill U Ihl' \ became more l1lodl)l'IIteclover t imc,

Bashm 1I11111HI Prince were I\lSHtiireeliv\l and SII'lIcllll'\ld In Ih\lI!'IIPPI'Olll'h 10 PII IllI'lIl CI1I'O with IlIlXIi.lI'lind Mum fill'd NOl11ewi1\lI'\llnhctweeu tho !lUll U dilul'llw IIlid MIIIII III1'lldNlylo ol'~IIIIPNIIII. ,/Olill / !\wlnlll, 1~11\IPholl\l11l11l1 wilit nutluu, I" Mill I'll 1111111 vlow JIIII ( '1111\, lul\\I~plllIlI\\ IlIllII vl,'w wlth /111111111, \ ,1111111111 Y 111%

Kingdom. ('llIIrl\ls Simpson, 'What Is the Gospel?' New Wine (June 1974),4-7. This was ilit III_lorn HOl'iosorarti~ on the kingdom of God and the church by Simpson. They 1\ jlllhllNhcd lntcrns fI book. Charles Simpson, A New Way to Live (Greensburg, P A: /111I1111 ( 'hrlatiun Outreach, 1975). I'ltolllOV\llllUnl was influenced by E. Stanley Jones's The Unshakeable Kingdom 'h,' 111II'11I1II~1/1I~ Ij('/',I'{)II (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1972), often recommended II IUIII', 111111 Mnmlurd, 1,I/i'(,11(/I1).1("~I' NI'Ii'S/('II('/' (l loly Spirit Research Center, Oral Ii. III \ JlllVIIIHlly, 'I'IIIMII, OK, Nuvcmhor I <)7~). I.X (2). fo,ltlllllill d, /,11,'( 'II,IIIUI"'.\' M')\w/,,//,,,, 1' III 1111 '"Pllill, 'l'IIIIl~I'tlpl III 'Thy 1,llIl4tilllll 1'111111111I1HNlllu' VI" I!!! III lit IIt'/I
/I

IJ

II

, .~'/I, I
111l\'lIll\pll~'lIll'(IIII\d hllNh Itl/'II

'/1

movement, i'mld: '( IIHllills 1IIWIIYII I 11,11",11111\1 I\,IHII:!I11,11 III iil'" il WIIH III,IVI'I II 111111.\ when (jod WIIH1101 III 1111111 IIIIIIIl\" .. 1111I11,.lit\.I Kllllt Ill' Ihe co 1I10S,'II .Jeslis' earthly ministry expressed (lud'M Iii 1'111, IIlH11110hil human sitllulioll ( 10 restore 0 new dimension of'God' rule Ihll( hilI! hllllllloNI by Adam' fit II Af'lul' defeating Satan through his dOulh lIild I'UHIII'I'l.ll.ltlon, Christ ascended 'and was seated at his father's right hand und given lull authority over oil creation (Mt. 28,18), At.Christ's ascension and enthronement, he gave gi Its to humanity, that is, the fivefold office ministries of apostle, prophet, cvnn gelist, shepherd, and teacher, as delegated authorities for his kingdom rul (Eph. 4,9-12), Drawing from Psalm 110, the movement taught that Christ WI'IS to romu iII seated in heaven until his enemies in the earth were subdued by the activit of the' redeemed community. , .whereby he would establish God's sovcrei gn right to reign in his own redeemed earth', 12The church, therefore, was tll~\ key to the establishment of God's kingdom, In a 1975 message, reflecti lit an eschatological hope, Baxter declared:
This visitation of the Holt pirit is not just to give usgoose bwnps ~ld ~ach us to play tambourines and sing new choruses, That's all part of the package, but there is something much more important than all of that. It is God's almighty purpose being revealed, that at the end of this age He is going to manifest His glory in the ~ed community', and this outpouring of the Holy Spirit is not only an outpouring of blessing, but is also al) outp~ of authorit,x ~nd He is establishing spiri_lli~h9ritY...in the ;;th that He may in this hour bring into existence-his Ki'ilgdom in power arid answer the prayers of multiplied thousands through the centuries who have interceded by saying, 'Thy Kingdom come,' 13

1I11i11.l1,i\I'(INhll~

(\f'(

1111 1\1\1) __ 111 hI! I Ill' P"Il'!I(.:\l1 O\llw(Jl'king III Y '11I1Mllllllil lilt Iii \'\'1 Iy IUllillVlil" 1

0vJ. t~(L"AAI""

t,~

a'.:

I IIII delegntcd (\u(hOl'itiUH III IIIlI l'IIIII'l'h SUI'VUto mediate God's rule flllllllHlltheil' exercise of' spid(III\IIIII(I\()I'ily, By subn\ittingto delegated IIIIIHIIi(y, believers were submitting to Christ. 'It becomes plain that this 111111 drove their developing ccclesiology. They were convinced that ,'pl 111111111 concepts of divine authority, discipleship, and Shepherding, lie (he 1\11eventuul health and well-being of the body of Christ' ,ISSince the church III IIH.' center and vehicle of God's kingdom expression in the earth, 111111111111 be of greater importance than its restoration to the biblical could

,q

hlt'"!.
I 11\1errn J<ingdom of God was frequently replaced by' what was beli~d I 11\h\1 \I s-ynonymous term, the' overnment of Go " God was the ulti111,1\1' ruler 0 a creation, and he was establis 1IIIIIIIIdlthe church,
.t ,.

Ecclesiology 111111\1 Shepherding movement's developing ecclesiology, the local church I,. 1111.l Ie of God, and not buildings or institutions, In the historical poop 11 lid Iliol1 ol'the Belie~.t:s' Church, t~ Shepherding movement empha~ized !Ill I IIIrrcl: us 'the covenanted and disciplined communi of those walking ill 11m wtlLQf .Jesus Christ.. ,t e believing people' ,16 They acknowledged liB ItlvlHib(e, universal Church, but stressed the visible and local nature of jllI I 1IIII'chus its essential character." As with critics of the Free Church fli !I Inn, the Shepherding movement was accused of being opposed to the '1mll' und institutional churches, This is part of the movement's paral 1'1dlili story. Basham, Baxter, Mumford, Prince, and Simpson worked hard 111I1I11l(nining their commitment to the revitalization of the historic, institulit II url ch IIrchcs. Before, during, and after the heated controversy, they were IIlltllll spellkcrs in denominational Charismatic conferences, 18 The controj'IljV nnd thcir emphasis on developing their own churches did slow their

