Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Page 1 of 176
Illustration of "Wolf in Sheep's Clothing" – created by Dianas Hunting
(photoshoptalent.com/profile/dianas hunting/)
I first heard of Promise Keepers (PK) through the body of believers with whom I share membership and
worship at non-denominational Pathways Community Church, in Largo, Florida.
PK came on to me rather strong in their efforts to recruit me into their movement, reminding me of my past
involvement recruiting for the Armed Forces.
After reading a publication, "Promise Keepers (PK), Pro and Con", I felt there was something unscriptural
about the Promise Keepers efforts to fulfill their questionable mission. Since one of the gifts of the Holy
Spirit is the gift of discernment, I opened my Bible, New International Version(NIV), to, ("Job 34:4"):
"let us discern for ourselves what is right; Let us learn together what is good.", and to ("Philippians
2:10") "So that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless until the day
of Christ."
Based upon these scriptures, I began to investigate further into the Promise Keeper's movement. The
information I found in my research troubled me further. The more I found, the more concerned I became. I
prayed for wisdom and Truth in my efforts to bring these facts into the light of God's Word and present this
material in a manner that will allow my brothers and sisters in Christ to better understand what I found.
I pray that God's Holy Spirit will guide your thoughts and impressions as you read these words.
Certain words kept running through my mind and are reflected in the title page of this treatise:
"Beware of Wolves in Sheep's Clothing"", Doctrine of Demons", and "Beware of Promise Keepers".
Page 2 of 176
9 The great dragon was hurled down-----that old serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the
whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.
9 and the great Dragon was cast was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil and Satan, who leads
the whole world astray: he was cast onto the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 and I heard a loud voice saying in Heaven, “Now is come salvation, and strength, and the
Kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of our brothers is cast down,
which accused them before our God Day and Night.”
Table of Contents
Page 3 of 176
Preface 1
War in Heaven 2
Table of Contents 3-8
Promise Keepers (PK), Pro and Con 9
The Whore of Babylon 21
Beware of Promise Keepers 22
The Harmful Impact of Promise Keepers (PK) 24
The Problems Created by (PK) 25
Many Christian Leaders Warn of (PK) 27
The Roman Catholic – (PK) Connection - The Art of Double-Speak 29
(PK)'s Close Connection with Catholic University 33
(PK) Supports Women Pastors 36
(PK) Welcomes Female Pastor Leading Male Members 37
The Seven False Premises of Promise Keepers 38
What is wrong with (PK)? 44
The Problem 45
A Typical Rally 45
Opposition Surfaces 46
Defending its Mission 47
What is the Truth about (PK)? 47
A Charismatic Fervor 48
Unity at the Expense of Truth? 50
It's Affect on Local Churches 51
Throw the Gate Wide, for the Great Whore of Babylon is ready to Enter 114
Page 11 of 176
"God's army", fighting "a raging battle" with Jesus as their "commander-in-chief" and clergy as
"commissioned officers".
"They still base much of their belief that a man should be the head of the family on Ephesians 5:23:"For
the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church..." (NIV). PK has recently been
downplaying the matching verse 22, which states: "Wives submit to your husbands, as to the Lord" (NIV).
Page 12 of 176
Well-known groups within the Religious Right support PK. James Dobson of Focus on the Family donated
10,000 critically needed dollars to PK in 1992. Dobson has given them publicity on his radio show, has
addressed their rally in Denver CO, and has written a chapter in the PK guidebook. Focus has published PK
books and materials. Other Fundamentalist radio and TV programs have publicized PK.
According to one source: 5
The founder, Bill McCartney has spoken for Operation Rescue, an extremist anti-choice group.
PK speakers Joseph Garlington and Wellington Boone have been closely involved with the Coalition
on Revival (COR), a Christian Reconstructionist group that wants to enforce Old Testament law in the
US, extending the death penalty to include blasphemy, homosexuality, and abortion.
Mark DeMoss, former spokesperson for Moral Majority leader the Rev. Jerry Falwell and former
advisor to Patrick Buchanan, now handles publicity for PK.
Rev. Amos Brown, pastor of the Third Baptist Church in San Francisco CA, called PK a "Trojan horse
for the political and religious right". He criticized the exclusion of women from its rallies. He said:
"Whatever is going to be done to improve the family is going to take a holistic and collective effort
involving husband and wife".
Spokespersons from the Center for Democracy Studies state: "Promise Keepers emerged as the cutting
edge of the religious right and is representative of the "third wave" of the religious right's political
development since World War II. The first was Jerry Falwell's fundamentalist-led Moral Majority. The
second was Pat Robertson's charismatic-led Christian Coalition with its grassroots structures. What
distinguishes Promise Keepers from prior waves of religious revivals in this country is its organizational
prowess, theological extremism, and the extent to which it wants comprehensively to restructure this
country's social order. With backing from Focus on the Family's James Dobson and The Family
Research Council's Gary Bauer, who have criticized Ralph Reed for selling out their principles, the so-
called third wave is positioning itself to the political right of the Christian Coalition." 6
Male Supremacy.
Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW) has said: "I see the Promise
Keepers and I am afraid. I am very afraid. And I am angry." She describes their goal as a "feel-good
form of male supremacy". She opposes PK as a "stealth male-supremacist group". She believes that they
are "quietly building a mass movement in the US". NOW is selling some amusing buttons with such
slogans as: "God, please save me from your followers," and "Sorry, I've missed church. I've been
Page 13 of 176
practicing witchcraft and becoming a lesbian." She commented on another occasion: "Two adults
standing as equals and peers taking responsibility for their family is a much different image than the
man being the head and master, and women being back in an old role that historically was very
detrimental."
Feminists and other critics point out that Promise #4 includes a corollary commitment for men to
reclaim their leadership roles in the family - against opposition from their wives if necessarily. They
propose an authoritarian family structure. PK is opposed to families in which both spouses share power
equally.
Tony Evans, a senior pastor of Oak Cliff Bible Fellowship in Dallas TX wrote a section titled
"Reclaiming your Manhood" in a PK book titled "Seven Promises":
"Sit down with your wife and say something like this: 'Honey, I've made a terrible mistake. I've given you
my role. I gave up leading this family, and I forced you to take my place. Now, I must reclaim that
role'...I'm not suggesting you ask for your role back, I'm urging you to take it back...there can be no
compromise here. If you're going to lead, you must lead."
Rev. Barry Lynn, of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State said: They don't just
want to be responsible. They want men to be the leaders, not just of the church but of their families, of
their government, of the whole culture."
Rape and Violence End Now (RAVEN) is a nonviolence education program for men in St. Louis MO.
Mark Moloney, their executive director commented: "I don't think all they stand for is odious. However,
I think we should be concerned with the things they are not saying. They are not talking about how you
raise a child nonviolently or how you enter a relationship in a way that is not controlling." 5
Harry Walls, pastor of Christian Fellowship Baptist Church in Wellston, conceded that: "The message
of male leadership has been oppressive...And if I sit 10 men down and say, `You are the leader of the
house and here's what that means,' some will leave with only one message: `I'm the leader.'"
More than 60 religious leaders formed an anti-Promise Keepers coalition called Equal Partners in
Faith. They sent a letter in 1997-MAY that stated that when Promise Keepers excluded women and
female clergy from their events, they were sending a message "that women belong behind men, not in
equal partnerships, and that this is God's will for men and women".
Karen Grasse from the University of Pennsylvania commented:
"I know many men who have taken 'Christian' teachings and used them as their God-given authority to
'keep a woman in her place' and maintain their male-leadership role. They refuse to let their wives get a job,
to go to college, have her own friends, dress the way she wants to, etc. They want to control a person in
order to be the 'leader.' And guess what a lot of Christian men do when their wives won't do what they tell
them to -- a little verbal hollering, a few slaps, a little hitting, to show them who's in charge because God
said so in the Bible."
"The Promise Keeper philosophy sounds harmless on the front end but indicates oppression of another
person is okay in order to practice the teachings. As Lucie Johnson has pointed out, the teachings indicate
'reclaim your leadership EVEN if the other person is opposed.'"
PK has been severely criticized for trying to bring all conservative Christian men together. One
Fundamentalist source describes this as "radical ecumenism", and criticizes PK's association with groups
lacking "doctrinal purity" and which are modernistic and worldly. 12 "Those who get involved with Promise
Keepers will also be trained in a blasphemous mixture of humanistic psychology and corrupt Christianity."
13, 14 Another source wrote that Promise Keepers "...founder and several of its leaders are part of the
Page 14 of 176
charismatic movement which is a major catalyst in the effort to bring about fellowship and eventual union
with the Roman Catholic Church; whereas, in truth, the Roman Catholic Church is a false church,
preaches a false gospel and is not a part of the body of Christ." 15
Gay-Lesbian Rights:
PK is opposed to equal rights for gays and lesbians, including the right to marry. They describe
homosexuality as a sin that "violates God's creative design for a husband and wife." The founder, Bill
McCartney served on the board of Colorado for Family Values, which sponsored the anti-gay
Amendment 2 in Colorado. That amendment barred local laws in the state of Colorado that guaranteed
equal rights for gays and lesbians. (It was later declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court.) A
PK spokesperson, Jim Jewell said at the time of the Washington DC rally that "The Bible and Promise
Keepers are preaching that any sex outside a marriage between a man and a woman violates God's
standards. If the charge against Promise Keepers is that we are taking the Bible too seriously or literally,
we plead guilty to that."
Freedom of Choice:
PK is opposed to women's access to abortion and to everyone's access to euthanasia. Their official
periodical stated: "The legal undermining of the sanctity of human life, from the pre-born to the old and
infirm, represents a rejection of America's two-century tenet that mankind is made in God's image and is
a repudiation of morality as a factor in court decisions". 9
Religious Intolerance:
There are religious tolerance and religious liberty concerns about the founder of Promise Keepers and
about at least one rally speaker.
While head coach at the University of Colorado, the American Civil Liberties Union criticized him for
instituting a mandatory pre-game prayer. Others criticized him for favoring Christian players. He has
Page 15 of 176
said: "The only way [that] God can be worshiped is through Jesus Christ."
Tom Claus, a Native American of the Mohawk tribe and a Christian angered some Native leader in
1996 when he spoke at a PK rally in a traditional headdress. His speech was interpreted by some as
exonerating Europeans for the invasion of North America and destruction of Native culture and
religion. His reasoning was that the end result of the conflict was the conversion of many Natives to
Christianity. A video of his comments was widely circulated among the American Indian community.
Vernon Foster, a director of the American Indian Movement commented: "He isn't speaking for the
Indian when he stands up and does his ministering. He's telling the United States its okay to oppress
Indian people, its okay to push Christianity on them."
Page 16 of 176
for Jesus Christ. It is worth noting that these rallies will inevitably be interpreted as political because of
the elections later that year. If the rallies were to be associated with the beginning of the new
millennium, they would have been be scheduled for 2001-JAN-1. He urged "an end to racism inside
the church of Jesus Christ" by the year 2000. He made no similar call for an end to sexism or
homophobia. He promised 37 free events over the next two years. He expected to expand the ministry
globally.
A group of pro-life activists has synchronized the start of their billboard campaign with the PK rally.
They will be erecting large portable anti-abortion billboards across the US. One will show the remains
of an aborted fetus beside pictures of lynched blacks and emaciated corpses from concentration camps.
Another billboard consists of four large photographs of a (rare) second-trimester abortion in progress.
A leader, Gregg Cunningham, said: "We have been systematically denied access to every forum. We
can’t get onto television, we can’t get into newspapers, we can’t get onto billboards, [and] we can’t get
into churches or classrooms or civic organizations. The last forum open to us is the public square."
Helen Alvare, who played a major role in the anti-abortion campaign by US Catholic Bishops,
predicted that the billboard campaign would probably alienate more people than it wins.
The Lesbian Avengers were there in full force. They had been told that they could not make a political
statement, so they removed their shirts and went topless instead. The men generally averted their eyes;
there were no whistles or catcalls. The Avengers said that the Promise Keepers are racist, homophobic
and want a return to patriarchy. They offered seven of their own promises, including fighting this
"perversion of Christianity". Katie Tobler, a young woman dressed only in shorts, said "Promise
Keepers has an agenda to put women back in the kitchen, to have babies and stay at home. They are a
fraud."
Laura Montgomery Rutt, Executive Director of the Alliance for Tolerance and Freedom attended the
rally. She reported that The Family Research Council, a Religious Right political organization put on
an advertising blitz to convince the rally attendees to join their group. They offered a free picture of the
Mall in return for a name and address to add to their database. In violation of the rules, PK solicited
money at the Mall; they gave out Bibles, which included envelopes for donations. Ms. Rutt reported
that: "They had minorities from many nationalities and races take the stand and 'absolve' them from
their sins of bigotry, including Hispanic, African American, Native American...The Atheists held signs
that said 'Real men don't pray'. NOW had a press rally." She attended a pre-event interfaith service that
promoted inclusion and tolerance for all people.
Page 17 of 176
Promise Keepers laid off its entire US staff of 345 employees, effective 1998-MAR-31, and become an
all-volunteer agency. 200 of them are in their head office in Denver, CO. In their press release, they
commented that this "represents a transition of a magnitude unique in the history of nonprofit
organizations."
The financial difficulties apparently arose because attendance at 1997 regional rallies had dropped by
about 50%. Many men did not go, preferring to attend the massive Washington DC meeting instead.
Admission to regular meetings cost $60; the Washington rally was free. Another cause was the decision
to lower admission fees in order to make it possible for more low income Christians to attend and to
attract more men that are non-Christian.
The layoffs were announced at a staff meeting on FEB-18. They asked each church across the US to
donate $1,000 to Promise Keepers. Founder Bill McCartney said "it's the will of God for churches to
give this money...If the church fails to do this, they will have missed the heart of God If they're a small
church, that doesn't let them off the hook. They need to ask a large church for the money." 5
Christianity Today (1998-MAY-18) announced that about 1,500 churches had given $1,000 or more;
others gave smaller donations. Some 35,000 individuals contributed money, making the total receipts
equal to 4 million dollars by APR-9. They recalled their employees; unfortunately, 70 had already
found alternative employment.
Their 1997 budget has been variously reported as $90 to 112 million; the 1998 budget will be $45
million
During 1998-OCT, they reduced their full time staff again, from 250 to 180. They are basing future
conferences on the Billy Graham crusade model. That involves an invitation from local churches,
which will do much of the organizing.
Page 18 of 176
Abortion is freely available, although not always conveniently accessible. There are very few
protests by pro-life groups.
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is banned; sexual orientation is a protected class,
similar to gender, age, nationality, etc.
Gay and lesbian partnerships are recognized in one province, British Columbia.
Earl Waugh, head of religious studies at the University of Alberta said that a major religious difference
between the US and Canada relates to the ties between religion and the state. He reasons that religious
organizations in Canada are less likely to criticize government policy or get involved in the political
process compared with the US. "While we do not have a state church, we have a number of semi-state
churches. They're less radical." Canadians have not followed the tradition of inter-denominational
worship that is common in the US.
Recent developments:
Attendance at 1998 rallies: Promise Keepers reported a severe reduction in attendance in its 1998
rallies compared to previous years. In the 12 months ending 1998-OCT-10, 454,000 men attended 19
PK events. One year previously, attendees totaled 638,000 at 19 events in stadiums and arenas plus
the 500,000 to 1 million men who attended the rally at the Washington DC mall. About 15 rallies are
planned for 1999. 6
Cancellation of 2000-JAN rallies: Promise Keepers had planned to hold rallies at the capitol
buildings of all 50 states in the U.S. on 2000-JAN-1. They have since canceled these plans because
of concern over the Y2K problem. Many conservative Christian leaders had prophesied that
computer program failures on that day will devastate the world. Neither the rallies nor the disasters
happened.
2000-FEB-7: PK has started a series of daily three-minute commentaries called "4th and Goal:
Coaching for life's tough calls." It was originally broadcast over 145 stations in the U.S.
2000-MAR layoffs: A news item dated as 2000-MAR-15 by the Calvary Contender, but received in
MAR-6 stated that PK has undergone a major restructuring. This included staff layoffs and the
closing of eight regional offices.
2000-JUN: PK held its first rally of the year in Lynchburg, VA during JUN-3/4. Attendance was
down compared to previous years. Fifteen more rallies are planned during 2000, starting with one at
Pittsburgh on JUN-23/24.
2001-DEC: PK conducted "Passage", an all-day conference in Columbus OH. An unknown number
of teenage males, ages 13 to 17 were taught about "integrity, courage, humility and faith". They
conducted conferences in 17 cities during 2001. 7
Promise Keepers Mixes Freudian Fables, Jungian Myths, & Other Self-Serving, Man-
Made Psychologies & Philosophies with Biblical Truth
The most dangerous lies are those that are stuffed in the skin of truth. That's what's happening in the PK
movement. Many of the preachers and teachers are teaching a psychological self-love/ self-esteem gospel
that is based on the humanistic psychological principles of Carl Rogers not the Bible. Then there are those
who promote the Freudian Fables and the Jungian Myths. By the way, Carl Jung admits that he got his
teachings from spirit guides (demons) one of whom was called Philemon (not the New Testament letter).
Their gospel message is connected to dealing with the "unconscious" needs and "repressed memories" we
Page 19 of 176
"all" have. Other speakers endorse the occult practices of visualization and inner healing and victimization
therapy.
That brings me to Dr. Robert Hicks, psychotherapist, pastor, and professor of pastoral theology. PK has
distributed thousands and thousands of his book The Masculine Journey and/or the accompanying Study
Guide. In chapter after chapter, subjective insights into manhood are offered through quotes by a host of
secular authors with a psychological or New Age bent. These include psycho-occultist Carl Jung, Inner-
healing therapist Leanne Payne, transpersonal New Age psychiatrist, and occultist/spiritualist Elizabeth
Kubler-Ross, a psychologist Sam Keen, former theologian in residence at Esalen, and the New Age/Eastern
mystical therapeutic center south of San Francisco. Keen's books feature vicious diatribes against biblical
Christianity. [4/94 the Berean Call]
One can also question Hicks concerning his lead-in quote to Chapter One from Former U.N. Secretary
General Dag Hammarskjold: "The longest journey is the journey inwards of him who has chosen his
destiny" (pure New Age); In Chapter Two there is a quote from evolutionist Charles Darwin. "Man with all
his noble qualities still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin."
The book is filled with heresy and New Age psychobabble. Hicks teaches that David was a "manic-
depressive" who's Psalms were the "musings" of a disordered mind (p. 114). [You have to be totally
indoctrinated by inner-healing psychobabble to derive even a jot of such nonsense from the Bible (4/94 The
Berean Call). This also shows Hicks' low view of Scripture.]
Hick's claims "Jesus...was the second Adam...was very much human...was also very much...phallic. ...I
believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent phallic passions we experience as men" (pp. 180-181). This
seems to be either the result of Freudian brainwashing or hanging out in locker rooms. Either way, its
blasphemous (4/94 The Berean Call).
That's not all. The blasphemous movie The Last Temptation of Christ is referred to in a positive light!
Claiming that Jesus is a "phallic male", Hicks says Jesus "may have thought about it as the
movie...portrays" (p. 181) - referring to Jesus thinking about having sexual relations with a woman! To cite
The Last Temptation of Christ as evidence that Jesus may have been tempted with lust for Mary Magdalene
is as blasphemous as that movie itself (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise Keepers, p. 6).
Hicks even justifies gay men being Christians by claiming that Jesus was also tempted with homosexuality
(p.181)!
The majority of the book keeps referring to the phallus. The first 70 pages do so clearly, and so does the
last chapter, "A New Male Journey". For example, Hicks says that all men have a "deep compulsion to
worship with our phallus" (p. 56). Hicks says - "Possessing a penis places unique requirements upon men
before God in how they worship Him. We are called to worship God as phallic kinds of guys, not as some
sort of androgynous, neutered non-males, or the feminized males so popular in many feminist-enlightened
churches" (p. 51). Hicks' "phallus" phraseology is clearly Freudian and brings forth images of Greek
paganism rather than biblical manhood (Jul/Aug 1994 PH Awareness Letter).
On what does Hicks base his teaching? Not the Bible! Yet PK officially endorse the book and it is used for
mentoring men.
"The organization possesses a morally good goal, but it is based on a doctrinally flawed foundation. Truth
is minimized and experienced is maximized." (Dr. Douglas R. McLachlan; Central Baptist Seminary
Testimony.
Page 21 of 176
The Woman on the Beast (17:1)
Page 23 of 176
psychological bent, including Carl Jung, inner-healing therapist Leanne Payne, transpersonal
psychiatrist/spiritualist Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, and Sam Keen, former theologian in residence at Esalen, the
New Age/Eastern mystical therapeutic center south of San Francisco. Keen's books feature vicious diatribes
against biblical Christianity.
"The author of The Masculine Journey, who is also a pastor and seminary professor of pastoral theology,
demonstrates what a perverting influence a psycho spiritual bias can have. Consider the following small
sampling of quotes (his and others) related to just two of man's alleged stages:
"The phallic stage: 'Possessing a [male sexual part] places unique requirements upon men before God in
how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of
androgynous, neutered nonmales, or the feminized males so popular in many feminist-enlightened
churches.' 'I believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent phallic passions we experience as men.'
"This seems to be either the result of Freudian brainwashing or hanging out in locker rooms. Either way, it's
blasphemous.
"Regarding man's (emotionally) wounded stage: 'In order for men to discover what manhood is all about,
they must descend into the deep places of their own souls and find their accumulated grief.' 'I am convinced
many men in our society today are lashing out at women, at society, at bosses, even at God--all because
they do not understand the wounding experience.' 'The story of Jacob ... illustrates a young man having
been severely wounded by a dysfunctional family system.'
"You have to be totally indoctrinated by inner-healing psychobabble to derive even a jot of such nonsense
from the Bible.
"There are just too many biblically erroneous teachings in Hick's book to cover here. Most involve his
interpretations based upon psychology. Where do you find male and female categories of emotional
wounds? or anatomically related worship? Where do you find understanding manhood as a key to a godly
life? You don't if you simply take Scripture at its word: 'There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus' (Gal. 3:28)."
That this type of psychobabble will permeate Promise Keepers is seen in the fact that those who attended
last summer's conference were encouraged to purchase the study guide for Hick's book and to form The
Masculine Journey study groups.
We conclude with the warning given by McMahon: "Dr. James Dobson, on a recent radio broadcast, held
out great hope that Promise Keepers would stir the coals of revival among men in this country. That is
indeed a worthwhile hope, but it grieves us deeply to see that the sparks of truth are being fanned into false
flames by the winds of psycho spirituality. The unbiblical preoccupation of this Christian men's movement
is with man himself and from man's perspective. It can only truly live up to Coach McCartney's exhortation
to contend for the faith by getting back to the basics of the faith. The emphasis has to be focusing on God
Himself, getting to know Him and His way through His Word. If not, it is at best doomed to a grace-barren,
fleshly form of godliness."
Page 24 of 176
"This movement is PROMOTING A DISREGARD FOR THE BIBLICAL TEACHING ON
ECCLESIASTICAL SEPARATION. This is a very difficult teaching to protect anyway, because the tide of
public opinion and even evangelical opinion is running strongly against separatists. It is not fashionable to
raise barriers and delineate theological truths sharply. When a major group like Promise Keepers urges the
Christian public to drop their `biases' and `prejudices' and rally together with all who call themselves
Christians, many within even fundamental churches are going to respond positively. Many think
fundamentalists are too contentious anyway and will welcome an opportunity to break away from what
they feel are overly-narrow parameters.
In most of our separatist churches there are people who are members, and even, in some cases, leaders, but
who do not really share the separatist convictions of the church. If the pastor does not promote Promise
Keepers, such people are likely to promote division in the church.
"Fundamental churches that become active in the Promise Keepers movement WILL BE EXPOSING
THEIR MEN TO TEACHINGS, PHILOSOPHIES, AND ACTIVITIES THAT ARE CONTRARY TO
THE HISTORIC POSITION OF THEIR CHURCH. While some men could perhaps attend rallies without
being negatively influenced away from their church's teachings, they will be relatively few in number. `Evil
communications corrupt good manners' (1 Cor. 15:33), or, as someone has rendered it, `Bad company
corrupts good character.' If men of a fundamental church associate on a regular basis in worship with
Roman Catholics and charismatics, their spiritual character is going to be corrupted, their discernment will
be impaired, and their stand for the faith will be weakened. This in turn will cause the entire church to shift
its position, since men are the leaders of the church. It will be gradual, but it will happen.
"As men participate in Promise Keepers, THEY WILL BE ATTRACTED TO LEADERS WHO ARE
NOT SOUND IN THEIR THEOLOGY AND PRACTICE. The speakers represent a wide spectrum of
theological teaching which would be contrary to the teaching of most fundamental churches. It is already
difficult for pastors of sound churches to protect their sheep from attractive and articulate persons like this.
They are featured in many public settings, author best- selling books, and appear on Christian radio and
television. A pastor does not need to give them further exposure to his people through Promise Keepers.
"Participating in the programs of Promise Keepers OPENS THE DOOR FOR FURTHER AND WIDER
COMPROMISES. Once you begin to ignore or at least minimize the importance of sound doctrine in favor
of certain perceived benefits, it is easier to continue doing this. Convictions begin to erode, and justification
is made for all manner of unholy alliances.
"To involve the men of a fundamental church with a group including many non-fundamentalists encourages
a pragmatic and `feeling-oriented' basis of judgment rather than a scriptural one. We are living in a society
that has largely replaced the objective with the subjective. The important point for many is `How do I feel
about this?' If one `feels good,' or `receives a blessing,' then the activity must be acceptable. To sing
rousing songs with 30,000 men in a stadium is exhilarating to many. They view it as an uplifting spiritual
experience without stopping to consider the theological ramifications of it. This is to put the judgments of
men above the judgments of God. Our prayer and aim ought to be that of the psalmist:
`Make me to go in the path of thy commandments, for therein do I delight' (Ps. 119:35). Our question
should not be whether or not we are having a `meaningful experience,' but whether we are walking in the
commandments of the Lord. Are the premises of Promise Keepers scriptural? This is the key question.
"To worship and cooperate with Roman Catholics and others who are in doctrinal error PROMOTES THE
IDEA THAT CORRECT DOCTRINE IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN FELLOWSHIP. This is a very
popular concept today in Christendom. One is reminded of the slogan of an organization that was one of the
forerunners of the World Council of Churches: `Doctrine divides, but service unites.' Many professed
evangelicals today follow that philosophy, though they may not articulate it in that way. But it is not God's
Page 25 of 176
emphasis. The early [churches] continued `in the apostle's doctrine and fellowship...' (Acts 2:42). Doctrine
is more important than fellowship and is listed first. Fellowship must be built on doctrine.
"There is at least one more potential result from involvement with Promise Keepers that might be harmful.
IT REMOVES THE CENTER OF BIBLICAL INSTRUCTION, AT LEAST IN SOME MATTERS,
AWAY FROM THE LOCAL CHURCH. Where are men supposed to be receiving their spiritual
instruction? The answer is clear from Scripture--from their pastor within the context of their own church.
This is not to say that one cannot be blessed and helped occasionally through the ministry of someone
outside the church. However, the New Testament emphasizes the fact that the God-appointed pastor is to be
the chief spiritual tutor.
"`And he gave some ... pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry,
for the edifying of the body of Christ' (Eph. 4:11,12). The leaders of the Promise Keepers are not the
pastors of the men to whom they minister. Whose responsibility is it to teach men about how to be fathers,
husbands, and spiritual leaders? It is the responsibility of the pastor. ...
"People will travel hundreds of miles and pay lots of money to sit and watch a noted leader put diagrams on
a huge overhead screen, and with much flourish and charisma tell them the very same things their pastor
has been telling them for many years. They will return to their homes, however, and tell their friends, `I
never heard such teaching! I learned so much!' The fact of the matter is, they heard little that their pastor
had not already told them many times. But to hear it in a different, more `exotic' setting from someone who
is supposed to be a noted `expert,' somehow seemed to give to it an authority heretofore unknown.
"Special problems can arise, however, when outside teachers, not part of the local church, give instruction
which is contrary to that given by the pastor. Bill McCartney, as an example, says it is perfectly all right to
worship with Roman Catholics, yet a man's pastor says it is not. A conflict is immediately engaged, and to
whom will the church member be loyal?
"I have kept the promises I made to the Lord when He saved me in 1973. I am thankful that salvation is not
based on my promises or my works but on the free unmerited grace of Jesus Christ because of His shed
Blood on Calvary.
But out of a repentant heart I made many promises to the Lord that I would serve Him and seek Him and
honor Him. I have failed miserably in so many ways, but this I can say: I have served the Lord Jesus Christ
for 22 years.
"I have not turned back to the world. I have continued in His Word. I have loved Him and served Him. I am
a promise keeper to the Lord. And as such I cannot affiliate myself with the Promise Keepers movement
which is contrary to His Word.
"I have kept the promises I made to my wife at our marriage altar on August 13, 1976. I vowed to love her
and to be faithful to her, to take care of her, to cleave to her until death do us part. I have done that. I am a
promise keeper. And as such I cannot affiliate myself with the unscriptural Promise Keepers movement
which seeks to insert psychology and self-esteem programs into the family instead of the pure Word of God
and the simple Scriptural pattern for the home.
"I have kept the promises I made before my ordination council. I was questioned in regard to my
understanding of and commitment to the sound doctrine of the New Testament Faith. I was given a solemn
charge to keep the that Faith and to be steadfast in work of God. I agreed to stand fast in the Word of God
and not to turn aside doctrinally or morally, and I have done that. I am a promise keeper. And as such I
cannot affiliate myself with the Promise Keepers movement which claims that doctrine is less important
than unity.
"I have kept the promises I have agreed to with my church. Ever since I was saved in 1973, I have been a
member of a Bible-believing Baptist Church. Each of those churches has had a Covenant which states the
responsibility of a church member as laid out in the Word of God. I have kept those Covenants for 22
years. I am a promise keeper. And as such I cannot affiliate myself with the Promise Keepers movement
which promotes things contrary to our church covenant."
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON PROMISE KEEPERS SEE
Way of Life Literature's Web Site
http://www.wayoflife.org/
Page 28 of 176
practice of using some speakers who are identified with denominations that are apostate or charismatic"
(General Association of Regular Baptists, June 25, 1997).
Another Baptist group which has publicly testified against Promise Keepers is the National Convention of
Free Will Baptists. At their 1997 convention in Cincinnati, Ohio, they issued a motion "urging our people
and our churches to avoid Promise Keepers and instructing denominational departments and employees not
to promote nor participate in the movement."
Other organizations and associations which have taken a public or written stand against Promise Keepers
include the American Council of Christian Churches, the Ohio Bible Fellowship, the Fundamental
Evangelistic Association, Mission to Catholics, Media Spotlight, Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries,
Independent Baptist Fellowship of North America, Bob Jones University, Biblical Discernment Ministries,
The Berean Call ministry, and Baptist World Mission. This is only a small sampling.
Douglas Comin, Reformed Presbyterian pastor, has written a booklet entitled Promise Keepers in the Light
of Scripture (413 W. 8th St., Washington, IA 52353).
Douglas Wilson and David Hagopian have written a book warning about Promise Keepers. It is entitled
Beyond Promises: A Biblical Challenge to Promise Keepers (1996, 269 pages, Canon Press, P.O. Box
8741, Moscow, Idaho 83843). It has been recommended by such well-known Evangelical leaders as John
MacArthur, Jr., John Armstrong, R.C. Sproul, Jr., and Don Matzat. MacArthur says of the book, "I found
the entire book deeply thought-provoking and profoundly sobering. ... My prayer is that it will help
multitudes of men from making shipwreck of the faith."
We don't agree with these men on a number of important issues. We also do not agree with them that there
is much redeeming good in Promise Keepers, but it is our purpose here to note that a broad range of
Evangelical leaders are publicly warning of Promise Keepers.
Another example of the testimony against Promise Keepers is Phil Arms’ book Promise Keepers Another
Trojan Horse (1997, 414 pages, Shiloh Publishers, P.O. Box 770, Alief, TX 77411; 800 829-9673). Arms,
pastor of Houston Church in Houston, Texas, spent 15 years as a Southern Baptist evangelist. He has
spoken to hundreds of thousands of students on high school and college campuses. He has a national
weekly television ministry called Phil Arms Presents.
Let me give one more example. Dr. A.L. Barry, President of The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, in a
letter to a church member who asked about Promise Keepers, gave clear warning about PK's doctrinal
error. This letter was published in its entirety in Christian News, June 10, 1996. Following are some
excerpts:
"In your letter you do raise a number of important concerns about the PK movement. I have watched the
PK movement develop. The background of the movement is important for us to understand. It traces its
theological roots to the Pentecostal movement. For instance, the magazine of the PK movement features
many advertisements from charismatic and Pentecostal organizations. The magazine itself is published by
individuals who have been associated with a popular charismatic magazine called Charisma. So, we need
to be cautious as we hear the PK movement's doctrinal assertions.
"The PK movement very purposefully de-emphasizes the importance of complete faithfulness to the Word
of God. They tend to overlook differences between denominations as not all that important. The Holy
Scriptures time and again urge us to be completely faithful to all that Jesus has given us ... The PK
movement tends to view specific doctrinal points of disagreement as non-essential, unimportant and thus
able to be overlooked. This would explain why the PK movement offered Holy Communion to a very
diverse crowd of people at the PK clergy conference recently held in Atlanta.
Page 29 of 176
Differences must be ignored in order to facilitate this sort of ecumenical gathering, which we would
describe as unionist. Because God commands us to be faithful to the whole counsel of His word it is both
dishonest and insincere for us to pretend that differences do not 'matter' or are 'insignificant' and thus join in
fellowship with those who do not accept the teachings of the Word on whatever the subject might be, the
sacraments or the doctrine of regeneration, or justification, faith, sanctification and all the rest.
The PK movement downplays differences in these key areas and tries to reduce everything to a very
simplistic formulaic approach to the Faith. The PK movement tends to accept the notion that there is a
'generic' sort of Christianity to which the various denominations add their particular emphases, sort of like a
'base' of paint to which various colors are added to give the paint the particular color desired. ...
"Overlooking differences is not an option for the faithful man of God. Recognizing them and realizing that
in this life we may have to separate over them is a responsible choice, as opposed to simply 'agreeing to
disagree' and then neglecting these divisive issues" (A.L. Barry, President, The Lutheran Church - Missouri
Synod, Christian News, June 10, 1996).
FRIENDS, PROMISE KEEPERS HAS DRAWN SOME LARGE CROWDS, BUT BY NO MEANS IS
THERE A CONSENSUS AMONG CHRISTIANS THAT THIS MOVEMENT IS FAITHFUL TO THE
WORD OF GOD. ANY MOVEMENT MUST BE TESTED BY THE WORD OF GOD, NOT BY THE
EXPERIENCE OF THOSE WHO ATTEND ITS MEETINGS.
At Way of Life Literature's End Times Apostasy Online Database, there are dozens of articles exposing the
error of the Promise Keepers movement -- http://www.wayoflife.org/special/spec001.htm
Promise Keepers’ stated goal is to target men of ALL DENOMINATIONS and ethnic groups who desire to
promote personal integrity and moral accountability. The response has been phenomenal. A crowd of 4,200
men attended the first convention at the Coors’ Event Center in Boulder in 1991. By 1994, roughly 300,000
men attended seven conferences. The organization’s financial and numerical peak was achieved in 1997.
PK’s “Stand in the Gap” rally in Washington, D.C., in October 1997 drew as many as one million men. Not
only have hundreds of thousands of men attended PK conferences, but permanent local PK groups have
also been established in many parts of the country.
The Promise Keepers movement encourages men to adopt the “Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper.”
Promise Number six states, “A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any ... denominational
barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity.” That is ecumenism, and Promise Keepers is one of the
most ecumenically successful movements in history.
Page 30 of 176
When men of God warn about this and expose Promise Keepers’ ecumenism, though, two very different
types of responses occur. First, some Promise Keepers defenders admit the ecumenical aspects of PK and
glory in them. Second, other Promise Keepers defenders deny that PK is ecumenical in any unscriptural
sense.
A case in point is information available on one of the unofficial Promise Keepers Internet Web sites. Posted
on this site is “Promise Keepers Controversy--a Defense of Promise Keepers Ministry”--an extensive
apologetic against the charges, which have been made by fundamentalist Bible-believing Christians.
Consider an excerpt:
“The doctrinal error that is cited concerning Promise Keepers is its ‘ecumenical emphasis.’ Indeed one of
the stated goals of Promise Keepers is to ‘break down denominational barriers’ and promote unity among
Christians, but by definition a Christian is one who has ‘accepted by faith God’s gift of salvation which was
made possible by Christ’s death.’ This would not include liberals who deny substitutionary atonement, or
Roman Catholics who believe they are saved through the church or the sacraments. This would include all
who have come to genuine faith in Christ, without regard to the denominational label they may wear.”
The author of this, Jim Korth, says that his information is based on Promise Keepers books, attendance at a
Promise Keepers conference, and an interview with Dallas Seminary professor Howard Hendricks, who
speaks at PK meetings.
The problem is that Pastor Korth’s defense of Promise Keepers denies the facts. He says that the unity
sought by Promise Keepers does not include “Roman Catholics who believe they are saved through the
church or the sacraments.”
Every Catholic who accepts Roman Catholic doctrine believes that the church and the sacraments have a
part in salvation. The New Catholic Catechism states: “The Church affirms that for believers the
sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation” (1129). Words could not be plainer.
It is evident that Roman Catholics believe the sacraments are necessary for salvation. Are Roman Catholics
participating in Promise Keepers?
First, we need to point out that Bill McCartney has never rejected the Roman Catholic Church. The
following overview is from Dave Hunt’s The Berean Call:
“Bill McCartney was a lifetime devout Roman Catholic who attended Mass daily until he visited the
Boulder Vineyard Fellowship, liked the pastor’s preaching, and began attending there. He has never broken
with the Catholic Church. If he has, then let us hear it from him: when he left Romanism and why --i.e.,
what was wrong with it that caused him to leave and why he would seek to rescue other Catholics from its
errors. Any ex-Catholic I have ever known came out of that church because of having come to know the
Lord Jesus Christ personally as Savior, and thereafter desired to see other Catholics delivered from Rome’s
false gospel. In contrast, McCartney accepts Catholics as Christians and sees no reason to evangelize them.
