BY DALE MARTIN

n the seven years that have elapsed since the first Promise Keepers national pastors' conference, the highly influential movement has morphed from an emphasis on forming godly men into a parachurch cheerleader for an increasingly radical ecumenical agenda.

The February 1996 conference in Atlanta, Georgia (which I attended with nearly 40,000 fellow pastors), majored in promoting the development of Christian fellowship by breaking down the "walls" of racial and cultural divisions. It minored in urging the various denominations represented there to emphasize our common Christian commitment.

The second PK pastors and leadership conference, held February 18-20, 2003, at Bank One Ballpark in Phoenix, Arizona, seemed to have reversed that agenda. What was minor is now major. Denominationalism is openly being called "sin," leaving many of us pastors and those we serve baffled about what to think of the faith communities to which we have dedicated our careers and that have been our spiritual homes, sometimes for generations.

A friend of mine also attending the Phoenix "Come Near to Me" conference asked the truly insightful question: "If denominationalism is a sin, and denominations are defined by doctrines, then who decides which denomination is committing sin?"

Most serious Christians believe in particular doctrines and join faith communities because they believe the Bible teaches those truths and promotes such fellowship covenants. Calling such behavior "sin," as numerous Promise Keeper presenters did in Phoenix, is wrong on two counts: it both judges another person's heart, and it is a sharp thrust at the liberty of conscience that has undergirded the establishment and growth of the United States. Seventh-day Adventists, among others, should be particularly concerned by such rhetoric.

The defining churches of contemporary American Christianity are most often community, interdenominational, or nondenominational entities. In such groups biblical doctrines are frequently downplayed to encourage "fluidity" and "responsiveness." Only the basics of Christianity are kept on the table.

Adventists keeping a sharp eschatological eye on the ecumenical agenda will remember that there were two major evangelical groups prior to the 1996 Atlanta conference that were withholding their enthusiastic endorsement of the unity agenda. These were the 15 million-member Southern Baptist Convention, and the fastest-growing segment of contemporary Christianity, charismatic/Pentecostal churches. It became patently clear in Phoenix that the holdouts of seven years ago are now firmly on board. The president of the Southern Baptist Convention, James Merritt, was a featured speaker. The charismatic/Pentecostal delegation was likely a majority presence among the 9,000 attendees at Phoenix, with one of their own, Jack Hayford, former senior pastor of the Church on the Way, acting as the conference emcee.

Many fine speakers made presentations at Phoenix, including Bruce Wilkinson, author of The Prayer of Jabez, popular Dallas pastor Tony Evans, and author Max Lucado, among others. The "Come Near to Me" conference was also remarkable for the highly visible presence of Messianic Jews. A Dallas rabbi electrified the crowd with a declaration of common belief: "We're back," he shouted into the microphone, indicating that he and other Jews present are united with Christians on the identity of Jesus-and in practicing charismatic worship, I might add.

Power of Music
A fascinating technique in evidence at Promise Keeper events designed to build support for the PK agenda is the frequent use of music to diminish inhibitions and thereby subordinate doctrinal concerns to the unquestioned "mandate" for Christian unity. The Phoenix conference featured both increased musical volume and more sophisticated "Christian rock" than was heard at Atlanta.

Equally intriguing was the manner in which key presenters referred to the conference music. Speakers from Hayford to Wilkinson regularly described the music as "worship," creating a distinct dichotomy between "worship" (i.e., music) and the presentation of a message. The inference was clear: that which moves us emotionally (or even physically!) is real worship. That which touches our minds is only a "message," and, of course, potentially divisive. In such circles emotional music easily trumps the solemnity of the preached word. Worshipers have been justifying such celebrations since the golden calf experience at Sinai- and frequently preparing themselves to accept the misuses of Scripture that often accompany such celebrations. Ratchet up the feelings with "worship" music, and the manipulation of Scripture is often just around the corner.

Conference organizers seemed naively unaware of the frequent relationship between highly emotive worship and a decreased emphasis on Scripture. While all could lament the data presented at the conference that showed that the percentage of Christian youth who believe in the full authority of Scripture has fallen from 54 percent to 10 percent between 1991 and 2001, almost none drew the logical inference that this has happened in a decade of almost complete acceptance of popular idiom and rock culture in youth worship services. Jim Burns of Youth Builders, a major developer of youth ministry curriculum, reminded attendees that 80 percent of the average church youth group will stop attending church in the three-month span between their high school graduation and the fall. This is yet more evidence to me that much contemporary youth ministry is experiencing-and perpetuating-a virtual famine in the hearing of the Word of God. I found myself heartily agreeing with the observation shared by one youth leader attending from Minnesota: the Word must be reemphasized if the church is to survive.

Questionable Link
While Adventists can find much to agree with and even applaud in the desire to support and encourage pastors, serious proponents of Scripture will be concerned by the language of Promise 6 of the movement's seven founding principles. It enunciates a commitment "to reaching beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity." Linking morally outrageous and socially outdated racial barriers to doctrinal differences based on an allegiance to the Bible is a clever ploy. Denominational differences are thus seen to be both fundamentally opposed to the unity for which Christ prayed and socially irrelevant. Jack Hayford made the point clearly when referring to a fellow speaker who is president of the Baptist-sponsored Moody Bible Institute: "I detest the concept that would put Joe Stowell in a different camp from me."

For such advocates, denominational distinctions make as little sense as racial barriers. This is no minor point: when adherence to biblical truth is placed on the same moral level as racial prejudice, Adventists, above all others, should pay close attention. We can emphatically agree that racial prejudice is not to be tolerated anywhere, anytime. But we must also object when the sin of racial divisiveness is used as a ruse to attack legitimate denominational distinctions based on differing understandings of Scripture. Christian love and fellowship don't preclude or exclude theological convictions. Indeed, those who have actually spent their lives cultivating relationships with pastors of other faiths will point out that theological convictions are frequently the source of richer fellowship and even greater understanding.

_________________________
Dale Martin pastors the Ocala, Florida, Seventh-day Adventist Church.