~T~
[Atc---h

~~

"I

Ikt~
bc.>~~

The expression of God's rule through the church made the movemen t' H leaders address practical issues of spiritual authority, Mumford wrote:
The message of God's Rule and the impact of the whole New Testament speaks to us about God's reign over His Church through those whom He delegates (see Ephesians 4,11-13) to implement that authority, When we speak of authority, we mean simply God's order, not authoritarianism. Submission, authority, and discipleship, as I understand and teach them, are the

National Men's Shepherds Conference, 1975, Holy Spiril Research Center, Oral Roh erts University, Tulsa, OK, 2, I L Ern Baxter, 'Thy Kingdom Come', 12. Baxter, 'Thy Kingdom Come'. 1\ 13. Baxter, 'Thy Kingdom ('(IIIH", I

II I~ I(,

1'1

Mumford, Lile1i:hangers Newsletter, 3, '10'011111\; God's Government', New Wine (June 1974),30, 1)011111(\ Dumbaugh, The Believers' Church (New York: Macmillan, 1964),33, !I\lll Mumford, 'The Vision 0(' the Local Church', New Wine (July/August
PIIHIIIIIIl PIiPIlI"

), II H, I H 11\111 umford, 'DiHl.:lplli M

""Idlll',

(unpublished

paper, 1976), private

II,

II/I

I"

"'I'IIi/mll'

. Discipleship and Shepherding hcse convictions necessitated practical spiritual authority to provide leadership to believers. Convinced that God was working to take the renewal beyond its focus on ~iritual blessings' to corporate maturity, they emI)hasized the restoration of the fivefold ~s of apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, and teachers. The concept of delegated authority undergirded discipleship and shepherding practices. It was through thes ministry offices that God 'would bring into existence a community of men and women ... who would resemble Christ.i .v" Of these five offices, th shepherd was the most vital to the realization of their ideal of an alternat --~'iocie~y. t was the shepherds who were 'in charge ofth~deemed I community ... to develop it to maturity ... and attr~ct!ht: world to an alternat society and counter-culture'.24-

~ \<:,

-.

wns 1Ivery fundamental and vital ongoing relationship which brings maturity 10 the believer in every phase of his life. The Christian life is not simply knowledge to be learned, classes to be attended, etc., but rather a life-style which is primarily imparted and passed on by sharing closely with others who know the Way. This is the relationship that the 'youngest brother' 'I'lmothy had with Paul. We believe the Lord is leading us to 'grow up' or muturc some disciples so that they will be capable of discipling and bringing olher~ to a similar degree of maturity. As the older Christian teaches the younger, he is able to watch over his life, and often to prescribe what is needed for his continued growth and Il?:aturity. These prescriptions may come in the form of 600ks to read, tapes to listen to, teachers to sit under, lint! various other input into one's life. It also involves feedback, oversight :ol1ccrning his life-style, where he goes and what he does. It is my conviction Ihlll discipleship should be an ongoing part of every Christian's experience. l'hc ci rcumstances may vary, but what we want to transmit is not information Ill' pl'occdllres,~ut a way ~e. The life of Christ flowing between two persons is a manifestation of discipleship.f

Th'tmovement's teachers had worked from 1970j9,iscovering"ibibJical foundations to introduce 'the concept of divine authority into our decadent and rebellious society'." Discipleship and shepherding were the essential .omponenrs they felt they had found in the Scriptures.

While initially a distinction was made between discipleship (a more IIll'IlH(J and focused relationship) and shepherding care (a less intense 11111 ng relationship), in practice, the distinction was blurred, with disciIlII'i p!tINhipand shepherding being nearly synonymous. As the movement 11I1111I1'(Jd. there was little reference made to discipleship; the sheep-shepIIl'lt/rclationship was more the focus."
/Il'/illI'l'din

19. Arter 1975 they were no longer welcome at many independent Charisma! ic xinfcrcnccs but continued to speak for Catholics, Lutherans, and other denorninationnl 'hn risll1l1lic con lcrcnccs. Mumford, 'Disciple Position Paper', 5. Mumford, 'Disciple Position Paper', 5. llnxtcr, 'Thy Kingdom Corne', f4. UUXIOI',Thy Kingdom Come", 16. ' IluXIIlI', 'Thy Kingdom Come', 23, M um (hi'll, /,//i'( '/iIll//o{<'I'.I' Nowslctu,

/allII/Ilg more distinguished the movementthan its teaching on shepherding 1:111("IlvCI'Y believer was to have a personal, definite, committed relationship
('IIliries Simpson,'(iter to Chuck Farah, 8 May 1975, 12. Jesus as a pattern for 1111114111111wns often stressed by Simpson. lile 1/, Simpson, 'Making Disciples', 5. 1M MUIl1I\)rd, L!/eChc1l'/W~r.l' Newsletter, 2. .11), 'I'1l1lCUilCCplS oJ'disciploship WOI'C,n tho view of thefive teachers, affirmed by i illl' jlIIH'tlCIlH ol'J)nwsoll '1'1'011111111 NIiViKIII()I'S, ol'thc Robert E. Coleman's The Master ""IIII/,iIJllllfWIl,I'11I (Now Y(lI'k: 1/111111111/-111, 1(64) not only recommended but 1{llvoll, , 'III InlhLlIll()VClIIl11l1'N ~'lllh'" II Idlill III ""l1ll1j.111Iil' 111lk prncticcs. 10 I
'it,

fVt;xG
IftSfz;l
A

-jk

~ wlth II Nh~pllUl'(l.'l'he 11~~dWIIM 'pll.lllni j\ti~jpfid I 1111 ' 111'4 WIISluter 1111 it 1~1mud, This wos the ccrneratone 01111111111\fi!rt"'" II \ hlMlIllogicul prucI ~Ice, As noted before, a person Will!,lollll't11! I liB ell!lI! 1IIIIIIlIIgh h iN01'her I relutionship with a shepherd who wus wIIIIIIH III IllY 111111111\ down for his sheep. Contrary to charges of critics, tho Hlluph\lld HIII\l~PI.llllliol1Hhip ever 1 n ~Hl'l'iedany sotcriological dimension. Tho 11l0W1I1~1l1 IUlldul'N '1'4 never questioned that salvation and entry into the unlvcrsut, invlsiblc church was through anything but faith in Christ, who alone was 'the Door'. They did believe that ~lticipation in local church necessitated a personal commit,ment to a shepherd who served as 'a door', caring for the sheep ~' behalf. Mumford defended this controversial view and explained:
In Spokane, Washington, under the oversight of some twenty pastors, I taught on John 10 concerning the shepherding concept and the requirements of a true shepherd to lay down his life for his sheep. In that teaching I made a statement concerning The Door which is Jesus Christ, and the fact that Jesus is The Door, and that a man, as a shepherd, one whom God has called, becomes a door. That is, he picks up his position as an under-shepherd to the Lord Jesus, ' ... to shepherd the church (that is, tend and feed and guide the church) of the Lord ... ' (Acts 20.28, Amplified), and begins to function in the calling which the Lord has given him. This function in no way affects another man's salvation or redemptive relationship with his Lord. It has nothing to do with a man putting himself between the Lordand the individual believer as a substitute for the Lord in his life. This teaching on John 10 was intended to show that a true shepherd must not be a hireling, but rather that he embrace the standard ofconduct taught and exemplified by the Lord Jesus Christ as The Door and the Chief Shepherd. 30