“In his autobiography, From Ashes to Glory, McCartney admits that as a ‘daily communicant in the
Catholic Church’ he ‘had never been encouraged to read the Bible, so ... knew nothing about the Word of
God’ and ‘had been totally without a clue about what it’s like to be a whole-hearted, committed Christian’
(p 110). Those statements alone condemn Catholicism! He then tells what he apparently offers as his
conversion story (pp. 110-13) and calls himself a ‘born-again Catholic.’ In fact, it sounds like a ‘dedication’
of his life to Christ, as though he thinks he was already saved and is confusing ‘sanctification’ with
‘salvation.’
“His next statement is even more confusing: ‘Making a profession of faith like I did may not be expected
Page 31 of 176
and may not even be important in the Catholic church.’ This is an astounding declaration if he has just
related how he got saved! No ex-Catholic who has come to faith in Christ as his Savior would ever say that
to do so would not be essential for other Catholics. In fact, he would insist that they, like all mankind, are
lost and on their way to hell until they receive Christ and look to Him alone for their eternal salvation
instead of to their Church and its sacraments. Clearly McCartney has no such conviction” (The Berean
Call, November 1996).
Further, PK Founder Bill McCartney said plainly that Roman Catholics are invited to participate in Promise
Keepers. He did not specify what kind of Roman Catholics. In an interview with the Catholic publication
Our Sunday Visitor, McCartney said that full Catholic participation was his intention from the start. “Back
in 1992, at our first stadium event, we very clearly stated from the podium that we eagerly welcomed the
participation of Roman Catholics, and we’ve had scores of Roman Catholics attend and go back to their
churches excited” (Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, p. 10).
In 2001, Bill McCartney told the press that he considers the Roman Catholic Church “a legitimate Christian
church.” Following is an excerpt from a telephone interview with Richard Scheinin of Knight Ridder News
Service:
Question by Richard Scheinin: What parts of your Catholic upbringing do you hold onto?
Answer by Bill McCartney: I know many Catholics love God with all their heart. I have genuine respect for
anyone who truly has given their life to Christ. We read about Mother Teresa and her heart and what a
wonderful example she was.
A. I had a born-again experience at the age of 33. And as a result of that I found a church to fellowship in
where I felt I was being fed properly. I don’t say that as a reflection on Catholicism. But once I was born
again, I got an evangelical spirit.
A. Of course. (“Men’s faith group founder keeping his Promise,” The Daily Oklahoman, Sept. 15, 2001, p.
6B).
Thus it is obvious that Bill McCartney does not believe that Rome preaches a false gospel. He considers
Mother Teresa a genuine Christian even though she was committed to Rome’s sacramental faith-works
gospel, she prayed to Mary, and worshipped the mass wafer. (See “Was Mother Teresa a True Christian” in
the Fundamental Baptist CD-ROM Library.) Bill McCartney’s position is entirely contradictory and
untenable. He claims to have accepted an evangelical gospel even while continuing to hold to Rome’s false
gospel. This is impossible. You cannot believe in the truth and in lies, too. You cannot worship God and
idols. You cannot believe in a true gospel and a false gospel. This demonstrates the incredible confusion
that is created by the positive-only, judge-nothing ecumenical philosophy!
Roman Catholic paper The Tidings (March 31, 1995) stated that Promise Keepers is “being expanded to
include Catholic congregations.” Catholics were encouraged to participate in Promise Keepers because
“there is no doctrinal issue which should cause concern to the Catholic Church” and “there is no attempt at
proselytizing or drawing men away from their [Catholic] faith to another church.”
According to the December 1995 issue of the Charismatic Roman Catholic publication New Covenant, a
Promise Keepers group was formed in a Catholic parish in Tallahassee, Florida.
Page 32 of 176
Catholic priest John Salazar spoke at a Promise Keepers meeting in Plainview, Texas, in December 1995.
A local newspaper reported, “Father John Salazar, who leads Catholic churches in Kress and Tulia,
implored listeners to value themselves because they were made in the image of God. . . . ‘That is the Jesus
Christ we need to bring, especially to other men and to young men,’ Salazar said to an audience that
encompassed everyone from quietly reverent Episcopalians to openly enthusiastic Pentecostals” (Lubbock
Avalanche-Journal, Lubbock, Texas, December 3, 1995).
The Promise Keepers field representative for the upper Midwest, Steve Jenkins, is a Roman Catholic. He
represents Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Iowa, and Wisconsin. He became involved in Promise
Keepers after attending the 1992 PK conference in Boulder, Colorado.
The March-April 1996 issue of the respected Foundation magazine reported the following relevant bit of
information: “Some people find it difficult to believe that Roman Catholics are actually participants in the
Promise Keepers movement, but it is true. A Promise Keepers Wake Up Call brochure distributed in San
Louis Obispo, Calif., urges pastors, churches and their men to attend special rallies during March, one of
which is to be held at the St. Rose Catholic Church in Paso Robles, Calif. This fact was confirmed by a
phone call to the Promise Keepers leader in that church.”
In 1997 Promise Keepers appointed a Roman Catholic, Mike Timmis, to its Board of Directors (1997
Summer Conference brochure for the Franciscan University of Steubenville).
One of the speakers at several of 1997 PK rallies was Roman Catholic “evangelist” Jim Berlucchi
(“Making New Catholic Men?” Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, p. 10).
In June 1997, Promise Keepers hosted a Catholic Summit at its headquarters in Denver, “sounding out
Catholic volunteers and leaders from around the world” (Ibid.).
In June 1997 Promise Keepers organized a Roman Catholic mass as part of its Rich Stadium conference in
Buffalo, New York. About 50 men participated in the mass, which was designed to prepare Catholic men
for the Promise Keepers conference. Catholic priests participated in the clergy luncheon that Promise
Keepers also conducted prior to the conference (John Swomley, The Humanist, Sept. 19, 1997).
In January 1998, Roman Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver gave a “thumbs-up” to Catholic
men who want to participate in Promise Keepers (The Catholic Register, quoted in Religious News Service,
Jan. 19, 1998). Chaput’s remarks followed a lunch meeting with Promise Keepers founder Bill McCartney.
Chaput stated that though Catholics have legitimate concerns about the PK movement, they are obligated to
“joyfully embrace groups like Promise Keepers.” The Catholic Archbishop said a chief concern was
Promise Keepers failure to understand that the Bible alone is not the Christian authority. He said that
Catholics also believe in “sacred tradition” and noted that “the church preceded Scripture.” He said that the
Catholic Church has been given the authority “to interpret, teach and safeguard the Scripture.” He said that
task resides with the Catholic bishops. According to this false and blasphemous Catholic dogma, the Bible
does not rule the church, the “church” rules the Bible. The Catholic Church claims that no one can
understand the Bible properly apart from its authority. Chaput said that in early March he will conduct a
Catholic mass for Catholic members of Promise Keepers.
Roman Catholic Ralph Martin was a speaker at the Promise Keepers conference in western Michigan in
August 1998. Fundamentalist Digest Editor Don Jasmin attended the meeting with press credentials and
noted: “The PK emphasis is more dangerously ecumenical than ever, with Roman Catholics now occupying
strategic places of prominence in administration and operation...” (Calvary Contender, February 15, 1999).
Promise Keepers holds weekly meetings at St. Anthony’s Catholic Church in Lakeland, Florida. Lakeland
Page 33 of 176
is my hometown, and I personally saw this meeting advertised on St. Anthony’s signboard on a visit with
my relatives in August 1999. I also called St. Anthony’s and spoke with a representative of the church. I
was told that their weekly Promise Keepers meetings are connected with the national Promise Keepers
organization and that the group is scheduled to attend the Promise Keepers conference at the Tropicana
Dome soon. The meetings are led by John Angel, who works at St. Anthony’s.
Since 1995, Promise Keepers representatives have been featured at the Catholic Men’s Conferences held at
the Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio. The July 23, 1995 issue of Today’s Catholic contained an
article entitled “Promise Keepers Christian crusade draws Catholic men.” This paper reported that in July
1995, an official Promise Keepers Leadership Seminar was conducted at the Catholic Franciscan
University of Steubenville (Ohio). More than 600 Catholic men participated. The meeting concluded with a
Catholic mass led by the school’s president, priest Michael Scanlon. This same priest distributed elements
at one of the masses at the North American Congress on the Holy Spirit & World Evangelization in New
Orleans, July 1987. I attended this massive charismatic-ecumenical conference with press credentials.
Scanlan is a traditional Catholic. He believes the sacraments are necessary for salvation. He believes he can
turn the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper into the very body and blood of Christ. He prays the rosary.
He prays to Mary, hailing her as “the Mother of God.”
At another North American Congress on the Holy Spirit & World Evangelization, held in Indianapolis in
August 1996 (which I also attended with press credentials), he told the story of being jailed for
participating in ecumenical anti-abortion marches. During his time in jail he conducted masses and taught
the Protestants how to pray the rosary. He considered it a great achievement that some of the Protestant
anti-abortion crusaders adopted the rosary into their worship. This Catholic priest will not give up any of
his heretical doctrines, but he certainly is not opposed to teaching them to any gullible “Protestants” who
will listen. And now he is a participant in Promise Keepers.
Promise Keepers representatives Dale Schlafer and Glenn Wagner spoke at the Franciscan University in
1995 and again at the May 31 - June 2, 1996 “Christian Men’s Conference.” The Franciscan University
sponsors annual “Defending the Faith” conferences, in which Catholic dogma is upheld and defended with
great boldness. The Catholicism of the Franciscan University is even more dangerous than traditional
Catholicism because its adoption of charismatic experience has given it a semblance of biblical piety and
spiritual fervor. This university sponsored a conference in June 1996 dedicated to “Mary as spouse of the
Holy Spirit.” The announcement said, “Rediscover Mary’s prophetic role through her recent apparitions.”
The Franciscan University Summer Conference Magazine advertises pilgrimages to Mary shrines. The
theme of the 1996 issue was “Following Pope John Paul II into the Third Millennium.” The cover of the
1997 issue features this prayer by Franciscan University President Michael Scanlan: “With renewed fervor,
we re-consecrate our lives and our work to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”
When Promise Keepers leaders Dale Schlafer and Glenn Wagner returned to the Franciscan University in
1996, they attended a Catholic mass. Their guide, John Sengenberger, an official at the university,
explained that the mass only made sense “if you believe in the real presence of Jesus” (Our Sunday Visitor,
July 20, 1997). This, of course, is true. The Vatican Council II stated that in the mass “Christ perpetuates in
an unbloody manner the sacrifice offered on the cross, offering himself to the Father for the world’s
salvation through the ministry of priests” (Vatican II, The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Instruction
on the Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery, Introduction, C 1,2, p. 108).
Page 34 of 176
“In this sacrament Christ is present in a unique way, whole and entire, God and man, substantially and
permanently” (Ibid., Instruction on the Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery, Chap. 1, E, p. 114). Further,
the Catholic Church teaches that the mass is a necessary part of salvation. Vatican II stated: “As often as
the sacrifice of the cross by which ‘Christ our Pasch is sacrificed’ (1 Cor. 5:7) is celebrated on the altar, the
work of our redemption is carried out” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Chapter 1, 3, p. 324).
This doctrine is blasphemy. It denies the once-for-all finished atonement of Jesus Christ, and it exalts sinful
men to the place of God in claiming to have the power to offer the very Jesus Christ on their altars. When a
Roman Catholic bows before the consecrated wafer of the mass, he thinks he is bowing literally before
Jesus Christ. The wafer is placed in a “tabernacle” and is available to be prayed to and worshipped between
masses. Consider the following solemn statement from the authoritative Vatican II Council of the mid-
1960s:
“All the faithful ought to show to this most holy sacrament the worship which is due to the true God, as has
always been the custom of the Catholic Church. Nor is it to be adored any the less because it was instituted
by Christ to be eaten. For even in the reserved sacrament he is to be adored because he is substantially
present there through that conversion of bread and wine which, as the Council of Trent tells us, is most
aptly named transubstantiation” (Vatican II, The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Instruction on the
Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery, Intro., C 6, pp. 109,10).
During the aforementioned mass at Franciscan University, John Sengenberger knelt on his knees before the
consecrated wafer, then he fell prostrate upon his face before it. In his mind he was worshipped God in the
form of the wafer, but in reality he was worshipping a man-made idol, for there is absolutely no biblical
authority for the Catholic mass. There is not even New Testament instruction for the appointment of
priests, and without a consecrated priesthood there can be no mass. SENGENBERGER SAID THAT
PROMISE KEEPERS LEADER GLENN WAGNER, A VICE PRESIDENT OF THE ORGANIZATION,
FOLLOWED HIS EXAMPLE AND PROSTRATED BEFORE THE IDOLATROUS WAFER (Our
Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997).
This Catholic institution is a participant in Promise Keepers, and has been since 1995. This is plain
evidence that though Promise Keepers claims to preach the true gospel, it refuses to expose false gospels
and it willingly joins hands with those who are committed to false gospels.
Are these Roman Catholics confused about Promise Keepers’ doctrines and goals? Have they been
mislead? Why do they have the idea that Promise Keepers will accept them regardless of their false
doctrine? I will tell you why. Because Promise Keepers already has accepted them and has made no issue
of doctrine whatsoever. For Promise Keepers representatives to claim that they only desire unity among
those who follow the true Gospel is a deception. Further, for them to claim that their only motive in inviting
Roman Catholics to participate with them is evangelism, is nonsense. The facts refute this.
The Promise Keepers’ doctrinal statement is weak enough to allow for all sorts of false doctrine. In fact, in
1997, it amended its statement of faith, revising some of the lines that Catholics had found offensive (Our
Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, pp. 10,11).
Section five of the PK statement of faith read: “We believe that man was created in the image of God, but
because of sin, was alienated from God. That alienation can be removed only by accepting, through faith
alone, God’s gift of salvation, which was made possible by Christ’s death.”
After receiving a review of their statement by Catholic theologians in the summer of 1997, Promise
Keepers changed the previous statement to the following: “Only through faith, trusting in Christ alone for
salvation, which was made possible by His death and resurrection, can that alienation be removed.” This
statement was accepted by the Catholic theologians who reviewed Promise Keepers’ position, whereas the
Page 35 of 176
previous statement was rejected.
Those not familiar with Rome’s false gospel might not understand the importance of this apparently
insignificant difference. Rome does not deny that salvation is through Christ alone (though he redefines this
to mean Christ through the Catholic Church). The Roman Catholic Church acknowledges that salvation is
through faith and grace which was made possible by Christ’s death and resurrection. What Rome denies is
that salvation is through faith ALONE by grace ALONE as a gift ALONE ENTIRELY WITHOUT
WORKS OR SACRAMENTS! In fact, the Catholic Council of Trent, which is still in force, placed a curse
upon anyone who teaches this.
The article in Our Sunday Visitor claims that “by faith alone” is a doctrine devised by Martin Luther. This
is perfect nonsense. Salvation by grace alone through faith alone is precisely the Gospel preached by the
Apostles and given to us in the Word of God. Paul described this Gospel by revelation in Romans 3:23 -
4:6. It is the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone without works of any kind. Paul also
carefully described the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Again, there is not one word about works or
sacraments. The Gospel is salvation through faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Period. It is Christ alone, grace alone, faith alone, no works, no sacraments. Praise the Lord!
When the Philippian jailer asked the Apostles, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” they said, “Believe on
the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house” (Acts 16:30,31). Nothing here about works
or sacraments or church or priests.
The Lord Jesus Christ taught the same thing, of course. When the crowd asked Christ, “What shall we do,
that we might work the works of God?” he replied, “This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom
he hath sent” (John 6:28,29). Again, nothing here about works or sacraments. John 3:16 says “whosoever
believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life.” Faith alone. Faith in Christ, plus nothing and
minus nothing.
Biblical grace means the unmerited eternal salvation of God which comes freely and directly to the
believing sinner through the atonement of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:24 -- 4:6; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9; Tit. 3:4-7). The
Roman Catholic Church has redefined grace to include sacraments. “Grace,” by Rome’s definition, means
Christ, by His death, has provided (“made possible”) salvation to be distributed by the Catholic church to
those sinners who adhere to its sacraments. The New Catholic Catechism states: “The Church affirms that
for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation” (1129). Words could not be
plainer.
We see that Promise Keepers leadership has bent over backwards to increase Catholic participation in its
movement and to calm the fears of Catholic leaders about the prospect of Catholic men leaving Romanism
because of their participation at Promise Keepers events. They are not requiring that Roman Catholics
reject Rome’s false doctrines. Promise Keepers leaders are not exposing Rome’s blasphemous gospel and
doctrines that have led multitudes to eternal damnation. PK leaders are faced with the same dilemma as all
ecumenists. If they were to preach the truth boldly and identify false doctrine plainly, it would destroy their
ecumenical agenda. The Apostles were not content merely to preach the Gospel in a positive manner; they
continually exposed false gospels and warred against doctrinal perversion. We are to follow in their
footsteps. Our commission is to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3). We are
to fight for the truth and AGAINST error. Promise Keepers leaders refuse to do this.
In explaining the doctrinal change, Paul Edwards, a Promise Keepers vice president, said the PK statement
of faith is “a dynamic document” and that “Promise Keepers is open to change.” He said: “Truth and unity
are equal, but in tension. We try to present truth, not washed down, yet not truth that devolves into
Page 36 of 176
denominational squabbles” (Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997). This is absolutely false. Truth and unity
are not equal. The Bible exalts truth far above any man-made unity. The goal of Promise Keepers to hold to
truth in the midst of an ecumenical unity between denominations in this apostate day is an absolutely
impossibility. Truth is the loser.
A wise pastor said, “We will have either a limited fellowship or a limited message.” Those who preach the
whole counsel of God find that their fellowship is extremely limited today. It is impossible to preach the
whole counsel of God, like Paul did (Acts 20:27), and have a broad-based Promise Keepers-type
fellowship. The Apostle Paul was concerned about the purity of the Gospel, but he was also concerned
about the purity of every detail of Bible doctrine.
In all of this we have evidence that the leaders of Promise Keepers are playing politics with their
ecumenical agenda. When questioned by concerned “Protestants” about Catholic participation in Promise
Keepers, they claim they want Catholics to come simply because they want them to hear the Gospel and be
saved. When questioned by Catholics about Catholic participation in Promise Keepers, they claim they
want to receive Catholics as they are, as brothers in Christ, without any desire to evangelize them away
from their “church.”
For more information see the following articles at Way of Life Literature’s End Times Apostasy Online
Database at http://www.wayoflife.org/special/spec0001.htm
Page 38 of 176
Many of the Promise Keepers speakers support women pastors. T.D. Jakes is an example. He is the popular
black Church of God in Christ conference speaker and pastor of the Potter’s House in Dallas, Texas. He
often speaks at Promise Keepers meetings. In an interview with Charisma magazine, Dec. 16, 1996, Jakes
was asked what he believes about women as pastors. He replied: "I try to avoid setting myself up as a judge
to tell anybody what God did or did not call them to do. There are many women who are celebrated as
ministers: Marilyn Hickey, Joyce Meyer, Jackie McCullough, Dr. Iona Locke, Ernestine Reems and Iverna
Tompkins. Many women are making a contribution to the body of Christ." This is typical New Evangelical-
Promise Keepers-type doublespeak. He is positive, up-beat, non-controversial. In regard to the hard issues
he is a fence-straddler. In spite of the clear teaching of the Word of God, in spite of the fact that the Apostle
Paul solemnly forbade women to preach or usurp authority over men, Jake refuses to judge whether it is
right or wrong for a woman to be a pastor. He refuses to enter into controversy and risk destroying his
popularity. Instead of basing his answer on the Word of God, he bases it on pragmatism. He points to
women who appear to be successful in the ministry. In other words, if it works, it must be right.
Their position in support of female pastors is another evidence that Promise Keepers is willing to ignore the
Word of God to further their own agenda.
Page 39 of 176
3. A PK is committed to practicing spiritual, moral, ethical, and sexual purity.
4. A PK is committed to building strong marriages and families through love, protection, and biblical
values.
5. A PK is committed to supporting the mission of his church by honoring and praying for his pastor and by
actively giving his time and resources.
6. A PK is committed to reaching beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power
of biblical unity.
7. A PK is committed to influencing his world, being obedient to the Great Commandment and the Great
Commission (Mike Betancourt, ed., "Promise Keepers: Should Fundamentalists Get Involved?" O
Timothy, 12, No. 4, 1995, p. 8).
Isn't that tremendous? Shouldn't every pastor rejoice and throw his support behind PK? In a word No. In
the next few pages, observe the many fatal flaws in the foundation of this movement--flaws that we will
call:
False Premise #3 - If it combines Gods truth with mans truth, it must be right
There is a burgeoning market for PK-endorsed books on ways to revive the role of "Christian manhood."
The views and methods may differ but they share the flaw of attempting to combine Scripture with the
psychological theories and methods of man. Robert Hicks book, The Masculine Journey, is a prime
example. Hicks twists the meaning of six Hebrew words for "man" to fit his own psychological theories of
manhood. He
"follows the predictable pattern of the integrationist. He takes a psychological theory, believes it to be
valid... and then considers what the Bible might add" (Martin and Deidre Bobgan, "Promise Keepers and
Psycho heresy," Psycho heresy Awareness Letter 2, No. 4, July-August 1994, p. 4).
He blasphemes the Lord Jesus by declaring that He was tempted to be homosexual and that He lusted
sexually (Albert James Dager, "Promise Keepers: Is What You See What You Get?" Media Spotlight,
1994, p. 6). He speaks of man's need for "celebrating the experience of sin" in adolescence as a "rite of
passage" (Bobgan, "Promise Keepers and Psycho heresy," p. 6).
Additionally, PK finds itself on the horns of a dilemma in regard to its treatment of homosexuality. PK
officially declares that it
"shares the same historic and biblical stance taken by Evangelicals and Catholics (Fax, "Promise Keepers
Statement," sent to Pastor Greg Dixon, Indianapolis Baptist Temple, Dec. 8, 1993).
Yet in trying to placate as many people as possible they conclude just as officially that this abomination is
"a complex and potentially polarizing issue to be understood in the context of psychology and genetic
research" (Ibid.).
They state that "homosexuals are men who need the same support, encouragement and healing we are
offering to all men.... We, therefore, support their being included and welcome in all our events" (Ibid.).
Whatever happened to condemning sin and calling for repentance and receiving the Gospel?
Page 41 of 176
No fundamentalist in his right mind would ever associate with the hodgepodge of men and ministries
involved with PK. God has declared for us to come out from among them and be ye separate (11
Corinthians 6:17).
Page 42 of 176
But wait a minute. Think about it. Do these pastors understand the condescending connotations of these
mammoth pity parties? PK purposes to do what churches and their leaders have failed to do. PK is in effect
saying,
"You poor guys. You have beaten yourselves silly trying to do this job. We truly appreciate your efforts,
but you are so tired and ill-equipped. Why don't you just step aside and let us handle the job? We love you
because your failure to do your job effectively has given us a reason to exist."
These pastors were also being cheered for renouncing their "denominational barriers" as sin (Mark Nispel,
"Promise Keepers 1994," Christian News, 32, No. 34, Sept. 19, 1994, p. 7). This indicates that PK not only
embraces the false doctrine of inclusivism, but strongly opposes the Bible doctrine of separation. This is
blatant blasphemy against God's Word. God pronounces woe on those who are guilty of it (Isaiah 5:20).
McCartney has said, "that he thought perhaps the Lord's main purpose for Promise Keepers was to gather
his clergy" and in 1995 he hopes "to gather 75,000 of them in Denver."' Pastors, if you love the Lord and
honor His Word, keep yourself and your men far from PK.
Page 43 of 176
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE
PROMISE KEEPERS?
It's Leaders Espouse Views That Are Antithetical to the Bible's
Teachings, and Outside the Realm of Mainstream Belief"
"Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from
God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." -- 1 John 4:1
By MATT ANDREWS
How faithful to the Word of God, is the Promise Keepers men's movement? How close of an association do
its founders and board members have with the charismatic fringe? What theology is really being espoused
by its guest speakers, and in the numerous books, videos, and other materials that carry the PK official
statement similar to the hierarchy of the Catholic Church that a literary work is free from error in matters of
catholic doctrine and morals, and authorizing therefore their reading by the PK faithful?
These and other legitimate questions have largely been overlooked as this evangelical Christian men's
group attracts uncritical and enthusiastic press coverage, and its ranks of members swell with every big
conference it holds.
"PK", as it is affectionately called by its followers, has been described by Time magazine as "one of the
century s fastest-growing religious phenomena". It attracts a largely white, male, middle-class Protestant
audiences who listen to soft Christian rock and hard Christian preaching, and weep in one another's arms.
Page 44 of 176
Founded in 1990 by Bill McCartney, the controversial and outspoken ex-coach of the University of
Colorado football team, the Promise Keepers movement has grown in Malthusian proportions.
McCartney's idea was to organize a nondenominational parachurch that would minister to and disciple men
to "celebrate Biblical manhood and motivate men toward a Christ-like masculinity."
He came up with the concept of men-only stadium rallies -- a combination of Super Bowl game and revival
meeting.
Though his idea attracted only 72 participants in 1990, more than 727,000 "Jesus Jocks" -- as one British
publication called them -- came to PK events last year. They have filled arenas from Detroit's Silverdome
to Washington's RFK Stadium, from Minneapolis' Metrodome to Atlanta's Georgia Dome, for 20 Promise
Keeper two-day marathons.
Its leaders say they are tapping into a mass identity crisis among American males, who have for a long time
felt isolated, powerless and disenfranchised by a society in transition that seems to view them as
expendable.
They trace the country's free-fall to the fact that many men are not keeping their promises to wives,
families, and churches. They see the skyrocketing crime rate, huge number of divorces, increasing racial
tensions, juvenile delinquency and out-of-wedlock births as indications that men have abdicated their
Biblically defined role as leaders in the home.
Many Christians would find it hard to argue with any of these premises.
The Problem
However, critics of Promise Keepers charge its leaders routinely express views that are antithetical to the
Bible's teachings, and outside the realm of mainstream belief. They claim it has an unbridled ecumenicist, a
charismatic leadership emphasis, and relies on an anti-God secular psychology.
They say Promise Keepers mimics new-age male bonding and self-discovery therapies, and endorse a
book, which suggests levels of initiation rites to manhood. They decry its emphasis on phallic symbolism
and the fact that Jesus is presented as a sexual male. They note that PK requires submission to leaders and
employs a pyramid structure in its organization that it intrudes on the privacy of a man's family life and
sexual habits. They point out that the group encourages male domination of women, and is rooted in the
Vineyard ministry, with strong links to the Kansas City Prophets -- a controversial cult claiming visions
and revelations from God.
Critics say they do not presume to judge the integrity or the motives of all those in Promise Keepers or
question the salvation of these men. They concede that many involved with PK are sincere. Instead, they
say they are concerned with the doctrine of the movement and the ministry being promoted. They stress
that any group that claims to represent Jesus must 1) preach a pure Gospel, and 2) address man's spiritual
growth from an accurate interpretation of God's Word. Critics say Promise Keepers fails on both counts.
They worry that the vast majority of men who attend PK rallies probably know very little about the beliefs
or church affiliation of the speakers who appear. The lecturers are accepted as authorities on Christian
living simply because they say they are Christians and believe the Bible.
"Since the ministry of these teachers runs the gamut from compromising new-evangelicalism and
charismatic error, to ecumenical liberalism, it is clear that they are introducing the Promise Keepers to
Page 45 of 176
unscriptural doctrines and fellowships," says Al Dager of Redmond, WA. "This is a very serious matter."
Rev. Gil Rugh, senior pastor of Indian Hills Community Church in Lincoln, NE. agrees. "There is so much
theological diversity among those involved with Promise Keepers that no in-depth discussion of Scripture
or what it means to be a Christian could take place without tearing the movement apart."
As one former Promise Keepers member remarked, "it's so diluted and deluded, you can't get very much
out of it."
A Typical Rally
There's no doubt that this is one men's movement that attracts followers
from all economic and social strata.
A Promise Keepers rally is a spirited affair. Balloons, gliders and beach balls are batted around. Blaring
rock music pounds to increase the hype. Entire sections of the stadiums stand to challenge the other sides,
with chants of, "We love Jesus, yes we do! We love Jesus, how about you?" Guys wear T-shirts reading
"Men with a mission."
Scores of single young men are called to take a vow of chastity until marriage, and nearby mentors move
close to them to lay hands of support on their bodies, all heads bowed in prayer.
Between munching on sausages and nachos, they do "The Wave," and commit themselves to God, family
and racial reconciliation. One pro-PK observer noted that "at times the...crowd seems excited not so much
by what is being said as by the opportunity to 'hang' with other men."
"Promise Keepers is a fun thing as well as a serious time for men to grow," says Nate Adams, author of
"Nine Character Traits Separating the Men from the Boys," who attended a rally in Indianapolis. "An
important aspect of the conference is the chance men have to express their boyish and playful sides." How
does this carnival atmosphere help in preaching and teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ!?
Karl Sooder, a communicant of St. Peter's in Chattanooga, TN., and a volunteer for the PK national
organization, says "Promise Keepers deals with contemporary social issues with contemporary men at a gut
level and because of that it is attracting young men at an incredible rate." He reports that "The greatest
response has been from young married men with small children at home. Promise Keepers helps them in
dealing with social issues head-on -- marriage, raising kids, values at home -- in a practical way."
Opposition Surfaces
While PK literature is filled with testimonials from women who say their once-philandering or errant
husbands have been transformed into upright citizens and loving spouses, the movement has not been free
of controversy.
California Catholics for Free Choice, which picketed one Promise Keepers rally, claims PK is "really not
about religion." Rosemary Stasek, director of the Catholic group, says Promise Keepers "have a social
Page 46 of 176
agenda. They take the trappings of religion and all their Biblical citations and use them to legitimize their
social view about the relative roles of men and women."
According to a statement released by the National Organization for Women (NOW), Promise Keepers
"ideology is one of power and control. It resembles the rationale of the batterer, not the savior."
In USA Today, Stuart Wright, a sociologist at Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas, called the organization
"an attempt to raise the authority and status of angry white men who find themselves declining in privilege
and power. It is part of a movement of the religious right to reconstruct the 1950s."
Jay Coakley, a sociologist at the University of Colorado, said in the same article that Promise Keepers
"gives moral legitimacy to men who wish to regain power," and represents "the same white male
Republican vote you saw in the last election."
In the New Age Journal, writer Jeff Wagentheim observed: "...despite the group's assertions to the contrary,
Promise Keepers is an organization with vast political influence. The fact that hundreds of thousands of
men are being actively encouraged to adhere to a highly conservative set of values and to work to instill
those values in their communities and nation should not just be a matter of theological interest."
Promise Keepers reports receiving 10,000 phone calls and up to 5,000 pieces of mail per day. It has a staff
of 360 and a budget of $120 million.
William Martin, a Rice University sociologist who specializes in modern revival movements, warns that
"There is no doubt that the leaders of the religious right will see [PK] as a major resource, and seek to
strengthen ties with it. There is a danger it might be hijacked."
There is other evidence that PK leaders are involved in political or controversial issues. In 1992, founder
McCartney supported an initiative on the Colorado ballot to block civil rights protections for gays and
lesbians.
Harvey Baynes, a full-time employee of the Promise Keepers, was arrested in March 1995 in connection
with a protest outside a Denver Planned Parenthood clinic.
Christianity Today magazine even warned in an editorial, "Nothing would sink [PK] quicker than getting
drawn into a mean-spirited political crusade."
Although the media frequently describe the Promise Keepers as a fundamentalist movement, there are those
who would take issue with this portrayal.
A resolution passed at a Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches session complained that "Promise
Keepers' teachings are a strange mixture of truth and error. Its methods for promoting these teachings are
questionable."
The fundamentalist resolution claimed that, while "some Scriptural values are taught...they are mingled
with pop-psychology and have an ecumenical emphasis, while a charismatic aura pervades the
proceedings." It condemned the fact that "One of the Promise Keepers' stated goals is to 'break down
denominational barriers,' including Catholic, liberals, charismatics, and neo-evangelicals under its banner.
It urges its members to 'break down the walls that separate us, to be a bridge builder, and to pray daily for
unity among Christians in your community.'"
Therefore, the pastors and delegates to the Fundamental Bible Churches urged Christians to "be wise, to be
Page 47 of 176
warned, and to beware of this false movement."
Defenders of the men's organization counter that while their supposed ecumenical emphasis does include
"all who have come to genuine faith in Christ," without regard to the denominational label they may wear,
this by definition naturally precludes certain segments of the population.
For example, they point out that the doctrinal positions officially held by Promise Keepers include a belief
in the inspiration of Scripture, the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, bodily
resurrection and the need for regeneration -- and these things are all rejected by liberal theology.
Additionally, the teaching that man's alienation from God can be removed only by accepting through faith
God's gift of salvation distinguishes Promise Keepers from Roman Catholic doctrine, which teaches
salvation through the church and its sacraments.
Defenders explain that the goal of Promise Keepers is not unity of all men, or all faiths, but of all who hold
to what PK literature calls "the true Christian faith." Stated another way, Promise Keepers claims it "does
not promote unity at the expense of sound doctrine. It does seek, however, to focus on the essential issues
of the faith, and leave other important, though less essential issues, in the hands of the local church."
All of this sounds reasonable in theory, but it does not appear to be adhered to in practice. How else to
account for the fact that members of widely divergent denominations -- evangelical, Pentecostal, mainline,
Mormon and Roman Catholic all -- identify with PK beliefs, and enthusiastically so?
Indeed, an investigation by Midwest Today, which included a careful examination of PK tapes, biographies,
speeches, literature and interviews with those both inside and outside the movement, cast a far different
light on the group and found substantial evidence to contradict many of its official claims.
Others see a far more sinister possibility. Jewel Van Der Merwe, a writer in the UK warns, "Is Promise
Keepers creating a new folk religion? The large mass rallies, the exaltation of emotion over reason, the lack
of doctrinal integrity, the taking of oaths (Seven Promises), the focus on fatherland and fatherhood, and the
ecumenical inclusion of aberrant esoteric doctrines bears a disconcerting similarity to the Nazi era which
gave rise to one of the most dreadful armies in history."
A Charismatic Fervor
While information contained on an (unofficial) Promise Keepers Internet page on the World Wide Web
assures that "Charismatic doctrine and practice is not promoted or endorsed in any Promise Keeper
publications or conferences," this appears to be a misstatement.
The Promise Keepers make available a teaching manual written by Dr. Robert Hicks entitled, "The
Masculine Journey: Understanding Six Stages of Manhood." At the end of the book is a statement that
reads: "Promise Keepers wants to provide men's materials like this book."
A close examination of the book raises serious questions about the true theology and teachings of the PK
leadership.
Page 48 of 176
The Rev. Dennis L. Finnan, pastor of the St. Charles Bible Church in St. Charles, Minnesota, and host of
"The World, the Word and You" weekly radio broadcasts, says that "Hicks' book is Biblically erroneous,
blasphemous and centered on the exclusivity of human wisdom. For example, in chapter after chapter,
subjective insights into manhood are offered by quotes of a host of secular authorities such as Carl Jung,
who turned out to be a demon-possessed psychiatrist; Leanne Payne, a New Age psychiatrist; and
occultist/spiritualist Elizabeth Kubler-Ross."
In the book, Dr. Hicks accuses Jesus Christ of being a sinner, of having sexual thoughts and fantasies about
Mary Magdalene, and of being tempted by homosexuality. He urges men to celebrate such rites of passage
as their first sexual experience or the first time they are influenced by drugs or alcohol.
"Until their endorsement of this book is withdrawn publicly, no man of God should trust any publication or
statement of Promise Keepers," says James l. Holly, M.D., a frequent critic.
Another area of great spiritual concern to those who trust the Bible alone, and in its entirety, is the close
association of the Promise Keepers with the radical fringe of the Charismatic movement.
James Ryle, one of the Board of Directors of PK, has come under fire for some of his rather far-out beliefs.
For instance, he has declared himself to be a modern prophet who has had personal revelations from Jesus
Christ.
In 1990, at a Vineyard Harvest Conference in Denver, Ryle asserted that God had personally instructed him
to reveal to the church that the 1960's rock stars, the Beatles and their music, were the direct result of what
he called a "special anointing of the Holy Spirit."
Ryle boldly proclaimed that he, personally, had been designated by the Lord as a lookout. He quoted God
as having told him in these exact words: ":The gifting and sound that [the musicians] had was from Me... It
was My purpose to bring forth through music, a worldwide revival that would usher in My Spirit in
bringing men and women to Christ."
Not to be outdone, Jack Hayford, who has been a keynote speaker at several PK conferences, claims he,
too, has seen a vision of Jesus Christ seated in heaven and has personally heard Him speak.
Hayford also relates a story about how a man rids his house of evil spirits by rituals in his yard. Many
Bible-believing Christians would reject this as an occultist practice.
The founder and main spokesman of Promise Keepers, Bill McCartney, is a former Catholic who converted
to the Vineyard movement. Consistent with Vineyard doctrine, McCartney, when addressing Promise
Keeper rallies, often gives what he claims are direct revelations from God. Thousands of men thus subject
themselves to the teachings of a man claiming to speak on behalf of the Almighty, when Scripture is clear
God is not giving new revelation in this age.
Rev. Finnan comments that "This troubles me that this seemingly wonderful movement, to unite men in the
common bond of Jesus Christ, is being founded by those who are at the least spiritually misguided and at
the worst are under Satanic delusions."
Critics refer to the Book of Revelations' clear warning that "If anyone adds to these things, God will add to
him the plagues that are written herein." (Rev. 22:18).
Page 49 of 176
Vital Relationships With Men
The Promise Keepers' emphasis on pursuing vital relationships with other men includes the stipulation that
"Each man willingly grants the others the right to inquire about his relationship to God, his commitment to
his family, his sexuality, and his financial dealings."
"This is a common thrust of the Promise Keepers, to call men to openly discuss private sexual matters with
other men," observes pastor Dennis Finnan. "This is very alarming to me for the Bible tells us we are not to
discuss such intimacy with anybody but our mates."
Rev. Gil Rugh concurs. "Certainly as brothers in the Lord men are to encourage, rebuke, and admonish one
another, but nowhere in the Bible are men told to give other men the right to inquire about those things.
Obviously, if a man is involved in sin, he needs to be confronted (see Gal. 6:1). There is, however, nothing
in the Bible that gives other men the right to inquire into private family and sexual matters."
Promise Keepers preaches that Jesus was a "man's man," a carpenter (In Jesus' time on the earth, houses
were not built with wood, but with stone) who lived at a time, according to PK advocate Rev. J. Alfred
Smith Sr., "when they didn't have power saws."
