Letter from Bro. Chester Wright to Bro. Haney

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Dimples

Brother, this bothers me also.

The exhibits shown are simply someone questioning what has taken place.

What if MJ was your pastor and this letter which is a private email was published abroad?

It could have been handled differently. Like questioning the issues and not bringing names into the fray. IMO, MJ should have been left out of the email if CW had anticipated this email circulating past the eyes of his superintendent.

[Sarah]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Well, it seems the letter had to be released to others by KH or CW himself.

You would think so.

This is what bothers me the most. How did someone else get their hands on it, and whatever possessed anyone to post it on an open forum like this? Did he get permission?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Sarah

You would think so.

This is what bothers me the most. How did someone else get their hands on it, and whatever possessed anyone to post it on an open forum like this? Did he get permission?

Why would he need permission to post it here? The email was MASS mailed to ministers in the fellowship.

[Sarah]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Why would he need permission to post it here? The email was MASS mailed to ministers in the fellowship.

I didn't read the whole thread, so I didn't realize that.

That puts a whole different face on the situation!

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Amos

Accusation?

CW is smarter than I am too, or than most folks I know.
'That is no "accusation."

The accusation, or bash, as Joyful puts it, was that CW had more Bible in his little finger than "the other guy will ever have". In essence, you've passed judgment on MJ's depth of scripture. The insinuation is that CW is much more theologically sound than MJ, and knows the Bible so much better, that there can't even be a credible comparison.

Come on, Amos, have the integrity to admit that you took the same kind of potshot (or worse) at MJ (A preacher) that you're accusing others of taking at CW.

It's obvious to the onlookers.

[Steve Epley]

If y'all think CW is a con the movement has really moved to the left.

That would be like Ted Kennedy being a political con?

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

If y'all think CW is a con the movement has really moved to the left.

That would be like Ted Kennedy being a political con?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Proof, please.

The accusation made by Amos is unfounded. Yet he is a product of Westburg ... it's to be understood.

Other horrific accusations targeting fellow ministers from CW's deal with MJ and any minister using the word relevant or journey to describe their ministry as:

a. being possessed and motivated by "an old deceiving spirt" ,
b. they intentionally deceive,
c. and that they have utter disdain for God's Holiness.

There are many "buzz-words" associated with this new version of the manifestation of an old deceiving spirit. They think we older guys don't know the language, so therefore when they preach they say things that they expect that we will understand one way, while those "in the know" understand that they are saying something very different to them.

They have concluded that all "holiness" is Phariseeism -

[SDG]

I think Wright has defined the relevancy movement as follows:

Let me share some things which I have discovered in just a small amount of
time while doing some research and checking:First, a significant portion of these young men among us are questioning"when the blood is applied." The result of their "searching" is that they have concluded that it is applied at repentance, producing the conclusion that Water Baptism and Receiving the Holy Ghost is NOT necessary for salvation. They have concluded that all "holiness" is Phariseeism - that all of our standards are traditions of men, traditions of an older, out of date generation. This thinking is already affecting young men from Every area of our nation. I have several in my district that at leaning this direction. I have talked to several men from different areas of the country and it is happening to men they know as well.


Second, this group wants to reach the world through "relevancy" or
"relating" to the culture of this generation. A man who preached this past
General Conference uses people in ministry in his church who have NOT been
baptized in Jesus name and who have NOT received the Holy Ghost. He also
uses people in positions which represent his church to the public with NO
holiness standards at all. You can see for yourself atwww.thepointonline.tv and www.yourjourney.tv While I am not intending to single him out specifically, he is a very visible representative of the direction that many of our young men are going. Using him gave all of them a feeling of vindication and accreditation. There are many "buzz-words" associated with this new version of the manifestation of an old deceiving spirit. They think we older guys don't know the language, so therefore when they preach they say things that they expect that we will understand one way, while those "in the know" understand that they are saying something very different to them.