No1 'obe.dten
SuhnllNNllllIllH.llllIHlill\1WI 1111111I11".111111' IIvl.ll'llind decisions tiS oponty 11111 11M possihle. 'l'hlH UIL'IIIIK11111111111111 1 rll'IIHIIIIIH,Much1Ii1 occupational changes, hlt'ge llnuncinl cx 11I.lIl<lIIIlI"", lrllr\III" l'IIIIII/l.UN, other matters that affect iii lint! liS norsonatty, us well tlM 1111\ Hlllilp 1\1whicl: we fire related, will be open to the group before they [11'0IlIHlII~,ud, .atcgoricauy, let me sny: 'l'he group or the shepherd does not make any ultimate determination us to whether the individual can or cannot make the decision, but they give feedback, guidance, and counsel which is expected 10 be seriously considered before action is taken ... [There] is a need to om brace true Biblical and balanced authority if the Lordship of Christ is to become practical and applicable in this critical hour of world history.33 ~+-((~

SuL~1fil~o .- Je,.il <t

~(\P~C

t'V sWJ.-- -ft~

l'Sc-"J'~

~ft

II

t
~ (I

The movement taught that submission to a shepherd provide.d spiritual 'covering' by being in right relationship to God's dekgated authority in the church. The shepherd assumed responsibility for the well-heing of h is sheep. This responsibility included not just their spiritual well-being, but .~ fulldevelopment emotionally, educationally, financiallY:- vocatiQ)~lIy, and s~~lIyY Submitting to a shepherd necessarily involved a thoughtful recognition of 'those whom God has placed over us and required a deeper level of transparency and openness' than many in the Charismatic Renewal were accustomed to.32 Mumford wrote:
O. Mumford, LijeChangers Newsletter, 3-4; Mumford's italics. 31. IIrn Baxter and Bob Mumford, Elders' Meeting: Part I (Ft Lauderdale: Audio Publ iC1I1 ions Service, 16 November 1975), audiocassette; Mum ford, 'Disciple POHilion

Muny of the movement's early followers were young people who wnntcd and needed the discipline the Shepherding relationship brought wlth its concept of authority and submission. Shepherds were to lead their hecp and ij[.ovide practical guidance in etiquette, personal dress, manage1111.:111, budgeting, and basic home, yard, and automobile care. Moreover, hephcrds were tOasSISt 'people in their ~~;'fdifficultie, fami!y \:,IInp1icati ons, or SImIlar mtncate personal problems. To do so effectively 1~'q\lH~equate degree of bIbhcal authority', Mumford wrote." 'y to under~g how this wor~d was th~QgnitiQn-that-foU-(jw:' 1111'4 voluntarily to make a definite commitment to a shepherd that.iawere eluded an invitatIOn to be discipled and pastored in all areas of life." Thus, l!to Hhepheroliad permission to spea-k-into-lit~ The move1111.l111'S leaders believed this approach prevented t~x..er.cis.e...Qfunwanted plrltual alitIlOTItY, since individuals had asked for it. Functiona~ for a IIlII'SOIl~mrnitted t part of one ofthelr~ch.es..r.equir.e.d this defi1I1111 coallnitme.n.tJQA.~!J~pherd. Consequently, one was either 'in or out', _ itliHod on ~s willingness to bepastored personally. ~~ll!~lJt's 1IIIIdurN raile~hze fully the strong desir~pe.op.le-hCULe..1.cLbe1ongand IJIIlIIntll1yoftheir followers committed to t~~tem without recQgnizing how it WOul~cticalT Many of them be_~e un~.per-ative or dlNllluNi~ by the degree 0 authOrIty exercised. Many of these people II11I10 tell of their negative experiences. Others submitted willingly and / hili loved they were a l,rt of a kind of spiritual vanguard preparing the way III' the Lord.

lo ~()
+: [rh:frp

r0-f d'll&L !

c_.p.
.b.-? 7~
-li!\
'4

Pupal", 5.
12, Mumford, 1.(li'C'hlll/!o/I'I',\' Nt'II'.I'lt'llt'l',
.,

I\, Mumford, 1,!/i'('//(/IIW;'oI' Newsletter, 5. 101, M 11I11 /,/li'('//ll/Igt'l'oI' NI'IIW/('1I1'1', ((lJ'(I, 3. I~, 1)1I111111Mhlilll, 'l.olldIIIMlllp, A IIlhlkllll.ook',

New Wine

(March 1974), 14-17

till 1/)'

'111
'(I VI '1/(/111

,) ,,', 'I '11'.1'/11111;:'1'

Nelllllol/slifl

,\'hl

'l ,It, 'I'd/lip"