Steve Farrar agrees that true manhood can be gleaned from the example of Jesus. "[He] could be tender and
gentle, but Jesus could also walk in and clear out a corrupted temple," Farrar asserts.
It is this emphasis on Jesus' masculinity that troubles some observers. As theologian Lewis Smedes, who
recently retired from Fuller Theological Seminary, points out, following Christ "is a gender-neutral calling:
That which is important about Jesus being a model is not his modeling of maleness but his modeling of
humanity," he insists.
On the other hand, Jesus's leadership was also based upon humbling himself, washing the feet of the
Apostles. The leaders of Promise Keepers talk about establishing a new, non-domineering male leadership
in the home through such servant hood to spouse and family.
But some think PK takes things too far. One of the leading spokesmen on this subject within Promise
Keepers, Gary Smalley, is resoundingly criticized.
Al Dager thinks that "Smalley is destroying God's institutional structure of the family by suggesting that the
husband submit himself to his wife. This is [found] nowhere in Scripture. I am not suggesting that a
husband has the right to boss his wife around. I am stating that it is the husband's responsibility to ensure
that his family is following the Lord."
The Biblical mandate for this is seen in Titus 2:5, Proverbs 14:1 and elsewhere.
"It seems as if Smalley is more concerned with how the wives feel about their husbands than how God feels
about them.
"Women love Smalley because he focuses men's attention not on how to please God, but how to please
their wives," observes Dager. "His courses do not utilize Scripture as much as psychological theory."
Indicative of this approach is that a cartoon included in a Gary Smalley piece portray a man holding
window cleaner, a vacuum cleaner, and a laundry basket while offering strawberry cheesecake to his wife
who is lounging in her Laz-E-Boy recliner with a rose, a telephone, the TV remote control, and the Bible.
Page 50 of 176
Dager concludes, "The Bible does not tell us to glorify our wives, it tells us to glorify Christ, and Christ
alone."
Critics claim Promise Keepers blurs the distinction between truth and error. Comments Rev. Rugh: "Those
involved in ecumenism often quote Jesus' prayer in John 17:21, where He prayed, 'that they (Christians)
may all be one to show that believers should be unified.'
"Certainly, believers should earnestly desire the unity Jesus referred to." he acknowledges. "However, in
that same prayer, Jesus prayed, 'Sanctify them in the truth; Thy Word is truth' (John 17:17). True unity
must be based on the truth of Scripture or else it is a false unity. The Bible nowhere calls for unity at the
expense of truth.
"Promise Keepers attempt to promote godliness without following God's plan as set forth in His Word,"
Rugh contends.
Rev. Bill Randles, pastor of Believers in Grace Fellowship Church in Cedar Rapids, IA. complains, "People
are being encouraged to de-emphasize doctrines so they can come together as though doctrine is a
meaningless detail.
"If PK is supposed to be a great move of God, doesn't truth and discernment count for anything?" he asks.
Many who have embraced the Promise Keeper ministry are now bent on recruiting new followers with
fully as much zeal and pressure as sports-minded college alumni men seek to recruit top athletes for sports
programs.
The organization has sought to infiltrate local churches through encouraging the formation of men's small
groups to aid in building what it calls its "network." PK reports having 11,842 "Key Men" and
"Ambassadors" who introduce Promise Keepers to clergy and make available to churches its questionable
resources.
Promise Keepers claims it has a commitment to build up the local church through empowering pastors. The
rallies have typically concluded with all the clergy in attendance being called to the front of the arenas to be
prayed for and applauded by the other men.
But many clergy are distancing themselves from the movement. Gil Rugh says this is because "the pressure
to follow the crowd and silence the voice of scriptural reproof is growing."
Critics observe warily that the machinery is coming into place for PK to have a continuing influence on its
members and their denominations for years to come.
M.H. Reynolds, Editor of Foundation magazine, sees this dilemma: "How could a pastor say 'No, we
cannot...' to men returning from a Promise Keepers conference who promise the pastor they will support
him, work with him, and pray for him as never before? How can he deal with these undoubtedly well-
meaning, yet misled, men within his own church who are now exerting pressure upon him to fall into line
with the program?"
Page 51 of 176
Bill McCartney has offended clergy by his bullying statements about the reluctance on the part of pastors to
ally themselves with Promise Keepers. He said at a Detroit rally that any clergyman who wasn't planning to
attend the 1996 Pastors Gathering in Atlanta "needs to be able to tell us why he doesn't want to go."
A Summary
The problem with the Promise Keepers is summed up by Pastor Jack Stephens of Columbus, OH. He says,
"I am told that when oleo was first sold it came in white, bland-looking sticks. A separate packet of yellow
dye was included with your purchase and had to be kneaded into the oleo to give it a butter color. PK is like
that old oleo. It is totally colorless regarding any true doctrinal substance.
Anyone involved with it can add whatever doctrinal coloring in whatever amount they choose in order to
make it personally palatable. But no matter how much you attempt to color it, PK still isn't butter... "
God's word must be obeyed to enjoy God's blessing.
To remain silent about the "wolves in sheep's clothing" is disobedience and receives God's rebuke.
(Isaiah 56:10-11) Israel's watchmen are blind, they all lack knowledge; they are all mute dogs, they cannot
bark; they lie around and dream, they love the sheep. They are dogs with mighty appetites; they never have
enough. They are shepherds who lack understanding; they all turn to their own way, each seeks his own
gain.
The Bible says, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw
yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us …
and if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man and have no company with him that he may
be ashamed."(2 Thessalonians 3:3,14)
Page 52 of 176
Promise Keepers
Ecumenical "Macho-Men" for Christ?
Promise Keepers was founded in 1990 by Bill McCartney (born 1940), then the head coach of the
University of Colorado football team. The stated goal of this "nondenominational", parachurch organization
is to celebrate Biblical manhood and motivate men toward Christ-like masculinity. "To unite men through
vital relationships to become godly influences in their world -- by making promises to Jesus Christ and to
one another that last a lifetime," reads Promise Keepers' purpose statement.
[By definition, a parachurch ministry is one "raised up" supposedly to accomplish something churches are
charged to do by the Scriptures. However, one should question rising up an organization outside the church
(parachurch) to accomplish objectives ordained by God to be produced by the normal, proper functioning
of the local church and all its parts, especially the development of "godly men." All too often, what is
established to assist local churches ends up competing with them and introducing unscriptural philosophies
and practices.]
"Promise Keepers' mission is to help promote spiritual revival in the homes, churches, and communities of
this nation. This will be accomplished by modeling, praying for and instructing all men to grow in Christ-
like masculinity, enabling them to become 'promise keepers' to the Lord who loves them, to their wives
who trust them, to their children who need them, and to the world which must be influenced by them"
(Spring 1992, Men of Action).
Although Bill McCartney is credited with founding Promise Keepers, until late 1998 he was the figurehead,
holding the title as CEO of PK. Randy Phillips was the president and administrative head of Promise
Keepers. As of October 1998, McCartney is overseeing three divisions as president and founder. Randy
Phillips has moved from president to the new position of vice president for global ministries. Phillips has
served as a senior pastor for five years, as an associate pastor for ten years, and led the Denver Broncos'
Bible study for two years. Phillips, like McCartney, is a former Roman Catholic. Both are also affiliated
with the hyper-charismatic Vineyard movement -- Vineyard churches emphasize the validity of "signs and
wonders" for today and view miraculous displays of divine power as essential to the growth of the Church.
(See Note at end of report.)
Page 53 of 176
Promise Keepers programs include regional stadium rallies, pastors' conferences, one-day leadership-
training seminars, books, study guides, videos for small men's groups, national TV spots, a newsletter, and
an Internet web site. Books have become a big seller for PK; Thomas Nelson Publishers has nearly two
dozen titles on the market for men, including a revised version of McCartney's autobiography, From Ashes
to Glory. Nelson is coming out with new titles from PK speakers and is offering retailers merchandising
aids to help direct mail customers to newly expanded men's sections (4/29/96, Christianity Today).
- Various newspaper articles appear to accurately portray the Promise Keepers movement:
(a) "Many people credit Edwin Louis Cole of Euless with starting the Christian men's movement with his
1982 book Maximized Manhood. His organization, called the Christian Men's Network, publishes a
quarterly newspaper, and conducts seminars for men across the country called the Real Man Event. ...
Promise Keepers' gatherings at football stadiums ... often are accompanied by men sharing problems,
openly crying and embracing one another. After a conference ends, they are encouraged to form small
groups to meet regularly and continue to talk about their struggles" (10/27/94, Dallas Morning News, p.
7A).
(b) "Promise Keepers asserts that men, by walking away from their family duties, are responsible for much
of America's societal dysfunction, which the group's leaders say includes high school dropouts, a soaring
crime rate, racism, divorce, homosexuality and abortion. ... [And that we can] restore the nation by
exhorting men to become 'promise keepers instead of promise breakers.'... The women's movement,
Promise Keepers says, is at least in part a reaction to the pain and abuse women suffer at the hands of men.
This analysis worries critics, who say that such talk could move the group beyond the family to political
activism. Some observers see Promise Keepers as the latest turn in the search for male identity in a fast-
changing and conflicted society. In American history through the 1950s, the family structure was
unabashedly patriarchal. The 1960s and 1970s ushered in the Sensitive Man who acknowledged a feminine
side and sought to nurture. The 1990s brought the Wild Man, hairy-chested and testosterone-driven,
extolled in author Robert Bly's bestseller, Iron John. Now, Promise Keepers' slogan is: 'A man's man is a
godly man.' In some ways, it is a throwback to the days of 'Father Knows Best.' Dad is still in charge, but
he is kinder, gentler and a lot more spiritual" (7/9/94, The Bloomington Herald-Times [Los Angeles Times
story]).
(c) "Promise Keepers combines the Jesus Saves preaching of Billy Graham with the male bonding message
of Robert Bly, the call for racial conciliation of Martin Luther King, Jr., and the marital advice of Ann
Landers. ... It [the 6/95 PK rally in Houston's Astrodome] had men roaring and applauding Jesus as if he
had just scored a touchdown. ... Leaders hope that men will leave the rallies, return to their neighborhoods
and churches, and form support groups and partnerships with other men to share feelings, concerns, and
advice" (6/27/95, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, p. B10).
- Promise Keepers started out small in 1991 -- 4,200 men attended the first Boulder, Colorado Conference
(held at the Coors' Event Center). In 1992, 22,000 men attended. In 1993, 50,000 men jammed University
of Colorado's Folsom Stadium and another 52,000 in 1994. However, that is not all. For the first time in
1994, Promise Keepers held regional conferences in six additional cities, with over 227,000 men in total
attendance. All totaled, Promise Keepers 1994 attendance at its seven conferences was approximately
280,000 men.
In 1995, Promise Keepers held rallies in football stadiums in 13 major U.S. cities that attracted 727,000
men. Registration fees of more than $38 million were taken in (at $55 per registrant). In 1996, Promise
Keepers held 22 rallies and drew 1.1 million attendees (1,098,534 to be exact); revenues exceeded $65
million (at $60 per registrant). (One event was cancelled in 1996, at Denver's Mile High Stadium, due to a
dispute over an alleged $300,000 seat-tax liability.) In 1997, 18 rallies were held, but attendance was down
more than 40% to about 630,000 (leading to the cancellation of two of the rallies). In 1998, the slide in PK
popularity continued -- 19 events attracted only 453,000 men; this in spite of the fact that the events were
Page 54 of 176
now free. Only 15 events have been scheduled for 1999 (with 10 of the 15 rallies to be in smaller indoor
arenas; total attendance is projected to be about 300,000), and revenues have been projected at only $41
million.
- On October 4, 1997, PK held its Stand in the Gap: A Sacred Assembly Of Men rally on the Mall in
Washington, D.C. -- to "kneel in prayer between the Lincoln Memorial and nation's Capitol to seek
forgiveness as men ask God to restore America ... we must be of one accord ... our feet in unity...
confessing personal and collective sin" (PK's version of the Farrakhan "Million Man March"?). Ten million
dollars was budgeted for this free event. Attendance estimates ranged from 480,000 to 700,000. (Speakers
included Mike Timmis, a Roman Catholic and PK board member, Jack Hayford, Joseph Stowell, Max
Lucado [Church of Christ pastor/false gospel of baptismal regeneration], James Robison, and Tony Evans,
along with a taped message from Billy Graham.)
At the Stand in the Gap rally, it was also announced that PK would no longer charge a registration fee of
$60 for its conferences. Since then its income has plummeted. McCartney announced that some of the 19
conferences scheduled for 1998 might be cancelled, since the stadiums and arenas require substantial
deposits and Promise Keepers do not have the money. McCartney unveiled PK's plan for the next three
years. He said he wanted every pastor in America to participate in this plan. Every pastor was expected to
march to the same unified plan. He said, "We need a unity of command," and, "We need to have everybody
on the same page". The page, of course, is PK's page. He said that the Promise Keepers clergy conferences
in 1998 would be for instructing the pastors in their marching orders. He said, "[R]racial and
denominational reconciliation standards will be presented at these pastors' conferences in practical ways
that we can live in unity in the Body of Christ, and together make a difference for the Kingdom!"
- To keep up with phenomenal growth of its early-days, Promise Keepers had more than 500 staffers at one
point in 1997 (about 30% made up of minorities) (up from 22 employees in 1993, 85 in 1994, 300 in 1995,
and 437 in 1996) and a 1997 annual budget of more than $117 million (up from $96 million in 1996, $64
million in 1995, and only $4 million in 1993). (Tax records show that from 1993-1995, PK has booked a
profit of $14.7 million, with more than half of that in 1995, the last year for which tax records are available.
Net assets are $15 million.)
However, because of falling attendance and free admission at future events (PK's 1997 income fell shy of
$70 million), PK laid off about 100 employees in 7/97, and the remainder of all paid employees worldwide
effective 3/31/98. PK hired back about 180 staffers later in 1998 after a successful fund raising campaign
(see below). Part of the problem might be attributed to the pay levels of PK's executives. PK's 1996 tax
returns, which were obtained by Time magazine, show that PK's five vice-presidents were paid between
$78,000 and $100,000 each; then president, Randy Phillips, earned $132,512. Their 1997 salaries were the
same or higher. McCartney currently draws no salary, other than paid health insurance. However, he is paid
"honorariums" for speaking at PK rallies (about $4,000 each; $21,000 total in 1996). In addition, tax
records show McCartney received $61,833 in compensation plus other benefits for the years 1995-96.
(Source: Plains Baptist Challenger, 8/97).
- Due to its financial woes, McCartney claimed in early 1998 that God wants every church in America to
give $1,000. Speaking to a clergy conference in St. Petersburg, Florida, on February 19, attended by more
than 3,000 pastors and church members, McCartney said that God told him to say that "every church that
names the name of Jesus is supposed to give Promise Keepers $1,000" (Steve Persall, "McCartney appeals
for church donations," The Denver Post, Feb. 20, 1998). He went on to say that big churches are "supposed
to call the smaller churches and say, 'It wasn't all that hard for us, but can we help you?'" and small
churches which lack the $1,000 are supposed "to call a larger church and say, 'Can you help us out here?
We want to facilitate what God is doing.'"
To claim that every church in America is supposed to send Promise Keepers $1,000 is absolute insanity.
PK does not obey the Bible and has no Biblical authority for its existence. It has its own fabricated agenda,
Page 55 of 176
yet it has the gall to think that every church in America should be at its disposal. (Source: 2/24/98, FBIS.)
[McCartney also sent a "Speed Alert" letter in early-March, 1998, to every person on PK's mailing list -- a
$98 donation was requested.]
- Promise Keepers has made concerted efforts to bring their program into the local church body. Their
success is evidenced by the fact that many churches have now assimilated various Promise Keepers
programs into their churches as a "springboard" for their local men's ministry. Men have been specifically
designated as Promise Keepers "Point [Key] Men", who then aggressively recruit others and are
responsible for keeping the group going. The Key Man serves as the link between his group and PK
headquarters. (The "Point Man" name was changed to "Key Man" in 11/95):
"The Point [Key] Man plays an important position for initiating and facilitating men's ministry in his
church, and he is vital to Promise Keepers. ... The Point [Key] Man, with the approval of his pastor, is the
critical connecting link between the men's ministry of his church and Promise Keepers. Either a lay leader
or a pastor, the Point [Key] Man initiates, organizes, and supports the men's ministry program of his church
[including small group development]. He acts as a conduit for resources, including materials, national
conferences, and training seminars provided by Promise Keepers and other contributing ministries" (Spring
1992/April 1995, Men of Action). [The Key Man application (circa 1999) has a statement to be signed that
reads: "I support Promise Keepers' desire to see Vibrant Men's Ministry, Vital Prayer Networks, and
Intentional Reconciliation established in every church".]
PK's Dale Schlafer was asked, "What if a pastor wanted to remove a Key Man, but men's group disagreed
and pressured the pastor to keep him?" Who would carry the authority in the local church? Schlafer stated
that the pastor would prevail; however, the pastor is urged to contact PK before any final decision is made
so that PK can work through what is going on. This is an unhealthy arrangement and sets the stage for the
possible destruction of the local church. If a local church is to maintain its independency, the church must
have the final authority in such matters. This question would never have been asked if PK was not trying to
gain a foothold in the local church. Perhaps pastors who support PK will respond to this by saying "Not to
worry -- if I have to remove my PK Key Man, I just won't notify PK headquarters". Who is to say that none
of the men will call PK? Would you bet your life on it that PK will not meddle in the matter, when they
have expressed interest in doing just that? Can a pastor be sure that the PK men in his church (who have
made vows to support PK no matter what) will not have the pastor fired or start a church split? Why would
PK express any interest in challenging a decision by any pastor to remove or replace a PK Key Man, while
at the same time telling the PK's to "Obey your pastor, no matter what?"
- Promise Keepers "Ambassadors" have been positioned by PK between the Field Ministry staff and the
Key Men. Their function is to introduce Promise Keepers to churches in the community and to recruit Key
Men -- "He carries the message of Promise Keepers to his community, identifies potential Point [Key]
Men, and encourages reconciliation across denominational and racial lines" (4/95, Men of Action). The
Ambassador Candidate booklet states that, "Because Promise Keepers is committed to building relational
bridges, Ambassadors must avoid negative political, doctrinal, and denominational remarks and
discussions," and that if an Ambassador encounters "a church outside his personal comfort zone" in
doctrine or culture, "he should remember he doesn't have to answer every question" (pp. 3-4). (Emphasis
added.) Nevertheless, the "walls of denominationalism" are difficult to break down -- "this process may
take six months to a year" (p. 12).
Once a man is accepted to be a Promise Keepers Ambassador, the cautions against standing for sound
doctrine become even more specific. The Ambassador's Instructional booklet warns the Ambassador that he
no longer represents himself and his "personal stands on a doctrinal issue," but instead represents Promise
Keepers "unique mission" and is "participating in the task of uniting men." The booklet gives "Some of the
[doctrinal] issues that should not be addressed: Eternal security; the gifts of the Spirit; Baptism; Pre-
tribulation or post-tribulation; Sacraments or ordinances" (p. 10). The Ambassador is told that the PK's
Purpose Statement and Statement of Faith had been "carefully worded" in order to avoid doctrinal conflict.
Page 56 of 176
Of course! How else could it be accepted by Mormons and Catholics alike (see later in this report)?
(Reported in the 11/95, The Berean Call.)
Texas PK Conference Director Vinton Lee has stated that PK is "not just a conference ministry. ... It is an
entry point for men", through PK's church ministries in an effort to pump its discipleship curricula directly
into local congregations. Over 200,000 local churches had tapped Promise Keepers for information as of
7/95. However, because much within Promise Keepers' teaching materials is Biblically unsound and
heavily psychologized, this is a real problem for lovers of the truth. [As of 5/95, there were 10,840 Point
[Key] Men and Ambassadors with Promise Keepers (4/29/95, Houston Chronicle). (11,842 at year-end
1995)]
- Two of our main concerns about Promise Keepers are the blatant promotion of psycho heresy on the part
of most of Promise Keepers most popular authors and speakers and a rising tide of ecumenism that blurs
doctrinal distinctive. (Two other concerns, discussed later, are PK's charismatic emphasis and its outright
disdain for doctrine.) Indeed, Promise Keepers is both aggressively psychological and ecumenical:
"We believe that we have a God-given mission to unite men who are separated by race, geography, culture,
denomination, and economics. ... (John 17: 20-23) We are dedicated, then, to addressing the division that
has separated the body of Christ for too long. We are committed to call men to reconcile in Christ, to live as
one. ... In the context of covenant relationships, a man willingly grants other men the right to inquire about
his relationship to God, his commitment to his family, his sexuality, and his financial dealings. Together
they form a team that is committed to advance God's kingdom. Coach McCartney's challenge to us at
Promise Keepers '93 targeted two phases of man-to-man relationships. Phase one focuses on meeting with a
squad of men 2-4 times a month. Phase two involves meeting once a month with men of different ethnic or
denominational backgrounds. ... Coach challenged us to focus on the three P's: (1) the pages of Scripture,
(2) prayer, and (3) understanding one another's pain. ... When we take the risk of becoming vulnerable and
transparent, we more readily understand and share the pain of our brothers. This establishes trust" (Fall
1993, Men of Action). (Emphasis added.)
It could be argued that ecumenism is the very heart of Promise Keepers. This aggressive ecumenism (the
attempt to break down the barriers that separate world religions so that cooperative efforts can be
undertaken) can be further illustrated from the Promise Keepers 1994 Conferences brochure -- Seize the
Moment, and from the winter 1994 issue of Men of Action:
"Clearly, something unprecedented happens when men from all denominational, ethnic, and cultural
backgrounds assemble in the name of Jesus Christ. ... Invite and travel with not only your friends and
family but with men from different ethnic and denominational heritages. ... Remember those who are
outside your church, denomination, and ethnic group." (Emphasis added.)
Notice in the above quotes the subtle line that is crossed as denominational barriers are placed in the same
category as racism and social discrimination, as if they are equitable concepts. How are these barriers
created? By doctrinal differences! The implication, thus, is that doctrinal differences, like racial, ethnic, and
socioeconomic differences, must be ignored if unity is to be achieved. Hence, the slogan of all ecumenists
-- "doctrine divides." Groups like Promise Keepers call upon Christians to disobey Christ by accepting and
accommodating the presence of theological error in their midst (The Communications Digest, November-
January 1996, Marc A. Graham, "Promise Keepers: Satan's Newest Ecumenical Strategy," pp. 5 & 9).
[The 1/6/97 Christianity Today reported that PK was taking new steps to achieve its goal of denominational
unity and to allay fears that it will steal men's loyalty from their churches. PK was forming separate
"partnerships" with various denominations. Agreements had already been made with three tongues-
speaking groups (Assemblies of God, Church of God [Cleveland, Tenn.], and the International Pentecostal
Holiness Church). (The AOG had appointed a staff member as a liaison between the two groups, had sent
many of its leadership for training in men's ministries, and planned to use PK for some technical support.
Page 57 of 176
The AOG's new men's ministry was named "Honor Bound: Men of Promise.") PK was finalizing
agreements with the Southern Baptist Convention and the Christian and Missionary Alliance.]
The whole thrust of Promise Keepers, then, is anti-doctrine. Theology is of very little significance to PK;
instead, it is a "relationship with Jesus" that matters. Life, not doctrine is important. Nevertheless, there can
be no spiritual life without truth, and there is no relationship with Christ unless it is grounded in the Word.
Christ and His truth cannot be separated! (3/97, Think on These Things, p. 3).
- The book Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper is a workbook being used by the Promise Keepers
movement. Contributing authors include Campus Crusade's Bill Bright, pop psychologist James Dobson,
ecumenical evangelist Luis Palau, psychologist Gary Smalley, hyper-charismatic Jack Hayford, and Bill
McCartney. It was published in 1994 by Dobson's Focus on the Family Publishing. Under Promise #6 is a
chapter entitled "A Call to Unity" by Bill McCartney. The following excerpts from this chapter and the
workbook notes, which follow it, reveal the unscriptural confusion pertaining to the nature of the church
and the dangerous ecumenical goals of Promise Keepers:
"The Body of Christ comprises a wide diversity of members. There are many denominations, various styles
of worship, and representatives from all occupations. ... The Bible says there is only one Body. Jesus
prayed that we all might be one. [John 17] As men who are Promise Keepers, we must determine to break
beyond the barriers and our comfort zones and get to know other members of that Body. ... We're going to
break down the walls that separate us so that we might demonstrate the power of biblical unity based on
what we have in common ... be a bridge builder ... Pray daily for unity among Christians in your
community."
The prayer of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 17 is abused and twisted out of all sense of context when it is
said to be a prayer for ecumenical unity. The unity Christ prayed for is one based on truth and the Word of
God (Jn. 17:6, 8, 14, 17, 19), whereas the ecumenical movement downplays the importance of doctrine. (In
fact, in Promise Keepers zeal for unity, it has decided that doctrine is an obstacle to unity, rather than the
Biblical basis for it.) True unity is a product of the Holy Spirit's regenerative and enlightening power, not
of man's puny, imperfect efforts. The Bible knows absolutely nothing of a proper unity apart from mutual
commitment to God's Truth -- "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" (Amos 3:3). The answer is
no, they cannot, unless they aim to disobey the Word of God. That Promise Keepers leaders care nothing
for a pure Gospel and for Bible truth is plain by their attitude toward Roman Catholicism (see below).
(Excerpted from the 1/95, O Timothy, p. 23.) (For an excellent analysis of Seven Promises of a Promise
Keeper, see also the Jan-Feb 1995, Foundation Magazine, "The Promise Keepers Movement is
Dangerous", pp. 4-12, 31-33. This article is also available in tract form from the Fundamental Evangelistic
Association, P.O. Box 6278, Los Osos, CA 93412. The tract demonstrates how PK has looked to extra-
Biblical sources and has attempted to dress up the seven promises in Biblical garb.)
- Promise Keepers not only erases doctrinal distinctive, but embraces and supports error. At the 1994
National Conference, Bill McCartney made it clear just how far Promise Keepers is willing to go with their
doctrinal indifference and desire for "Christian" unity (quoted in the 9/19/94, Christian News): (Statements
similar to the one below were also made by McCartney at the 1994 Promise Keepers' regional conference
held in Portland, Oregon, and in the book Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper, pp. 160-161.)
"Promise Keepers doesn't care if you're a Baptist. Are you born in the Spirit of God? Promise Keepers does
not care if you are a Pentecostal. Are you born in the Spirit? Now hear this! Promise Keepers doesn't care
if you're a Roman Catholic. Are you born into the Spirit of God?"
Thus, McCartney views the Catholic Church as just another Christian denomination with a few unique
aspects, rather than an apostate organization that teaches works salvation, extra-Biblical revelation, the
worship of idols, and dozens of other false doctrines. And yet in Folsom Stadium (1994 National
Conference), all were led into what was called and considered to be public worship and prayer with all the
Page 58 of 176
others there in the stadium in the name of "Christian" unity. However, it is a false unity because there is no
agreement in the true Christian faith! (Jude 3 -- ... contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to
the saints.) [See Media Spotlight editor Al Dager's interview with Promise Keepers then president Randy
Phillips in the Media Spotlight 11/94 Special Report: "Promise Keepers: Is What You See What You Get?"
pp. 11-12. In summary, Promise Keepers official policy toward leading Roman Catholics to the truth is one
of hands-off. Within Promise Keepers, it seems that rebuke, correction, and exclusion apply only to those
who would insist on purity of doctrine among those with whom they fellowship.]
- As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the feeling is apparently mutual. The Catholic Archdiocese of
Los Angeles is quite willing to welcome McCartney and friends back into fellowship with Romanism. An
article in the 3/15/95 The Tidings, an official publication of the L.A. Archdiocese, had this to say about
Promise Keepers ("'Promise Keepers' Promises Spiritual Renewal for Men", p. 3):
"[Promise Keepers] began among more fundamentalist and evangelical Christian communities, but [is] now
being expanded to include Catholic congregations. ... At the urging of Cardinal Roger Mahony [of the L.A.
Archdiocese] ... has studied the feasibility and appropriateness of utilizing Promise Keepers at the Catholic
parish level. [It was concluded that] there is no 'doctrinal' issue, which should cause concern to the Catholic
Church. Promise Keepers places a very strong emphasis on returning to your own church, congregation, or
parish and becoming an active nonprofessional. There is no attempt at proselytizing or drawing men away
from their faith to another church." (Emphasis added.)
One Catholic who attended the Anaheim, California regional Promise Keepers conference in May of 1994
was so "inspired" he brought "the concept back to his parish, which in turn sponsored a Promise Keepers
seminar for 100 men, with presentations by local priests". The Los Angeles Archdiocese has concluded,
"Promise Keepers can grow at the local parish level ... without adversely impacting existing parish
programs or finances." In fact, the L.A. Archdiocese is quite confident that no Catholics will be lost to
Protestant churches through Promise Keepers, since "one of the promises of the [Promise Keepers]
program is to return [a PK participant] to [his] local church ..." Thus, Roman Catholic leaders are quick to
observe how Promise Keepers can be used to build their own church which preaches a false gospel! [With
this official Roman Catholic endorsement of Promise Keepers, the 5/5/95-5/6/95 Promise Keepers Los
Angeles Men's Conference drew in excess of 72,000 to the 100,000-seat Los Angeles Coliseum.]
The Catholic charismatic magazine New Covenant has also featured Promise Keepers. On the front cover
of the 4/95 edition and in an article titled "Bands of Brothers," New Covenant cites Promise Keepers as a
hope for bringing men back into the churches. The article describes Promise Keepers as focusing on male
bonding as a means to restore men's identities as members of a warrior class. (Reported in Media Spotlight,
Vol. 16 - No. 1, "Promise Keepers Update," p. 3.) [Patterned after PK, the Catholic church has developed
two separate new men's groups of their own: "Saint Joseph's Covenant Keepers, which focuses on small
groups and obedience to eight commitments; and Ministry to Black Catholic Men, which accentuates
personal and community change through a message of responsibility for rebuilding relationships, families,
and communities" (4/29/96, Christianity Today).]
An article in the 7/23/95 Today's Catholic titled "Promise Keepers' Christian crusade draws Catholic men,"
claims that Catholics have become very active in Promise Keepers. In fact, PK has even made a practicing
Roman Catholic (Steve Jenkins) a PK Field Ministry representative for all of the states of Minnesota, North
and South Dakota, Iowa, and Wisconsin! Jenkins used to be a computer salesman, but became involved in
PK after attending the 1992 PK conference in Boulder, Colorado. The same issue of Today's Catholic also
reported that an official PK Men's Ministry Leadership Seminar was held in July of 1995 at Catholic
Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio, where 640 Catholic men attended. The conference closed
with a Catholic mass performed by Steubenville's president, priest Michael Scanlan. [Men's Ministry
Leadership Seminars were held at Franciscan again in 1996 and 1997. Scheduled to speak at the 1996 event
was PK V.P. Dale Schlafer. Other speakers included Catholic priest Michael Scanlan and Catholic Deacon
Raphael de los Reyes, Director of Radio Peace Catholic Broadcasting. The notice in the Franciscan
Page 59 of 176
University '97 Summer Conference Magazine says: "Join NFL coach Danny Abramowicz, pro-family
advocate Alan Keyes, Detroit business leader Mike Timmis [now a PK board member], Hispanic evangelist
Deacon Raphael de los Reyes, and a dynamic team of speakers including Jim Berlucchi, Jeff Cavins, John
Mooney, Mark Nehrbas, Father Michael Scanlan, TOR, and Dale Schlafer of Promise Keepers as we strive
together to be men of Jesus Christ and faithful sons of our heavenly father."]
- PK has also received endorsement from the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. The 5/17/97
Buffalo News (New York) contained a report on the upcoming Promise Keepers conference in that area.
Following are excerpts from this report:
"Although the movement is perceived to be largely Protestant, [Bill] McCartney said during a news
conference in the Buffalo Christian Center that:
PROMISE KEEPERS HAS THE APPROVAL OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF
CATHOLIC BISHOPS, USES SOME CATHOLIC SPEAKERS, AND WELCOMES CATHOLIC
MEN, INCLUDING PRIESTS.
The bishops' position, contained in a 1996 position paper prepared by its Committee on Marriage and
Family, indicates that Catholics may participate in Promise Keepers events. The conferences, the paper
suggests, may 'be filling a spiritual and pastoral vacuum' in the lives of some Catholic men and challenged
church leaders to develop programs to meet those needs. Bishop Henry J. Mansell of the Buffalo Catholic
Diocese said Friday that 'Catholics are free to attend the Promise Keepers conference.'... 'It is his hope that
after the conference there will be follow up experiences in their home parishes,' said Monsignor David M.
Lee, diocesan director of communications."
- At a PK meeting in Plainview, Texas in 1995, a Catholic priest urged listeners to value themselves
because they were made in the image of God. He also encouraged PK-ers to keep themselves pure. One
observer commented on this:
"Imagine involving the Catholic Church and Catholic priests into telling men to keep their promises and to
keep themselves pure. Look at any country where the Catholics make up the majority and you will find an
immoral and corrupt society. In those societies, women have very few rights, and the men have open
season on committing adultery. Imagine Catholic priests speaking on keeping promises and staying pure,
when 40% or more of the Catholic priests are homosexuals [by the Catholic Church's own admission]. ...
[And] are charged with molesting children, especially boys" (12/95, Plains Baptist Challenger, p. 4).
- Promise Keepers also has no problem involving Mormons in its meetings. While Mormon headquarters
has no official position on Promise Keepers, many Mormon men have and continue to participate in
Promise Keepers. Local Mormon leaders generally agree with Promise Keepers seven promises and have
privately praised the movement and commented on how attendance "has been a life changing experience
for some of the Mormon men". Promise Keepers has given at least one presentation to a Reorganized
Mormon church that was "very high" on the Promise Keepers and "would no doubt be going with it" since
they had "no problem with it at all. ... It is a wonderful program. The men at my church will be
participating." (Reported in the May/June 1995, Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter, "Promise Keepers,
Catholics, and Mormons ... Together," pp. 1, 3.)
[Chip Rawlings, a local Los Angeles lawyer and leader in the Palos Verdes Stake (a group of Mormon
congregations), has publicly urged members to participate in PK. PK's seven promises are "like something
straight out of the men's priesthood manual for the [Mormon] church," he told the L.A. Times (5/6/95
article). It is interesting that Promise Keepers, while claiming to preach a non-doctrinal gospel at its rallies,
finds acceptance even among Mormon leaders, whose theology and Christology are aberrant (Mormons
view Jesus as Satan's brother, the product of the Father's physical intercourse with Mary, who then attained
Page 60 of 176
Godhood as had His Father before Him), and Roman Catholic clergy, who insist that true salvation rests
only in the sacraments of the Church.]
- In late 1997, a unique opportunity to examine the validity of PK's salvation message became available on
the Internet -- Promise Keepers posted their opinion of an online salvation tract titled "Meet Jesus". When
printed on paper, "Meet Jesus" is six pages long. The first three pages culminate in a "salvation prayer",
while the last three-address discipleship. It is a very professional presentation complete with pictures, but
more than that, it is positive proof that the PK doctrine of salvation is a perversion of that found in the
Bible:
NO GUILT -- The essence of "Meet Jesus" is that "we have inherited" a "disease" called sin, but that we
are not at fault. Blame is placed on Adam; personal guilt for our own sin is completely ignored.
NO ACCOUNTABILITY -- The words "punishment" and "hell" never appear in "Meet Jesus". The
consequences of sin are said to be "eternal separation from God". In addition to being a half-truth (at best),
this must seem rather inconsequential to a man, who has already lived his entire life separated from God.
NO REPENTANCE -- Aside from a pat on the head repentance is ever mentioned. The prayer for salvation
has a sentence that says, "I turn from my sin", but the reader is never given any indication of what this
means, or that he even has any personal guilt or sin from which to turn. His sin could very well be nothing
more than the "diseased spiritual DNA" mentioned earlier in the tract.
NO TRUTH -- Without a doubt, "Meet Jesus" was intended to be acceptable to all. A Catholic, Mormon, or
Jehovah's Witness could read it without seeing any contradiction to their own false doctrine. In fact, the
Mormon heresy that we are all children of God from birth is well supported in "Meet Jesus". The opening
words of the "salvation prayer" are "Father, I've come home."
NO JESUS -- Perhaps the most egregious offense in "Meet Jesus" is the fact that you do not. You would
think that a document intended to introduce the Lord would talk about who He is or what He did. In the
first three pages of "Meet Jesus" (which lead up to the "salvation prayer", there are two sentences (36
words) that say anything about the person and work of Christ. The words "blood" and "atonement" never
appear. Aside from one allusion to His deity, He is never specifically identified. The doctrines of
substitution and propitiation are never mentioned in either name or concept.
We cannot say we are surprised. An ecumenical organization made up of men who cannot agree on what
one must do to inherit eternal life cannot be expected to accurately present Biblical salvation. A group like
Promise Keepers, dedicated to the un-Biblical agenda of a one world church and government, is not likely
to ignore its goals by proclaiming the truth of the word of God. Could anyone be surprised to learn that
such a group is not actually bringing lost sinners to "meet Jesus"? (Source: 10/97, Plains Baptist
Challenger; "Promise Keepers vs. Biblical Salvation", by George Shafer.)
- On the national radio program "Promise Keepers This Week", for 8/31/96, PK founder Bill McCartney
made the following remarks:
"I look for real problems in the future in the area of denominations. I believe that what we have seen has
been the grace of God. I believe that -- there have been thousands of Catholic men that have come to
Promise Keepers, and they have been blessed and they have gone back to their churches, and they have
said, 'We want more of this.' In addition, the Catholic churches have gathered, the bishops have gotten
together, and they have sanctioned Promise Keepers. They said, 'Go ahead and go. This is something God
is doing.' Well, in the meantime, while this has been slow to develop, God has been bringing the various
Protestant denominations together. ... Now Promise Keepers is going to have to understand that more and
more Catholics are going to participate. In addition, what every person needs to do is stop looking at
people's labels and ask this question: 'Does this guy know Jesus? Does he love Jesus with all his heart? Has
he been born of the Spirit of God?' In addition, if you see that fruit, then quit making judgments. Just accept
Page 61 of 176
him. We are all the same before God ... So let us not start categorizing people. Let us just allow God to be
God and he can bless whom He chooses to bless. And that's how Promise Keepers is going to grow."
