"Holy Cooperation"?! Christian communism?!

Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.

[512]

Has anyone heard of Andrew McLeod or read his book "Holy Cooperation"?
   
an essay that is supposed to be about the same thing the book is about is at

http://bookofacts.info/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18

I'm a bit mixed up. 

I know some Christians who are kinda interested in what McLeod is saying - and they are from several churches.   One is a baptist church, another a non-denominational, and another is emergent.  And it's pastrors and staff members who are interested in what McLeod is teaching. 

For me, it rasies all kinds of red flags.  But because of my GCM experience, it doesn't take much for me to be really jumpy about stuff.   my "cult" radar is overly sensitive after GCM, but this guy seems to be promoting Christian communism - and heaven on earth.  I wish heaven on earth was possible!   


One section that really sounded the alarm for me:

"I suspect that one response to all this is that socialism has been tried and doesn't work. And it is certainly true that state socialism hasn't worked well, and the initial attempt at Christian communism was not sustained. However, I would argue that this is because the change was too abrupt; the participants did not have a chance to adjust to a communal way of life...The failure to create heaven on earth with their first try does not provide any reason why the vision of the first Christians is any less wonderful. A cooperatively-structured world without poverty or need is, at the very least, a really nice idea that will be very difficult to attain. It might also be a miracle." 

There is a huge shift in The Church (the entire Body of Christ) towards being more "missional" and "incarnational" - really living out the gospel in tangible ways.  Good thing.  However - I worry that is goes so far as to forget - this is not ever gonna be heaven on earth!  heaven is heaven and earth is messed up.  We are just called to bring the good news and love people - which can mean meeting needs but not creating heaven on earth...

I looked into other things on McLeod's Book of Acts site.  They list cooperatives in the US  including one at Fuller Theological Seminary  http://www.fuller.edu/admissions/housing/ic.aspx

Fuller explains the goals of their "intentional communities"

"Although each community has a distinctive ethos and covenant, all offer a lifestyle of education through intentional community living. The corporate core values of Fuller’s Intentional Communities include:
Shared leadership
Consensus decision-making
Common meals
Regular community meetings (every 1-2 weeks)
Community chores
Various opportunities to build community
Quarterly day retreats
Hospitality to the seminary community"

so is Fuller Theological Seminary supporting Christian communism in a bad way?   hmmmm...
 

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.   

[EverAStudent]

so is Fuller Theological Seminary supporting Christian communism in a bad way?   hmmmm...

For fear of being seen and known as a bigot, I would sooner trust a GCx elder on matters of doctrine than a degree-holder from Fuller Seminary.  I have read a substantive number of books and articles written by Fuller Seminary staff--ughhhhh!!!!! 

Fuller has a bent toward an error-laden Bible, mysticism (most kinds), anti-nomianism, NPP, and all things emergent church-ish.  Fuller tends to be leading edge, but that edge seems persistently to be the flat broad shaft of the blade instead of the twin cutting surfaces of the Sword of God's Word--you can bash people over the head with it, but it will never cut straight.

[theresearchpersona]

Fuller is also the major propagator of "Church Growth"; it's chairs of those areas include such men as Donal MacGavran, and his successor C. Peter Wagner (another self-proclaimed apostles out there, who of course demands "OBEY ME": teaching that men must obey himself and his cohorts, and that they're laying a new foundation for the Church in the 21st century: GC, by the way, has read his stuff, and stuff by many of those heavily affected by him, without chewing what they bite).

I don't know if you want to trust GC anymore, therefore: it too has its shares of emergents, etc..

As for Christian socialism: even in Acts, though the Church made collections for the needy, it nevertheless recognizes disparity among the Christians in their assemblies, and though they are to take care of the members who are in true need (and not just idle)...notice it never ever urges them to socialism; it does command them to be sensitive to one another (i.e. not taking food in turn before those hungry at the love feats and lord's supper, when you're well-off enough to have been able to eat at home first, while the needy among them may not be). Blessing and want alike are either blessings from the Lord: and neither is to be worshiped, abused, overvalued, etc..

People like to cite the Jerusalem Church as an example of Christian communism/socialism: but theirs was a voluntary socialism (and probably it can't even rightly be called that) that was not even hinted at by any teaching we have any record of (either in the Bible, or the early Christian writings from the time the apostles were still living); characterizing any of the NT as socialist is eisegesis of a grievous form. There are social principles, of course, but they don't constitute "socialism" in the sense we think of.

At least, this is what I can call to mind on a moment's notice when this question is brought-up: perhaps more later, as I'm sure it's something we'll all increasingly encounter from teachers (it's increasingly popular); it's an idea that seems to wax and wane in history, in various forms.

[G_Prince]

It just matters what terms you use. "Sharing all you have with the poor" good! "Redistribution of wealth" Bad!

[Linda]

Or, how I would phrase it, "Me, voluntarily and cheerfully giving a lot to the poor and needy is very, very good."

"Me, taking your money, and cheerfully giving it to the poor and needy is stealing, and very, very bad!"

BTW, my husband grew up in a Christian commune that had a compound! This is probably why a lot of GC stuff didn't seem "weird" to him at first.

[EverAStudent]

It just matters what terms you use. "Sharing all you have with the poor" good! "Redistribution of wealth" Bad!

Very little could be further from the truth but closer to Fuller Seminary's position.  Euphemisism may blind the undiscerning, but they should never mislead the elect. 

Sharing is a voluntary act of love, redistribution of wealth is government imposed requirement onto a population it does not trust to be loving or to use money the way it wants the people to use money.

Fetal stem cell research is the murder of a baby (the meaning of the word "fetal") so as to harvest its tissue for use in laboratory experimentation.

Abortion is the unnatural extermiination of an innocent life (murder) usually for the financial convenience of the mother.

Change, as used recently, means the cessation of Christian values as public policy and the institution of practices that are ungodly or unbiblical.

Gay marriage is an oxymoron that serves as a euphemisim to give a glimmer of spiritual legitimacy to homosexual practices that God repeatedly forbade in Scritpture.

"Largest economic recovery bill in history" is a euphemism for "spending so much money today that it could not be earned and repaid for at least 30 years--assuming later generations even try to repay it--so that this generation can live well at the expense of the next 4 generations of this country who will be barely functional economically."

Euphemisms are a terrible way to gloss over greedy realities.