('1111I11/ 1111/' '/II

v
\
_I

r'hc Sht,lpht,ll'dlng movement 11l1lHllllllrlllilillh'I\~11i111t1 (111I1 WIIHI.lNlllblishod through God's covenants. 'I'hlll\ihill Il'l 1111 Ii" I hul'lI PII/ljII'IlVi.lllllntal dealings with Abraham, Moses, David, IHl'lIl,I,llIld,lIl11l1ly,llIlIlIlgh work (he Jesus Christ. They taught that God WllS II~'OVl'1I11111 IIIIII,II\f4 (Inticovenantkeeping God, and that he established rcconciltntku: willi lnuuunkind through hrist's death on the cross." Those who recent (Inti 1\11'1\ faith to Christ, in and therefore meet the conditions of God's unilateral declaration of sovereign mercy, are reconciled to God.37Reconciliation brings the believer into relationship, not only with God, but with God's people through participation in the redeemed community. This theology of 'covenant', with its distinct ecc1esiological dimension in the movement's self-concept, became the truly identifying theme. The concept of covenant was very focused on lateral, person-to-perscn relationships. They saw covenant relationship as the solid ground for permanene and stability within a disintegrating culture. A believer's relationship t, God was firmly rooted in God's covenant love, demonstrated by Christ's sacrificial death. Consequently, believers were to commit themselves with the same kind of self-sacrificial love and loyalty to their leaders and fellow believers. Covenant was the 'cohesive substance of kingdom life as given by Jesus Christ'. 38Christ and his relationship with the Twelve, Mumford rote, was an example for today's church:

or

IIICOlosHillns 2, 11/1'11111 H(l\llIkM 1I011l1llyor'joints', but also of 'ligaments'. In the nnturnl body IIWIIIH.lIIIN the bands of tissue, which hold bones 111'0
together at the polnt whcltllhtly uro joined. Thus the strength of any joint is never greater than Ih/ll ul'Ihc ligament which holds it together. In the Body f'Christ, 'joints' are tho interpersonal relationships between believers whom Jod joins together. But what is the 'ligament' needed to keep each joint strong and secure? The answer, I believe, is: covenant commumeni"

It was this foundation of a covenant relationship

between Christ and His disciples which was a foundation poured for a whole new society. It is the nature of covenant and our loyalty to that covenant that gives Christ's work permanency in a fluctuating and impermanent world. Thus I began to understand that the covenant and the covenant relationship is the ark of safety in Ollr degenerate society.39

The relational emphasis of covenant is evident in the movement's use 0 f the term 'joints'. With a restorationist perspective, the leaders believed I God was bringing together the dry bones of Ezekiel 37 in their day.4o Derek Prince developed this perspectiv,e in his book Discipleship,

Prince illustrated the depth of these covenant commitments by comparng them to the marriage covenant. Many in the movement saw covenant relationship as a commitment to lifelong relationship." Practically, covenunt meant 'abandoning the option to quit' in relationships. ~e.anLQne INHumed (unlimited liability' in relationships by helping a brother or sister IIone's own expense ifnecessary.43 The importance of covenant relationItip accentuated their quest for authentic Christian community and fostered II\uiI'attempts to develop practical church structures. So much of what was helicved and practiced flowed out of this relational emphasis, The movemeru re ularly used the biblical metaphors for the church, parti0ilaily_QD~.s IlInlemphaSIze re a lOns IpS. e c urc was the Body of Christ, a spiriIlllti family, an army, and a nation. -------As~ll gr~re the fundamental building blocks of I'IHII'ch structure under the leadership of shepherds and also the leadership Ill' apostles, prophets, evangelists, and teachers. House church and cell l~ !1I'OUpS ere not auxiliary, but the very center of church life. The house w rhurch structure was validated both by the New Testament example and by the Old Testament pattern (Exod. 18) of captains of tens, fifties, hun~~ tlimlH,and thousands. This ecclesiological structure created a need for 5 ))1 0..5) numy small group shepherds/leaders. The shepherds were seldom profes\WJ-I)~ 1\111111 trained, but were products o'f11leOisci Ieshi and she herding I rl HI\)Ju...M.2,stshepher sffiere ay people serving only part-time in.fuciL IIIk'H.Mally, however, di move lnto vocational salaried Christian se!:Yke. ,'110 Shepherding movement saw itself as developing a kind of spiritual ()/h ~s; A.1 IIImv. It emphasized thweed for discipline, rank, and commitment." It V Yl1VV'~

't,:
dJfYL~~

5~~

sP

A1;i

:l

36. Charles Simpson, 'The Salt of the Covenant: Loyalty', New Wine (Pebruary 1975),15-J8(15). 37. Charles Simpson, 'What Must We Do?' New Wine (July/August 1974), I H. 3R. Mumford, 'Disciple Position Paper', 23. 39. Bob Mumford, 'Principles of Relationship' (unpublished paper, J 975), privnt holding,S. ,,0. Prince, Discipleship,
40-42.

II, Prince, Discipleship, 46; Prince's italics. /.:::-'''' I', I) I,) 1'1,)Prince, UKcm/<!nI.\ (n.p.: n.p., n.d.), audiocassette. Em Baxter said, 'covek 1I111111uYllllyNt) slrong il CIIIlonly he broken by death'. Ern Baxter, Covenant Relais "'//1'111,1.\' 1'11/'1 I (n.p.: n.p., I (nil), IIl1dllll'IIMNtlllll, II, Hll11pHOII, 'Tlltl HIIII', 17, . II, MIIlIIl\lId, Oml',\' I'/II'/JII,I'I' II'/ilt 1111' l'll(ll'b' 'II1t11l\', uudlocaescrtc.

----1

b(/)~ /'
j ~

r::

/'1\, J f \

IK
used 1110 t01111 'Npil'itllul IhtIH.Il'!lolld' 1111111 IIw i)N~ turing rolntionshlp
1~\lltll"

Iilff, 1'lIllIhllshlng nur-

'''t'dtw/IlIOJ.!.)

79

Ih(ll ol1l1'lod uuo Mpililmil 1111111111 A believer was Ilv

Y>\

ucouragpd to.1ludJ}Hh9rbODdlulllli 01 1\l~1 IlII1 pll~ III 1\ II IlIlIgl1t that other

Intcral rctationships with fellow bclicver illllll.IIIIIIHI.\'IIIIIl'l1 Of' cell group resulted from the relationship a disciplc mudc wlth IIIl1xhephcrd or spiri-

.",

tual father. In other words, the primar~ cOJllloclluu with tho B.fOUP was :first to the shepherd, and spiritual famil was a b - roduc.I:I<, Jesus had called together a iverse group of disciples who had then to learn to love each other, and so it was for the sheep who submitted to a shepherd. Leaders taught that the pathway into ministry was through a submitted relationship to a shepherd. It was in this context that a man could learn to manage his personal and family life in order to qualify for spiritual leadership and ministry. It was often said, 'First the natural then the spiritual. '<17 Under a shepherd, a man was to prove responsible in the natural affairs of life: family, job, :finance, and property stewardship. Thus he prepared himself for spiritual leadership.i'' The Shepherding movement stressed the importance of serving one's shepherd as foundational to development for ministry. Believers were to prove faithful in serving another man's ministry before receiving their own.'? Essentially, the concept was that, as followers served their shepherds, it helped shepherds serve the followers with more effective pastoral