We should focus on the matter of labels, but Bill McCartney is very confused about labels. Labels mean
something. They are important. I am glad that the pharmacist uses labels. I am glad that the grocer uses
labels. I am also glad that Christians use labels. Our labels commonly define what we believe; they define
our doctrinal position, which tells others whether we have the Jesus of the Bible or a counterfeit one. PK
has a counterfeit one.
- Based on the information detailed above, it is evident that in addition to the well-known Seven Promises
of Promise Keepers, there are three unwritten promises also being made and kept. The three unwritten
promises are just that -- unwritten. You will not find them directly stated in Promise Keepers' books; nor do
they appear in any of their talks, whether at the rallies or in smaller gatherings. It is doubtful, if asked, that
the Promise Keepers would directly affirm or deny these three promises. Nonetheless, Catholics, Mormons,
and Reorganized Mormons know that the three unwritten promises exist and they trust the three promises
will be kept. The three unwritten promises of Promise Keepers are very simply:
(1) Promise Keepers will not violate your doctrines;
(2) Promise Keepers will not proselytize your men; and
(3) Promise Keepers will send men back to their parishes, churches, and wards.
If these three unwritten promises were not committed to and kept, why would Catholics, Mormons, and
Reorganized Mormons encourage their men to participate? Would they send their men to rallies or
meetings where their doctrines would be violated or their men would be proselytized and stolen from their
parishes, churches, and wards? Absolutely not!
The "gospel" message of the Promise Keepers is not the true Gospel message. The true Gospel message
will, at times, offend and condemn. Furthermore, true Biblical preaching and teaching will speak of
heresies and aberrant teachings and will even name names, as the apostle Paul did. Imagine, if you will, the
apostle Paul having a "rally" and inviting the Scribes, Pharisees, Essenes, Judaizers, and others. Then
imagine Paul committing himself to not violating their doctrines, not proselytizing them, and then sending
the men back to their "churches". Underneath the hoop, holler, and hype of the Promise Keepers movement
is an ecumenicalism that smacks of the last days spoken of in Scripture, rather than what some have called
the "greatest move of God since the day of Pentecost". This "move of God" is arguably the largest (in terms
of numbers) and broadest (in terms of denominations) ecumenicalism that the world has ever seen (Adapted
and/or excerpted from "Promise Keepers' 3 Unwritten Promises," Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter, Sept-
Oct 1995, pp. 1-2).
- McCartney also stated at the 1994 National Conference that he thought perhaps the Lord's main purpose
for Promise Keepers was to gather His clergy, and that in the summer of 1996 McCartney hoped to gather
75,000 of them in Denver (see next item for change of venue). To exaggerate this plan, McCartney held a
revival-style "altar call" of sorts for pastors. All the pastors present among the 52,000 in attendance were
asked to come down to the stage. All the people sang and yelled for ten minutes while about 3,000 pastors
came forward. McCartney had all the pastors assembled in front of the stage turn and hold up their hands to
the crowd and a blessing was pronounced on the people. Then the pastors turned and kneeled, and there
were prayers said confessing sin for not carrying out their office faithfully, including "putting up barriers
on account of denominational dogma"; i.e., a prayer asking for forgiveness for being a pastor who is not
doctrinally indifferent! Some pastors there called this the "emotional highlight" of the weekend and
"special". There was waving of thousands of hats in the stadium and a screaming liturgy of the crowd "we
love you", and the pastors responding "we love you." (Reported in the 9/19/94, Christian News, p. 6.)
Those who love the truth should take note and watch carefully because Promise Keepers has a very large
emotional following and organizational momentum. In spite of their errors, they could be very effective at
Page 62 of 176
this point -- an appeal to a priestly pastoral class. In fact, McCartney has stated that we as Christians need
our pastors to rightly divide the Word of Truth for us because we cannot do it for ourselves!
- Promise Keepers held a "1996 National Clergy Conference" (2/13/96-2/15/96) in Atlanta's Georgia
Dome stadium. The theme for the conference was "Fan into Flame", because McCartney believes "God
wants to bring revival to His church through its clergy" (2/26/96, Christian News, p. 10). The purpose of
this gathering, according to McCartney, was to "tear the hearts of pastors wide open so that a single
leadership can be produced". He had hoped to "bring as many as 100,000 ministers and priests of all races
together" (7/1/95, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, p. C8). [Actual attendance was 39,024, which
represented all 50 states and more than a dozen foreign countries; 600 in attendance were Roman Catholic
priests!] Speakers for the event were Jack Hayford, Joseph Stowell, Chuck Swindoll, and E.V. Hill. Steve
Green provided the ecumenical contemporary music, while Billy Graham sent a message relayed to
everyone that PK is "the organization that helps the church work," and needs to "tear down the walls that
separate us." In addition, James Dobson's Focus on the Family sponsored a three-hour evening reception
for the attendees on 2/14/96.
At the beginning of the conference, hyper-charismatic Jack Hayford was speaking and trying to influence
everyone to "dance in the Lord," an unscriptural routine favored by the fanatical wing of Pentecostal
charismatic's. Hayford said he learned the dance in Africa, and later the Lord spoke to him directly saying,
"May I have this dance?" He then began doing an African folkdance around the podium, suggestive of the
dances associated with heathen witch doctoring. [Nobody at the conference seemed disturbed that Hayford
was teaching him or her Charismatic worship forms, much less that he claimed to receive these teachings
through direct revelation from God!] General musical choices at the conference were of the satanic hard
rock variety (ear-splitting noise) that was utterly devoid of true spirituality. (Reported in the 3/11/96,
Christian News, p. 11.)
In keeping with the spirit of paganism, PK had a group of Cherokee Indians walk 168 miles from North
Carolina to perform a name-giving ceremony. Since the highest honor, that an Indian can receive is a name,
the Indian's Chief conferred names on Randy Phillips and Bill McCartney. Phillips was given an Indian
name that means "God's Eagle", while McCartney received the name "Victorious Warrior". Both were
honored with Indian Headdress, a poem was read called "No More Broken Treaties," and a former Indian
Medicine Man, Peter Gray Eyes, prayed over Phillips and McCartney. What will PK come up with next?
(Reported by Christian Interactive Network's live coverage; and the Spring 1996, Men of Action.)
McCartney even encouraged the pastors present to enter into a blood covenant. A major thrust McCartney
gave was, "Commitment is seen in discipleship and a blood covenant. The blood covenant means to be
bound in speech and action with all who are in this covenant. This covenant is stronger than family and
denominational ties." He then asked, "How strong is your commitment to the blood? Do you agree?" This
was followed by an ear-piercing shout of "We all agree!" from the 39,000 clergy. The idea of a blood
covenant is not Biblical; it is rooted in pagan spiritual practices whereby two people would cut themselves
and mingle their blood in order to form a bond stronger than family ties. McCartney's idea of a blood
covenant is to accept everyone who calls himself born again without regard to beliefs and practices that are
contrary to Scripture. McCartney was asking the "clergy" to enter into a blood covenant with false teachers.
In addition, the amazing thing is that they heartily agreed! What does this say about the discernment and
spiritual condition of so many "clergy", particularly the PK-enamored clergy? (Reported in the 8/96, Media
Spotlight, "Promise Keepers Keeps On Keeping On," p. 6.)
When a question was asked at a press conference regarding "laughing revivals" -- where those involved
"bark like dogs" and "bray like donkeys" -- Dr. Henry Blackaby (SBC author of the mystical book
Experiencing God), speaking on behalf of PK said, "We don't try to evaluate that, and neither do we take a
position regarding women serving as pastors." Dr. Joseph Stowell [President, Moody Bible Institute]
immediately declared, "Our God does not ever wear an angry face. He deals with compassion." [We do not
know what Bible Dr. Stowell uses, but it is not the same one we use! Does he really think God did not have
Page 63 of 176
an angry face when He told Moses He was going to destroy Israel for its sin (Exodus 32:9,10), or that Jesus
Christ did not have an angry face when He drove the money changers out of the temple? The Bible says the
Lord Jesus Christ "looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts"
(Mark 3:5).] These thousands of clergymen hugged one another, laid hands on one another's head, and
exchanged names, addresses, and phone numbers. This took place so that when they returned home they
could be to network in communication and to begin "prayer meetings" together. They were urged to refrain
from "criticism of any other group". PK wants reconciliation in spite of doctrinal differences between
churches -- even Protestant and Roman Catholic groups (Ralph Colas report, 4/1/96, Christian News, pp. 1,
9-10; bracketed comment from O Timothy editor, David Cloud).
The Atlanta Clergy Conference included compromise, ecumenism, apostasy, Jesuit casuistry (the end
justifies the means), and hyper-emotionalism, along with a theology based on relationships rather than
Biblical truth. Thus, Promise Keepers has once again proved that it is much more than a group attempting
to help men live godly lives. It is a committed program of intentional compromise -- an ecumenical train
moving from one area to another. PK's premise that unity "is based on our love of Jesus" is incorrect. Unity
must be based on the unchanging Word of the living God (Ralph Colas report, 4/1/96, Christian News, pp.
1, 9-10). [The very idea of a clergy conference is itself antithetical to Biblical truth. There is no clergy class
found in Scripture; it was an invention of Roman Catholicism and has been maintained through the
Protestant churches. The concept is that of priesthood separate from the priesthood of all believers.]
- Promise Keepers even invited women pastors to participate in its 1998 conferences. According to the Los
Angeles Times religion page, Jan. 24, 1998, a few female pastors participated in the regional clergy
conference on January 20 in San Diego, California. The LA Times interviewed one of these, Roberta
Hestenes, pastor of Solano Beach Presbyterian Church and former president of left-wing Eastern College
near Philadelphia (the teaching home of Tony Campolo). She said, "I find it surprising that I am going. But
I've heard [Promise Keepers founder] Bill McCartney say that they desire to be supportive of women
pastors, and I'm taking him at his word." This is not a new feature of Promise Keepers. In July 1996,
Promise Keepers director for the state of Missouri, Louis Monroe, said PK welcomes female pastors.
(Source 1/27/98, FBIS.) [Nine such Clergy conferences were held in 1998 (1/15/98-3/12/98), with the
theme, "Equipping Leaders of Men: Practical Ways to Develop Men of God in Your Church.")
- In the spring '92 issue of the Promise Keepers' Men of Action newsletter, it was reported:
"12,148 Committed Promise Keepers & Counting -- To date, that's how many men have made a decision to
live their lives dedicated to the seven tenets of Promise Keepers. ... We have identified seven areas of a
man's life which are directly affected by this commitment."
The Winter 1994 issue of Men of Action reports that there are now over 13,000 men who have signed the
seven tenets of Promise Keepers; a 6/95 newspaper article said over 65,000 have signed pledges. Promise
Keepers is now including commitment cards with each conference attendee's syllabus, so the number of
commitments should dramatically increase.
The following is tenet number 5, which we believe encourages ecumenism and, thereby, directly violates
the doctrine of Biblical separation (Rom. 16:17; 2 Jn. 10, 11; etc.):
"A Promise Keeper is committed to reach beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the
power of biblical unity. He acknowledges the current division in the church and is discovering that God
wants Christian men of all ethnic and denominational heritages, rich and poor, educated and uneducated, to
stand together in honor of Jesus Christ. He is willing to cultivate relationships with his brothers in Christ in
order to understand their pain. A Promise Keeper is willing to cross over the lines that have divided the
church and meet with at least one man of a different race or denomination at least once a month."
(Emphasis added.)
In addition, tenet number 7 states: (Emphasis added.)
Page 64 of 176
"A Promise Keeper is committed to pursue vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he
needs his brothers to help keep his promises. [Where is this in the Bible?] He agrees to meet with a small
group of men 2-4 times each month. ... Each man willingly grants the others the right to inquire about his
relationship to God, his commitment to his family, his sexuality, and his financial dealings. ..."
[Of the Promise Keepers' seven promises, Promise #5 reads: "A Promise Keeper is committed to supporting
the mission of the church ... by actively giving of his time and resources." So, what is the result of the past
eight years of PK? Religion researcher George Barna reported recently that male church attendance has
shown NO increase since 1991, when PK sponsored its first event in Colorado. (Source: 12/1/98, Calvary
Contender.)]
- For an example of just how silly Promise Keepers' infatuation with breaking down racial and
denominational barriers has become, one only need look to the 6/94 Promise Keepers regional conference
held in Denton, Texas (2/6/95, Christianity Today, "Manhood's Great Awakening," p. 23):
"Some 33,000 men gathered for the conference held last June, only to be sent fleeing by a devastating
rainstorm that destroyed equipment and shut down the program for more than five hours. Recalls President
Randy Phillips, 'When we got back together, we said, "Lord, is there something you want to show us
here?"' The men unanimously concluded that God had allowed the storm to happen to show them how
much they were lacking in making the Texas meeting a racially mixed affair, says Phillips. 'After that, all
the speakers laid aside their prepared messages and united together to address how racism has divided the
church.'"
Over three years later, McCartney did his Martin Luther King impression at an 11/96 PK staff conference
("two marathon days of confession, repentance, and reconciliation") -- "Promise Keepers has got to be a
place where our brothers and sisters of color feel respected, where they feel accepted, and where they can
finally say, 'Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty we are free at last'" (Spring 1997, Men of Action,
pp. 5-6).
- One of the movements within Promise Keepers that is also gaining prominence within other ministries is
the concept of mentoring. Promise Keepers is based on the belief that every man must have an older mentor
to whom he can be held accountable for his decisions and actions in life. Moreover, Promise Keepers
believes that every man should not only have an older mentor, but also have a spiritual peer, as well as a
younger man to whom he can be a mentor. Another word for mentoring would be discipling or
shepherding, which has gained prominence within the charismatic movement. Yet, as much as Promise
Keepers insists on the importance of male bonding and accountability to one another, the Promise Keepers
manual on the subject (Brothers! Calling Men Into Vital Relationships: 1993) is heavily psychological in
orientation, not Scriptural (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise Keepers, pp. 7-8).
Promise Keepers believes that as a part of mentoring, every man must be accountable to some other man,
especially in the areas of one's finances, sexual life, and relationship to God. This partner gained through
mentoring, then, must be given complete freedom to inquire into any of these areas at will; with the
understanding that he may bring correction to those areas, he feels are not in proper alignment. This is a
kind of covenant relationship not found anywhere in Scripture. In fact, to the contrary, God takes such
covenants far more seriously than does Promise Keepers (cf. Num. 30:2). [Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special
Report on Promise Keepers, p. 13. See also the 4/95, Men of Action, p. 8, for "An Open Letter from
'Generation X,'" which is a plea for mentors, all couched in psychological terms.]
One error that comes from this covenant relationship is the encouraging of men to take oaths. This
unbiblical practice is not at all uncommon at Promise Keepers meetings. These oaths are supposed to entail
life-changing decisions. Instead, they impose an extra-Biblical series of requirements on men. The Seven
Promises themselves comprise nothing more than a surrogate sanctification that puts men under legalism
rather than grace (9/95, The Christian Conscience, p. 24).
Page 65 of 176
- Promise Keepers even goes so far as to mandate mentoring relationships. In Seven Promises of a
Promise Keeper (pp. 55, 61) and its sequel, The Power of a Promise Kept (p. 4), PK teaches:
"It is impossible for men to fulfill the commands of Scripture without being in significant relationship with
other men." (Emphasis added.)
Apparently, God overlooked this fact when He only made Eve to help Adam fulfill the commands entrusted
to him. Another PK author actually asks, "Do you have someone other than your wife with whom you can
share your secret temptations and failure" (The Power of a Promise Kept, p. 123). By "other than", this
author clearly means someone instead of your wife, not in addition to her, since only six pages later, he
commends to the reader the example of one so-called promise-keeper who salved his conscience by telling
his male soul mate, instead of his wife, about some infidelity he had committed. Another PK writer even
lists factors to help husbands decide on a case-by-case basis whether they should confess infidelities to
their wives (Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper, p. 96), but then, without skipping a beat, this same
author mandates that men develop bonds with a few other men with whom they can "acknowledge" their
"secret sins." (Excerpted and/or adapted from the 3/4/96, Christian News, p. 13.)
- Does a "promise-keeper" even need to be a believer? Apparently not. Despite all the hype about
developing godly men, Promise Keepers has now admitted that it does not know if its conference attendees
have ever trusted Christ. In a 4/94 letter sent to men in the Indianapolis, Indiana area, Promise Keepers V.P.
of National Ministries and "PK Minister at Large", E. Glenn Wagner, confessed that at an "invitation"
during the opening session of Promise Keepers '93 in Boulder, Colorado, more than 5,000 men responded!
But since there were not enough "trained counselors" available to help those responding, Promise Keepers
decided to employ Billy Graham Evangelistic Association trained instructors to train the volunteer
counselors that were to work each of the seven conference locations in the Spring and Summer of 1994:
"The Promise Keepers Counselor Training Course [is] the same as the Billy Graham Counselor Training
Course [with] ... classes ... developed over the last forty years to train counselors for Billy Graham
Crusades." This should be cause for alarm to anyone familiar with Billy Graham Crusade methods.
Promise Keepers claims that at 1994's conferences, approximately 16,000 men "surrendered or
recommitted their lives to the Lordship of Jesus Christ" (4/95, Men of Action). But for Promise Keepers,
instead of that meaning that men's hearts were flooded with grief and repentance and seeking forgiveness,
we are told they answer some form of an altar call, are given some words of loving assurance during
"counseling" in the name of Jesus, and then challenged to go out there and try harder; i.e., they are pointed
to a list of promises they must keep. Even under the most optimistic circumstances, if broken-hearted men
were to hear the pure Gospel of Christ at a PK rally, with no strings attached, where would they seek
ongoing comfort and fellowship once the rally had moved on to the next town? Would they be directed to
nameless churches, churches that commend social friendships as the means of comfort, or to churches that
obscure the gospel with their zeal? Nowhere in the Bible does it say that God wants to unite men through
vital relationships with each other in order to become godly influences in the world. It says that God wants
to unite men into His Church with the One Man, Christ (10/16/95, Christian News, p. 14).
- Who are the speakers at Promise Keepers national meetings and what is their theology? The ministries of
the speakers/teachers at Promise Keepers meetings run the gamut from compromising neo-evangelicalism
and charismatic error, to psycho spiritual occultism and ecumenical liberalism. It is, therefore, clear that
these men are introducing the men attending these meetings to unscriptural doctrines and fellowships.
(Dates spoken at Promise Keepers National or Regional Men's Conferences and/or concurrently held
National Leadership Conferences are in parentheses.):
(a) Bill McCartney (1991-1999) -- Founder and board member of Promise Keepers, and head football
coach at the University of Colorado until his January 1995 resignation. A former Roman Catholic,
McCartney's theology is now charismatic as evidenced by his membership in a local church affiliated with
the Vineyard Christian Fellowship [the church has since changed its name to try to remove its Vineyard
Page 66 of 176
stigma] -- a denomination founded by hyper-charismatic, signs &wonders "healer" John Wimber. Promise
Keepers also has McCartney's Vineyard pastor, James Ryle, on its Board of Directors, and Vineyard
member Randy Phillips was its then president. (See later in this report for more on Ryle and McCartney.)
[In his book From Ashes to Glory McCartney speaks glowingly of his Roman Catholic background, and
asserts that he still believes much as a Roman Catholic. He states that he did not leave Roman Catholicism
as much as he joined James Ryle's Vineyard Fellowship because it was "meeting his needs at the time".]
(b) Gary Smalley (1991-1997) & John Trent (1992-1993; 1995-1998) -- author, founder and President of
Today's Family, Gary Smalley is the "Church's" leading proponent of Right-Brain/Left-Brain
pseudoscience. This right-brain/left-brain myth, which claims to describe personality types by brain
hemisphere dominance, as well as give insights to male/ female communication effectiveness, has been
thoroughly discredited by secular neuroscientists (to say nothing of the fact that it also has no support in
Scripture). The popularization of right-brain/left-brain has been largely due to the book The Language of
Love, co-authored by Smalley and fellow psychologist, John Trent. (Both also have theological degrees, but
apparently believe that the Bible alone is insufficient to handle people's problems of living.) As for John
Trent, former Vice President of Today's Family, and now President of Encouraging Words, he talks about
personality traits, not like those of the Bible, but astrology. He compares our behaviors to animals and says
this is why we act the way we do -- he has you compare your actions to a lion, a golden retriever, a beaver,
or an otter. (Trent has also endorsed Robert Hicks' book, The Masculine Journey, as teaching "what
Biblical masculinity" is all about, and has written a book titled How to Handle Your Promise Keeper,
directed to women who desire to control their husbands in the manner Smalley and Trent teach.) (See later
in this report for details of the teachings in Hicks' book.)
(c) Chuck Swindoll (1994-1995) -- Swindoll is the former senior pastor of First Evangelical Free Church
of Fullerton, California (for 24 years); he resigned in mid-1994 to become president of neo-evangelical
Dallas Theological Seminary. Swindoll's "résumé of heresy" is seemingly endless -- he recommends the
books of many of the worst psychologizers, New Agers, and occultists imaginable, all under the banner of
"all truth is God's truth"; he teaches a psychological self-love/self-esteem gospel that is virtually
indistinguishable from that of the atheistic psychologists, in effect, denying the doctrines of grace and
redemption; he openly supports ecumenical cooperation with Catholics and charismatics, all under the
guise of "grace" and non-judgmental "acceptance"; he endorses the occult practices of visualization and
inner healing/victimization therapy; and he teaches that believers can be demon possessed. [At the 7/94 PK
Boulder, Colorado conference, Swindoll, clad in faded denim, roared onto the stage astride a motorcycle to
the band playing "Born to Be Wild," and then delivered a sermon on avoiding temptation.]
(d) Luis Palau (1992; 1995-1999) -- internationally known Argentinean evangelist Luis Palau ("the Billy
Graham of South America") is a Catholic sympathizer whose ecumenical message is heavily diluted with
pop psychology and Armenian easy-believes. He regularly cooperates with apostate Methodism and the
radical fringe of Charismatic's (e.g., Oral Roberts).
(e) E.V. Hill (1992-1999) -- hyper-charismatic pastor of the Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church in the
Watts section of Los Angeles (member in the apostate National Council of Churches) and V.P. of the
National Baptist Convention. Hill praises Jesse Jackson (apostate, radical social activist) and has been
linked with liberal groups such as the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (which endorsed the
early-1993 Gay Rights march on Washington, D.C.!). Hill is a frequent guest speaker on various
charismatic platforms (e.g., at Kenneth Hagin's RHEMA Center).
(f) Jack Hayford (1991-1999) -- author and hyper-charismatic pastor of The Church on the Way in Van
Nuys, California; he claims to have seen a vision of Jesus seated in heaven and to have heard Him speak!
(At the 5/94, Promise Keepers regional conference in Anaheim, California, Hayford gave three reasons
why God required circumcision in the Old Testament: "[1] God wants to touch your very identity as a man;
[2] He wants to reach out and touch your secret and private parts. This enables Him to better perform
surgery on the heart; [3] God wants to touch man's creative parts.") He is the senior editorial advisor for
Page 67 of 176
Ministries Today, a pro-charismatic magazine published by Strang Communications, is a Promise Keepers
board member, believes that the Catholic mass is a valid form of Christian worship (Seven Promises of a
Promise Keeper, p. 19), and believes that being committed to doctrinal distinctive at the expense of unity is
an example of "small-minded sectarianism" (12/95, Charisma, p. 68).
(g) Gary Oliver (1991-1993; 1995-1996; 1998) -- author of Real Men Have Feelings Too, psychologist,
Clinical Director of Southwest Counseling Associates, and Promise Keepers board member. Among the
many Freudian and miscellaneous humanistic psychological models used by Oliver, his favorite appears to
be one based upon the teachings of "Christian" psychologist Dr. Larry Crabb. Concerning PK and
Catholicism, Oliver says, "Since day one, we've really encouraged Catholic participation, not because they
are Catholics, but because anyone who loves the Lord is welcome."
(h) Larry Crabb (1992; 1996) -- author, clinical psychologist, and founder and Director of the Institute of
Biblical Counseling at Colorado Christian University in Morrison, Colorado. Crabb's model of counseling
is primarily a psychological system of unconscious needs that supposedly motivate all behavior. This
system has been derived from Freudian (the "unconscious") and humanistic (a hierarchy of needs)
psychology, with great emphasis on so-called emotional needs.
(i) Robert Hicks (1993) -- Professor of Pastoral Theology at the Seminary of the East (Dresher, PA),
pastor, psychotherapist, president of the psychologically-oriented Life Counseling Services, and author of
the Promise Keepers endorsed book The Masculine Journey (foreword by John Trent). (See later in this
report for details.) Hicks is the author of other psychobabble books: Uneasy Manhood, Returning Home,
Failure to Scream, and Man of All Passions.
(j) Howard Hendricks (1993; 1995; 1997) -- psychologically oriented Distinguished Professor and
Chairman of the Center for Christian Leadership at Dallas Theological Seminary. He has authored many
books about marriage and family life (e.g., Heaven Help the Home), and spends considerable time
conducting so-called "Christian" marriage enrichment seminars. (Hendricks has also endorsed Robert
Hicks' book The Masculine Journey as "an eye opening key to understanding the Bible's teaching on what it
means to be a man".) He is also a Promise Keepers board member.
(k) Joseph Stowell (1994-1999) -- Ecumenical psychologies and president of the Moody Bible Institute.
Stowell has previous strong ties to the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches (GARBC).
(l) Jim Smoke (1993) -- Executive Director of the Center for Divorce Recovery and author of Ten Ways
You Can Grow through Divorce. Smoke is a self-love advocate whose terminology sounds much like that
of Carl Rogers.
(m) Bill Hybels (1994-1996) -- Author, church-growth guru, and the ecumenical, psychologically-oriented
pastor of the 12,000-member Willow Creek Community Church in Barrington, Illinois.
(n) James Dobson (1993) -- pop psychologist, author, and founder and Director of Focus on the Family
Ministries. According to Dobson, "low self-esteem" is the root cause of most societal ills. Dobson has
heavily promoted Promise Keepers on his nationwide radio program, and Focus on the Family Publishing
is one of Promise Keepers' publishers and produces most of its tapes. In fact, PK credits Dobson's
nationwide radio program promotion of the PK '92 Convention as instrumental in PK's subsequent
extraordinary growth. In PK's early years, Promise Keepers was keep afloat by a gift from Focus on the
Family.
(o) Greg Laurie (1994-1999) -- author, crusade evangelist, and charismatic pastor of the 12,000-plus
membership Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California; Calvary Chapel's Chuck Smith is
mentor for this ecumenical psychologies.
Page 68 of 176
(p) Bill Bright (1992; 1995-1996) -- ecumenical/Catholic promoter and founder and Director of Campus
Crusade for Christ. Bright was a signatory to the 3/94 ecumenical accord -- "Evangelicals & Catholics
Together: the Christian Mission in the Third Millennium", and won the $1 million 1996 Templeton Prize
for Progress in Religion.
- Also speaking at one or more of the six 1994 Promise Keepers regional conferences held in May-June
and October of 1994 (in addition to those listed above) were Calvary Chapel's charismatic pastor, Chuck
Smith and Boulder Valley Vineyard Christian Fellowship pastor and Promise Keepers board member,
James Ryle. Total attendance at the six 1994 regional conferences was estimated at more than 225,000.
(The October 28-29, 1994, Dallas meetings were not originally scheduled, but still they drew over 30,000
men.)
At the 7/94 Boulder, Colorado National Conference, "A Christian rock band set the mood. When the music
stopped, the crowd rose to do 'the wave,' shouting 'Jesus, Jesus, Jesus.'... 'We're scoring baskets for Jesus,'
declared emcee Bob Horner, an official with Campus Crusade for Christ." Then there were Swindoll's
motorcycle antics described above. (7/29/94, Newsweek, "The Gospel of Guy hood", pp. 60-61). Not to be
outdone, later in the evening Gary Smalley made his entrance on a kiddy-sized Big Wheel bike. All this in
the name of Christian manhood! (Nate Adams, author of Nine Character Traits Separating the Men from
the Boys, says that Promise Keepers is a fun thing and stresses the importance of the conferences giving
men the chance to express their boyish and playful sides. Another observer described the 1994 National
Conference as a "techno-tent revival"; another as a "charismatic camp meeting experience ... [resembling] a
cross between a Bill Gothard Seminar and a Billy Graham Crusade"; another as "part tent revival, part mass
male bonding ritual"; and another as a stadium show that is the "time-tested snake oil of tent revivalism --
contrived emotion, a fervent push for here-and-now decision, dumbed down doctrine, and the elision of
denominational differences.")
- Promise Keepers held thirteen, 2-day (Friday-Saturday) stadium conferences in 13 major U.S. cities in
1995; the first was in late-April in Detroit's Silverdome, and the last was in late-October in Dallas's Texas
Stadium. Total attendance was 727,000. (There was no special 1995 "National Conference" in Boulder,
Colorado, as in previous years; all conferences are now equal in status.) Special Friday morning seminars
were also held in each of the 13 cities. One seminar was for pastors on how to "encourage and equip pastors
for men's ministry", and the other was for "worship leaders" on how "to lead men in their church".
The theme for Promise Keepers '95 was Raise the Standard. Each of the 13 conferences had the same eight
topics, with only the 45 scheduled speakers rotating topics from conference to conference. Dallas
ecumenical pastor Tony Evans spoke at 11 of the 13 conferences, while Jack Hayford and Bill McCartney
spoke at eight each, Howard Hendricks at six, E.V. Hill at five, and Gary Smalley at four. Some of the first-
time Promise Keepers conference speakers included Juan Carlos Ortiz, the pastor of Hispanic Ministries at
apostate Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral; Chuck Colson, co-author of the ecumenical accord
"Evangelicals and Catholics Together" and recipient of the Progress in Religion Award; self-esteem
psychologizer, Dennis Rainey; psychologizing financial guru, Ron Blue; Billy Graham's liberal son,
Franklin Graham; Far East Broadcasting Company's Billy Kim, who speaks and travels with hyper-
charismatic David Yonggi Cho and is vice president of the apostate Baptist World Alliance; John Wesley-
White, evangelist for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association; and charismatic Bruce Wilkinson.
- The theme for 1996's rallies was Break Down the Walls -- Randy Phillips said, "There are centuries-old
walls built of pain, hurt, neglect and abuse. Our desire is to exalt the person of Christ and power of the
cross in a way that breaks down the walls that exist brother-to-brother, brother-to-sister, and church-to-
church" (2/12/96, Christian News, p. 1). Promise Keepers held 22, 2-day (Friday-Saturday) stadium
conferences in 22 major U.S. cities; the first in mid-April in the Los Angeles Coliseum, and the last in late-
October in Dallas/Ft. Worth's Texas Motor Speedway. Total attendance for the 22 conferences was more
than one million men! Special Friday morning seminars were also held in each of the 22 cities for "men in
church leadership ... with the goal of uniting in worship, instruction, and encouragement".
Page 69 of 176
Each of the 22 Break Down the Walls conferences covered the same seven topics, with only the 69
scheduled speakers rotating topics from conference to conference. Bill McCartney spoke at 13 of the
meetings, while Dallas ecumenical pastor Tony Evans, Jack Hayford, John Trent, Gary Smalley, Greg
Laurie, Franklin Graham, Bruce Wilkinson, and Chuck Colson spoke at three meetings each. [At the 9/96
rally in NYC, Colson, sounding like "Mother" Teresa, said, "If you trust in God it doesn't matter what
religion or race you are, we all belong to each other."] Some of the first-time Promise Keepers conference
speakers included John Dawson, charismatic author and International Director for Urban Missions of
Youth With A Mission (YWAM); Max Lucado, popular psychologically-oriented author and Church of
Christ pastor; James Robison, hyper-charismatic pastor and televangelist; Haddon Robinson, ecumenical
Gordon-Conwell professor and neo-evangelical writer for Radio Bible Class; and Rick Ryan, pastor of the
charismatically-oriented Calvary Chapel of Santa Barbara, California.
In addition to 1996's stadium rallies, hundreds of Wake-up Calls/Rallies (also called "Men's Ministry
Leadership Seminars"), "Key Men/Ambassador Training Seminars"; "Foundations for Effective Men's
Ministries Seminars"; and "Building Men of Integrity Seminars" were held by PK from February-May,
some of them in Catholic churches, and some in Pentecostal churches. As an indication of PK's total lack of
discernment, one of the Wake-Up Call meetings was held on 2/6/96 at apostate Robert Schuller's Crystal
Cathedral in Garden Grove, California.
- The theme for 1997's rallies was The Making of a Godly Man. Promise Keepers had originally scheduled
20, 2-day (Friday-Saturday) stadium conferences in 20 major U.S. cities; the first in early-May in the
Pontiac Silverdome, and the last in late-October in Texas Stadium. Two were cancelled due to low
attendance. [PK also held a rally on 1/10/97 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Speakers included Jack Hayford, Billy
Kim, and Bill McCartney.] Each of the 18 The Making of a Godly Man conferences covered the same six
topics, with only the 40 scheduled speakers rotating topics from conference to conference. Total attendance
for the 18 conferences was expected to be about 900,000, but was only about 630,000. Special Friday
morning "Clergy Conference for Men" meetings were also scheduled in each of the 18 cities, with the
theme "Becoming an Agent of Revival".
[Note: We are no longer going to make specific comments on each year's conference (as with the
1994-1997 conferences above), due in part to the waning influence of PK as national phenomena.]
- Not only can we surmise Promise Keepers theology by examining the theology of those it invites to
speak at its conferences and seminars, but also by the materials, it makes available to its attendees. At the
July 1993, National Conference in Colorado, psychotherapist Dr. Robert Hicks' book The Masculine
Journey: Understanding the Six Stages of Manhood was provided in hard cover to each of the 50,000 men
who attended. Both the book and the accompanying Study Guide at the time carried the Promise Keepers'
logo, information, and/or phone numbers. At the end of the book, the statement was made: "Promise
Keepers wants to provide men's materials (like this book) ..." (p. 203). Moreover, the book was advertised
in the July/August 1994 premier issue of the Promise Keepers magazine New Man (as well as in subsequent
issues -- New Man is now controlled by Charisma's Stephen Strang), as well as in Charisma magazine.
Thus, it was reasonable to assume that Hicks' teachings were representative of the Promise Keepers'
doctrine of manhood. [In 10/94, Promise Keepers first began to make available a seven-page statement that
was supportive of Hicks' teachings; see the end of this section and the 10/94 revised edition of Psycho
Heresy Awareness Ministries' 44-page booklet, Promise Keepers & Psycho Heresy, for an analysis of this
statement. As of early 1996, Promise Keepers no longer sells The Masculine Journey at conferences or
through its catalogs, and when inquiries are made of PK, it no longer tries to defend the book and the study
guide. Nevertheless, PK continues to refer to Hicks' theology as "orthodox". See clarifying statement at
the end of this section.]
Hicks claims that his book will help identify the landmarks to watch out for along one's "masculine
journey", "help discover where you are in the journey, how to grow comfortable with your unique identity,
how to move closer to God, and how to experience genuine camaraderie with other men." To the contrary,
Page 70 of 176
we contend that Hicks' efforts are nothing more than the same old psycho heresy (Freudian and Jungian, in
Hicks' case), wrapped in bad exegesis and a convoluted, psychologically biased interpretation of Biblical
language.
Hicks looks at the six Hebrew words translated as "man" or "male" in the Hebrew Bible and concludes that
each of these words reflects a different stage or stop on "the masculine journey" to manhood. (Hicks claims
he learned these words at seminary.) He claims that the Hebrew word zakar "depicts man as a phallic
being. Men have an innate sexual force, which sometimes is denied, denigrated, or perverted. ... Gibbor ...
means to be a warrior. ... Sometimes the warrior ends up being wounded. ... Enosh describes man in his
woundedness, weakness, and frailty. Men today have been wounded by abusive or absent fathers; by
domineering mothers or teachers; by layoffs; by failure, alcohol and divorce. ... Many men are bleeding to
death on the inside. ... Zaken ... elder [mentor/sage]. This is the man the Bible presents as connected to all
of life, reconciling his past conflicts, and making significant contributions to his community and culture. ...
The zaken time of life is the destination of the male journey and should be sought after and celebrated"
(Spring/Summer 1993, Men of Action). Hicks also claims that the word àdam speaks of man created as a
"noble savage"; this apparently comes from humanistic anthropologist Margaret Mead's romantic idea that
uncivilized people have a natural purity because they have not yet been corrupted by society. Hicks also
claims that Ìsh "reflects man as a ruler of his own soul, being independent of outside considerations."
(Reported in the Jul/Aug and Sep/Oct issues (1994) of Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter.)
Therefore, Hicks' six stages to manhood, in order, are (1) creational male (àdam); (2) phallic male (zakar);
(3) warrior (gibbor); (4) wounded male (enosh); (5) native man (Ìsh); and (6) the sage (zaken). Following
are some lowlights from The Masculine Journey and/or the accompanying Study Guide: (All emphases
added.)
(a) In chapter after chapter, subjective insights into manhood are offered through quotes by a host of
secular authors with a psychological or New Age bent. These include psycho-occultist Carl Jung, inner-
healing therapist Leanne Payne, transpersonal New Age psychiatrist and occultist/spiritualist Elizabeth
Kübler-Ross, and psychologist Sam Keen. (Keen is a former theologian in residence at Esalen, the New
Age/Eastern mystical therapeutic center south of San Francisco. Keen's books feature vicious diatribes
against Biblical Christianity.) [4/94, the Berean Call] One can also question Hicks concerning his lead-in
quote to Chapter One from former U.N. Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold: "The longest journey is the
journey inwards of him who has chosen his destiny" (pure New Age); and to Chapter Two from
evolutionist Charles Darwin: "Man with all his noble qualities still bears in his bodily frame the indelible
stamp of his lowly origin."
(b) In Hicks' discussion of man's (emotionally) wounded stage (enosh), he confuses sins and wounds: "In
order for men to discover what manhood is all about, they must descend into the deep places of their own
souls and find their accumulated grief. ... I am convinced many men in our society today are lashing out at
women, at society, at bosses, even at God -- all because they do not understand the wounding experience. ...
The story of Jacob ... illustrates a young man having been severely wounded by a dysfunctional family
system" (pp. 115-117). In addition, Hicks teaches that David was a "manic-depressive" whose Psalms were
the "musings" of a disordered mind (p. 114). [Wouldn't the Holy Spirit would be impressed with such a
statement! -- You have to be totally indoctrinated by inner healing psychobabble to derive even a jot of
such nonsense from the Bible (4/94, The Berean Call). This also shows Hicks' low view of Scripture.]
