I caught a bit of Close Up last night, with Brian Tamaki (Pastor? Bishop? King?) of Destiny's Church in a bit of a debate with Mark Vrankovich from Cult Watch.
They both had a few good points. Brian was likely correct in that he had turned many people's lives around, put them on a self-respecting track, maybe a track to respecting a lot more than themselves.
The problem is, he's not very humble about it. In fact, he seems to be accepting praise, glory - and now oaths of allegiance. He doesn't seem to see a problem with that, but it is, as Vrankovich points out. The Christian faiths, and every church I know of, actually, are supposed to subordinate their ministers to their God. Focusing the adulation on a specific man and maybe his inheritors is, well... kingmaking.
In this respect, Destiny seems to fail the test of a church.
But is it a cult? It must be said, oaths of allegiance are not uncommon in our society. A quick google turns up a Parliamentary Oath, Oath of Allegiance, the Judicial Oath, the Executive Councillor’s Oath, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary’s Oath, the armed forces oath, the citizenship oath, the local government member’s declaration, the police oath, and the special constable’s oath, all in our legislation.
And what are employment contracts if they are not legally enforceable oaths of allegiance? Employees hand over a lot of their personal values and integrity and promise to serve their company or corporation's interest to the best of their ability. We consider is "professional" to subjugate our person in this way, merging into a body corporate to one singular end.
For business that singular end is profit, and as a society we accept that goal, and expect business to direct their private armies properly within whatever legal restraints are set on them.
The difference with the Destiny Body Corporate, is that we have no idea how King Tamaki might direct his oath-sworn army in relation to society and the law. And "god only knows" what benefit Church members get for their money. He may just be a con man, But given his trend of self-aggrandisement, and the glib and scornful references he makes to democratic society in his sermons, it is sensible to be watchful at the least.
They both had a few good points. Brian was likely correct in that he had turned many people's lives around, put them on a self-respecting track, maybe a track to respecting a lot more than themselves.
The problem is, he's not very humble about it. In fact, he seems to be accepting praise, glory - and now oaths of allegiance. He doesn't seem to see a problem with that, but it is, as Vrankovich points out. The Christian faiths, and every church I know of, actually, are supposed to subordinate their ministers to their God. Focusing the adulation on a specific man and maybe his inheritors is, well... kingmaking.
In this respect, Destiny seems to fail the test of a church.
But is it a cult? It must be said, oaths of allegiance are not uncommon in our society. A quick google turns up a Parliamentary Oath, Oath of Allegiance, the Judicial Oath, the Executive Councillor’s Oath, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary’s Oath, the armed forces oath, the citizenship oath, the local government member’s declaration, the police oath, and the special constable’s oath, all in our legislation.
And what are employment contracts if they are not legally enforceable oaths of allegiance? Employees hand over a lot of their personal values and integrity and promise to serve their company or corporation's interest to the best of their ability. We consider is "professional" to subjugate our person in this way, merging into a body corporate to one singular end.
For business that singular end is profit, and as a society we accept that goal, and expect business to direct their private armies properly within whatever legal restraints are set on them.
The difference with the Destiny Body Corporate, is that we have no idea how King Tamaki might direct his oath-sworn army in relation to society and the law. And "god only knows" what benefit Church members get for their money. He may just be a con man, But given his trend of self-aggrandisement, and the glib and scornful references he makes to democratic society in his sermons, it is sensible to be watchful at the least.
Imagine a group of Christians anywhere in the world that would get behind their Pastor without grumbling, complaining and with one heart and mind to do a task important to the church as a whole or defending the honour of Christ.
ReplyDeleteAny Pastor would relish a group like this but can't have them because most are 'too busy on Wednesdays' 'Sorry my business calls me' 'You expectme to do what?' ' Isn't there someone else that can do it?'.
While there might be some concerns about a group of people that have a corporate unity only seemingly found in the early NT church tell me what Pastor in this country coul rally his entire congregation to a spiritual cause wihtin a month let alone a day.
That is what commitment to Christ migt involve, total unselfish loyalty to the Church, it's cause, and it's own vision.
Looking at Destiny specifically who gets a lot of flak for trying to be as unlike the failed churches of today as possible, maybe we should ask the question as to why our own Pastors couldn't get themselves (let alone their congregations) to a place to stand up against homosexual law reform that would start the teaching in our schools that homosexuality is now ok. As 95% of Christians send their kids to state school its an outrage. Destiny has a school of it's own and I appluade them for it.
Just remember the early church we all cam from was critised in exactly the same manner foir exactly the same things.