1I'lIIlllwsls Oil Mol,' 1"",'/"1>11111 'l'hc movement Htl'CHI'Illd11l~ 1 IHlt,'dIhr mule leadership, with strong fathers 1111<1 husbands in the hume. II WlIS understood that women were not to have ovcrnmental lcadcrshlp in the church, and emphasis was placed on the very different roles in the Scriptures for men and women." The movemcnt's leaders believed that many churches suffered from men abdicating their rightful place of church leadership. Women had assumed roles that properly belonged to men.They were also concerned over the we~k,J~.ffel\Iin~ stereotypes often ascribed to min~gasJors. Fmuily Relationships 'l'hc movement's teachers viewed the home as the most basic unit in church II lc. They emphasized biblical order for husband-wife relationships and pnrenting.52 Men were to be the heads of their households, and women were to submit to their husbands. It was stressed that healthy families mndc a healthy church.

f 'ffl4M-1

,--IlIA;
I

vt~"
V"I/hlSfMS

puS&:

Suhinlssion for All Spiritual Leaders Mumford and the other four men regularly taught that for one to exercise

~-Q

pldtual authority or leadership one must be submitted to spiritual author1y, ~\ They believed their mutual submission and accountability served to Illodol what all leaders needed. They emphasized that leaders needed to care.l'' ~~ervice involv~.!:p:.:.ra=c:.:t:.:ic:.:a::..l ::la=b..:::o:...r:::..su:::c:.:h:..:a=s:...yL:.a::.r=.d-'..w.:...:o::.:r~k...::a:::n=d.::.h:.::..ouse11tltI so rneone who could provide spiritual authority and covering for them. ~ . \1 The movement held high expectations for participation and involveI hl.lNC submitted relationships would protect not only the leader from the vulnerability of being alone, but protect the sheep from exploitation by \ ment. Members were expected to verbally commit themselves, to tithe 'lone Ranger' leaders. their income, be fully involved in all aspects of church life, and submit all \ 1\ .\ areas of their personal lives to their shepherd's counsel. Members wer lrunslocal Spiritual Authority confronted by their shepherd if they failed to live up to those commitIIIlI five teachers pastored other leaders around the nation, and in a few nents. 1\11I11I1\0eS, pastored men internationally. This networking was not, in their 1"11'I'option, an ecclesiastical structure; rather, it was an 'organic' network hlllwd on relationship and true spiritual authority. Most of the men Mumford \1111he others pastore\\were t independent Charismatics. A few relation45. Mumford, 'Disciple Position Paper', 18. IIlpM were established with men in denominational settings. These denomi46. Mumford, 'Disciple Position Paper', 18-21. 111111111111/ relationships were justified, as Kilian McDonnell has observed, by 47. A common phrase in the movement from 1 Cor. 15.46 NIV. 4R. Charles Simpson, 'Faithful in the Natural Things', New Wine (September ... -~~;\, I IllINhlllll,Lcndcrahtp', Ifl, ' 1(75),24-29. .1 Nt'II/IVIII(f 1'Il~lIll1l'iy 1IlIIIIIIlIli IlItlt'lllH un Ihc biblical family. Several entire issues 49. Mumford, 'Disciple Position Paper', 21. 1IIIIh.IIIIIIIIIlIl 10 Iho 111\111 H\I\~Nt'II' I/'''/t'' (>1'10\)\,)1' 1974; May 1975; October 1975. Ill" 50. Serving pustoml leadership became the rOOliN 01' 1'11I11'1H11l hy untagonista (lild \ IIIIHIlIl 111'I \111I111I"hlp'. I , NOIlHll(lIlllllr members of rho movement.

Ar ?
dJ lOlAf
{-'1 r t-01/1/1
JV -

cbMR

n ~'\'

II/\,

HO

'1111'SIll/
1\' l't 1/1$1, ('/ IS /11

HI
l'he rcachors clel1llud lit .. decision to trust in ,/OHIt/l ('ItIII'lI.,l"I'Ollllheirperspective, evangelism was a disciple-making PI'OUOHHwhicl: IUlerson, through faith and repe~, In surrendered to Christ's lordship, then submitted to a shepherd, and in~rntcd into the church commllnit}'_Evangelism, simply for decisions, was liHcouraged in favor of evangelism that produced mature disciples." The essential evangelistic character of the Shepherding movement was clonrly centered in its belief that Christian community authenticated and ~IOlTIonstratedthe reality of the message of the kingdom of God. The for111111 of local churches into an alternate society and counterc~ ion III'CcSsary'to successfully challenge our present society, so thoroughly influenced with secular and religious humanism, with the Good News of lito Kingdom of God'. 59 _ Eschatology ~

I)

'tho norcclved distinction tby thu I1vl'IIHI\\NTI ~i}iJl'~'iiintOtlltllll\\lthorily tlnd Hpil'itllul tlllthol'ity'.~I' The (lvc IUt\cllllIM III!In'l'Il 11111'l'Iilll'lllullluuthol'iLy wus 011too often external and without spltlllllllllllllHy. whl~roIIlie spiriLual uuthority was relational and life-changing, 'I'huy 1'111\\1 Aposlle Paul and 111(\ his translocal relationships with Timothy, 'l'ltIiH. (lild Iho churches at Corinth and Ephesus as illustrations of their translocul relutionships.F' Personal Tithing The movement taught that tithes were to be given to shepherds personally. The concept was that ~en tithing households could support a full-time shepherd with a reasonable income and allow for the close pastoral care ~hatwa~~essed that the tithe was given to on~p\ h erd~d not the ch!!!1<b. hey taught that as the sheep prospered under the T s 1repherd's leadership, the shepherd would prosper as well. IE.actual church practice, the tithes were given to the shepherd, th~ected into a general &nd for establishing salaries based on a shepherd's productivity. The ductivity was predicated on the number of sheep he shepherded and the amount of their tithes. Additionally, distribution of funds took into consia:oration the shepherds' needs. All of these decisions were made by the elders of the church. Tithes w...e@fes~fved support ministry activities with 01'Iei'to i~e~d one's tithe for church facility costs, and benevolence ~eds.56 This financial approach made possible a very high ratio of fulitime leaders to followers. The practice of personal tithing meant not only that sheep tithed to thei r shepherd, but also that shepherds tithed to their shepherd. This led to the perception that all tithes were sent to Ft Lauderdale. This was not the case. Basham, Baxter, Mumford, Prince, and Simpson did receive tithes, but only from the men they directly pastored, usually three to ten men'?