(c) Hicks claims that what keeps men moving along this journey is having some other male mentors in their
lives and seeing Jesus as the primary voice of God in each stage. "Jesus ... was the second Adam ... was
very much human ... was also very much zakar, phallic. ... I believe Jesus was phallic with all the inherent
phallic passions we experience as men" (pp. 180-181). [This seems to be either the result of Freudian
brainwashing or hanging out in locker rooms. Either way, it is blasphemous (4/94, The Berean Call).]
Page 71 of 176
(d) More blasphemy -- the movie The Last Temptation of Christ is referred to in a positive light! Claiming
that Jesus is a "phallic male", Hicks says Jesus "may have thought about it as the movie ... portrays" (p.
181) -- referring to Jesus thinking about having sexual relations with a woman! Nevertheless, doesn't Hicks'
suggestion make Jesus guilty of the sin of lust, thereby embracing the movie's blasphemy? In fact, the
movie portrayed graphic sexual desire, not merely temptation. To cite The Last Temptation of Christ as
evidence that Jesus may have been tempted with lust for Mary Magdalene is as blasphemous as that movie
itself (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise Keepers, p. 6). Hicks even justifies gay men being
Christians by claiming that Jesus was personally tempted with homosexuality (p. 181)! (Has not Hicks read
Romans 1:18ff?)
(e) In the book's accompanying Study Guide, Section Three, "Exploring the Issues with Other Men" (p.
33), the following statement is made: "Our culture has presented many initiation rites, or passages to
manhood, that are associated with the phallus [penis].
Which ones have you experienced? Do you have a story to share with other men about one such event?"
He then lists such supposedly debilitating "phallus" experiences as potty training and bed-wetting, pubic
hair development, pornography, first date, wedding night, and conceiving one's first child.
[Why do Christians need to talk about these things? Why so much emphasis on the penis? Freudian
psychology is based upon genitalia and the discussion of these matters, but the Bible condemns such
discussions (Eph. 5:4; Col. 3:8; Phil. 4:8, 9). If we are dead to sin (Col. 3:1-3), should these questions even
be allowed in church? For example: What experience with pornography and the male sexual organ could be
discussed without the potential for stirring sinful thoughts? Moreover, what experience about one's
wedding night would be permissible to discuss with other men? Does not one's body now belong to his
wife? Is not the marriage bed sacred? How ungodly to discuss such intimacy with anyone else but her!]
(f) Hicks does not stop here, but whines, "If only the church had alternative initiation rites to the ones
offered above. What creative alternative celebrations can you think of?" (p. 33). [How can this be? Again,
this is not possible without sin.]
(g) The majority of the book keeps referring back to the phallus. The first 70 pages do so clearly, and so
does the last chapter, "A New Male Journey". For example, Hicks says, "The phallus has always been the
symbol of religious devotion and dedication" (p. 51), and that all men have a "deep compulsion to worship
with our phallus" (p. 56). Hicks discusses the phallic stage -- "Possessing a penis places unique
requirements upon men before God in how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as
phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of androgynous, neutered non-males, or the feminized males so
popular in many feminist-enlightened churches" (p. 51). Hicks' "phallus" phraseology is clearly Freudian
and brings forth images of Greek paganism rather than Biblical manhood (Jul/Aug 1994, Psycho Heresy
Awareness Letter).
(h) Hicks further discusses the matter of initiation, bemoaning the absence of ceremonial initiation rites for
adolescent males. He wishes there was "some way we could make more ceremonial the first rich awareness
of our mortality and utter sinfulness". He continues, "I'm sure many would balk at my thought of
celebrating the experience of sin. I am not sure how we could do it. But I do know we need to do it." To
defend (rationalize) his point, he talks about how we condemn our teens when "... they have their first
experience with the police, or their first drunk, or their first experience with sex or drugs ..." He says we
could look upon any of these "... as a teachable moment and a rite of passage. ..." Then he purposes that
"true elders could come forward and confess their own adolescent sins and congratulate the next
generation for being human". Hicks closes the paragraph by saying, "Then they could move on to the all-
important issues of forgiveness and restoration ..." (p. 177). Unbelievable!
On what does Hicks base his teaching? Not the Bible, but rather his own personal experience of what it
means to be a man -- his arbitrary stages of manhood are developed in order to accommodate his own
Page 72 of 176
personal experience and subjective psychological notions. By giving Biblical labels to these stages and
mixing in some Biblical language, Hicks deceives the undiscerning into believing the Bible validates
everything he says about manhood. Yet Hicks follows the predictable pattern of the psychological
integrationist. He takes a psychological theory, believes it to be valid under the guise of "all truth is God's
truth", and then considers what the Bible might add. His teaching originates from the opinions of godless
men and the Bible is bent to conform. Since Hicks' book is the official guide for "the masculine journey", it
is reasonable to assume that Promise Keepers' mentoring will utilize Hicks' stages of manhood, his secular
psychology, his deceitful descriptions, and his mixed methods of maneuvering men along (Jul/Aug &
Sept/Oct 1994, Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter).
Sadly, attendees at the 1993 Promise Keepers National Men's Conference were encouraged in a post-
conference follow-up letter to purchase The Masculine Journey Study Guide and to form Masculine
Journey study groups (4/94, The Berean Call). In fact, Promise Keepers media director Steve Chavis says,
"All our success here [regarding PK in general] is contingent upon men taking part in small groups when
they return home" (2/6/95, Christianity Today, p. 28).
[For further details of the psychotherapeutic encounter group format incorporated in the Masculine Journey
Study Guide, see Sarah H. Leslie's article in the 1/95, The Christian Conscience: "Promise Keepers:
'Encountering' Guys at Risk," pp. 14-18.]
[See the Jul/Aug, Sep/Oct, and Nov/Dec 1994 issues of the Psycho Heresy Awareness Letter for further
detailed analysis of Hicks' book and of Promise Keepers' official response to those questioning Promise
Keepers' support of Hicks' book. PAL also has available for $3.00 a 44-page booklet titled Promise
Keepers and Psycho Heresy, or for $10.00, the 44-page booklet along with a two-tape message set and the
previously cited 16-page Special Report from Media Spotlight (Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries, 4137
Primavera Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93110).]
- In a seven-page fax received from Promise Keepers (PK) in 10/94, 2/95, 9/95,
and again in 4/96, Promise Keepers details its official support for Robert Hicks and
The Masculine Journey. (This fax was being sent to anyone who protested PK's
use of The Masculine Journey.) PK states that they originally decided to officially
sponsor Hicks' book and Study Guide because, in their analysis, "What we
discovered was a biblically-centered, frank, and honest account of a man's journey
with God. We were convinced that it would help men pursue Jesus Christ ... it
would be a tool that challenged men to grow in Christ likeness ..." PK claims that
"Dr. Hicks is clearly choosing God's Word to describe maleness." PK
acknowledged that humanistic ideas clearly conflict with Christian values and
contradict Biblical teaching, "But those are neither the values nor the teachings
we find in the writings of Dr. Hicks, Dr. James Dobson, Gary Smalley, Dr. John
Trent, and Dr. Gary Oliver". Moreover, PK went to great length to rationalize the
sexual explicitness in the book, and concluded that the problem with The
Masculine Journey is not in its content, but "... in the way that the book is read".
[!!] [Gary Smalley, John Trent, James Dobson, Chuck Swindoll, Jack Hayford,
Gary Oliver, Robert Hicks, and many others are in the forefront of Promise
Keepers speakers and writers. Their seduction by the most ungodly aspects of
psychology has seriously tainted their understanding of God's Word and even of
the person of Jesus Christ Himself. This, if nothing else, should raise red flags of
danger for anyone who might feel attracted to Promise Keepers.]
Page 73 of 176
Shortly after our article "Promise Keepers Still Endorses The Masculine Journey
went to press in 3/96, they replaced the seven-page support letter with a brief
statement, which said: "Promise Keepers no longer distributes the book The
Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks, published in 1993 by NavPress." After
admitting, that Promise Keepers distributed (gave) the book to every man that
attended the 1993 conference, the rest of that statement simply talked about
Promise Keepers rather than about The Masculine Journey. No warning, apology,
or repudiation of the book could be seen.
As of 6/17/96, Promise Keepers has begun to supply yet another position statement
regarding The Masculine Journey. The current statement says: "Several passages in
The Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks (1993, NavPress) could be understood in
more than one way. Some of the content of the book has unfortunately lent itself to
a wide range of interpretations and responses involving theological issues which
Promise Keepers does not feel called to resolve." The statement continues to say
that they do not want these unforeseen controversies to detract from the focus of
Promise Keepers. After again saying that they no longer distribute the book, they
state: "At the same time, we believe Mr. Hicks' core theology is consistent with
orthodox evangelical Christianity, and that The Masculine Journey was a
forthright attempt on his part to deal with male issues from a biblical context."
(Emphasis added.)
Sadly, the organization only seems to be trying to avoid further controversy over
the book. There is still no hint of warning, apology, or repudiation. Any fair reader
of Promise Keepers' present statement on The Masculine Journey would have to
conclude that Promise Keepers still supports The Masculine Journey! The fact that
leaders of Promise Keepers were involved in the development of the book,
identified it as a Promise Keepers book, and gave a copy to every man who
attended the 1993 conference reveals the psychological foundations of the
movement. Until Promise Keepers makes a definitive statement confessing the
error of being involved in the development of the book The Masculine Journey, as
well as of promoting and distributing it, they must be held culpable.]
- One thing that sounds so worthwhile is Promise Keepers attempt to stress strong male leadership in the
local church. However, it seems as if Promise Keepers problem is not so much with female leadership per
se, as it is with lack of male leadership. In other words: Women are leading more than men; it's better if
men lead as much as women -- an "equality of leadership" as one Promise Keepers writer says (Seven
Promises of a Promise Keeper, p. 142). What PK clearly seems to be expressing is a desire not for men to
take absolute leadership (as the Bible teaches), but to begin to share in the leadership now held by women.
If Promise Keepers were to take the Biblical position as stated by the apostle Paul, they would lose some
popularity, because they would no longer receive the unbridled endorsement of wives that they now
receive. (Women say they want a strong man to follow, but not too strong. Certainly, they do not want a
man whose strength or determination for God might interfere with the wife's psychological "needs" being
met.) Promise Keepers somehow recognizes this, and thus the macho posturing, all the while being very
careful not to offend the women who really remain in control. Thus, too, the popularity of Gary Smalley
and his ilk that emasculate men while claiming great success in achieving marital harmony. Women love
Smalley because he focuses men's attention NOT on how to please God, but how to please their wives, i.e.,
"meet their needs". Smalley even teaches wives how to manipulate their husbands to get what they want.
Gary Smalley's books and seminars are probably the most dangerous to true masculinity on the market
today, yet Promise Keepers promotes him widely. (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on Promise
Keepers, p. 8.) [The 6/95 Houston PK rally held in the Astrodome serves as a good indication of the
behind-the-scenes involvement of women in Promise Keepers. Of the 3,000 volunteers, about two-thirds
Page 74 of 176
were women. Prior to the conference, these 2,000 or so women took part in anointing each chair in the
Astrodome with oil and then prayed over them. (Reported in the 6/18/95, Houston Chronicle, p. 4G).]
- Promise Keepers also has established inclusivity, anti-Biblical position on homosexuality. The following
was taken from a Promise Keepers' 12/8/93 fax, titled simply, "Promise Keepers Statement":
"As to homosexuality, Promise Keepers shares the same historic and biblical stance taken by Evangelicals
and Catholics -- that sex is a good gift from God -- to be enjoyed in the context of heterosexual marriage.
Promise Keepers also recognizes that homosexuality is a complex and potentially polarizing issue. There is
a great debate surrounding its environmental and genetic origins, yet as an organization we believe that
homosexuals are men who need the same support, encouragement and healing we are offering to all men.
While we have clear convictions regarding the issue of homosexuality, we are sensitive to and have
compassion for the men who are struggling with these issues. We, therefore, support their being included
and welcomed in all our events."
What is so "complex" about the "issue" (read "sin") of homosexuality? God says this perversion is His
judgment for the sins of rejecting and rebelling against Him, and He condemns it throughout Scripture
(Rom. 1:21-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 1 Tim. 1:9-10; Jude 7). Then, sin is always a "polarizing issue" to those who
live in the flesh rather than by the Spirit. In addition, homosexuality is not the result of environment and
genetics (cf. Rom. 1:18-32)! Though Promise Keepers acknowledges homosexuality as a sin in some of
their literature, by claiming it can be understood only in the confines of humanistic psychology and genetic
research, rather than in what God says, they actually promote homosexuality. Promise Keepers
Representative Steve Chavis concurs with the fax statement -- he says that homosexuals "will find a
message not of condemnation but of compassion", in PK's ministry (6/27/95, The Atlanta Journal-
Constitution, p. B10). Rather than including and welcoming the homosexuals, Promise Keepers should be
preaching the Gospel of Christ to them, which is repentance for their sin and trust in Jesus Christ for
salvation. Instead, Promise Keepers is apparently convinced that a person can be content to remain an
unrepentant homosexual and still be a genuine child of God. However, God's Word is clear -- no
unrepentant homosexual will inherent the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11). Further, the apostle Paul
commands that those who profess Christ and yet openly practice sin should be removed from fellowship (1
Cor. 5:9-11), not "tolerated". [A Promise Keeper can evidently be a committed abortionist also! An
interview with Bill McCartney published in the 6/18/95 Houston Chronicle quotes McCartney as saying
that a Promise Keeper can be pro-choice because, "That's an individual preference. We would not try to
direct or influence that. ... We welcome everyone; no one is excluded."]
Robert Hicks, in his book heavily promoted by Promise Keepers, espoused a similar "sensitive" approach
to the sin of homosexuality (The Masculine Journey, pp. 133-134). This "tolerant" position on
homosexuality is found in many of the materials sponsored by Promise Keepers. While calling for strong
male leadership in the churches, Promise Keepers has wimped-out on an "issue" that strikes at the very
heart of masculinity, and presents an affront to God by its militant in-your-face challenge to accept sexual
perversion or risk being called "unloving" and judgmental (Media Spotlight, 11/94 Special Report on
Promise Keepers, p. 6).
- Promise Keepers views Jesus as "the non-confrontive encourager". Geoff Gorsuch, in the PK manual
Brothers! Calling Men into Vital Relationships presents a distorted view of Christ. For example, he says,
"Jesus didn't view men as losers. He saw them as lost" (p. 49). The Christ of Promise Keepers seems to
prefer looking at men in an inoffensive and positive manner -- humanity is not to be thought of in a
demeaning term such as "loser", but as individuals who just need a little help to find their way. The truth is
that all men are losers and lost. A loser is one who does not triumph. Since no man can by himself
overcome sin, much less its penalty, he cannot be said to be just neutrally "lost": He is a loser as well. Apart
from God's grace we will all remain desperate losers condemned and under the curse of sin. In man-to-man
associations, some are winners and some are losers. However, in man-to-God relationships, every man is a
loser of the worst sort. Our victory can only come through the Holy Spirit as the merits of Christ's finished
Page 75 of 176
work on the cross are applied. (Excerpted and/or adapted from the 4/95 O Timothy, "PROMISE KEEPERS:
Should Fundamentalists Get Involved?," pp. 11-12).
- Also of great concern is Promise Keepers close association and fellowship with those in the charismatic
movement. (This concern arises because the "common experience" gained through charismatic's has
typically allowed for the setting aside of doctrinal differences, and has, thereby, more easily facilitated an
unbiblical unity, i.e., ecumenism.) As mentioned earlier in this report, not only have charismatics E.V. Hill
and Jack Hayford regularly spoken at the Promise Keepers Men's Conferences, but Bill McCartney's local
Vineyard Christian Fellowship pastor and ex-convict/ex-drug addict, James Ryle, is on the Board of
Directors of Promise Keepers. (He is, also, now a regular speaker at PK meetings, and has left the pastorate
for a full time speaking/conference ministry.) Ryle's position of leadership in Promise Keepers is most
disconcerting because of his clear association with "signs & wonders," hyper-charismatic, self-proclaimed
"prophet" John Wimber, the (now deceased) co-founder of the Vineyard Movement.
Ryle, like Wimber, declares himself to be a modern prophet, and thus, claims to have many of the same
"revelatory" powers claimed by Wimber. For example, at an 11/90 Vineyard Harvest Conference in
Denver, Ryle asserted that God instructed him to reveal to the church that both the Beatles and their music
were the result of a special anointing of the Holy Spirit, and that God was looking for others upon whom to
place that anointing, supposedly to bring about a worldwide revival through music. Ryle said:
"The Lord has appointed me as a lookout and shown me some things that I want to show you ... The Lord
spoke to me and said, 'What you saw in the Beatles -- the gifting and the sound that they had -- was from
Me. ... It was my purpose to bring forth through music a worldwide revival that would usher in the move of
My Spirit in bringing men and women to Christ. ...'"
In the same manner, Ryle claimed that God gave him a vision of a Beatles' concert where the audience,
instead of screaming the names of the Beatles, were this time "screaming the Name -- Jesus". Such a
prophecy, that millions will be saved through a reintroduction of the "anointed music" (and demonic,
Hinduistic philosophies) originally "given" through the Beatles, could not possibly have been from the
Holy Spirit! Instead, Ryle's statements clearly reveal the Satanic delusions under which he and other so-
called modern prophets are "ministering" (Jan-Feb '91, Foundation). One should be leery of any "prophet"
who discerns the demonic as anointed.
[Ryle preached a similar sermon at his Boulder Valley Vineyard Church on 7/1/90, entitled "Sons of
Thunder". In that sermon, Ryle alleges that God is about to anoint Christian musicians with the same
"anointing that was originally given to the Beatles". He said God told him in a dream that, "I called those
four lads from Liverpool to myself. There was a call from God on their life; they were gifted by my hand;
and it was I who anointed them, for I had a purpose, and the purpose was to usher in the charismatic
renewal with musical revival around the world." Ryle goes on to say that God told him He lifted the
Beatles anointing in 1970 and has held it in His hand since, but that He is about to release it again in the
church. (Reported in the 2/96, The Christian Conscience, p. 20.) In other words, Ryle says the Beatles
rebelled against God's purpose, so the idea had to be sacked! Apparently God's will was thwarted by the
Beatles and God has yet to come up with plan "B"!]
More on Ryle's charismatics -- from a Dreams and Visions Prophetic Conference brochure (8/4/94-8/6/94),
announcing James Ryle as a speaker:
"After a traumatic childhood, years of neglect in an orphanage, and imprisonment in the Texas State
Penitentiary, God filled James Ryle with love, identity, and purpose. He began preaching in 1972,
exhibiting a great gift for communicating the Word of God in relevant, revealing, and redemptive ways.
James travels extensively in the U.S., Canada, and Europe, advancing the church through prophetic
preaching and conference teaching. James is the author of the very popular book The Hippo in the Garden
(Creation House: 1993). In 1989, it was prophesied that James would be a 'seer' to the body of Christ. That
Page 76 of 176
same year, he had a dream where he saw a hippo in the garden. After seeking God for the interpretation,
James says the Lord revealed that the hippo represents a new prophetic movement that will sweep the
church and affect the world. According to James, the new movement will appear as out-of-place amid the
status quo as a hippo walking in an English garden. James has also written an article about dreams and
visions in the 8/93 Charisma: 'Hearing God's Voice in Living Color.'"
In a 1995 book (with foreword by Bill McCartney), A Dream Come True: A Biblical Look at How God
Speaks Through Dreams and Visions, Ryle again adds to God's written Word his own subjective personal
revelations, visions, words of prophecy, and dreams. Ryle invites men to begin analyzing their dreams, and
concludes the book by inviting the reader to ask the Lord for a vision of Jesus as "God has given each one
of us what I call vision hunger -- an appetite for revelation from God, an inner need for visual soul
stimulation" (p. 228). As Ryle proclaimed in The Hippo in the Garden, to him "The Bible is not an end in
itself, rather, it is the God-given means to an end" (p. 74). What Ryle and others in the Vineyard, and,
hence, the Vineyard-spawned Promise Keepers, are teaching is that God's written Word should be viewed
through the lens of one's personal, spiritual experiences, dreams, and visions as opposed to rightly asserting
that one's personal spiritual experiences ought to be viewed through the lens of God's written Word.
(Reported in the 2/96, The Christian Conscience, pp. 21, 26. See also Carl Widrig Jr.'s article in the 5/96,
The Christian Conscience, "Is God Saying What James Ryle is saying", pp. 46-47)
- Like James Ryle, Bill McCartney also claims direct revelation for God. On a "PK This Week" radio
program (9/28/96), McCartney speaking at the 1995 Oakland PK Conference, in a message titled, "The
Power of a Promise Kept", said that God told him, "If men of color don't come to PK, then I'm not coming
either." McCartney said that some men sent him mail challenging him that what he said "wasn't scripturally
sound -- what right do you have to get up and say this?" McCartney's answer: "But I knew in my heart I
had heard that [from God] so I stood by it." Later he says that at the PK Portland meeting: "The Holy Spirit
of God came on me like you can't believe and validated me and said, 'Yes, you have been speaking my
heart. Keep speaking what I have put on your heart.'"
- The Vineyard influence in Promise Keepers is most disconcerting. As mentioned earlier, McCartney,
Phillips, and Ryle were all affiliated with Vineyard churches. Paul Cain, one of the original Vineyard
"prophets", claims that PK is the fulfillment of a divine dream he received when he was 19 years old
(8/30/95 message at Christ Chapel, Florence, AL). The Vineyard movement believes that God is giving
new revelation today[Research Editor's Note] Rev. 22:18, "Warn everyone who hears of this prophesy
of this book: if anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described on this book",
19 "and if anyone takes words away from this book of prophesy, God will take away from him his share
in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book] and that the miraculous signs of
the early church should be normative for today.
The phenomenon known as "Holy Laughter" revivals began in a Vineyard church in Canada in January of
1994. It became known as the "Toronto Blessing" during South African Evangelist Rodney Howard-
Browne's meetings there in October of 1994. When people were "slain in the Spirit", they began to roll on
the floor and laugh hysterically, sometimes for hours. (These revivals now even include barking like dogs
and making other animal noises as evidence of the working of the Holy Spirit.) A 9/94 Charisma magazine
article reports that John Wimber's Vineyard churches in the U.S. had been largely swept up by the strange
incidents. Would it be surprising to see this "advanced" (demonic) form of charismatic show up in the near
future in one of Promise Keepers stadium rallies? Charisma is even now referring to Promise Keepers as
the "Boulder Blessing" (5/95, Charisma). (For more on the laughing phenomena, see the 1995 Media
Spotlight 16-page Special Report titled "Holy Laughter: Rodney Howard-Browne and the Toronto
Blessing.")
- I think we can only expect to see more of this evil, ecumenical, hyper-charismatic influence in future
Promise Keepers' conferences, materials, etc. For example, Charisma magazine is the official voice of the
charismatic movement. (Charisma has supported the work of such leading charismatics as Oral Roberts,
Page 77 of 176
Jimmy Swaggart, and Jim and Tammy Bakker. It has endorsed Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, and
other hyper-charismatics who have denied such fundamental doctrines as the deity of Christ and the
Trinity. It has also endorsed the "Holy Laughter" phenomena.) Charisma's founding editor, Stephen Strang
(Strang Communications Company), entered into a partnership with Promise Keepers in early 1994 to
publish a bimonthly men's magazine titled New Man: for Men of Integrity. (Initial 5/94 premier issue press-
run was 225,000, and was distributed free to attendees at the first six 1994 PK conferences; as of 4/97, the
publisher reports a paid circulation of over 330,000, more than double that of Christianity Today, the
leading "evangelical" magazine in America.) Strang says:
"This high-quality magazine will feature practical articles designed to encourage and equip its readers to
become godly men. It will be a lively publication for men of the '90s, appealing to their interests, such as
sports, hobbies, and health. Like Promise Keepers, the magazine will cross ethnic and denominational
boundaries to unite men in Jesus Christ -- a magazine for any man who loves Jesus and is born of the Spirit
-- charismatic, evangelical, Protestant or Catholic" (4/94, Charisma).
The editorial advisory board of New Man includes Reconstructionist Wellington Boone and hyper-
charismatic Jack Hayford. New Man also publishes articles, advice, and interviews from psychologizers
Gary Smalley, Tony Evans, Larry Burkett, Howard Hendricks, Jack Hayford, Bill McCartney, Gary Oliver,
Luis Palau, James Dobson, Ken Canfield, and Bill Bright. [In April of 1997, New Man became an
independent publication, but remained part of Strang's publishing conglomerate.]
- The premier issue of New Man featured a profile on Bill McCartney (pp. 29-37). The story reports that
before dawn most days, the "emotionally challenged" McCartney (i.e., "I'm just learning to love and be
loved.") and his wife read together a few pages from psychologies Gary Oliver's book Real Men Have
Feelings Too. McCartney would then go to his office overlooking Colorado's Folsom Stadium. Upon
arrival, he would make sure to "pray over each chair, 'invoking the Spirit of the Living God' on any fixtures
in reach" of anyone who might enter that day. McCartney thinks this charismatic ritual "honors God and
invites His Spirit here". McCartney also tells of his consecrating the Colorado football program "to the
Lordship of Jesus Christ", and that by God's grace, Colorado then won a national championship! This
charismatic nonsense would be humorous were it not for its tragic consequences.
[McCartney resigned his $350,000-a-year head football-coaching job in January of 1995, in order to spend
more time with his family and working with Promise Keepers. It remains a mystery what qualifies this man
to lead a men's movement. He readily admits that for decades he failed his wife and family in the worst
possible ways. Moreover, to our knowledge, he was "the only major college football coach in America with
two illegitimate grandchildren sired by two different players upon his only daughter" (1/96, GQ magazine,
p. 111).]
- The 12/13/97 World magazine says: "PK founder Bill McCartney has written a disturbing book --
disturbing for what it leaves out". Sold Out, supposedly an autobiography about the difficulties of his
marriage, omits any mention of his adulterous affair, or that his daughter got pregnant twice out of wedlock
by two different members of his football team. He did mention though that his wife four years ago was
bulimic and suicidal and that he had been an alcoholic [drunkard]. (Source: 1/1/98, Calvary Contender.)
- Not to be left out of the "rally crowd," a number of look-alike PK organizations for women have been
created (the total attendance at all look-alike events for 1998 were expected to top 600,000, which makes
the women's groups larger than PK itself). The women's groups "are a combination of revival meeting and
spiritual pep rally ... [having] much in common with secular self-improvement and motivational seminars:
Disorders are the order of the day, and victimhood almost always precedes victor" (4/6/98, Christianity
Today):
(a) "Heritage Keepers" conducted its first conference 8/10/96 in Wichita, Kansas, with 8,000 registration
requests for only 3,000 available seats. "Heritage Keepers is designed to teach a woman how to be godly to
Page 78 of 176
her family, God, and community," says Pastor Bob Beckler, who created it with his wife Lori. Speakers
were John Trent, a frequent speaker on the PK circuit and author of How to Handle Your Promise Keeper
[does not this title speak volumes about the manipulative focus of PK and why PK receives such
overwhelming support from the wives of PK-ers!] along with psychological counselor Marge Caldwell and
four-temperaments guru Florence Littauer.
(b) Deborah Tyler of Morristown, Tennessee, organized four "Keys for Abundant Living: A Promise
Keepers Counterpart" conferences in 1996. Meetings were held in Dallas, Birmingham, Nashville, and
Little Rock, each drawing about 1,000 women, with speakers including Anne Graham Lotz, Gloria Gaither,
and Luci Swindoll. Conferences were planned for seven Southern cities in 1997. They are part of Tyler's
Renaissance Ministries, designed "to provide opportunities for women to be challenged, inspired, and
encouraged and to lead each woman to a personal commitment to God's Word as the ultimate authority for
successful living".
(c) One of the most ambitious undertakings may be that of "Chosen Women: Daughters of the King." This
new Pasadena, California-based group (founded by Susan Kimes, in conjunction with Calvary Church in
Santa Ana, California, where she has held women's conferences since 1985) had hoped to attract 80,000
women to the Rose Bowl May 16-17, 1997, with speakers such as Ruth Graham, Anne Graham Lotz,
Elisabeth Elliot, Bunny Wilson, and Jill Briscoe. Actually, 30,000 attended, which is still the largest
women-only stadium rally since the Promise Keepers men's movement began. Women of all ages sang,
danced, did the wave, blew bubbles, batted beach balls, prayed, and applauded the all-female slate of
speakers. Attendees paid between $56 and $71 in registration fees for the experience (6/16/97, Christianity
Today).
(d) In 1997, "Women of Faith: Joyful Journey" meetings nationwide drew about 197,000 women at 15
conferences organized by Women of Faith (up from 38,000 in 1996). (For 1998, Women of Faith's
leadership was projecting double that total for 29 conferences under the theme "Bring Back the Joy.") They
are sponsored by Minirth-Meier New Life Clinics, the Freudian "mental health" clinics in Richardson,
Texas ("It was time for the clinics to do something for women in America [to] help them celebrate life and
God's grace," says New Life's Stephen Arterburn -- "I really believe that the idea was a gift from God."
Arterburn sees Women of Faith as a good patient-recruiting tool for psychological counseling: "The clinics
always did conferences dealing with problems, and the response was underwhelming". He says they revised
the Women of Faith conference focus "to see how many more people we could reach by celebrating what is
good about life". "At Women of Faith events, New Life and their Remuda clinics (which specialize in
eating disorders) are on hand to provide information about their counseling services."). Several speakers on
the Women of Faith circuit are best known as humor writers, including Patsy Clairmont, Barbara Johnson,
and Luci Swindoll. Zondervan is producing a Women of Faith Bible and study guides; Integrity Music is
planning worship music products; and Campus Crusade's Women Today International will provide follow-
up materials. (Reported in the 3/3/97 & 4/6/98 issues of Christianity Today.)
(e) Other groups that have sprung up in recent years include "Aspiring Women" of Nashville, Tennessee;
"Suitable Helpers" of Wheat Ridge, Colorado; "Promise Reapers" of Houston; "A Promise Kept" of Los
Angeles; and "Praise Keepers" of Eldon, Missouri [the latter's co-founder Donna Henley says: "Women's
ministries are always bigger than the men. This will be bigger than the men's" [she has proved to be
correct] (3/1/97, Calvary Contender)].
(f) A Focus on the Family sponsored one-day event in Nashville on 9/21/97 drew 19,600 women from 47
states and Canada (with a 20,000 wait-list). James Dobson was the only male speaker at the "Renewing the
Heart" conference. Five more conferences are scheduled for 1998, at $48 per attendee.
- There are also PK off-shoots targeting other groups. One such group is "Young Warriors", a PK program
targeting teens. The first program was held in 9/96 in Dallas, and featured a day of rock concerts, speakers,
and games. The concerts included Christafari, Sixpence None the Richer, Prayer Chain, The Walter
Page 79 of 176
Eugenes, E-Ric, Judah, Audio Adrenaline, and others including local bands. The speakers included Miles
McPherson, Jacob Aranza, and local youth pastors. Games included Sumu Wrestling, Velcro Wall, Bungee
Run, Just, and more. Tickets were $20. Z Music Television, World Vision, CCM Magazine, and others
sponsored Dallas YOUNG WARRIORS.
- The music at PK rallies has usually been typical "Christian" Contemporary Music (CCM). Look for rap
music to begin to take over. Mike De'Vine, a rapper, and former member of the vile rap group "2 Live
Crew" (De'Vine says he left the group in 1989 after growing sick of the lifestyle) hooked up with PK to
provide "music" at its 1996 stadium rallies (both writing and performing). De'Vine claims to have "turned
to Christ and a new rap message, recording five albums on his own label. ... [He] believes he's on the cusp
of breaking into the big time, and he's looking to PK as a pulpit." PK is also interested in De'Vine and his
rap music to help bolster PK's new youth program. De'Vine says: "That's what the aim is, to blow up
positive rap music, man. We are going to bust it up with Promise Keepers. We'll be doing the 2 Live Crew
thing all over again -- only this time it will be positive." (Reported in the 1/26/96, Rocky Mountain News,
"Ex-2 Live Crew member on a divine mission," pp. 17D & 19D).
- Promise Keepers has also gotten into the Study Bible business. PK and Zondervan have entered into a
partnership to create a Promise Keepers Study Bible that will contain notes and guides specifically designed
for men who attend PK conferences. This is PK's second such venture with Zondervan, the world's largest
Bible publisher. Zondervan produced 200,000 Next Step kits for sale at the 1995 conferences -- a
multimedia kit containing a book, a video, and an audio cassette "to help men take the next step in their
Christian walk" (7/31/95, Christian News, p. 14).
- Theistic evolution is the unbiblical belief that God was involved in the evolutionary process, originally
creating lower life forms, then letting them evolve by random chance (or continuing to create various
species over millions of years), and eventually infusing evolved man with a soul. PK's official magazine at
the time, New Man, endorsed theistic evolution and argued that whether or not God used evolution to bring
man into existence is of little importance (New Man, Jul-Aug, 1996, p. 54; as reported in the 3/97, The
Berean Call).
Contrary to PK's belief, the manner in which man came into existence is of critical importance! If the earth
is millions or billions of years old, with death thereby occurring prior to Adam's sin, then the Biblical
doctrines of sin and salvation are moot. If death and bloodshed preceded Adam's rebellion against God,
then what are "the wages of sin" and how did the entrance of sin change things? Moreover, if death
preceded sin, then death is not the penalty for sin, and Christ's death on the cross-accomplished nothing!
Since such evolutionary and old-earth thinking is totally incompatible with the work of Christ, should it not
be a requirement that a so-called "Christian" ministry believe in literal creationism as taught in the Bible?
- To combat the decline in masculine virtue, our humanistic society offers a cure far worse than the disease
itself. A rash of neo-pagan books and seminars attempts to get men in touch with their buried masculinity.
And thousands of men flock to rustic retreats to don tribal masks and beat drums in hopes of forcing their
hidden "Wildman" to emerge (4/94, Charisma). But is there really much difference here from the
"Christianized" version emerging through McCartney's Promise Keepers meetings (with Promise Keepers'
endorsement of Robert Hicks' six stages of manhood), Ed Cole's Christian Men's Network, Ken Canfield's
National Center for Fathering, Gene Goetz's Maximum Man conferences, and other such charismatic and
psycho heretical attempts at "celebrating Biblical manhood"? (PK is also spawning dozens of other
parachurch groups such as Dad's University, Career Impact Ministries, Business Life Management, Men
Reaching Men, and Fathers and Brothers.) Even Promise Keepers supporters such as Strang and Charisma
magazine appear to have inadvertently recognized the similarity:
"At times, July's meeting [1993 National Men's Conference in Boulder] resembled a pep rally with Jesus
cheers.' Hit him! Hit him! Hit him!' men chanted, as Pastor E.V. Hill of Los Angeles challenged them to
defeat the devil in their lives" (4/94 Charisma).
Page 80 of 176
Robert Hicks, when discussing his warrior stage in the previously referred to book, The Masculine Journey,
even quotes favorably from Patrick Arnold's book, Wildmen, Warriors and Kings: Masculine Spirituality
and the Bible. Arnold's book is not based on Scripture, but on the Jungian collective unconscious, Jungian
archetypes, and other aspects of Jungian occult spirituality. Hicks also refers authoritatively to another
men's movement author, Jungian psychoanalyst Robert Moore, from a book co-authored by Moore -- King,
Warrior, Magician, and Lover: Rediscovering the Archetypes of the Mature Masculine.
Many of the speakers at Promise Keepers conferences refer to what is called "the wounded male soul". This
woundedness supposedly "springs from the cultural estrangement of boys from their fathers and the
emotional repression American culture has deemed necessary for true maleness" (2/6/95, Christianity
Today, p. 25). In response, the hidden "Wildman/warrior" is resurrected to save the day, but this time in
"Christian" garb. At the 10/94 Dallas meeting held in Texas Stadium, the men in attendance raised their
hands and sang, "'Face to face, brother to brother, back to back, warrior to warrior,' as the words were
flashed on the giant screens overhead" (11/10/94, The Charlotte Observer, p. 11A). Even D. James
Kennedy, in a salute to Promise Keepers on his 9/18/94 television show, inadvertently (?) acknowledged
that Promise Keepers is a "Christian" alternative to "the secular revolution of men leading them out into the
woods and to their tom-toms ..." (In early 1995, Kennedy also taped a radio interview with Robert Hicks, in
which Hicks' book The Masculine Journey was treated with great favor.)
- Promise Keepers may be a tool for those holding the Manifest Sons of God doctrines to market their
beliefs to the rest of the American church. These beliefs, which are foundational to the "laughing
phenomenon" associated with Rodney Howard-Browne, are now entering mainstream churches of all
denominations via Promise Keepers. (Former Vineyard head (deceased) John Wimber had given his whole-
hearted approval to the laughing phenomenon.) The Manifest Sons of God believe that Christ cannot
incarnate in a divided body; therefore, it is crucial that the Church be united. Another term for this is "Joel's
Army". Promise Keepers has been linked to this army. An article in Jewell van der Merwe's Discernment
newsletter states:
"In a recent interview in response to a question as to whether the Promise Keepers could be fulfilling the
prophecy in Joel of raising an army, [Pastor] James Ryle answered, "Yes. ... 300,000 men have come
together so far this year under Promise Keepers. ... Never in history, have 300,000 men come together
except to go to war. These men are gathered for War."
Promise Keepers has incorporated key doctrines of the Manifest Sons of God into their material. The 2/95
issue of Suitable Helpers, a newsletter for women participating in Promise Keepers, expresses that
believers can become Christ Incarnate: "Our Lord is calling out a great host of men ready and willing to
become 'Christs' in their homes: Promise Keepers. In grand, bold sweeps, God has mustered an army."
[Noticing the potential political nature of this men's movement is none other than The New Age Journal,
which ran an article favorable to Promise Keepers in its 4/95 edition. The article noted the odd combination
of New Age men's movement ideology (Robert Bly's pantheism) combined with the political
evangelicalism of Pat Robertson.]