The relevancy movement is changing "church" to appeal to this generation
(their specific target generation is the 20-29 year olds). While I have a
great desire to see this generation reached also, I do not think that we
have to preach in tee shirts and blue jeans to reach them. Much of what so
disturbed the General Presbyters that they expressed about the Youth
Convention at last year's General Conference is not an isolated event, nor
just a trend. It is a movement - the relevancy movement. (Googleing
"relevancy" will shock you.) (By the way, the name "The Journey" is the
most "up-to-date" name for churches that are a part of the relevancy
movement - again, Google - "the journey church" and see for yourself.)
Bro. Haney I know that you are aware of my desire for progress. I have no
loyalty to religious traditions. I deeply desire to eliminate everything
from our doctrine and practices that are not completely founded upon the
Word of God. Therefore, I hope that you will understand and give some
credence to the concern that I have, since I have never been one for
maintaining the status quo. This email is written by someone who does
believe that change is positive. I am for changing the things which can and
should be changed. However, I am not for changing our Apostolic message,
only our un-Scriptural, non-Apostolic, ineffective methods.

In summation, Wright has inaccurately defined the relevancy movement as:

1. Believing one is saved at repentance
2. Believing holiness is Phariseeism
3. Appealing/relating to the 20-29 year demographic and culture by preaching in blue jeans and tee-shirts.

This revelation has come through "some research and checking". Who did he check with? the Posse?

The arguments made here are sophomoric, stale, trite, hoary, screwy and unfounded.

Also, who a pastor uses as volunteers is NO ONE'S BUSINESS but his own and the local church's.

I strongly believe CW owes MJ an apology ... there is no evidence that indicates MJ is not Acts 2:38 or believes Holiness is Phariseeism ....


Tell you what ....

The only old hag that has remained constant is the branding, the innate urge to tattle and tendency for exclusionary disfellowship.

All of this I find ironic, after Wright championed unity a year ago on the television issue.

What will continue to unfold is that the another entire pool of young, anointed, talented men will continue to leave ...
some of the best and brightest have left because of antedeluvian, obsolete, tradition-bound, politically-enamored, fiefdom-entrenched, upside-down thinking.

The org is back to it's mid 1990's numbers ... 8800 ministers ... down from 9200 about a year or 2 ago ...

Although recent periodicals boast of record numbers of new ministers joining ... the net loss is now -600.

Letters like Wright's have the potential to accelerate the bleeding.

Relevant enough?

When will local pastor's enjoy true autonomy without a neighboring GS running to daddy Headquarters with senseless gripes and spiritualized vendettas?

Unity, and maybe even, movement-wide revival, might happen when you MYOB.

And if you want to know how run a conference take a cue from last year's NAYC.

No, really.

[A_PoMo]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I think Wright has defined the relevancy movement as follows:


In summation, Wright has inaccurately defined the relevancy movement as:

1. Believing one is saved at repentance
2. Believing holiness is Phariseeism
3. Appealing/relating to the 20-29 year demographic and culture by preaching in blue jeans and tee-shirts.

This revelation has come through "some research and checking". Who did he check with? the Posse?

The arguments made here are sophomoric, stale, trite, hoary, screwy and unfounded.

Also, who a pastor uses as volunteers is NO ONE'S BUSINESS but his own and the local church's.

I strongly believe CW owes MJ an apology ... there is no evidence that indicates MJ is not Acts 2:38 or believes Holiness is Phariseeism ....


Tell you what ....

The only old hag that has remained constant is the branding, the innate urge to tattle and tendency for exclusionary disfellowship.

All of this I find ironic, after Wright championed unity a year ago on the television issue.

What will continue to unfold is that the another entire pool of young, anointed, talented men will continue to leave ...
some of the best and brightest have left because of antedeluvian, obsolete, tradition-bound, politically-enamored, fiefdom-entrenched, upside-down thinking.

The org is back to it's mid 1990's numbers ... 8800 ministers ... down from 9200 about a year or 2 ago ...

Although recent periodicals boast of record numbers of new ministers joining ... the net loss is now -600.

Letters like Wright's have the potential to accelerate the bleeding.

Relevant enough?

When will local pastor's enjoy true autonomy without a neighboring GS running to daddy Headquarters with senseless gripes and spiritualized vendettas?

Unity, and maybe even, movement-wide revival, might happen when you MYOB.

And if you want to know how run a conference take a cue from last year's NAYC.

No, really.

So, Dan. Why don't you stop beating around the bush and tell us how you REALLY feel?

I agree btw. I think that the UPC is like the AOG, it's best days are history.