cMrl
W'
~

pro:,

III1Hha Baxter, Mumford, Prince, and Simpson stressed the present natur~. 111, 111'1 kingdom, or government of God, and the totality of Christ's lordship he IIItill areas of life. They sought to aV<iida distinction between the secular und the sacred." They resisted the dispensation1n orientation of many PenIlll'OHtals nd Charismatics. While the movement never fully embraced a a IUlSlmillennial view, this orientation would grow over the years as Baxter 1I1111enced others. They regularly taught against the pre-tribulation rapthe 1111'1,) believing itcreated an escapist mentality that surrendered the view, 1III11 [ 10Satan. Their collective position probably came closest to represent11/-1 historical premillennial position of G. Eldon Ladd, which stresses the lilt\ 'ul ready but not yet' dimension ofthe presence of the kingdom" They WlII'I,) convinced that what they were teaching was eschatologically signifiI'tllil 10God's plan for the last days that began at Pentecost. A particularly revealing glimpse of their unique eschatology is seen in I\1111 1I ford' s teaching from Isa. 60.1-3. Mumford told a group ofleaders: M m

t;.l2Lc;>
LAd-d

~,~ fttf ~'

~7f'

54. McDonnell, 'Seven Documents', II, 117 . 55. Don Basham, transcript of 'How Ministries Relate Beyond the Local Church', message delivered at the National Men's Shepherds Conference, September 1975, l loly Spirit Research Center, Oral Roberts University, Tulsa, OK, 5-8. 56. Prince, Discipleship, 32-35. 57. I have the personal teaching notes belonging to former Shepherding loader ,'~t ROSHfrom a March 1975 me~ting in Atl~nta where B~b Mumford taught in detnll ,;iill1~dom Ilnnncos And the principles described above. Sl'ott I~oss, personal confer ~\l\l.'illlot~H,2 4 Murch 1996, private holding, 1-12.

A~
[0 Wayne Myers, 25 August 1975, private holding, 3-4. Mumford, 'Disciple Position Paper', 12. (10, ('hurles Simpson, '1lstllhlishillg till':Kingdom', New Wine (October 1974), 24-27. fll, 'l'hoir osch/l(olOI-\II.'III ONilloll WIISlwnys somewhat confused by the tension p o 1"'lwlIIJIl I'l'illoil'N dlHjllll\NllllolIlI11111111111111011 nlld Illixtor'H post-millennial viewsI),

~H, Churlcs Simpson, letter

:..~
!D
'hA-{'

. f\lIlIlIlol'd

IlIll'O Hldd h\l \vIIM 111I11I11I1""IIIIIII~1

'1'IIt' 8111'111i'1'
I.ll:\hl IN('!()Illing I() tho (')hUI'\)II, ll"lIlvN~ 1IIIIllilt' 11111111 d I\lItid Now th\)s two Ihings I think nro prcccedlng III HIIIIII1'IIII'IIIIlillili/li wny, 1I1It!l Ihink what we can see here does 11011111,11111 uuu \\,\11" Iii II /11/1111.1111'I nl:!10 get KII bcucr and bcucr and all of a sudden the K /11/-11111111111iN KollIl:!10 be on ( Ilid the earth. It doesn't mean that. It mcan 1111I1 111111111\)"" INl.'olllin,L(on the people and light is coming on God's pcoplo.i"

8
IIIllh~ I'OI~ of'shcphcrd and on covenant Il111llionships.M (I I W/~ 11I~III1I1UO group of Charismatic Lutherans, In to tl lIoh Mumford made II dol'l 111'11JiOIl10 conferees that illustrates what he and the other five men believed:
I believe with all my heart, ment church with apostles, the nine gifts of the Spirit flow together as one. This God is going to restore to himse1fa New Testaprophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers and and the fruit of the Spirit. They will move and is the next thing on God's agenda.65

In this kind of victorious eschatology, Christ would rule through his church in the midst of a disintegrating world as a mighty witness for God's ingdom. God would prepare in the last days a victorious church ready for he second coming of Jesus Christ to consummate the age. Restorationist and Eschatological Impulses he movement's self-concept was linked to restorationist and eschatological npulses which are far from unique in North American religious history, ike the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements and general North AmeriIanProtestantism from which the Shepherding movement emerged, there as a deep restorationist inf1uence.63 Especially characteristic ofthe five's 71-77 teachings, were their repeated references to a restoration of the ew Testament church order and practice. As already stated, they were convinced their teachings were a part of God's ongoing renewal process. T of the restorationist impulse, the five teachers believed that after the death' oft e- os es an more u ya er ons a . e, ~Iffered a reat loss 0 in a rea Ity t at gave nse 0 dea institutiona IS111, ~hile there a a ways remame a faIthful remnant, it was Martin Luther's 5 Theses that ushered in the 6egin1TIngof God's restoring work, which ad continued with the English and North American awakenings under hn Wesley and Jonathan Edwards. The Pentecostal and Charismatic ~ovements, with their emphasis on theperson and work ofthe Holy spirit, were also a part of this renewal continuum. The teachers believed that, in' their day, God was restoring the eccIesiological dimensions of New Testament life. This restoration focused on the fivefold office gifts of biblical

Ikrek Prince was especially given to the restorationist ideal of a return III the primitive church's power and vitality. He saw this restoration as a IIImcult, but necessary process:
Also, we must recognize that in many respects the contemporary church is J'unctioning-by New Testament standards-on a gravely subnormal plane. While we cannot forever tolerate such subnormality, it is foolish to suppose that we can immediately make all the changes that are needed. To raise the church from its current subnormality up to the New Testament standard will require-for all of us-much time, labor, faith, and forbearance.P''

eJ

~~

,
It
I"

)
~

it11\"
(IN

\,11

~w.'~)