Promise Keepers appears to be creating a new "folk" religion. The large mass rallies, the exaltation of
emotion over reason, the lack of doctrinal integrity, the taking of oaths (the seven promises), the focus on
fatherland and fatherhood, and the ecumenical inclusion of aberrant esoteric doctrines bears a disconcerting
similarity to an era, which gave rise to one of the most dreadful armies in history; Hitler's Nazis. The
infiltration of Manifest Sons of God doctrines into Promise Keepers (via Vineyard) combined with New
Age ideologies (via Robert Bly and Robert Hicks) appears to create a new American folk theology
pantheism, the idolatry of self, the belief in a divine mandate to take the land, the superiority of a group,
and the necessity of group hysteria. (Excerpted and/or adapted from "Promise Keepers: A Militant Unity?,"
Ed Tarkowski and Sarah Leslie, 4/95, The Christian Conscience, p. 18.)
Page 81 of 176
[Is Promise Keepers going to be used to mobilize worldwide support for a bi-millennial celebration of Jesus
2000th birthday Jubilee, a celebration already intertwined with the New Age movement? This appears to be
the case. There was a favorable review in the Jul/Aug 1995 issue of New Man, of New Ager Jay Gary's
book, The Star of 2000. Gary's self-published book advocates such a celebration (Pastor Bill Randles,
8/22/95 open letter to Bill McCartney). (See the recent Spiritual Counterfeits Project article entitled "Sign
of the Times: Evangelical and New Agers Together," for a detailed exposé on Jay Gary and New Age
friends.)]
- Charles Grandison Finney was an early-19th century revivalist in the Northeastern part of the United
States, and a kindred spirit of John Wesley. (Wesley was steeped deeply in the writings of Roman Catholic
medieval mystics, claimed to have read them avidly, and was instrumental in publishing a great number of
these Roman Catholic works. This false mysticism stayed with Wesley all his life. Finney doctrinalized
Wesley's "second experience" teaching.) Finney's introduction of new methods for getting converts and the
orchestrating of emotion and excitement in huge revival gatherings was clearly based on his heretical
understanding of being born-again. Finney writes that he repudiated all the fundamental doctrines of God's
sovereignty in salvation, including the vicarious nature of the atonement of Jesus Christ, in the interests of
preaching revival. Finney's purpose was solely to convince the human will and produce decisions and
commitments.
Finney's "new measures" in revivalism left an indelible stamp upon Evangelicalism. Evangelism crusades,
revival meetings, the altar call, the "decision" to "accept" Christ, the "prayer of faith," the use of excitement
and emotion to facilitate "decisions" for Christ, and the attempt to promote the moral reformation of the
culture can all be attributed to the "new measures" introduced by Finney in the 1830s. Many of the modern
movements such as Church Growth, Promise Keepers, and the so-called Religious Right find their roots in
Finney. Evangelicals cannot escape his influence.
The problem with Finney's influence on modern-day evangelicalism is that Finney's methods produce
"results". He initiated what was called the "Second Great Awakening". Great revivals were reported in
towns and cities throughout the country. Lives were reportedly changed. Moral reformations reportedly
occurred. However, since Finney did not preach the total corruption of the human nature and rejected the
truth of justification by grace through faith alone, the basis for his "results" could not have been the Holy
Spirit. Finney's results were exactly as Finney defined them -- a human dynamic.
We must, therefore, also question the multitudes who have become "men of integrity" by sharing in the
emotion and excitement of Promise Keepers revivals. Is not Promise Keepers also not the work of the Holy
Spirit, but rather of emotions, methods, and group dynamics orchestrated to produce decisions,
commitments, and modify behavior -- in other words, a human dynamic? By employing Finney's methods,
one gains Finney's results ("Assessing the Promise Keepers", 12/25/95, Christian News, pp. 1, 7-8.].
- Promise Keepers is apparently willing to give up the true treasures given by Christ for a feel-good
experience with the guys. Promise Keepers and others dedicated to the Christian men's movement are
unbiblically preoccupied with man himself and from man's perspective. They are at best doomed to a grace-
barren, fleshly form of "godliness". Instead, the emphasis should be focusing on God Himself, getting to
know Him and His way through His Word (4/94, The Berean Call, and 9/19/94, Christian News).
It is highly unlikely that an organization that waffles on doctrinal integrity will inspire men to truly be men
of God. Strength of leadership honors God only when it complies with God's written Word. To ignore
doctrinal integrity, as Promise Keepers does, nullifies any other claims to integrity. While claiming to be an
instrument to draw men closer to Jesus Christ, Promise Keepers is in reality minding earthly things. Their
God may not be their belly (Phil. 3:13-21), but it certainly appears to be their loins (Media Spotlight, Vol.
16 - No. 1, "Promise Keepers Update," pp. 8,10.).
Page 82 of 176
If men were to come together as men, they would do well to follow what the Bible says rather than
Freudian fables, Jungian myths, and other self-serving, fabricated psychologies. Moreover, they would do
well to gather in the place where they are meant to grow -- in the local church -- not in huge "techno-tent"
rallies with "mob psychology" or in groups using encounter group techniques and undermining important
doctrinal distinctiveness. Indeed, the magnitude and the extent of Promise Keepers' aberrations from
orthodoxy warrant a rejection of the entire movement (Promise Keepers &Psycho Heresy, p. 29).
- A telltale sign that there is something desperately wrong with the PK movement is the favorable press
given to Promise Keepers by the worldly media. Why would the world be promoting Promise Keepers
when Jesus said the world would hate us as it hated Him? (Pastor Bill Randles, 8/22/95 open letter to Bill
McCartney).
One worldly source that has not praised Promise Keepers is Scott Raab, writer-at-large for GQ magazine:
"There's nothing new, much less revolutionary, in what Promise Keepers is pushing, which is not really
about Jesus Christ at all, but about Satan. After listening to all the speeches and the prayers [at the 9/95
Oakland, California PK conference], after reading their books and magazines, it is abundantly clear that
these guys see the Archenemy everywhere, but especially in the mirror. What PK offers men finally is
protection -- from themselves" (1/96, GQ magazine, pp. 129-130).
- Can two walk together except they be agreed? (Amos 3:3). It must be assumed that those who participate
in the PK movement also agree with their kindred in that movement. It must also be assumed that pastors
who attend PK rallies embrace the doctrine that God was once a man as do their "Mormon brethren". It
must also be assumed that those pastors who send or take their men to PK meetings agree with the
Pentecostal "flavor" of those meetings and wouldn't mind if those men came back home from PK speaking
in tongues, rolling down the aisles, and recruiting other men to do the same. Any pastor who takes or sends
his men to a PK rally is a traitor to the cause of Christ, is an unfaithful shepherd over the flock of God, and
has betrayed the trust placed in him by his congregation to protect them against the wolves. (Excerpted
and/or adapted from the 1/96 The Wilderness Voice, pp. 6-7).
Note fm Media Spotlight: The 7 Promiscuities (a miscellaneous mixture or mingling of persons or things)
of Promise Keepers -- (1) Catholicism; (2) Mormonism; (3) Charismatic's; (4) Psychology; (5)
Merchandising; (6) False Doctrine; (7) Blasphemy.
*7/97 Update: PK has now changed their Statement of Faith to not exclude Catholics! Section five of the
Promise Keepers credo previously read: "We believe that man was created in the image of God, but
because of sin, was alienated from God. That alienation can be removed only by accepting, through faith
alone, God's gift of salvation, which was made possible by Christ's death." Concerned about PK's
exclusionary statement in light of PK's courting of Catholics, several Catholic theologians reviewed the
statement and presented their objections to Glen Wagner, PK's V.P. of National Ministries. As a result, PK
revised section five to read "Only through faith, trusting in Christ alone for salvation, which was made
possible by His death and resurrection, can that alienation be removed." This change suits the Roman
Catholic Church just fine. Its definition of grace includes sacraments. "Grace," by Rome's definition, means
Christ, by His death, has provided salvation to be distributed by the Catholic Church to those sinners who
adhere to its sacraments. The New Catholic Catechism states: "The Church affirms that for believers the
sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation" (1129). Paul Edwards, Promise Keepers' vice
president for advancement, explained that the statement of faith is a 'dynamic' document, and that Promise
Keepers is open to change. (Mike Aquilina, Our Sunday Visitor, July 20, 1997, pp. 10, 11). [In the same
article, McCartney was quoted as saying that full Catholic participation in PK was his intention from the
start.]
Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper Update: A revised edition of this book (now in paperback) was
published in early 1999. Some new material was added from new authors, as well as changes in wording in
a few places, most notably being the revision of Jack Hayford's infamous statement that: "Redeeming
worship centers on the Lord's Table. Whether your tradition celebrates it as Communion, Eucharist, the
Mass, or the Lord's Supper, we are all called to this centerpiece of Christian worship"; the naming all of
these has been removed, and, instead, says merely, "whatever your tradition ..." The Tony Evans' chapter
was also gone from the revised book (he previously received a lot of heat for his comments on the roles of
men and women in marriage), and the Randy Phillips introduction was also gone in exchange for a similar
one (plenty of stories) from Bill McCartney. In addition, a significant change was the suggested reading
material at the back of the book -- gone was The Masculine Journey. It is clear that PK is trying to take out
of the book things that were particularly controversial.
Page 84 of 176
The Promise Keepers Movement is Dangerous -- Watch Out
For It!
By M. H. Reynolds, Editor, Foundation magazine
Foundation, Vol. XVI, Issue 1
Fundamental Evangelistic Association, P.O. Box 6278, Los Osos, CA 93412
A new men's movement called Promise Keepers is sweeping our nation like a wildfire. Is it of God, or
man? Will it solve the problems of those who have embraced its principles and teachings, or will it
compound those problems? Can a Biblical answer be given to those important questions now, or is it best to
withhold judgment until a later time? Obviously, some very conflicting views already exist as to the basis,
Page 85 of 176
programs, benefits, and goals of the Promise Keepers movement. This report is based upon the actual
words of its leaders made in public meetings, contained in press releases, or printed in books, magazines,
and articles, which have either been published or endorsed by leaders of the Promise Keepers movement. It
is obvious that this movement is superbly organized and has tremendous financial resources at its disposal.
The way it has caught on since its formation in 1990, and its ambitious plans for expansion in the future,
require our immediate response and warning.
Most pastors and other individuals have so far heard only good reports about it. Even though some have
questions and a feeling of uneasiness concerning it, they have had little or no opportunity to examine it
carefully. While it is true that most if not all of the major evangelical and charismatic leaders are praising,
supporting and participating in Promise Keepers, that, in itself is no guarantee that its principles, practices
and goals are in accord with the Scriptures. Having personally read every word of the book, Seven
Promises of a Promise Keeper, as well as all the latest press releases and many of their other articles, we
have come to the inescapable conclusion that this movement represents another massive effort of Satan to
mix truth and error in some very deceptive ways.
Therefore, we do not hesitate to give the strongest possible warning now concerning the dangers of the
Promise Keepers movement. Our reasons will be clearly stated and properly documented from original
sources so that God's people may be able to see for themselves how this new movement is mixing truth and
error. If for no other reason, the Promise Keepers movement is dangerous because it promotes an
unscriptural agenda of forging a religious unity which is absolutely forbidden in God's Word (2 Cor. 6:14-
7:1; Eph. 5:11). Its founder and several of its leaders are part of the charismatic movement, which is a
major catalyst in the effort to bring about fellowship and eventual union with the Roman Catholic Church;
whereas, in truth, the Roman Catholic Church is a false church, preaches a false gospel and is not a part of
the body of Christ.
Throughout the centuries, the Roman Catholic Church has been an enemy of all true believers and the
blood of hundreds of thousands of martyrs is upon its hands. However, for the past few decades, the Roman
Catholic Church has changed its outward appearance and approaches. It has a new face of tolerance and a
kindlier public image but the damnable heresies it proclaims remain as dangerous as ever. Furthermore,
those who are only familiar with Roman Catholicism, as practiced in this country, would not believe the
raw heathenism, which is part of their worship in countries where they have been in control for centuries.
It should be of great concern to every believer to know that the Promise Keepers movement is taught and
led by men who blindly praise the Pope and are giving Roman Catholicism an undeserved and unwarranted
vote of confidence and even appreciation instead of sounding the warnings God's Word commands.
The Promise Keepers movement and its leaders totally reject the many plain commands of Scripture to
separate from and warn about false teachers, disobedient brethren and the world. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18; 2
Thessalonians 3:6, 14, 15; 1 John 2:15-17. As a result, those whom they seek to "disciple" are deprived of
the warnings God's Word says are necessary to preserve the purity of the Gospel and the purity of the
church. Instead of obeying the command of God's Word to "preach no other doctrine" (1 Tim. 1:3); and by
refusing to heed the warning God gives in Galatians 1:6-10 concerning all who preach "any other Gospel,"
they have become "blind leaders of the blind" about which Jesus Christ warned (Matt. 15:10-14). Since the
inevitable result of such spiritual blindness is that "both shall fall into the ditch", the strongest warning must
be given.
Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper is the title of a book published in 1994 by "Focus on the Family",
Colorado Springs, CO., and distributed in the USA and Canada by "Word Books", Dallas, TX. It is key to
the understanding of what Promise Keepers is trying to do. Contributing authors are Bill Bright, Edwin
Cole, Dr. James Dobson, Tony Evans, Bill McCartney, Luis Palau, Randy Phillips, Gary Smalley, Jack
Hayford, Wellington Boone, Howard Hendricks, E. Glenn Wagner, Gary Oliver, Dale Schlafer, H. B.
Page 86 of 176
London, Jr., Philip Porter, and Gordon England. Al Janssen and Larry K. Weeden edited this 210-page
book.
"Seven solid promises that will change a man's life forever" -- This bold claim, printed on the back jacket
of this book, only serves to heighten the need for an immediate, Scriptural analysis of the Promise Keepers
movement; for, indeed, these seven promises are not solidly based upon the sure foundation of God's Word
alone, but upon a mixture of God's Word with the suppositions of men.
Promise Two -- A man and his mentors: A Promise Keeper is committed to pursuing vital relationships
with a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him keep his promises.
(Analysis): How very dangerous is this false premise, which is based upon psychological theories rather
than on Biblical principles. Of course, Godly men can be of help to others and be helped by others. But to
encourage the false notion that a godly man cannot make it on his own in these tumultuous times without
depending upon other Promise Keepers to help keep him "on the right track" is another trick of Satan to
belittle the power of God and negate His "... great and precious promises" (2 Pet. 1:3, 4).
God's Word repeatedly warns about the danger of putting trust in men. Isaiah 2:22, "Cease you from man,
whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?" Jeremiah 17:5, "Thus said the Lord;
Cursed be the man that trusted in man, and makes flesh his arm, and whose heart departed from the Lord."
By contrast, note Jeremiah 17:7, "Blessed is the man that trusted in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is."
God's Word clearly commands us to "... have no confidence in the flesh" (Phil. 3:3). God specifically warns
Page 88 of 176
in 1 Corinthians 10:12, "Wherefore let him that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall." Those who
disregard God's warnings are surely headed for a fall.
Promise Three -- A man and his integrity: A Promise Keeper is committed to practicing spiritual, moral,
ethical, and sexual purity.
(Analysis): Once again, here is a statement that all Christians should desire to see fulfilled in their lives,
not just the men but women also. However, if the men have to depend on their brothers to attain these
goals, what about the women? Will a women's Promise Keepers movement also become a necessity and be
established as the newest women's movement on the scene?
In fact, however, the spiritual, moral, ethical and sexual purity needed by every believer is not to be found
in making boastful promises nor in dependence upon other believers but can only be obtained by heeding
the Word of God which says, "Whereby are given unto us [all of us!] Exceeding great and precious
promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in
the world through lust" (2 Peter 1:4). It is the promises of God that are all-important and they assure divine
power to accomplish His purpose of godliness in an ungodly day, not the promises of even the finest, most
sincere men who attempt to formulate what they believe is needed to change men and then the world.
Promise Four -- A man and his family: A Promise Keeper is committed to building strong marriages and
families through love, protection, and Biblical values.
(Analysis): Here is another promise, which is certainly desirable as stated. However, the question, which
must be asked and answered, concerns just what are these "Biblical values?" A careful study of Promise
Keepers literature reveals that their programs are based upon some Biblical values given by God, but are
also mixed with some very dangerous psychological principles and practices which rest upon the theories
of men. This unsound material will continue to flow into churches long after the initial excitement of the
program wanes.`
Promise Five -- A man and his church: A Promise Keeper is committed to supporting the mission of the
church by honoring and praying for his pastor, and by actively giving of his time and resources.
(Analysis): Whether such a promise is scriptural or unscriptural depends entirely upon which church is
involved. Is it a church, which proclaims a false gospel (such as the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and liberal
Protestant churches)? Is it a church, which is disobedient to God's Word by its fellowship with false
teachers and those who "love the world"? (1 John 2:15-17). If so, to "support the mission of such a church,
honoring, and praying for its pastor, and actively giving of his time and resources" is helping to build the
one-world harlot church of the antichrist. Promise Keepers ignore the plain commands of God's Word
concerning separation from those who teach error, and fail to "reprove" such (Eph. 5:11). As a result, the
men in the Promise Keepers movement are much unprepared to stand against all the "wiles of the devil"
(Eph. 6:11).
Promise Six -- A man and his brothers: A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any racial and
denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of Biblical unity.
(Analysis): This required promise once again mixes truth and error and provides another example of how
the word "Biblical" is misused. While reaching beyond racial barriers is Scriptural, reaching beyond
denominational barriers as Promise Keepers are doing amounts to open defiance of God's plain commands.
It is not "Biblical unity" which Promise Keepers think they are demonstrating, but an unbiblical unity,
which will bring God's eventual judgment. 2 Peter 2:1-3.
Should anyone doubt the fact that the Promise Keepers movement seeks an unbiblical unity, just read the
words of its founder, Coach Bill McCartney, as found on pages 160, 161 of Seven Promises of a Promise
Keeper: "Now, I don't mean to suggest that all cultural differences and denominational distinctiveness are
Page 89 of 176
going to disappear. However, what I know is that Almighty God wants to bring Christian men together
regardless of their ethnic origin, denominational background, or style of worship. There is only one
criterion for this kind of unity: to love Jesus and be born of the Spirit of God. Can we look one another in
the eye -- black, white, red, brown, yellow, Baptist, Presbyterian, Assemblies of God, and Catholic
[emphasis ours], and so on -- and get together on this common ground: 'We believe in salvation through
Christ alone, and we have made Him the Lord of our lives'? Is that not the central, unifying reality of our
existence? In addition, if it is, can we not focus on that and call each other brothers instead of always
emphasizing our differences? Men, we have to get together on this!"
In this statement, McCartney's contradictory words should be noted concerning the necessity of believing in
salvation through Christ alone -- and then including Roman Catholics as "brothers" in spite of the fact that
they do not believe in salvation through Christ alone, adding sacraments and good works as requirements
for salvation.
Promise Seven -- A man and his world: A Promise Keeper is committed to influencing his world, being
obedient to the Great Commandment (see Mark 12:30, 31) and the Great Commission (see Matthew 28:19,
20).
(Analysis): The Great Commandment referred to in Mark 12:30, 31 records the words of Jesus Christ in
which love to God and love to one's neighbor are commanded. However, Promise Keepers presents a faulty
understanding of genuine Christian love in which reconciliation with a disobedient brother is insisted upon,
whereas, in truth, separation from disobedient brethren is commanded by God (2 Thess. 3:6, 14, 15). In
these days of increasing compromise, Satan has succeeded in blinding the eyes of many believers to the
fact that separation from disobedient brethren is not only for the preservation of a pure church, but is also
for the disobedient brother's spiritual welfare. Promise Keepers' mistaken premise that genuine Christian
love necessitates fellowship with, rather than separation from disobedient brethren, will do untold harm to
all concerned.
The Great Commission referred to in Matthew 28:19, 20 involves not only the preaching of the Gospel, but
also teaching those who believe "... to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." Giving the
impression that it does not matter what church is attended or what doctrinal creed any true believer
embraces is foolish -- it does matter to God and a warning against error must be given. The apostle Paul,
one of the greatest evangelists, pastors, missionaries, and teachers of all time, writing by inspiration of the
Holy Spirit in Acts 20:17-32, reminded the Ephesian elders that he had not shunned to declare "all the
counsel of God" (v. 27), warning "every one night and day with tears" for three years (v. 3l). What were
these warnings about? The grievous wolves (false teachers) who would enter in, "not sparing the flock" (v.
29), and those from within the church who would arise, "speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples
after them" (v. 30). Separation from, not reconciliation with such false teachers, is God's way of preserving
the purity and power of the church.
Much of the strong appeal of the movement is based upon humanistic psychological principles and
techniques. Many of its leaders, however, have become very proficient in using such dangerous theories
even while claiming to repudiate humanistic psychology. In another of Satan's "dangerous mixture"
deceptions, the term "Christian Psychologist" has mesmerized its proponents into believing that it is
possible to take the "good things" from humanistic psychology and combine these with Biblical teachings.
The result supposedly provides answers to problems Christians are experiencing which can be found in no
other way. As a result, Dr. James Dobson, who is one of the Promise Keepers leaders, and other well-
known "Christian Psychologists" such as Gary Smalley, John Trent, and Robert Hicks are leading many
astray.
We fully concur with the statement of Martin and Deidre Bobgan on page 29 of their 41-page booklet,
"Promise Keepers & Psycho Heresy". We quote: "If men are to come together as men, they would do well
to follow what the Bible says rather than Freudian fables, Jungian myths, and other self-serving, man-made
Page 90 of 176
psychologies. And they would do well to gather together in the place where they are meant to grow -- in the
local church -- not in huge rallies with "mob psychology" or in groups using encounter group techniques
and undermining important doctrinal distinctiveness." For a comprehensive and Biblical analysis of the
highly questionable book, The Masculine Journey -- Understanding the Six Stages of Manhood, which has
been given massive distribution to Promise Keepers, write to Psycho Heresy Awareness Ministries, 4137
Primavera Rd., Santa Barbara, CA 93112. A second book, AGAINST Biblical Counseling: FOR the BIBLE
(200 pages) will also be very helpful to all those who want the facts concerning the dangers of "Christian"
Psychology.
Our own publication, "The House That Freud Built", will provide valuable information concerning the
dangers of "sensitivity training" and "small group" psychological techniques as devised for those who claim
to be evangelical believers. This 40-page booklet gives the history of how "sensitivity training" was
introduced into evangelical churches. Originally printed in the September/October 1994 issue of
Foundation, this reprint will be a revelation to all who want to know the truth.
What does Promise Keepers say about its history and future plans? The following information is quoted in
full from the Fact Sheet, which was part of the official press packet prepared in January 1995:
How we started: On March 20, 1990, University of Colorado Head Football Coach Bill McCartney and his
friend Dave Wardell, PhD were on a three-hour car ride to a Fellowship of Christian Athletes meeting in
Pueblo, CO, when the idea of filling a stadium with Christian men first came up. Later in 1990, seventy-
two men began to pray and fast about the concept of thousands of men coming together for the purpose of
Christian discipleship.
Yearly attendance figures as given in this Fact Sheet testify to its small beginning and rapid growth.
1991 -- 4,200 men met at the Univ. of Colorado Events Center; 1992 -- 22,000 men met at CU's Folsom
Stadium; 1993 -- 50,000 filled Folsom Stadium to capacity; 1994 -- Seven sites nationwide totaling
278,600 men. 1995 Plans: Promise Keepers has scheduled 13 conferences across the United States from
April through October 1995. Sites include Pontiac, MI; Los Angeles, CA; Boise, ID; Washington D. C.;
Houston, TX; Denver, CO; Indianapolis, IN; Atlanta, GA; Seattle, WA; Minneapolis, MN; St. Petersburg.
FL; Oakland, CA. and Irving, TX. Total attendance for these 13 conferences is projected to be between
500,000 and 600,000. [BDM Editor's Note -- 10/96: 1995's stadium rallies attracted 727,000 men. PK
scheduled 22 rallies in 1996, with an expected attendance of 1.5 million. They plan 50 conferences in 50
states by the year 2000.]
Why "For men only": The conferences are designed for specific men's issues in the context of an all-male
setting. We have discovered that men are more apt to hear and receive the full instruction of the sessions
when they are not inhibited by concern for a woman's responses. One of the primary goals of the
conference is to deepen the commitment of men to respect and honor women.
(Analysis): Yes, Promise Keepers is a rapidly growing movement. In addition to the plans for 1995, we
understand that tentative plans for 1996 include bringing together 75,000 clergy for a Conference as well as
a huge rally in Washington, D.C. with the goal of one million men in attendance. In Promise Keepers
literature, repeated references are made to the supposition, "There is strength in numbers". However, where
is such a false idea supported in Scripture? God usually had to reduce the numerics of Israel's armies so
they would not become proud and take glory unto themselves for victories won -- glory which belonged to
God. Read the record of Gideon in Judges 7:1-22 as a prime example. Of course, in our day, the great
majority of professing Christians are willing to compromise Biblical principles, mistakenly assuming that
size is all-important to God as it is to men. That is a grievous error. Fidelity to the Truth is of utmost
importance.
Speakers at Promise Keepers "Raise the Standard" conferences include: Ron Blue, Wellington Boone, Bill
Bright, Dave Bryant, Ken Canfield, Tom Claus, Ed Cole, Chuck Colson, Rod Cooper, Daniel DeLeon,
Page 91 of 176
Tony Evans, Steve Farrar, Joseph Garlington, Bill Glass, Franklin Graham, Jack Hayford, Howard
Hendricks, E. V. Hill, Bill Hybels, T. D. Jakes, Jeffrey Johnson, Billy Kim, Greg Laurie, Crawford Loritts,
John Maxwell, Bill McCartney, Bob Moorhead, Gary Oliver, Juan Carlos Ortiz, Luis Palau, John Perkins,
Randy Phillips, Dennis Rainey, Raul Ries, James Ryle, Gary Smalley, Joe Stowell, Chuck Swindoll, John
Trent, E. Glenn Wagner, Stu Weber, John Wesley-White, Al Whittinghill, Bruce Wilkinson, and Ravi
Zacharias.
(Analysis): Without doubt, these speakers are very capable teachers who are able to give forceful
presentations of what they teach. The question to be raised however, concerns whether or not they will be
giving these huge crowds of men the whole counsel of God or a modified, altered, misleading presentation
of essential Scriptural truths. Since the ministry of these teachers runs the gamut from compromising new-
evangelicalism and charismatic error, to ecumenical liberalism, it is clear that they will be introducing the
Promise Keepers to unscriptural doctrines and fellowships. This is a very serious matter.
Promise Keepers officers and major staff members are obviously very capable communicators and
seasoned motivators -- their combined talents provide an amazing base for publicity and continued support.
An article by Stephen R. McLauchlin in the January/February, 1995 issue of Religious Broadcasters
magazine reports that the free 90-second daily "Promise Keepers Men in Action" spot announcements are
already being carried on approximately 400 stations. This article encourages stations to publicize Promise
Keepers by "giving coverage to the conferences, signing up to air "Men in Action", and covering local
stories that highlight grass roots experiences of the movement".
Campus Crusade for Christ is also involved in the movement. In the "Alumni Relations" newsletter of
January 1995, the following article was included, which describes the purpose of "Strategic Alliance", the
title they have given to the Promise Keepers/Campus Crusade organizational link: "Strategic Alliance --
Have you attended Promise Keepers and want to receive further training?' M.A.N. to Man' seminars are
part of a Strategic Alliance between Campus Crusade for Christ and Promise Keepers to help men 1)
personalize issues that concern men; 2) provide basic leadership training; and 3) give information on small-
group Bible studies especially for men."
Campus Crusade has a long history of increasing compromise. It adopted at its inception the policy of
totally rejecting Biblical separation; infiltration rather than separation has always been CCC's stated
strategy. Because of adopting this unbiblical course, CCC has increased its compromise. Liberal, Roman
Catholic and Charismatic delusion are now firmly lodged within this incredibly influential organization.
Their support will give Promise Keepers a tremendous boost.
Consider also The National Religious Broadcasters, which now numbers some 800 broadcasters,
representing a wide array of diverse theological positions. The NRB is an official arm of the National
Association of Evangelicals, which, since it is founding in 1942, has represented a position of compromise
between Biblical Fundamentalism and Ecumenism. Fifty years ago, the NAE recognized Roman
Catholicism as a false religious system, but it has now become one of the major forces, which, while
admitting that there are some differences, is now advocating cooperation with Roman Catholics as though
it could now be considered a part of the body of Christ. It is obvious that such a position is held by the
majority of professing believers today, but that makes it all the more important for all who stand for the
Bible and against all compromise to warn all who will listen.
Roman Catholic leaders in Southern California are welcoming promise Keepers. According to the official
publication of the Los Angeles Roman Catholic archdiocese, The Tidings, March 31, 1995 edition, Promise
Keepers is now considered a viable ministry for Catholics. The Tidings reported that at the urging of
Cardinal Roger Mahony, Christian Van Liefde, Roman Catholic priest and pastor of St. Hillary Church in
Pico Rivera, "has studied the feasibility and appropriateness of utilizing Promise Keepers at the Catholic
parish level." Van Liefde, while noting "the evangelical roots of the program", was quoted as stating,
"There is no doctrinal issue which should cause concern to the Catholic Church". Van Liefde was further
Page 92 of 176
quoted as saying, "Promise Keepers places a very strong emphasis on returning to your own church
congregation or parish and becoming an active layman". Van Liefde also mentioned the fact that one of the
promises of Promise Keepers is his commitment to "give generously of their time, treasure, and talent to
their local church". Roman Catholic leaders are quick to observe how Promise Keepers can be used to build
a false church, which preaches a false gospel.
The pressure to follow the crowd and silence the voice of scriptural reproof is growing. In closing this
article, however, we would point out that any pastor and church wanting to stand against such compromise
will have to take a stand now against the Promise Keepers teachings. Many who have already joined this
group are now bent on recruiting new members with fully as much zeal and pressure as sports-minded
college alumni men seek to recruit top athletes for sports programs.
We see this recruiting zeal of those who become involved in the movement to be one of its greatest
hazards. Why? Because there will be many faithful pastors who have in the past taken a stand against all
ecumenical endeavors and movements which would introduce doctrinal error and the devilish spirit of new-
evangelicalism into their congregations, but who now are pressured into buying into the Promise Keepers
program.
How could a pastor say "No, we cannot ..." to men returning from a Promise Keepers conference who
promise the pastor they will support him, work with him, and pray for him as never before? How can he
deal with these undoubtedly well-meaning, yet misled, men within his own church who are now exerting
pressure upon him to fall into line with the program? Imagine the faithful pastor's dilemma! Up until now,
he could herald a warning against Romanism, liberalism, ecumenism, charismatic delusion and the like
without reservation. Now he has men within his own flock who are introducing the people to all of the
above and more under the attractive packaging -- Promise Keepers!
Fundamental, Bible-believing pastor, you must take a stand against this or you will be taken down by it.
The machinery is coming into place for this movement to have a continuing influence on its Promise
Keepers for years to come. Should you be forced into the program now, dear brother, you will be battling
its impact for the duration.
A closing word about those who say, "Why not just emphasize the good things in Promise Keepers?" Such
an argument sounds reasonable until you consider the very serious doctrinal errors involved. When a
deadly poison is discovered in a popular medicine, no one insists on emphasizing the good ingredients;
every one insists on identifying and warning about the poison. When meat or other food is found to be
contaminated, the concern is not about the beneficial substances involved, but rather the giving of strong
warnings as to the nature, source, and elimination of the contamination. Spiritual poison and contamination
(error) are even more dangerous since they affect the eternal welfare of individuals and the reward or loss
of reward for believers (1 Cor. 3:9-15; 2 Jn. 8; Rev. 3:8-11).
As far as naming names is concerned, most believers also frown upon this today. Yet, the Lord Jesus Christ
(who is the very personification of love) issued some of the strongest warnings and rebukes ever given to
the false teachers of His day. Read Matthew chapter 23 and pay careful attention to the words our Savior
used concerning the Scribes and Pharisees. Notice His instruction to "call no man father" upon earth (v. 9),
and the particular words He used forbidding repetitious prayer (Matt. 6:7). Roman Catholics disobey both
of these. In addition, mark well the warning of Jesus Christ in Matthew 7:15: "Beware of false prophets,
who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves". In addition, what about Peter,
one of the three disciples who were closest to Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry? Was Christ's rebuke
of Peter before the other disciples unnecessary and unloving (Matt. 16:21-23)? In addition, look carefully at
the experience of Peter who learned the hard way about the disaster of claiming to be a promise keeper in
his own strength (Mark 14:26-42).
Page 93 of 176
Furthermore, the apostle Paul, one of the greatest Bible teachers, pastors, evangelists and missionaries of
his day spent three years warning the Ephesian elders about the wolves (false teachers) who would enter
into the flock from without; and a similar warning about those who would arise from within the church who
would desire to "draw away disciples after themselves" (please read Acts 20:17-32). Likewise, both Paul
and the other apostles, writing by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, did not hesitate to mention names. Notice
how often they rebuked by name those who were disobedient to the Word of God. 1 Timothy 1:20; 2
Timothy 4:10, 14; 3 John 9. We must follow their example and obey God rather than to trust the promises
of any man.
Promise Keepers is dangerous, but please do not forget that these words of warning are an effort to "speak
the truth in love"; praying always that God will help those affected to see this.
More than a million men crowded onto the National Mall Oct. 4 [1997] to hear from a diverse array of
speakers who came to call this cross-section of American churches to repentance. The throng heard from
charismatic, evangelical, black, white, Indian, Asian, and Hispanic speakers. They spoke of the gospel of
Jesus Christ, repentance from racism and sexual sin, the need for stronger churches and the conversion of
sinners.
Yet, under scrutiny, we find that their words, plans, and deeds are hollow and unbiblical, and are deceiving
many millions into false and dangerous beliefs and alliances. While television and newspaper cameras
showed hundreds of thousands of men sprawled on their faces in prayer, a survey of those in attendance
revealed that many of those same men lacked even a basic understanding of the simplest Bible doctrines
and could give no solid testimony of their conversion to Jesus Christ.
How is it that a million men, many of whom do not have a clear testimony of salvation, can redeem a
nation by "standing in the gap"? Moreover, why do they need to? Hasn't Jesus Christ once and for all stood
in the gap for anyone who will come to him?
In fact, a large percentage of those surveyed became angry that someone would have the gall to question
such an obvious display of unity. Men who would never consider getting upset over lesbian ministers or the
doctrines of Rome, quickly become red-in-the-face at the idea that there is something unbiblical about the
mixing of belief with unbelief, that God might not honor their noble pilgrimage to Washington. In addition,
this in spite of the clarity of God's Word on the subject of separating from all appearance of evil. In
interviewing the men at Stand in the Gap, the writers of this article found the words in Galatians to be true
-- "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" (Gal. 4:16). This is the very thing that
happened. The men considered us the enemy there. This is what happens when you leave the old-fashioned
faith. When false doctrine comes in, people begin to view those who believe right as the enemy. People do
not like the negative part of the Bible; it is not what it is for, but what it is against. Listen to what one
Promise Keeper wrote to a fellow brother that believes that the PK is of the devil:
"What is your problem, brother? Did you or did you not see what happened Saturday in DC? ... The
opposition from NOW and gay and lesbian organizations is a sign that it was a divine appointment. Why
must good Christian men like you and Phil Arms use your platform and ministry to join the opposition? I
do not understand.
Page 94 of 176
"You have such a problem with Catholics attending Promise Keepers; I hope they don't attend your church
-- they might save. That is what is happening at PK. Evangelism, you should try it. You know the great
Commission. If you have time in between bashing sessions or tearing down the body of Christ. Get real,
Get in love with Jesus.
"You guys are NUTS. To think that the only way to be saved is by being Baptist, and that Catholics are
wrong is just plain crazy. You really should attend a Promise Keeper event and allow it to change your life.
The Holy Spirit moves in strange and mysterious ways. He just might even be able to help you out of your
narrow view point."
The message that Jesus Christ of the Bible preached was a very narrow message. They (the religious
leaders, much like the PK leaders) crucified Him for the message He preached.
The concept of unity in diversity has so permeated the evangelical church [es] that seemingly no one on the
Mall could offer any reason why God should not smile at this patched together conglomeration of liberals
and conservatives, holy rollers and liturgists, Catholics and Baptists, old scholars and new-agers.
An announcer on a local Washington radio station covering the event spoke of the beliefs of most of those
present. "To a God who sees all, this must please his heart."
While we are instructed by Scripture to be of one mind, the evangelical today scoffs at the idea of true
biblical unity, based on complete agreement with, and submission to, God's holy Word.
As the speakers preached the PK gospel of repentance from denominational division, the men on site
revealed by their beliefs and opinions just what that means in a practical sense. The following is a
paraphrased summary of answers given to a list of questions posed to a number of attendees at this meeting.
As the surveys were being conducted, it seemed apparent that the real unity being displayed by the men on
the Mall was their inability to answer any of these questions consistent with the teaching of Scripture:
1. What church do you attend? Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, charismatics, independents, and others
answered the survey. One Liberty University student claimed to be a Baptist with a Catholic background,
and said that both traditions were valid.
2. Are you born again? Almost everyone, including the Catholics interviewed, responded "yes" to this
question, though several offered disclaimers by saying something along the lines of "I don't mean 'born
again' the way most people mean it."
3. Do you speak with other tongues? About a third responded that they did.
4. What is your understanding of the Bible? Is it to be taken literally? At this point, the answers began
coming less quickly and with far more explanation needed to develop each respondent's personal view of
what the Bible has to say and how it is to be read. Answers were extremely mixed on the inerrancy of
Scripture. Most indicated that the Bible should not be taken literally on history or science.
5. What do you believe will be the final condition of the church when Jesus returns? Answers to this
question were almost evenly split between those who believe the church of Christ will be large and
powerful and those who had never considered such a question and had no thoughts to offer on it. No one
said that they believed the church would be a remnant.
6. How important is it to you that there is little doctrinal agreement among the members of Promise
Page 95 of 176
Keepers? Almost every person interviewed quickly answered that it was of no consequence to him or her
that there was no agreement on Bible doctrine. Most took great pride in the ability to ignore Bible doctrine
for the greater good of the cause of unity. The one pleasant surprise to this question came from the only
woman interviewed. She was a 27-year-old volunteer handing out some of the one million free Stands in
the Gap CEV New Testaments. She answered that she was very concerned that there was not much stress
on doctrine.
7. What do you believe the Bible says about the importance of doctrine? Many answered with the
question, "What do you mean by doctrine?" Others said the Bible teaches only that there are essentials that
all Christians must subscribe to and that there is great freedom beyond that. The female PK volunteer was
the only one who answered that the Bible treats the subject of doctrine seriously.