II is evident that a strong eschatological impulse motivated the move1I11.1Ilt's identity. They were convinced thatthe restoration God was doing WIIS part of his end-time activity on the earth. In the message to Lutheran II ('hllrisl11atics in 1975, and again reflective of the other Shepherding it'IHlers,Bob Mumford proclaimed: 'We are moving toward the end of the IIW' II nd he challenged his audience to 'embrace all that God is doing'. 67 These restorationist and eschatological motifs were pervasive in the hephcrding movement's developing ecclesiology. This helps one to understand a striking dic1.!9tomy present in the movement, and one that IH'l'lIlnC more apparent as the movement matured. On the one hand, their II'Nlorutionism made them inherently anti-institutional, and the leaders (,(III repulsed by the idea of becoming a denomination. Yet, on the other let! 1 IIIid. us they were forced to organize themselves as a result of growth and l 11I1I1J'(!ycrsy, became functionally and increasingly institutional. The they

l~

-A
vJ:!J1
/7~

62. Ern Baxter and Bob Mumford, 1975, 1.

transcript of Elders' Meeting, 16 November

63. I am using the word 'restorationism' to refer to a questto restore the prirni] iv New Testament church experience. Restorationism, sometimes used interchungellhly with the term 'primitivism', is the subject of a collection of essays edited by Riehlll'd Hughes, See Richard Hughes (cd.), The American Questfor the Primitive Chl/rch ( 'h '011.0:University of Illinois PI'OMS, 9HR). 1

It,/' This concept oM:estoration was more fully elaborated in a 1979 message by f0/7JrAI t-.ll1ll1l\)nllo a group of his leaders. The title itself is revealing. Bob Mumford, Decline/ /IIII'A ,1~rt',\'/Re,\'torCition ofthe Church, Part I (Oklahoma City: n.p., 1977), audiocassette. ). M. llob Mumford, (Jod',\' WIII/br the Body ofChrist (Ft Lauderdale, FL: Life- LP07Q&rfL !D , I hllll/-llll'N, (75), l1udiocnHNcllo, 1 m t:J2e. /11\ l'rincc, f)/,I'('//J!('.I'I1III, \(1: Jltilll'\1 \.llnbol'lIlCN views in this small book, see le: <; his ./.7 l~ //~ fl'l (I, ilwc, 11/,w'I,I/,'I1iIt

[ 1Juz. )__ . 7~

Hil

'/'lIl'Sht'lilli

-]A

111\llllHlllIg purt 1\.11j\lolisectH.IM s [11 1975, Mumford, Prince, and Simpson, 1111'1111 II Ilhll, WI'I\IIlII!icreedal,resisted the idea of church buildings, and, ullllollf.\1t HIllHlllvll I 10their denominational Charismatic friends, displayed a goncrul nntl !tIH(ltlilionalrhetoric. By 1984, however, they went on to develop doctrinal slnlemcnts, purchase buildings, and exhibit many other institutional characteristics. Howard Snyder observed that renewal or restorationist movements are '~ypically naive concerning institutional and sociological realities and blind to the institutional dimensions of theIr own movement'. This was ~true for the Shepherding movement0'9 Over the years, the leaders continued to emphasize the organic and relational nature of their association of churches, and they regularly sought to decentralize and dismantle what they saw as ecclesiastical structures. Just as certainly, they maintained clear institutional features. Although it was regularly denied, the Shepherding movement had a functional headquarters in Mobile from at least 1978. There was a functional, if not formal, leadership structure that acted in a chain of command. There were central unifying doctrines, and the movement held regional and national conferences for its leaders and members. Moreover, New Wine served as a corporate voice for the movement. Nevertheless, the movement's leaders did not believe they were a denominational organization. It is noteworthy that the movement never formally organized itself into a legal corporation of churches. It was always a voluntary association of churches that never kept or maintained a formal roster of affiliated churches. Each associated church or cluster of churches incorporated independently, The leaders were correct in saying that th movement was held together hy l!.Qetwork of personal relationships. ~ ---I

or

-~

Other Developmental Factors The unusual confluence created by the varied backgrounds and theologica I pedigrees ofthe five teachers also affected the growing movement's ecclcsiological development and practice. ~ Simps~ was a tru pastoral leader. Baxter pastored for a long period, but he did so as a pUJpiteer morethan a pastor. Mumford and Prince were primarily Bibl
68. Margaret Poloma explores these tensions between 'Charisma and Institutionnl Dilemmas' from a sociological perspective in her The Assemblies of God at III" 'rossroads (Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee ProHH, 1989), xv, J 22-23. 59. I toward A. Snyder, Signs ofthe Spirit (Grand RllpldM:ZOIl(iI.lI'Van,1989),27.1.

Il\l\chol's,uud HtlMltlllll, wltilt' Itl/l\llllllhll\ toucher, was most comfortable as Ijourna Iis\. The chnl Il'IIH"WIIH Iltlll thclr united ministries and distinctive Il.lllchingshod thrusilltl.llil 1111\1 (JlIslor'ulund governmental roles as leaders 111'11 movement ofchurchc. As m~J)submitted to them, they had to adjust.c:Jo 10 roles they had not Ilnlicilli!.ted,defined fully, o~en equipped for. The ~ IlI.lW les had created high expectations among their followers. While the 1'0 11vc men never referred to themselves as apostles," many of their constituII(Ssaw them as such. Whatever title one would use, they found them.Ivcs in the unique place ofleading pastors around the nation, while at Ihe same time, leading the establishment of new local church structures. l'hojob would prove difficult over the years, and, in many cases, they were lull able to meet the demands of the task. HtJyJ4f( An additional consideration in the movement's development was the dis"\lssioh on ecc1esiological renewal from voices outside the Charismatic Ih'l\cwal. Missionary and author Howard Snyder's paper, 'The Church as lod's Agent in Evangelism', read at the 1974 Lausanne Congress on World l'vnngclisrn and later published in the bookLet the Whole Earth Hear His /11/('(.1, had caught the attention of Mumford." The Problem of Wineskins, which further developed Snyder's Lausanne paper, was enormously influI III on Mumford and Baxter in Ft Lauderdale.P Baxter called The Probinl ,,'1/1 ofWineskins 'a manual for what we are doing' .73 In the book and in his I IIlIsunnepaper, Snyder argued for radical change in church structures in III tI l'I' for Christ's church to fulfill its mission on the earth. Snyder believed leJ 111111 H111011 groups were a part of the biblical pattern for church life. It is not IIIpriaing that Baxter and Mumford felt Snyder affirmed their emphases. IWIII arlos Ortiz's book Call to Discipleship was also released in 1975.74 C I hilSI: and other books addressed concepts similar to the Shepherding move{ I. 11111111'1' teachings and were a part ofa growing emphasis in the early 1970s 111\ 1110 eed for ecc1esiological renewal and adjustment." n ~

, ~nLJ<ie.J

0, Simpson, letter to Farah, 2. /I Howard A. Snyder, 'The Church as God's Agent in Evangelism', in J.D. Doug1111(lId,), 1,('1the Who/~arth Hear His Voice (Minneapolis, MN: World Wide Pub-

IIIIIlhlllM, 1<)75).327-60.
I
\ Ih'IIM

l luwurd 1\. Snyder, The Problem ofWineskins (Downers Grove, IL: InterVar1(1 n Illlxll.ll'ont! L30b M"I'I Ihl'd, Il/d(n"

lIyl'luHM,1(75).
Meeting (Ft Lauderdale: Audio Publica-

Hili lce, v

November 11>7~). 1111(\10011/01/010110, 1111111('/11'10/01 01//",. ('1111 III f)/,YI'iI,/twill,J (Plllin(1old, NJ: Logos, 1975). 1 IIWllIIWll (), I~ 11'111" d~. I M'II' 1"tI", /'"' IIII' ('/1111'1'11 (ll'tllld RnpidH: Zondcrvnn,
I)

Ho
ity

'1'//1' SIII'/il/I/'
li~~lllSi()l()gicull'llnllWlll

(
\1"1/\

it It [itlll I pI I III ~pltitlllllllllthOi /1111 Ilillllllllllnd'M IHI\\ Institute or Basic Youth Confl icts impact tens ol' lilt 1\1~lIl1dltII ( '1liiNI ilillNaround rh I nitcd States. Gothard stressed the impOII/lII(l~ " "~!lll.Ivcl"N submission III to God's 'chain of command' in the family, church. workplace, and civil society. Charismatic Larry Christenson's 1970 book '11/(' hristian Family C was a bestseller for years with its teachings of God's order and submission in the husband-wife relationship." This environment reinforced the Shepherding movement's sense of being in season with what it believed God was doing in its day. ' The Shepherding movement's leaders were self-consciously restorationisl and eschatological in their teachings. They expected these truths to create U negative response from the contemporary culture. Mumford expected reac\ tion to the introduction of 'divine authority into our decadent and rebel Iious society' because' authority is not what our generation wants to hear'. 77 What they did not expect was the severity of the criticism that arose frOI11 within the Charismatic Renewal. The movement's leaders were forced t( defend these teachings and grapple with the realities of leading a new church movement within the renewal. Days of bitter debate and controversy lay ahead.
WIIS COIIVII/lilll' \1 II,

and family lire us well. The lllll'ly

Chapter 6
CHARISMATIC CONTROVERSY

The Calm Before the Storm Who urn Baxter moved to Ft Lauderdale in early 1975, he joined Basham,
Mumford, and Prince as a fellow elder of Good News Fellowship, with Mumford serving as the senior leader. The association of house churches \vIlN pri mari ly focused on developing sheep and shepherd relationships and IIllld only occasional public meetings. The priority in 1975 was to build a

1111)(101 what they were teaching. In the fall, Baxter and Mumford began for It'/ldling weekly leadership training meetings. Mumford told the leaders Ih~l'~was a need for a 'base of operations out of which the redeemed comItill IIi attac~ degenerating world'. Reflectin their restorationism, III' suld, 'The or IS movmg and it's important for me to say that we feel lid iNspeaking to prepare us as an alternate society. ' I This perspective 1I11llrVlllod their et'f'ortsto mature theIr constituents. The Ft Lauderdale 1IIIII'd1 was also being influenced by Charles Simpson's Gulf Coast FellowIIlp in the Pascagoula, Mississippi and Mobile, Alabama areas, which was 1I1111'~\ developed and functional.' fully Nllllpson had visited Ft Lauderdale and was impressed with their pro!I'HM. In u February 1975 letter to men he pastored, Simpson wrote:

/7)':;

(--;;n

R~

{ f -;

Circle (Waco, TX: WordBooks, 1971); Gene A. Getz, S//(II' pening the Focus on the Church (Chicago: Moody Press, 1974); Donald G. Blouch, The Reform of the Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970); Robert C. Girard, Brel/II'I'1I l lang Loose (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972); Ray Stedman, Body Life (Glondnlo, ,:1\: Regal Books, 1972); W. Graham Pulkington, Gatheredfor Power (New York:

1970); David Mains,Full

Ih'llilionShip in Ft Lauderdale the best I've seen. God is doing a beautiful Ihllig, ilrn is moving there now. 'Good News Fellowship' is the church. Bob INplislor, Derek, Don, Ern are all in leadership-all are responsible for discipll's, 'I'ithing to sheplf,[ds being practiced-shepherds bring into General IIlIlId nnd salaries arc a.\d out'

--hli(~
------'"

Otuj

Morehouse-Barlow, 1972). 76. Larry Christenson, The Christian Family (Minneapolis, Hhip, 1970).
7. Mumford, L!/eChangers Newsletter, 2.

MN: Bethany Fellow

IllIXIl.ll'lind Mumford, 'I'I'IIIlNCripl. I, I1/1/1 IIntl MIIIIlI\U'(i, 'l'I'IIIIHI'llpl, l.. IIll' '1. ."' ( '11I1I'IIlII SIIIIPNOII,IIlII~~10 (111\\11(111Il'i1\\llo 1 (/'1111,), . ,Idlll!.!, I

17 February 1975, private

126

The Shepherding Movement the Charismari outcome to this Lauderdale and The 1975 ~(! City on 23-26 1973 and 197 , 4,600 pastors an ers spoke in the I Christenson wht 'How to Exercise Beyond the Loa Larry Christen to the controvers for the unveiling States'." The CO]] acknowledge the a woman in his ch the Charismatic R
The accepted m mite, which spJi seemed that ped midst ofthe 'log pleship. But instead 0 the logjam came In other word sectarianism, we might make room Church.7

The 'national' or 'ecumenical' council as it was called. Standing: Bob Mumford, Steve Clark, Charles Simpson, Larry Christenson, Ralph Martin, Paul DeCelles. Seated: Don Basham, Derek Prince, Ern Baxter, Kevin Ranaghan, Don Pfotenhauer.

c.

Christenson's wo attendees, two-thir Renewal and were a: prised oflay pastors:

4. Estimates of attes 'Logos Report: National 1975),42. 5. Conference Brod holding. 6. McDonnell, 'Sev 7. 'Echoes of the Spi

The ecumenical council in Jerusalem with Cardinal Suenens. The 1977 trip 'was an expression of the growing relationship of the group. From the left: Suenens, Ranaghan, Mumford, Simpson, Prince, Basham, DeCelles, Baxter, Christenson, Clark, Martin.

-...-

- - '-~ ::..

- ------

_ -s