8. Do you believe there will be a revival before the return of Jesus Christ? How will in manifest
itself? "Yes. You're looking at it", was the primary response. One respondent said that there would be a
revival and deception at the same time. No one else interviewed depicted any type of apostasy to avoid.
9. Do you believe that Roman Catholics are Christians? Almost every respondent said yes, though
several added weak stipulations. "Yes, they can be," or "Yes, if they accept Jesus Christ, they are", were the
most typical answers. No respondent said flatly that Roman Catholicism is not Christianity.
10. Do you know what the Eucharist is? Most had no understanding of the Catholic Eucharist. One
former Catholic understood completely and renounced the Eucharist as unchristian and another evangelical
understood that it represented the literal body and blood of Christ, though seemed not to object to its use.
11. Do you believe that a Christian can pray to Mary? This question produced some of the most
surprising answers as several said that a Christian can pray to Mary but should not expect an answer. After
receiving that answer, the question was rephrased to say, "Do you think God minds when a Christian prays
to Mary?" Some of the respondents changed their opinion to limply say something along the lines of,
"Well, I suppose", but many did not.
Given space, many direct quotes could be provided that would further show the woeful lack of Biblical
doctrine that most Promise Keepers understand or subscribe to. For most reading this article, that is
probably not necessary.
Nor is it necessary to give a great deal of space to the fair speeches delivered from the platform. Most of
the danger in Promise Keepers, as with all neo-evangelical organizations, lies not in what they say (though
that is often bad enough), but in what they refuse to say.
We could cite Dr. A.R. Bernard, pastor of Christian Life Center in Brooklyn, NY, and his continued
references to the great work of reconciliation performed by Martin Luther King. Would the cause of Christ
not be better served by calling on black Christians to jettison their allegiance to a man who was no
Christian in any biblical sense? Will God not judge those who follow a man who denied the deity of Christ,
who spent his last night on earth in the same adulterous pattern he had lived the last years of his life, and
who preached, not the gospel of Jesus Christ, but rather the gospel of social reform?
We could point to Jack Hayford, Randy Phillips, Raleigh Washington, or any of the numerous speakers
who urged men to their knees in repentance, yet refused to acknowledge that there was anything to repent
of in attending churches run by false prophets, or liberals, or homosexuals or women.
We could call on James Ryle, the pastor of the Boulder Valley Vineyard, who gave a clear presentation of
the gospel, calling on all the men present to repent, and yet failed to acknowledge his own false prophecies
and repent of them. (See Foundation magazine article on Ryle's false prophecies for more information)
Page 96 of 176
While more than a million men streamed into Washington to acknowledge their sins, they went home none
the wiser for what many of those sins are, even after spending the day between prostration and group hugs.
Anyone who has ever witnessed to a modern-day evangelical knows firsthand of the overwhelming
ignorance that exists today on the subject of apostasy. Multiply that by one million and you have "Stand in
the Gap". One British newspaper described the audience in this way: "Every denomination was represented,
from Roman Catholics, Episcopalians, and Baptists to 'Bikers for Christ' wearing T-shirts declaring 'Satan
sucks.' There were guitar-playing Christians calling on people to 'Jam for the Lamb,' and muscular
Christians sporting logos of a Herculean Christ under the words 'Lord's Gym.' There were also T-shirts that
had the saying from a Bud-Light commercial with the words 'I Love you Man,' but instead of having a man
saying that to a friend trying to get his beer, it was Jesus saying the words 'I Love You Man'."
One of the saddest sights was to see the thousands of men wearing the shirts that said "BREAK DOWN
THE WALLS." In Nehemiah, the Lord's people were building up the walls to keep the enemy out.
However, at D.C., they were telling the men to break down the walls. When the walls are broke down, the
enemy can easily come in. That is exactly what the Devil wants -- for Christians to have their spiritual
walls broken down so that he can come in and wreck their faith.
Even the Chicago Tribune took notice of the disparity of beliefs among participants: "... Joseph Stowell,
president of Chicago's Moody Bible Institute and representative of one of America's most venerable and
buttoned-down evangelical institutions, spoke from the same podium as Charismatics and Pentecostals who
practice a wildly different kind of worship." [Actually, Moody very well represents the doctrinal
smorgasbord found at PK.]
For Promise Keepers, "wildly different" beliefs and practices do not constitute any cause for concern,
unless they produce division. Only then are they to be repented of. Fellowship with apostasy is not
something to be avoided, but something to be embraced. How different this is from the attitude of
Scripture: "I have not sat with vain persons; neither will I go in with dissemblers. I have hated the
congregation of evil doers; and will not sit with the wicked" (Psalm 26:4).
In this treacherous and deceitful age, a number of issues should be of primary concern for a group that
caters to evangelical Christians. Some of them are:
• Ecumenism and the return to Rome
• Worldliness in the churches
• The replacement of the gospel with psychological counseling
• Homosexuality in the church
• The charismatic invasion of churches
• False prophets in the church
• The legitimization of liberal churches which desecrate the Word of God through unbelief and
apostasy
• The flippancy with which publishers have perverted the Word of God
Not once was any man at Stand in the Gap warned of, or given an opportunity to repent of, these grave sins
before a Holy God. The concept of standing firm on any particular doctrine or belief has been utterly
Page 97 of 176
abandoned by the majority of evangelicals today. It has been replaced by a concept of God's love in which
anyone who names the name of Christ, no matter how far afield in doctrine, is welcomed into the
fellowship of believers.
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves,
covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural
affection, truce breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors,
heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying
the power thereof: from such turn away" (1 Timothy 3:1-5).
[This article is part of an eye-witness report by Brian Snider (bsnider@quicklink.net) of the "Stand in the
Gap" rally in Washington, D.C. Brian Snider is a free-lance writer from Birmingham , Alabama; he
represented FOUNDATION Magazine at the Promise Keepers Washington D.C. rally. The FOUNDATION
Magazine article contains photographs taken by brother Snider].
Additional comments by David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak
Harbor, WA 98277
One of the theme songs of the ecumenical movement is "God is destroying denominational lines". This, as
we have seen, is still one of the chief goals of the Promise Keepers movement. They are breaking down the
walls between denominations. This is a gross error, which ignores the reason for denominational divisions.
Some divisions between Christians are manmade and unnecessary, but many others -- most, in fact -- are
doctrinal. Why, for example, is an Episcopal church different from an Independent Baptist church?
Different doctrine. One teaches baptismal regeneration; the other teaches baptism is symbolic only. One
baptizes infants; the other practices believer's baptism. One sprinkles; the other immerses. One has
priesthood; the other has pastors and deacons. One has a hierarchical church structure; the other practices
the autonomy of the New Testament assembly. One interprets prophecy symbolically and is working to
establish the kingdom of God on earth; the other interprets prophecy literally and is looking for the
imminent return of Jesus Christ. One allows its leaders and members to hold every sort of heresy and
immorality; the other practices discipline and separation.
What is the difference between an Assemblies of God congregation and an independent Baptist church?
Doctrine. One believes the baptism of the Holy Spirit is something the believer must seek and that its
manifestations are tongues and other spiritual gifts; the other believes the baptism of the Holy Spirit
occurred at Pentecost and that every believer has the Holy Spirit and has no need to seek a Spirit baptism.
One believes the sign gifts are operative today; the other believes the sign gifts were given to the Apostles
and ceased with the passing of the Apostles. One believes the Holy Spirit "slays" people; the other believes
"spirit slaying" is unscriptural and demonic. One believes the gift of tongues is operative today; the other
believes the gift of tongues had a temporary purpose and that its purpose ceased in the first century. One
believes salvation can be lost; the other believes salvation is eternally secure. One believes ecumenical
unity is the work of the Holy Spirit; the other believes ecumenical unity is the work of the devil.
Page 98 of 176
Those who call for the removal of denominational divisions are ignoring these serious doctrinal differences.
Any Bible doctrine worth believing is worth fighting for. When Paul wrote to Timothy to instruct him in
the work of the church, he did not tell him to "lighten up" and to ignore doctrinal differences. He solemnly
instructed him to remain steadfast in the apostolic doctrine and not to allow ANY other doctrine to be
taught.
"As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay here in Ephesus so that you may command certain men
not to teach false doctrines any longer" (1 Timothy 1:3).
"And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will
also be qualified to teach others" (2 Timothy 2:2).
Many Charismatics and other ecumenists are practicing gross hypocrisy. They teach their doctrines about
the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts and ecumenical unity and they expect everyone to agree with them. Those
who do not support their doctrine are labeled schismatic and unloving. Why is it right for the Charismatic
to teach and practice his doctrine, but it is wrong for the non-Charismatic to teach and practice his doctrine?
Why is it the non-Charismatic who is unloving and schismatic? Why is it not the Charismatic ecumenist
who is unloving and schismatic for calling upon non-Charismatics to give up their doctrinal convictions
and join hands with them?
Those who have the most to lose from the ecumenical call to dissolve denominational walls are those
whose doctrine is based upon the Word of God. A man who is convinced his doctrine is based on the Bible
is a traitor to hold hands with those who oppose his doctrine.
In Jude 3 God's people are exhorted to "earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints". The
faith once delivered to the saints is that body of truth delivered to us by the Apostles under divine
inspiration of the Holy Spirit and perfectly recorded for us in the New Testament Scriptures. Tell me, what
part of the New Testament faith am I to give up for the sake of ecumenical unity? I will answer that. None;
not one part.
National Mall
Washington, D.C.
October 4, 1997
Dr. Ralph G. Colas, Fundamental News Service
American Council of Christian Churches (ACCC)
"At Promise Keepers, we're not concerned about a man's denominational label," said PK founder and CEO,
Bill McCartney. Dozens of denominations sent official representatives to Stand in the Gap, PK's Assembly
on October 4, 1997, at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. -- including American Baptist, Assembly of
God, Christian and Missionary Alliance, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Episcopalian, Evangelical
Free, Lutheran, Messianic Jewish, Nazarene, Presbyterian Church USA, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist
Convention, and United Methodist.
A number of the above religious groups are a part of the National Council of Churches (NCC) or the
National Association of Evangelicals (NAE). Other denominations represented in Washington are outside
the NCC and NAE, such as the Roman Catholic Church and the Free Will Baptist Churches. While more
Page 99 of 176
than forty speakers addressed this large gathering, not one could be identified as a separatist
Fundamentalist.
Some of the men who were participants on the speaker's podium were Mike Timmis (a Roman Catholic
who was recently added to PK's Board of Directors), Joe Stowell (Moody Bible Institute president), Max
Lucado (Oak Hills Church of Christ, San Antonio, TX, pastor), Jack Hayford (Church on the Way, Van
Nuys, CA, pastor), Joseph Garlington (Covenant Church, Pittsburgh, PA, pastor), Tony Evans (Oak Cliff
Bible Fellowship, Dallas, TX, pastor), James Robison (TV host and charismatic Southern Baptist from
Texas), and James Ryle (Bill McCartney's pastor, Vineyard Christian Fellowship, Longmont, CO). Bill
McCartney spoke for 20 minutes while the others took a shorter amount of time.
The Public Relations organization used was the DeMoss Group, Atlanta, GA. They handled all of the
media contacts and credentialing of the more than 1,000 members of the press who had come from 10
countries. Strict procedures regulated the press, who met in a large tent with numerous videos set up so
they could see and hear what was taking place on the large stage set up on the Mall. The one and only press
conference that day was held with Bill McCartney in the media tent before the program began. At that
press conference, before inviting any questions from the press, McCartney shared that this long-planned
meeting came into existence because Randy Phillips, PK President, had a vision as he was jogging around
the National Mall. According to McCartney, this vision came from the Lord, and Phillips saw a large
gathering of men for a religious service at that place.
McCartney read the purpose statement that had been adopted for this giant assembly: " ... to gather a
diverse multitude of men in the name of Jesus Christ, to confess personal and collective sin, so that we may
present to the Lord godly men on their knees in humility, then on their feet in unity, reconciled and poised
for revival and spiritual awakening."
Coach McCartney gave the members of the press a preview of his talk scheduled for later in the day. He
said: "The church of Jesus Christ has been divided and a house divided cannot stand. The reason that we
see a downward spiral in morality in the nation is because the men of God have not stood together. We ask
each guy to go back to his own local church and to make a stronger commitment inside that church."
McCartney made another important statement: "We are asking that churches, through the leadership of the
pastor, connect with other churches in the community over a broad scale. Weekly, we want them to come
together -- the leaders -- to pray and share the needs of the community so that these pastors can bring the
burden back to their own men." In listing one of PK's major goals, the former coach said, "As a matter of
fact, on January 1, in the year 2000, in every state all across the United States, we are asking the pastors
and their men inside that geographical state to gather on the state capitol steps and take roll call. ... We do
not speak against other denominations, but as a matter of fact, we are all one brotherhood."
Jack Hayford, a charismatic pastor from Van Nuys, CA, emceed this event, which cost about $10 million.
His skill in behavior tactics was evident. He kept the program moving along in steps that were structured
around various appeals to the men. At given times, the men were urged to bow their heads, to kneel, to fall
prostrate on the ground, and even to hug one another. The music, for the most part, was not as wild as at
some of the previous rallies held in stadiums or even at the PK Clergy Conference in Atlanta, GA.
As speaker after speaker issued proclamations and confessions, the men formed small groups to confess
and repent for moral failures: cheating their employers, hating their enemies, ignoring their children, and
abusing their wives. They were asked to take a family photo from their wallet, hold it and look at their
loved ones, and then lie prostrate before God and confess, "I have been an abusive man. I have sinned
against you."
Max Lucado (Oak Hills Church of Christ, San Antonio, TX) led in confessing the sin of disunity in the
The PK men at this assembly were asked to pray for "the Miracle of the Millennium". This was to be done
so the "sin of sectarianism" could be confessed. It was declared, "Those who think they know all the truth
and that their denomination is more faithful to God's Word than another are guilty of sin. The world has
never seen a united church. We have seen a divided small church in communities from which we have
come. Today we see a united Great Church."
An example given to this large crowd of a great and noble Christian was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Yet
Dr. King rejected foundational truths, namely the virgin birth and physical resurrection of Christ. History
revealed that King was an adulterer; but this, of course, was not shared at the PK Assembly. The pastor of
the above and Beyond Baptist Church, Houston, TX, William J. Lindsey, said, "I believe part of the dream
that Martin Luther King expressed here in 1963 is being fulfilled today."
Although for a long time PK leaders had boldly announced that no offering would be taken at the
Washington Assembly, reduced income during 1997 necessitated a different strategy. Charismatic
evangelist James Robison made a strong appeal. He announced that it would be the greatest offering ever
given in all history. The free New Testament (Contemporary English Version) given to everyone contained
two offering envelopes, one for the person with the New Testament and the other for someone else who did
not have one and thus had no offering envelope. The men were strongly urged to write out their check or to
use a credit card. Robison encouraged everyone to put down a monthly pledge to PK -- $100, $50, $25, etc.
"Give the greatest gift you have ever given. Give a love offering to Promise Keepers", he pled.
It took so long to take the offering that no time was left to present the pre-recorded address by Billy
Graham. The press were given an advance copy of Dr. Graham's remarks. Graham said, "Coach
McCartney has just challenged each of you to return home with a renewed commitment to your local
church and pastors. Return to your churches as one who is a player, not a spectator." (As usual, and not
unexpectedly, Dr. Graham failed to distinguish between solid, Fundamental, Bible-believing churches and
those who are a part of Roman Catholic, Charismatic, salvation by works, etc., churches).
2. Some have suggested that Promise Keepers is an organization approved by God because the NOW and
the gay and lesbian organizations oppose it. However, bear in mind that these same radical groups also
oppose the U.S. National Catholic Bishops and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons).
Holy Scripture is the test of truth, not the presence or proclamations of opposition groups.
3. Promise Keepers continues to "break down the walls", biblical truth being replaced with the perceived
benefit of a male-bonding experience. Promise Keepers is an ecumenical hodgepodge, for it brings
together, under one umbrella, churches and individuals with various non-Fundamentalist affiliations (e.g.,
NCC, WCC, NAE, WEF, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist, Mormon, Oneness Pentecostal, independent
groups), as well as many compromising "Fundamentalists."
Page 101 of 176
4. Bill McCartney is a Roman Catholic who has become a convert to charismatic's since visiting the
Vineyard Fellowship Group in Boulder, CO. In his autobiography, From Ashes to Glory, he calls himself a
"born-again Catholic". He adds in that book, "Making a profession of faith like I did may not be expected
and may not even be important in the Catholic Church". Can anyone who is truly born again treat so
lightly, what the Lord Jesus declared to be an absolute essential? John 3:3 says, "Except a man be born
again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." PK continues to seek the approval of Roman Catholic leaders
and even changed its doctrinal statement so it would not offend Roman Catholics who reject "by faith
alone". The National Conference of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Marriage and Family said, "Catholic
men are being drawn to Promise Keepers. ... PK is the proverbial wake-up-call to the Church to encourage
and offer more ministry suited to the needs of men."
One need not be surprised when a Roman Catholic Monsignor in New York leads a special mass to help
Roman Catholic men prepare for a PK Conference. Promise Keepers continues to welcome Catholic
participation in its ministries. Mike Timmis was added to PK's Board of Directors and clearly identified
himself at the PK Assembly in Washington as a Catholic. Speakers at the PK rallies include signers of the
manifesto "Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission of the Third Millennium." Among
those who signed this unbiblical document, which called on Evangelicals to stop winning Roman Catholics
to Christ, were Chuck Colson, Jesse Miranda, Pat Robertson, Bill Bright, J.I. Packer, and a large number of
Roman Catholic leaders. Yet, PK leaders apparently consider unimportant or irrelevant -- in comparison
with PK's goal of "breaking down the walls" -- Roman Catholicism's heresy of teaching salvation by
belonging to their church. Steve Green sang, "Let the Walls Come Down" at PK's Assembly just as he did
at the PK Clergy Conference in Atlanta.
5. No less than five of the 16 PK board members have ties to charismatic churches. In spite of his extra-
biblical beliefs and practices, many Evangelicals associated with PK look with favor on John Wimber
(who died a month after the PK gathering), the Vineyard Denomination, and its third wave theology. A
leading charismatic leader, Jack Deere, has said that every Christian has the capacity to receive prophecy.
He declares, "In order to fulfill God's highest purpose for our lives, we must be able to hear His voice both
in the written Word and in the Word freshly spoken from heaven." Another charismatic, Marc Dupont,
believes that when a spirit of revelation is upon a person, that person can go into a mall and discern whether
an individual is involved in homosexuality or adultery or is suffering from child abuse.
The facts reveal that PK's unbiblical base is composed of charismatics and those who defend or excuse
maintaining membership in liberal, apostate denominations. Years ago, a rancher from one of the Western
states shared with me how they killed gophers that were damaging their fields and causing injuries to their
cattle and horses. "If you take a bushel of poison and just a peck of wheat," he said, "the gophers will not
eat it. However, if you take a bushel of wheat along with a peck of poison, the gophers take the bait and the
gopher population goes on the decline."
There are pastors and nonprofessionals who suggest that there is "good" in PK's goals and program.
However, mixed in with the wheat (truths) is the "poison" that gullible individuals swallow because of the
bait of psychological manipulations and mass confessions. "Biblically illiterate" people led by Bill
McCartney are propagating religious error.
Isaiah 8:20 spells it out most forcefully: "To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to
this Word, it is because there is no light in them."
Hicks' book is built on the premise (not found in Scripture and unproven in research) that men pass through
(or at least ought to) six stages of life. This theory did not emerge from the study of Scripture, but from
secular psychologist Daniel Levinson's book The Seasons of a Man's Life. Hicks then identifies six Hebrew
words that he believes dovetail with Levinson's teachings. No Bible scholar would agree with Hicks'
exegesis, but that does not stop Promise Keepers from endorsing his book. [See Editor's Note.] Hicks says
that males were meant to pass through the following stages: noble savage; phallic (sexual); warrior;
wounded; maturity; and mentor.
Since Hicks develops his thoughts through a combination of personal experience, psychological theories,
and Biblical principles. His views are a mixture of a great deal of error mixed with just enough truth to
deceive poorly taught professing Christians. Space does not permit a thorough critique of The Masculine
Journey (see BDM's report on Promise Keepers for more detail), but we will attempt to point out a few of
the more obvious areas of concern:
1) Hicks' primary resources are secular psychologists, etc. His book is full of references to Freud, Jung,
Levinson, Margaret Mead, Gail Sheehy, etc.
2) Hicks all but glorifies war and violence that is characteristic of his warrior stage. In addition, he does not
recognize the element of pride that is behind much of this conflict. For example, he says with approval, "To
be a male warrior is to be characterized by strength, competing to be superior, using one's energy to be
prominent, or vying to be important or to gain significance" (p. 77). The believer might think of James 4:1-
3 in light of such a statement.
Page 107 of 176
3) Borrowing from Robert Bly (secular men's movement leader) and Carl Jung (demon-possessed
contemporary of Freud), Hicks claims that, "In order for men to discover what manhood is all about, they
must descend into the deep places of their own souls and find their accumulated grief" (p. 99). Nowhere in
Scripture is anything like this taught, but it has become a fad, thanks to the writings of Larry Crabb (see
Inside Out).
4) Hicks clearly has a low view of Scripture. The most blatant example of this is found on page 114: "I call
the Psalms of David the musings of a manic-depressive."
5) Hicks also soft pedals sin. In an interesting paragraph concerning "Christian" homosexuals, Marxists,
and Catholics that he has known, rather than confronting such people, he confesses, "I have learned that the
way to look at God or the world is not necessarily through the lens or categories I currently believe are the
correct ones" (p. 134). In addition, in an incredible statement on page 177, Hicks says, "I'm sure many
would balk at my thought of celebrating the experience of sin. I am not sure how we could do it. However,
I do know we need to do it. For, example, we usually give the teenagers in our churches such a massive
dose of condemnation regarding their first experience with the police, or their first drunk, or their first
experience ... with sex or drugs. Maybe we could look upon this as a teachable moment and a rite of
passage. Is this putting a benediction on sin? Of course not, but perhaps at this point the true elders could
come forward and confess their own adolescent sins and congratulate the next generation for being human"
(p. 177). Can you imagine someone who claims to be a Christian suggesting that we should congratulate
the young person who has committed fornication or gotten drunk because he is simply being human?
Unbelievable!
6) Hicks writes, "If ever we needed to initiate the wounded in our midst it is now. We need to recognize a
man's divorce, or job firing, or major health problem, or culpability in some legal or sexual indiscretion, as
a wound to which we show deference as a part of the male journey" (p. 178). (Emphasis added.) The word
deference means "honor, reverence, veneration, acclaim, homage, and esteem, courtesy". Therefore, Hicks
is suggesting that we should honor reverence, venerate, and esteem, etc., the things he listed when they
happen in a man's life. Included in these things we should venerate, reverence, esteem, and pay homage to
be legal and sexual indiscretions. Rather than looking on them as sin, we should reverence them. We
should honor them. We should venerate them. We should esteem them. We should look on them as rites of
passage along the masculine journey. Incredible!
7) Hicks are obsessed by the male sex organ. He writes, "We are called and addressed by God in
terminology that describes who and what we are -- zakar, phallic males. Possessing a penis places unique
requirements upon men before God in how they are to worship Him. We are called to worship God as
phallic kinds of guys, not as some sort of androgynous, neutered non-males, or the feminized males so
popular in many feminist-enlightened churches. We are told by God to worship Him in accordance with
what we are, phallic men" (p. 49). This is the language of pagan religionists, not the Bible!
8) Hicks makes numerous erroneous statements about male sexuality. Claiming that the second stage of
manhood is the phallus (penis) stage (p. 48), Hicks goes on to state, "The phallus has always been the
symbol of religious devotion and dedication" (p. 51). In addition, "Improper teaching on the phallus will
drive men into sexual sins because their spiritual God-hunger is not satisfied. Sexual energy is essentially
spiritual" (p. 55). (This is teaching from the demon worshipers in India; it is called TANTRA sex yoga.)
Again, "Our sexual problems only reveal how desperate we are to express, in some perverted form, the
deep compulsion to worship with our phallus" (p. 56).
9) Hicks claims that what keeps men moving along this "masculine" journey is having some other male
mentors in their lives and seeing Jesus as the primary voice of God in each stage. "Jesus ... was the second
10) Hicks has a blasphemous view of Christ. He claims that Jesus experienced homosexual temptation (p.
181)! Even a cursory study of Rom 1:18ff would reveal Hicks' abominable error.
11) More blasphemy -- the movie The Last Temptation of Christ is referred to in a positive light! Claiming
that Jesus is a "phallic male", Hicks says Jesus "may have thought about it as the movie ... portrays" (p.
181) -- referring to Jesus thinking about having sexual relations with a woman! However, doesn't Hicks'
suggestion make Jesus guilty of the sin of lust, thereby embracing the movie's blasphemy? In fact, the
movie portrayed graphic sexual desire, not merely temptation.
2) After the leaders get beyond that hurdle, here is one of the discussion questions: "Our culture has
presented many initiation rites, or passages to manhood, that are associated with the phallus. Which ones
have you experienced? Do you have a story to share with the other men about one such event? Some
examples are: When were you potty trained and when did you stop wetting the bed? Pubic hair and growth.
An unfortunate experience with pornography. My first dating experience. My first embarrassing moment
with a girl. The wedding night. Conceiving my first child."
3) Another activity starts out like this: "Man's primary fantasy is 'having access to as many beautiful
women as desired without risking rejection,'" says Warren Farrell, who polled 106,000 men and women
from all lifestyles. Farrell also tabulated many secondary fantasies, some of which are listed here. From
these options, choose the one that best completes the sentence for you: 'The daydream, wishful thinking, or
primary fantasy that recurs for me is. ...'"
Does this stuff sound like Bible study or Freudian psychology? Isn't it interesting that Christian men can be
united as they practice and apply godless theories from godless men, but they cannot discuss the Word of
God!
DISDAIN FOR DOCTRINE
Promise Keepers' stated purpose is to move men toward Christ-like masculinity. However, PK does not
understand how to do this. Maturity is not developed through pep rallies, psychological teachings, and
sharing. It is developed though the application of the truth of God's Word (i.e., doctrine). However, to PK,
doctrine divides, and should be shunned. Their philosophy is well stated by Robert Hicks: "I am often
amazed at how God sometimes uses secular sources to communicate His truth better than Christian ones"
(p. 162). However, you cannot create godliness by going around the Word of God and seeking out the latest
pop-wisdom of men. This is one of Promise Keepers greatest error.
BDM Note: The following is excerpted and/or adapted from the July-August 1996, Psycho Heresy
Awareness Letter:
Page 109 of 176
Is it true that Promise Keepers is backing away from an enthusiastic support of Robert Hicks' book, The
Masculine Journey? It may appear so at first glance. For an extended period, Promise Keepers provided a
seven-page letter supporting The Masculine Journey to those who requested it. However, shortly after our
article ("Promise Keepers Still Endorses The Masculine Journey) went to press in 3/96, they replaced the
seven-page support letter with a brief statement, which said: "Promise Keepers no longer distributes the
book The Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks, published in 1993 by NavPress."
After admitting that Promise Keepers distributed (gave) the book to every man who attended PK's 1993
national men's conference, the rest of that statement simply talked about Promise Keepers rather than about
The Masculine Journey. No warning, apology, or repudiation of the book could be seen.
As of 6/17/96, Promise Keepers has begun to supply yet another position statement regarding The
Masculine Journey. The current statement says:
"Several passages in The Masculine Journey by Robert Hicks (1993, NavPress) could be understood in
more than one way. Some of the content of the book has unfortunately lent itself to a wide range of
interpretations and responses involving theological issues which Promise Keepers does not feel called to
resolve."
The statement continues to say that they do not want these unforeseen controversies to detract from the
focus of Promise Keepers.
After again saying that they no longer distribute the book, they state:
"At the same time, we believe Mr. Hicks' core theology is consistent with orthodox evangelical
Christianity, and that The Masculine Journey was a forthright attempt on his part to deal with male issues
from a biblical context." (Emphasis added.)
Unfortunately, the organization only seems to be trying to avoid further controversy over the book. There is
still no hint of warning, apology, or repudiation. Any fair reader of Promise Keepers' present statement on
The Masculine Journey would have to conclude that Promise Keepers still supports The Masculine
Journey! The fact that leaders of Promise Keepers were involved in the development of the book, identified
it as a Promise Keepers book, and gave a copy to every man who attended the 1993 PK national men's
conference reveals the psychological foundations of the movement. Until Promise Keepers makes a
definitive statement confessing the error of being involved in the development of the book The Masculine
Journey, as well as of promoting and distributing it, they must be held culpable.
* Portions of this report have been excerpted and/or adapted from an article by Pastor Gary Gilley in the
2/95 Southern View Chapel (now Think on These Things) newsletter; and from an article in the June/July
1997 Think On These Things.
(b) "At its March meeting, Promise Keepers' board of directors welcomed Mike Timmis as a new member.
A Detroit-area lawyer and businessman, Timmis is a longtime leader in the Catholic charismatic renewal."
(c) "At several rallies this year, PK has spotlighted Catholic evangelist Jim Berlucchi as a speaker."
(d) "In June, PK hosted a 'Catholic Summit' at its headquarters in Denver, sounding out Catholic volunteers
and leaders from around the country."
(e) "And EARLIER THIS YEAR, PROMISE KEEPERS AMENDED ITS STATEMENT OF FAITH,
REVISING THE LINES THAT CATHOLICS HAD FOUND OFFENSIVE.
(f) "PROMISE KEEPERS FOUNDER BILL MCCARTNEY TOLD OUR SUNDAY VISITOR RECENTLY
THAT FULL CATHOLIC PARTICIPATION WAS HIS INTENTION FROM THE START.' Back in
1992, at our first stadium event, we very clearly stated from the podium that we eagerly welcomed the
participation of Roman Catholics, and we've had scores of Roman Catholics attend and go back to their
churches excited.' ..."
(g) "As executive director of Christian outreach at Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio, [John]
Sengenberger cites Promise Keepers as the inspiration of the men's conferences his own office has
sponsored since 1995. ... Sengenberger invited representatives from Promise Keepers to visit the university.
'We had some frank discussions and told them we needed to see some Catholic involvement on the
leadership level.'... When Steubenville hosted its first men's conference in 1995, Sengenberger invited two
Promise Keepers officials to attend Dale Schlafer, who was at that time chairman of the board, and Glenn
Wagner, a vice president. 'It was their first time in a Catholic evangelistic setting,' Sengenberger said. 'They
were impressed. When they were leaving, we invited them to go through our bookstore and take out any
books they wanted. They went home with all kinds of theology books, Vatican II teachings. ... Dale took a
set of the Liturgy of the Hours. The following year, he told me he'd incorporated it into his daily prayer, so
Glenn asked for one, too.'"
(h) "Both men returned to Steubenville for the 1996 men's conference, where Sengenberger took them to a
Eucharistic holy hour.' I took them aside and explained what we were doing, how THIS ONLY MAKES
SENSE IF YOU BELIEVE IN THE REAL PRESENCE OF JESUS. That night we were down by the
stage, and I remember going down on my knees, then prostrate, down on my face-and right next to me was
Glenn Wagner, doing the same thing.'"
(i) "Yet profound differences remained between the evangelicals of Promise Keepers and Catholics who
were sympathetic. Last year, Promise Keepers published a 'statement of faith' with lines that seemed to be
crafted to exclude Catholics -- or force them to reject their Catholic faith. Section five of the Promise
Keepers credo read: 'We believe that man was created in the image of God, but because of sin, was
alienated from God. That alienation can be removed only by accepting, through faith alone, God's gift of
salvation, which was made possible by Christ's death.'"
(j) "'Faith alone' is a key doctrine of the Protestant Reformation. Though the phrase appears nowhere in
Scripture, it was inserted by Martin Luther into his German translation of the Bible. Concerned about this
Page 111 of 176
development at Promise Keepers, Sengenberger had several Catholic theologians review the statement and
present their objections to Wagner last summer."
(k) "EARLY THIS YEAR, PROMISE KEEPERS REVISED THE STATEMENT IN A WAY THAT
PASSED THEOLOGICAL MUSTER WITH THOSE CATHOLICS: 'Only through faith, trusting in Christ
alone for salvation, which was made possible by His death and resurrection, can that alienation be
removed.' Paul Edwards, Promise Keepers' vice president for advancement, explained that the statement of
faith is a 'dynamic' document, and that Promise Keepers is open to change.
We see in this article more evidence that Promise Keepers leadership is playing politics with their
ecumenical agenda. When questioned by "Protestants" about Catholic participation in Promise Keepers,
they claim they want Catholics to come simply because they want them to hear the Gospel and be saved.
On the other hand, when questioned by Catholics about Catholic participation in Promise Keepers, they
claim they want to receive Catholics as they are as brothers in Christ without any desire to evangelize them
away from their "church".
We see that Promise Keepers leadership is bending over backwards to increase Catholic participation in its
movement and to calm the fears of Catholic leaders about the prospect of Catholic men leaving Romanism
because of their participation at Promise Keepers events. They are not requiring that Roman Catholics
reject Rome's false doctrines. Promise Keepers leaders are not exposing Rome's blasphemous gospel and
doctrines, which have led multitudes to eternal damnation. PK leaders are faced with the same dilemma as
all ecumenists. If they were to preach the truth boldly and identify false doctrine plainly, it would destroy
their ecumenical agenda. The Apostles were not content merely to preach the Gospel in a positive manner;
they continually exposed false gospels and warred against doctrinal perversion. We are to follow their
example. Our commission is to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3). We are
to fight for the truth and AGAINST error. Promise Keepers leaders refuse to do this [because they are part
of that error].
Even the old PK statement was murky and insufficient. If they wanted to clarify the Gospel in the present
ecumenical climate, they would plainly state that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone because of
the atonement of Christ alone without works, sacraments, and priest craft. The old PK statement allowed
room for false gospels. The new statement is even worse, allowing more room for false gospels such as the
one preached by Rome. False gospels are not completely new gospels; they are the true gospel with a few
"minor" changes, with new definitions. Every false gospel redefines grace to somehow include works or
sacraments. This is what the Apostle Paul fought against in the book of Galatians.
When Promise Keepers first published its brief statement of faith, it did not include the phrase "through
faith alone". It was added because of the outcry of those who protested that the absence of this phrase
leaves room for false gospels, which mix grace and works, faith and sacraments. You see, false gospelers
do not deny that salvation is by faith and by grace. What they deny is that it is by grace ALONE through
faith ALONE without works and sacraments of any sort. Now we see that Promise Keepers has again
modified its statement to remove "through faith alone" to please the Catholic leaders with whom they are
fellowshipping. Promise Keepers vice president, Paul Edwards, tells us that PK's doctrinal statement is
"dynamic" and "open to change". This is typical of those with an ecumenical agenda. They claim that
Page 112 of 176
sound doctrine is precious to them, but in practice, they are incredibly flexible and nonchalant about the
most foundational of doctrines.
The article in Our Sunday Visitor claims that "through faith alone" is a doctrine devised by Martin Luther.
This is perfect nonsense. Salvation by grace alone through faith alone is precisely the Gospel preached by
the Apostles and given to us in the Word of God. Paul described this Gospel by revelation in Romans 3:23-
4:6. It is the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone without works of any kind. Paul also
carefully described the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Again, there is not one word about works or
sacraments. The Gospel is salvation through faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Period. It is Christ alone; grace alone, faith alone, no works, no sacraments. Praise the Lord!
When the Philippian jailer asked the Apostles, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" they said, "Believe on
the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou will be saved, and your house" (Acts 16:30, 31). Nothing here about works
or sacraments or church or priests.
The Lord Jesus Christ taught the same thing, of course. When the crowd asked Christ, "What shall we do,
that we might work the works of God?" he replied, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom
he hath sent" (John 6:28, 29). Again, nothing here about works or sacraments. John 3:16 says, "Whosoever
believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life". Faith alone. Faith in Christ, plus nothing and
minus nothing.
Biblical grace means the unmerited eternal salvation of God which comes freely and directly to the
believing sinner through the atonement of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:24 - 4:6; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:4-7). The
Roman Catholic Church has redefined grace to include sacraments. "Grace," by Rome's definition, means
Christ, by His death, has provided salvation to be distributed by the Catholic Church to those sinners who
adhere to its sacraments. The New Catholic Catechism states: "The Church affirms that for believers the
sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation" (1129). THESE WORDS COULD NOT BE
PLAINER.
Beware of Promise Keepers. Its leaders are either very ignorant, or they are very [deceptively]
clever. What are the predominate differences between the National Council of Churches, the World
Council of Churches, and the Apostate Promise Keepers Movement? There is only one difference –
SIZE!
Throw open the gates wide, for the Great Whore of Babylon is ready to
enter!
Claiming to speak with authority for some 42 million American Christians, the National Council of the
Churches of Christ (N.C.C.) includes thirty-three denominations representing most of the major Protestant
and Orthodox Churches in the United States. In addition, more than a score of denominations not actually
members of the N.C.C. have participated actively in its radical programs.
Headquartered at 475 Riverside Drive in New York City, the National Council functions through dozens of
interlocking departments, grouped under four major divisions, overseeing the N.C.C.'s international
operations. The program is of such magnitude that in 1968, alone, the National Council of Churches
expended over $19 million on a worldwide network of Leftist projects. In that year, however, the N.C.C.
collected $24,819,000 from gullible American Christians and tax-exempt Leftist foundations.
During the meeting of this group's General Assembly at San Diego in February of 1968, a presentation
titled "NCC Ministries and the Communist World" revealed that in 1967 over $1,584,000 had been given to
the Communist Government of Poland through an N.C.C. on-going ministry called Church World Service.
Although the aid was received in the name of the Polish Ecumenical Council, it was administered by the
Communists for their own purposes. During the period from 1952 until 1967, over $40 million worth of
food, clothing, and other material was give by the N.C.C.'s Church World Service to the Communist
Government of Yugoslavia. Even stranger was an admission in this N.C.C. report that the National Council
was operating a "refugee program" which picked up the tab for relocating Brazilian Communists in
Mexico.
To top it off, in 1968 the same U.S. Government which prohibits prayer in our schools donated $5 million
to the National Council of Churches through something called "(Ocean Freight Refunds." In fact, in its
1960 triennial report, the N.C.C. lists "Ocean Freight Refunds" from the federal government totaling more
than $23 million for the period 1957 to 1960.
The recipient of this federal largesse is the same National Council of Churches whose 1968 General
Assembly at San Diego demanded that America:
"Stop the bombing of North Vietnam as a prelude to seeking a negotiated peace"; "Avoid provocative
military actions against Communist China in the knowledge that it has a legitimate interest in Asia"; "Press
for the admission of the Peking government to the United Nations"; "Create conditions for cooperation
between the United States and the Communist countries of Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union and Cuba";
"Recognize the government of Cuba and acknowledge the existence of the East German Republic"; and,
"Remove restrictions on imports from Communist countries and on cultural exchanges between the U.S.
and the Soviet Union."
Other resolutions called for "increased support for poverty-rights action groups by Church Women United,"
and provided for financial backing of the subversive National Urban Coalition. The N.C.C. even directed
its member churches "to provide funds for local black groups to strategize for the summer and to support
inclusion of black power and black nationalist organizations in local task groups.... "In other words, the
resolutions of the National Council exactly followed the current Communist Line.
The N.C.C. has consistently propagandized for every conceivable Leftist program, from federally forced
integration to complete disarmament of the United States. From its office in Washington, D.C., the
National Council's spokesmen regularly appear before Committees of Congress to lobby for the causes of
the Far Left, though the National Council has never registered under the Lobbying Act of 1946. And,
despite its having been repeatedly exposed as a fraud the N.C.C. has somehow continued to maintain not
If the National Council of Churches has its way, that's just the way it will be!
Footnotes:
1
The Methodist Federation for Social Service, which later changed its name to become the Methodist
Federation for Social Action, admitted its cooperation with the Communists in its Bulletin number eight for
1932. It was subsequently cited as a Communist Front by the 1948 Report of the California Committee on
Un-American Activities. On February 17, 1952, the House Committee on Un-American Activities Issued
an 87-page document detailing the Red activities of the M.F.S.A. and its Communist personnel. Among
those in this Front cited as active Communists posing as church leaders was one Winifred Chappell, a
Soviet agent who was assigned by Harry Ward to do "youth work" for the Methodist Church. As Secretary
of M.F.S.S. for ten years, she counseled young draftees to commit wholesale sabotage and treason against
the United States. Writing in the Methodist weekly, Epworth Herald, Comrade Winifred advised youth to:
"Accept the draft, take the drill, go into the camps and onto the battlefield, or into the munitions factories
and transportation work — but sabotage war preparations and war. Be agitators for sabotage. . . ."
2. The National Council of Churches' Activities and Publications Lean Toward the
Political Left
We recognize that the NCC has no "theology" of its own. But the basic principles and ideals held by its
advocates, and reflected in its literature, are a cause for concern. The general direction of the whole
movement is on the side of liberal (neo-liberal) theology, and is hostile to the evangelical faith. The NCC
supports causes and promotes purposes which are not in harmony with Biblical teachings. Apparently its
most influential leaders have strong convictions with reference to social action, but lack corresponding
convictions with reference to the essentials of the Christian faith itself. Note the following examples:
(1) The April 26, 1963 issue of Christianity Today says, "Meanwhile in New York, the NCC issued a press
release which concludes that in most people's minds there is no longer any conflict between the teachings
of the Bible and those of Charles Darwin on man's origin. The release cited weekly NCC telecasts 'which
accept and explain the theory of evolution.' It said that heavy mail from viewers shows that 'scarcely one in
a thousand still finds any conflict between the Darwinian theory and the Book of Genesis.'"
(2) The November 7, 1965 issue of National Radio Pulpit, produced by the Broadcasting and Film
Commission of the NCC, says: "What about hell? What's happened to the fires which preachers used to
threaten the wicked? What's happened is that most of us are now quite unwilling and unable to say that God
chooses to send of His creatures to a place of endless and limitless torture . . . So (hell) is not a place He
sends men to, but a condition that they choose."
(3) In a special issue of The International Journal of Religious Education, the official publication of the
Division of Christian Education, NCC, Gerald A. Larue says that the message of the Bible is merely "the
witness of a writer at some point in history. We need not agree with what he (the writer) says, but we can
appreciate his point of view."
(4) An editorial in the February 15, 1963 issue of Christianity Today reviews the pamphlet published by the
NCC for the United Christian Youth Movement. The booklet is entitled, Called to Responsible Freedom:
the Meaning of Sex in the Christian Life, by William Graham Cole. Editor Carl F.H. Henry says of this
pamphlet, "In some respects it might even be considered an invitation to sexual promiscuity . . . It deplores
as Pharisaic those who would impose any rules whatever upon sexual mores." The NCC-published
pamphlet says on page 10, "What justifies and sanctifies sexuality is not the external marital status of the
people before the law, but rather what they feel toward each other in their hearts." The implication is that
sex need not be controlled by divine laws, but that the only test for moral conduct is love.
While it is true that the above statements are not necessarily official doctrines of the NCC, it is equally true
that these teachings are unashamedly tolerated. This raises the question in the minds of many, "Is there any
such thing as heresy any more?" The NCC refuses to label as heresy the denial of many cardinal doctrines
of the Christian faith; in fact, it seems that the only belief now considered heresy, is nonecumenicity.
4. The NCC Often Speaks "TO" The Churches And Not Necessarily "FOR" Them
The executives and staff members of the Council (along with certain chosen "experts") usually plan the
programs, pull the strings, and issue the directives that ultimately affect the lives of millions of people. And
in very few cases do the member denominations themselves have anything to say about the avalanche of
materials that are issued by its boards and agencies. Anyone familiar with the deliberative processes of
large assemblies, knows how much is prepared in advance, and how little is actually done on the floor of
the assembly. The actual control of the Council rests in the hands of a comparatively small group who work
between the meetings and behind the scenes.
Frequent pronouncements are made in the name of the affiliated churches, but such pronouncements often
reflect only a minority report. The Buck Hill Falls meeting (Christianity Today, June 6, 1965) supplies an
illustration of this: Dr. O. Frederick Nolde called for the cessation of bombing in Viet Nam as a calculated
Page 128 of 176
risk, and he also advocated the inclusion of Red China in the United Nations. This statement had already
been released to President Johnson and other high government officials before the Buck Hill Falls
Conference, with the intent of influencing United States policy. Behind the statement lay, supposedly, the
weight of many churches. But since no meeting of the WCC had take place since the statement was
formulated, and since the statement had not been officially adopted, it could hardly be called representative
of the opinion of the churches constituting the WCC. Indeed it was nothing more than a committee
speaking for itself in the name of churches that had no chance to vote on the statement.
Furthermore, the NCC increasingly provides leadership which the churches follow. Comprehensive
planning is often done on behalf of the churches, in such areas as curriculum development and lesson
programming. The NCC (instead of being merely "an agency through which the Churches can accomplish
that which they can do better together than alone") is becoming a policy-making and program-planning
source of guidance, information, and leadership--and thus it often determines important matters on behalf
of the churches.
The laity in the American churches are not asked for opinions in most matters. They are precommitted by
powerful ecclesiastical leaders, operating in overlapping committees at an ecumenical level, and church-
members often learn of such ecclesiastical involvement after commitments have been made, and can no
longer be easily reversed. The NCC pronouncements are not submitted to the members of the constituent
churches for approval before being announced to the public. Therefore these views cannot possibly express
the views of millions of members who are given no opportunity to express their opinion. Many of us are
convinced that the overwhelming majority of Christians in America do not approve of the NCC leadership's
proposals to get the Church involved in political, economic, and social issues, in the name of the Church.
The work of the Councils of Churches is, to a great extent, the business of theologians and church leaders.
As one Finnish ecumenical spokesman said recently, "The ecumenical leaders are generals without armies."
There seems to be a great divorce between the thinking of many of our ecclesiastical leaders, and the
believer in the pew.
CONTENTS
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
What Should Christians Expect In These Last Days? The Bible Gives a Very Clear Answer.
NOTE THE FOLLOWING SCRIPTURES:
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own
selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural
affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady,
highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the
power thereof: FROM SUCH TURN AWAY." 2 Timothy 3:5.
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they
heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall
be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3,4.
"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you,
who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon
themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of
truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of
you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not" 2 Peter 2:1-3.
What Is the Responsibility of True Believers In These Last Days? God Says:
"Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering
and doctrine. ...But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full
proof of thy ministry." 2 Timothy 4:2,5.
"Whosoever transgresses, and abides not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abides in the
doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you and bring not this
doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that bids him God speed is
partaker of his evil deeds." 2 John 9-11.
Preface
THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES was organized in 1948 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
One hundred, forty-seven denominations with a total membership of 293 million individuals were its
charter members. Presently, the WCC represents over 300 denominations with a membership of over 400
million people, making it by far the largest and most influential ecumenical body in the world. Because of
its tremendous size and because it so often appears to speak for the "Church," the WCC exercises a great
deal of influence both religiously and politically. However, most of the WCC's power and influence
involves only those in the top echelons of religion and politics. Most church members at the local level are
not even aware that they are a part of the World Council of Churches. Many would certainly be shocked if
they only knew what the WCC is doing and saying as their representative.
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR GOD'S PEOPLE TO KNOW WHAT THE WORLD COUNCIL IS
SAYING AND DOING NOW as well as what it has done and said in the past. Throughout the entire 38-
year history of the WCC we have closely followed its activities and actions, reviewing most of its
publications and attending many WCC Assemblies and other major meetings to obtain firsthand
information We have shared this important information with fellow-believers through our radio broadcasts
and the publication of numerous articles and special reports. Two of these articles, "The Truth About the
World Council of Churches" and "The World Council of Churches-An Ecumenical Tower of Babel," are
still being widely circulated because of the important documentation they contain. But we believe the time
has come to provide the far more extensive and intensive documentation which is printed in this booklet.
THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES CUP OF THE LORD OR THE CUP OF DEVILS? is an
Page 132 of 176
edited compilation of several articles which were originally printed separately in recent issues of
FOUNDATION Magazine. It is being rushed into print now at the urging of several Christian leaders who
are as concerned as we are about the manner in which the WCC is deceiving many true believers by putting
on a new face of "spirituality" and "evangelicalism" calculated to camouflage its continuing religious and
political radicalism.
THE LEADERSHIP OF THE WORLD COUNCIL HAS BEEN AND IS NOW PREDOMINANTLY
LIBERAL AND RADICAL TO THE CORE. It is the voice of Liberalism NOT Evangelicalism which has
been heard and seen loud and clear in WCC pronouncements and programs. For many years, the "voice of
evangelicalism" within the Council was non-existent or so faint it could scarcely be recognized. Now, some
compromising evangelical leaders would like us to believe that their voice is being heard and warmly
welcomed within the WCC. But in fact, the liberal leaders of the WCC welcome the "evangelical voice"
only because those who raise such a voice within the Council are satisfied with just being heard. These
"evangelicals" have forgotten the Satanic manner in which the WCC quite willingly accepts all different
points of view theologically, morally and politically, knowing that their ecumenical homogenization
process (blending truth and error) will provide a mixture that makes error seem more attractive and less
dangerous to those who are unaware of what is actually taking place.
WCC GENERAL SECRETARY, EMILIO CASTRO, SAYS THE WCC HAS "OVERCOME THE
SO-CALLED CONFRONTATION STAGE" in its present relationships with evangelicals. In the WCC
publication, One World, for January-February 1986, Dr. Castro says, "...a substantial number of Christian
brothers and sisters of evangelical persuasion are open to the ecumenical movement and willing to
participate in it with their testimony. ...I see signs everywhere of a wider participation of evangelicals in the
forum that is the World Council of Churches. I'd like to believe that the perspectives and experiences of the
ecumenical movement are also common riches for our evangelical brothers and sisters. I see many
evangelical writers quoting, without apology, persons who could be considered pillars in the ecumenical
movement I think we have overcome the so-called confrontation stage; now the challenge is to make the
best of the evangelical contribution to the total work of the WCC."
IT IS OUR HOPE AND PRAYER that this booklet will provide true believers with sufficient
documented information to enable them to take their stand for the truth of the Word of God, and against the
errors of the World Council of Churches, and to separate from any relationship with or support of the
WCC. The World Council of Churches, in the name of "Christian Unity," is paving the way for Satan's One
World Church and One World Government. God says, "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not
partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18:4.
Introduction
God says, "Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the
Lord's table and of the table of devils." 1 Corinthians 10:21. The command is very clear! God says, "YE
CANNOT" - but the World Council of Churches says, "WE MUST AND WE WILL!"
The World Council of Churches held its Sixth Assembly in Vancouver, B.C., Canada, July24 - August
10, 1983. From start to finish this major ecumenical gathering provided abundant evidence that the WCC
makes no distinction between the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils. In fact, one of their major goals
continues to be the visible unity of the church – just one cup – into which would be poured heathen
paganism and devilish heresies, disguised by evangelical verbiage and scripture taken out of context. The
continual mixing of truth and error which characterized the Vancouver Assembly clearly revealed that the
WCC is drinking heavily from the "cup of devils" although they call it the "cup of the Lord."
Accurate reporting of a World Council Assembly is difficult for several reasons. First, there is so
much going on every day from early morning until late at night; it might be likened to trying to take in
everything in an old-fashioned three-ring circus complete with its many sideshows. Then, there is the
complication caused by differences in language. Even though translation was provided in several languages
at most major sessions by use of ear phones, etc., it was often frustrating to speaker and listener alike at
those times when it became obvious that the proper meaning was not being conveyed. To further
complicate the reporting process, some of the section meetings were open to the Press – but no direct
Page 133 of 176
quotations were permitted. It was often difficult at the end of a day to sort out which statements heard or
read were official, unofficial, provisional, or confidential. Complicating matters even further was the
endless squabbling over procedural rules. It soon became clear that many of the delegates, most of whom
(80%) were attending a WCC Assembly for the first time, could not fully comprehend all that was going on
either! ONE FACT DID COME THROUGH LOUD AND CLEAR – THE WCC IS JUST AS RADICAL
AS EVER. THE LEOPARD HAS NOT AND CANNOT CHANGE ITS SPOTS! IT IS ONLY PAINTING
THEM DIFFERENT COLORS!
This eye-witness report of the WCC Sixth Assembly in Vancouver covers some of the most significant
aspects of this major ecumenical event viewed from the perspective of Scriptural principles. Many reports
have been and will be written by others from the perspective of theological liberalism or evangelical
compromise. Such reports paint a rosy picture of what took place in Vancouver. Liberals saw it as a great
step forward toward the goal of "one visible church" The majority of evangelicals were lavish in their
praise of what they considered to be "greater emphasis on evangelical concerns." However, seen in the pure
light of God's Holy Word, this WCC Assembly was not only the most deceptive of all the assemblies thus
far, but represented the most brazen attempt ever to unite the "cup of the Lord and the cup of devils" in
their continuing obsession for visible unity at the expense of doctrinal purity.
True Believers Will Want to Heed God's Warnings, Obey God's Commands, and Rest
in God's Promises
1 PETER 2:1,2. "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers
among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them and
bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom
the way of truth shall be evil spoken of."
2 CORINTHIANS 6:14-18. "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship
hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what
concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement
hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in
them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. WHEREFORE COME OUT
FROM AMONG THEM, and be ye separate, SAITH THE LORD, and touch not the unclean thing; and I
WILL RECEIVE YOU, AND WILL BE A FATHER UNTO YOU, AND YE SHALL BE MY SONS
AND DAUGHTERS, SAITH THE LORD ALMIGHTY."
LUKE 12:32. "Fear not, little flock; for it is the Father's good pleasure to GIVE YOU THE KINGDOM."
MATTHEW 6:33. "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall
be added unto you."
EVANGELICALS AT VANCOUVER
An Open Letter
Many evangelicals from all over the world are present at the 6th Assembly of the World Council of
Churches as delegates and observers, advisers and visitors, speakers and press representatives. Many are
members of churches within the WCC framework A number gravitated together and frequently shared
impressions and matters of common concern during these days. This statement represents our deep desire
to bear witness to what we believe God sought to say to us through the Christians we encountered, the
words we heard and the official actions taken at Vancouver. We do not claim to speak on behalf of our
churches or of all the evangelicals at the Assembly.
The theme of Vancouver is "Jesus Christ - the Life of the World." We are impressed anew with the
rich diversity and complexity of the worldwide Christian movement. We found the exploration of this
theme a stimulating experience, especially because the Assembly sought to call Christians everywhere to be
more faithful to their threefold task - the pastoral, the prophetic and the apostolic. As a result, its on going
concern is that the churches be spiritually renewed (the pastoral), that they become socially responsible (the
prophetic) and that they display diligence in their holistic witness to the Gospel (the apostolic).
As we pressed deeper into days crowded with presentations, reflection and interaction, it became
apparent that Vancouver 1983 marks significant progress over the last two Assemblies (Uppsala 1968 and
Nairobi 1975) in its overarching spiritual and Biblical orientation.
This was apparent in the following ways:
1. The dimension of worship was both central and spiritually refreshing. At plenary sessions and in the
daily worship services, we enjoyed warm communal fellowship as we reached out to God in prayer and
Page 141 of 176
praise.
2. The wider space given to Bible exposition and the affirmation of basic Biblical themes in plenary
sessions represent unmistakable loyalty to the historic rootage of our Christian faith.
3. Biblical messages on the nature and mission of the church under such key themes as Jesus Christ,
life and the world, prepared the way for earnest efforts to relate these truths to the problems facing
Christians today.
4. The Orthodox with their trinitarianism, their spirituality, and their participation in group discussions
at all levels reminded us of some of the church's non-negotiable treasures, while other segments of the
worldwide church called us to face the urgencies of today.
5. We entered into deeper anguish over the terrible injustices currently perpetrated against the poor,
the powerless and the oppressed throughout the world. We perceived anew that the issues of nuclear
disarmament and peace could become a preoccupation and divert attention from the equally urgent issues
of deprivation, injustice, human rights and liberation.
6. We found ourselves standing with the many who refused to believe that the powers of oppression,
death and destruction will have the last word on human existence.
7. Finally, and most important of all, representatives from all segments of the church called the
Assembly to accept the reality that Jesus Christ is indeed the life of the world. Women spoke alongside
men. The youth and the disadvantaged were heard. Even the children. And the ordained clergy made no
attempt to dominate the ministry of the Word of God.
Ever since the WCC was formed in 1948 at Amsterdam, each successive Assembly has been unique.
Vancouver was no exception. In its study papers, group discussions and personal conversations, we could
readily discern several concerns:
1. That Christians must rigorously eschew any docetic understanding of the Gospel. The church can
only be renewed today if it faces courageously the relation of Jesus Christ to the totality of human need and
experience. We see one-sidedness in a preoccupation with "contending for the faith" while ignoring a world
going up in flames.
2. That as the church presses deeper into the '80's, all agreed that Christians shall increasingly be
drawn in their Biblical reflection and theologizing to focus on the plight of the poor - those whom Christ
particularly singled out as the ones to hear the good news of the kingdom (Luke 4:18,19).
3. That increasingly, the church is being reinforced in its perception of the demonic dimensions of
structural evil. They are as offensive to God and as destructive to people as any personal evil. One WCC
official spoke for many when he related the poor to "the church's most important missiological issue - the
centrality of Jesus Christ" Christ alone is the life of the world and He alone can deal with the problem of
evil. But He must be proclaimed to all peoples. And the majority of those who have not heard the Gospel
are the poor.
4. That the dominant issue before the church today is the inter-relation of its concerns for justice and
peace. They cannot be separated. We note that this issue has both vertical and horizontal implications.
Moreover, the Biblical vision of justice with peace through Jesus Christ, the life of the world, was not
posed as one of several options for those who could follow Him, but the only option.
We were moved to join hundreds from the United States and Central America who covenated together
to seek a better understanding of the issues involved in the present conflict in Central America as a positive
step toward the achievement of peace with justice throughout the area.
As evangelicals we rejoiced that the Assembly did not simply confine itself to the prophetic task of the
church. The nurture of Christians and their witness to the unbelieving world were also included. But we
could not be true to our evangelical convictions were we merely to endorse the positive affirmations made
at Vancouver. We were troubled by occasional statements which implied that apart from Jesus Christ the
world can have life. Not every address reflected high Christological and soteriological perspectives. On
occasion we wanted to rise up and call the WCC to be consistent with its own basis: "A fellowship of
churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior according to the Scriptures and therefore
seek to fulfill together their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit" We
would assert that WCC leadership has the solemn responsibility to uphold this confession in all its public
What Would the WCC Say at Vancouver Concerning the Brutal Communist Takeover
of Afghanistan?
The facts concerning the unabashed USSR rape of its neighbor, Afghanistan, were so widely known
around the world that everyone knew the WCC could not completely sidestep this issue at Vancouver.
WCC officials realized in advance that this would be a "hot potato" and every effort was made to present a
resolution to the floor which could have the support of delegates from churches in the Soviet Union as well
as those from non-communist countries. The resolution presented to the delegates by the drafting
committee was very mildly worded and followed the "initiatives taken by the Secretary General of the
United Nations." Some delegates demanded an outright condemnation of the USSR and the immediate
withdrawal of its troops, thus precipitating a heated floor debate. Alexander J. Malik of the Church of
Pakistan complained that "the drafters have selected the weakest possible language." He said: "If it were
any western country, the WCC would have jumped on it and denounced the country in the strongest
possible language. Here, it only expresses its concerns and nothing is said about Soviet atrocities in
Afghanistan."
The World Council of Churches As Seen Through the Eyes of A Secular Editor
An Inescapable Question!
In retrospect – and after reviewing the official report of the WCC's Sixth Assembly in Vancouver – an
inescapable question arises: "How can the WCC possibly justify its pronouncements on so many extremely
complex issues?" Even if every voting delegate were an expert in some field where their experience and
knowledge would enable them to compose a helpful statement, given the factor of time and language
barriers alone, producing something worthwhile would be out of the question. Then, think for a moment
about the brazenness of the WCC in putting together documents on such a wide variety of complex issues
when 80% of the voting delegates had never attended a WCC Assembly before; knew nothing of the
complicated parliamentary procedures involved; and were expected to cast their votes when they had only
minutes or hours to review the final documents? Some delegates complained that they had not even seen
the final draft of the statement their group had been working on. Some of the statements could only be
completed by granting the group chairman or the WCC Central Committee the privilege to incorporate
certain changes suggested from the floor after the Assembly ended. Many WCC delegates did not actually
know until much later the final wording of the statements they had voted for or against! Some delegates
were incensed at such a procedure and expressed their displeasure by refusing to vote at all!
What Is Truth?
The true children of God accept the testimony of the written and living Word. The Bible says, "Thy
Word is TRUTH." John 17:17. Jesus Christ said, "I am the way, the TRUTH and the LIFE: no man cometh
unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6.
Contrast this with what WCC leader, Diana Eck Moderator of the WCC Summit on Dialogue with
People of Living Faiths, said at a press conference: "The return of religion, the return of the sacred, or at
least a heightened sense that the SEARCH FOR SPIRITUAL IDENTITY and SPIRITUAL MEANING is
somehow more urgent now than ever before." She took particular pains to distinguish between what she
considered to be two opposite approaches in that search, repudiating that which emphasizes "building
walls" but advocating what she called "a process of sinking roots." According to Ms. Eck, this preferred
Radical Women Leaders Were Represented At Buenos Aires as They Had Been At
Vancouver
Some of these had been in attendance at the two global meetings the previous month in Nairobi
marking the end of the U.N. Decade for Women. Annie Jiagge, moderator of the WCC anti-racism program
(PCR), said that women in Nairobi affirmed that "structures that create over-affluence on the one side and
poverty on the other are as much a problem as sexism and racism and that the struggle against sexual
discrimination will not be complete unless these economic structures and racism are realistically tackled."
The biblical prohibition against the ordination of women is still maintained by a few WCC member
churches and these radical women consider this to be intolerable since it supposedly deprives them of full
freedom. They refuse to obey the Word of God, providing another example of how WCC liberals attempt to
give disobedience to the Scriptures a false mask, deceitfully calling it "SPIRITUALITY AND
FREEDOM".
"As For Me, I Am Not Afraid of the Revolution, for It Is the Power of the People Unto
Salvation"
The WCC Commission on Faith and Order Is Broader than the World Council of
Churches Itself!
MEMBERSHIP IN THE WCC FAITH AND ORDER COMMISSION INCLUDES NOT ONLY
THOSE FROM WCC MEMBER DENOMINATIONS BUT ALSO SOUTHERN BAPTISTS, ROMAN
CATHOLICS, PENTECOSTALS AND SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS. The following quote is from the
preface, page ix: "This Lima text represents the SIGNIFICANT THEOLOGICAL CONVERGENCE which
Faith and Order has discerned and formulated. Those who know how widely the churches have differed in
doctrine and practice on BAPTISM, EUCHARIST AND MINISTRY, will appreciate the importance of the
large measure of agreement registered here. VIRTUALLY ALL THE CONFESSIONAL TRADITIONS
ARE INCLUDED IN THE COMMISSION'S MEMBERSHIP. That theologians of SUCH WIDELY
DIFFERENT TRADITIONS should be able to speak so harmoniously about baptism, Eucharist
[Address, December, 1983. Published in Journal of Ecumenical Studies 21 (1984): 64-70. Also published
in The Search for Visible Unity: Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry. Edited by J. Gros. New York: Pilgrim
Press, 1984. Reprinted with permission.] Seeing that the NCC's BEM conference in Chicago last October
was co-hosted by an ecumenical cooperative of Chicago-area theological schools, it was natural that these
Page 166 of 176
schools would contribute to the conference a public review of BEM's theology. This they did in two
successive panel discussions, each panel involving three Chicago faculty members: Lauree Hersch Meyer
of Bethany Theological Seminary, on "Baptism"; 0. C. Edwards of Seabury-Western Theological
Seminary, on "Eucharist"; Lewis Mudge of McCormick Theological Seminary, on "Ministry"; and Bernard
McGinn of the University of Chicago's Divinity School, on "Baptism"; Carolyn Osiek of Catholic
Theological Union, on "Ministry"; Robert Bertram of Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, on
"Eucharist".
Although the panelists were to address the substantive issues of Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, not the
conference theme of "reception" as such, what they said about BEM's theological substance had
implications for its reception process as well. Two implications in particular deserve notice. The two I have
in mind are not the obvious twosome, which every panelist also reflected: yes, BEM is already basically
receivable; no, it is not to be received uncritically or even without further rewrite. That much yes and-no
was reflected even by the two panelists from the Faith and Order Commission, Mudge and Bertram, who at
Lima had already gone on record in BEM's favor and so now leaned over backward to add what Moderator
Carl Braaten requested, a "critical response." However, beyond such general endorsement cum "critical
evaluation," which BEM's own preface invites, all six panelists surfaced two other, more nuanced, more
telling features of BEM's theology which in turn might foreshadow how the document will be received in
the churches: BEM's theological ambivalences or, better, its inconclusiveness, and second, its intimations
of something better still to come.
Inconclusive
First, in noting BEM's inconclusiveness I would not minimize that the document did evince definite
conclusions from our panelists. The conclusions they drew, however, all of them apparently warranted by
BEM itself, occasionally were not only different. They were at times markedly contrary, leaving the
audience in a quandary and the discussion as a whole undecided. That sort of irresolution may be a shadow
of things to come. All the more so if, as this conference recommended, a document like BEM which has
been ecumenically produced ought also, as in these Chicago panels, be ecumenically discussed and
received. The fallout from any reception process as multi-vocal as that may be a whole new range of
interesting theological impasses.
For instance, contrast the two presentations by Hersch Meyer and Edwards, she from Church of the
Brethren, he an Episcopalian. Both of them affirmed BEM for reasons of their own, but reasons not
evidently compatible with each other. Hersch Meyer explained that, for Brethren, "baptism was never
understood as a means of saving one's soul." Rather it functions as a rite of passage into the religious
group, thus fulfilling an important sociological need both of the person and of the community. It is only of
secondary importance that the "socio-ecclesial formation terrain" of the Brethren had traditionally limited
this rite to adults. For recently there has been a growing recognition that adolescents, too, need a rite of
passage. At that, "a meaningful adolescent rite need not be confirmation or baptism any more than a
meaningful infant rite needs to be baptism or infant dedication." What matters is "enrolling each new
generation meaningfully in the corporate identity."
Such a "free church" view of Baptism would seem to justify the misgivings voiced by Edwards. Not that he
had serious doubts about BEM. On the contrary, he could comfortably acknowledge that “the Lima
statement does presuppose a sacramental orientation that is reflexive to Anglicanism and the thought world
My question is whether many of the member churches of the World Council who have not been so
sacramental in their orientation throughout history as Anglicans have, are really this converted to a
sacramental point of view. As Edwards went on, his real question lay deeper. "The sacramentalism of the
Lima statement implies a Christology on a par with the classic Christological statements of the early
church.” Must not those creeds, therefore, be “an essential part of any discussion of reunion?” What he
wondered, not optimistically, was whether “all of the member churches are willing to ascribe such an
ultimacy to Christ.”
Hersch Meyer, on the other hand, whose Brethren obviously have “not been so sacramental in their
orientation throughout history as Anglicans have,” and maybe not so inclined “to ascribe such ultimacy to
Christ,” nevertheless argued from an explicitly Christological orientation of her own. The Christian
community into which Baptism provides a rite of passage is, after all, “the body of Christ” and membership
in it means “participation in Christ’s very life.” “What social scientists would call a sociological” event is
what “Brethren would understand as an incarnational” one. Indeed, Hersch Meyer’s single most theological
reason for approving BEM is its “Christological mode” of “Christian conversation.” But by that she meant,
“Christians today are learning to see in others who practice radically different forms of baptism...members
of Christ’s living body, incarnated in a social matrix sometimes painfully and astonishingly different from
our own.”
If that is what strikes Hersch Meyer as Christological significant about BEM, namely, its “openness to
expressions of God’s Spirit visibly different from our own," then she was being consistent in challenging
the way the BEM question is frequently posed, "the question to what degree the document adequately
represents the apostolic faith." "That very wording," she objected, "suggests to Brethren ... a view of
‘correspondence’ more than ‘relational’ truth." And Edwards' plea, by contrast, for "a Christology on a par
with the classic Christological statements of the early church" must then sound like the very thing Hersch
Meyer criticized as a "search for a particular deposit ... to rightly represent the faith." Still, BEM evidently
seems inclusive enough to embrace Brethren as well. Both their "faith and practice," says Hersch Meyer,
"is found within those descriptions the BEM document affirms."
Edwards, on the other hand, questions whether churches like Hersch Meyer's truly can find themselves
there. She, in turn, questions whether his sort of criterion is worthy of BEM, also Christological. "Its the
old question of the Council of. Florence," Mudge observed. "How do you know that when you use different
words you are speaking with the same intention?" (Or even, we might ask, when you use the same words?)
Edwards: "And the Catch-22 of all this is that in order to deal with the questions we're faced with we must
first reach some sort of methodological agreement so that we will know that we are talking about the same
thing . . . ." The discussion then digressed farther and farther from the theological issues at hand (Baptism,
Eucharist and Ministry) toward some elusive "hermeneutical" solution -- toward a solution, in other words,
outside BEM itself, though necessitated by BEM's own theological indeterminateness. BEM's
inconclusiveness did not need interdenominational give-and-take to reveal it, though that helped. It
surfaced right within panelists’ solo presentations, for instance, in McGinn’s and Osiek's, both of them
Roman Catholic lay theologians. McGinn was "puzzled . . . about the nature and content of [BEM's] new
ethical orientation granted in Baptism." Why "puzzled"? "Because the text says so little about what used to
be called original sin," upon which any such conclusions about baptismal renewal would presumably need
On the other hand, Osiek, on BEM's treatment of Ministry: "The traditional tension remains between the
theology of charism and the act of ordination; the tension is not resolved by simply assuming as I Tim. 4:14
seems to that ordained ministry is a charism." As for the apostolicity of ordained ministries, she observed,
"There is no more obvious sign of compromise in the document than the conclusion of #10: ‘There is
therefore a difference between the apostles and the ordained ministers whose ministries are founded on
theirs.' That there is a difference no one would dispute. Apparently every attempt to articulate what kind of
difference was unsuccessful."
Mudge, similarly, called attention to BEM's unresolved tensions, including one which the document itself
acknowledges: "... the degree of the presbyter's participation in the Episcopal ministry is still for many an
unresolved question of far-reaching ecumenical importance" -- far-reaching enough, I might insert, to
exercise Lutherans. Recalling Lima, Mudge was inclined to trace some of BEM's lingering tensions back to
its prepublication "drafting process." He remembered how free-church and Reformed theologians "felt we
were always tugging at cassocks to get heard." "I do wonder sometimes whether our Orthodox friends,
particularly those who are resident in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and Greece, have any real
understanding of what Protestantism is ... and what we mean in the West by the critical method."
The critical method came up also in Bertram's challenge to BEM, specifically with respect to its chapter on
"the institution of the Eucharist.” Here again was a case where the document is "halting between two
opinions," needlessly so. For one example, (and there were several) BEM at first gives the appearance of
affirming the apostolic tradition that the sacrament was instituted by the historical Jesus. But then,
"needlessly cautious,"
BEM retreats from that doctrinally crucial claim, apparently fearing that a dominical institution may no
longer be tenable, which to say the least is a premature conclusion. As a result, rather than grapple with
"historical-critical evidence" which in this case might just have supported the apostolic tradition, BEM
"shifts the dominical origins of the Eucharist instead to Jesus' general practice throughout his ministry of
table fellowship." But at what a price, "thus obscuring precisely in his new Supper Jesus does not eat and
drink with his disciples, and obscuring why he does not."
Anticipatory
If BEM gives off mixed signals, especially when these are tricked out in mixed theological company, it
seems to do so in a ..ay that does not at all stultify further effort. On the contrary, if our panelists' reactions
were typical, BEM awakens expectations which point beyond the document in its present form, perhaps
beyond anything that so far is conceivable. In that sense BEM is proleptic, self-eclipsing, anticipatory of
better things to come, as the following excerpts illustrate.
McGinn. "The Lima Statement obviously is looking for something more than mutual toleration. It does say
that it intends to be an expression of the common faith of the Church and it asks for the explicit mutual
recognition of each other's baptism on the part of the churches. But each of these express intentions
contains hidden ambiguities that make the process of reception (or non-reception) at least as important as
Osiek. "On the subject of the relationship of the ordained ministry to the apostles and of the ordained
priesthood to the priesthood of all believers, we still have some distance to go, both ecumenically and in
the theologizing of the more highly structured churches..... The greatest challenge for Roman Catholics, I
believe, will be to take this document seriously, not just as an ecumenical statement to tell us what others
are thinking, but as a document in which we see ourselves reflected and to which we look to guide our
reflections: “a statement to be not only informative but formative as well."
"A monumental step has been taken with the Lima document. Let us welcome it with appropriate joy as a
child born into the world who has thereby begun the long process toward maturity. There is a commonly
expressed opinion that the documents of Vatican II represented the state of the question at the time they
were written, but began to be obsolete as soon as the Council ended. Perhaps that would not be a bad way
to view the Lima document as well, so that we can receive it not as an achievement but rather as a call into
the future."
Hersch Meyer. "I think I would want to speak not so much trying to represent the document ... as trying to
find my way as a member of a free church tradition into the document, meaningfully. That is precisely the
reason why I ... was pressed to use incarnational and Christological language. I found no other way to make
coherent both my participation and also the limits where I felt participation simply couldn't occur . . . ." "I
would go past that, though .... That is to say, we have in our traditions, I think, an orthodoxy which trusts
formulations. . . . Some of us are organized more around orthopraxis than around orthodoxy. We trust that
as well. ... In ecumenical dialogue neither of these, when we actually are able to change, is the center of our
life. . . . Neither is orthodoxy nor orthopraxis a change of any transformation in our communion. Rather
that happens in the moment when we experience ourselves as made one ... by the Spirit in ways that allow
us to question very specific previous forms. To think only in terms of what we say and how we shall there
achieve unity or what we do and how we shall there achieve unity is not enough. Christological analysis is
not enough. Really a Trinitarian mode of reflecting on our life in communion together strikes me as utterly
basic. ..." Edwards. "I don't think that any Anglican could for a moment believe that the seamless robe of
Christ has been restored with the Quakers not in it. The Friends' spirituality is one that has borne an
effective witness to us, and in some ways we probably feel more commonality with you [Friends] than with
many of the people to whom we're closer in matters of polity. So I could never rest content until our
conversations had proceeded much farther along the road." "But finally, it may be that this ability to reach
across differences of tradition can only be done in stages. So conceivably only those who are able to live
with the kind of point of view of the [Lima] statement so far could participate in this first stage of
discovering what we have in common. But then when we are able to clarify that with one another, maybe
then a new stage of conversation could reach out to those who are in your [Friends'] tradition and others, to
find out what all of us have in common -- with the certainty that the things that unite us are far more
important than the things that separate us."
Such False Teachings Contradict God's Word and Negate the Principles of the
Protestant Reformation
There were many other indications at Buenos Aires that WCC SPIRITUALITY IS ONLY A
PSEUDO-SPIRITUALITY. True, there were "Bible Studies" on the program but they were taught by Dr
Kritster Stendahl, a "liberal of the liberals." There was an "ECUMENICAL WORSHIP FOR HOPE" led by
Bishop Jorge Novak of the Roman Catholic Church and Bishop Federico Pagura of the Methodist Church.
Roman Catholic Cardinal Juan Carlos Aramburu personally welcomed the WCC Committee members,
calling them "Dear Brethren in Christ" and saying, "We share the same faith in Jesus Christ ...We feel we
are very united with you in faith in Jesus Christ our Lord. " Although Roman Catholicism continues to
preach a false gospel and thus is under God's curse, the WCC leaders welcome them with open arms and
the feeling is mutual. TRUE SPIRITUALITY upholds the truth! It abhors and separates from error. TRUE
SPIRITUALITY crucifies the flesh with its lusts and walks in newness of life with Christ. But the WCC
continually joins hands with error and caters to the flesh. As but one further example of WCC carnality,
note carefully the following announcement which appeared in the WCC DAILY NEWS AND EVENTS,
issue number 1: "A reliable source has informed us that LIQUOR IS CHEAP AND PLENTIFUL at the
local supermarkets. Examples: Vermouth 50c; Gin 1.90; Vodka 95c." IT IS A SPIRIT OF CARNALITY,
NOT SPIRITUALITY, WHICH IS PLAINLY VISIBLE IN ALL WCC MEETINGS.
Canada:
Anglican Church of Canada, Canadian Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Christian
Church (Disciples of
Christ), Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, Evangelical Lutheran Church of Latvia in Exile,
Presbyterian Church in
Canada, United Church of Canada.