Credit Where Credit Is Due, Part 2

NickImageRead Part 1.

After graduating from college, I had the providential fortune to arrive at seminary just as William Fusco took up the presidency. In addition to the burden of leadership, Fusco was caring for an invalid and dying wife. Through the deep trial of his (and her) faith, the character of Christ shone with uncommon clarity. Without ever abandoning the key principles of his fundamentalism, Fusco consistently displayed a gentle spirit of kindness and personal sacrifice that I have rarely seen matched and have never seen surpassed. He was a man who overflowed with love of the Lord and love for people.

During my first year at seminary, I also met two professors whose teaching has marked me for life. The first, Charles Hauser, taught me more about dispensationalism and Christian living than anyone else. His most important contribution lay in his example. He modeled stability in the middle of trials, and his steadiness was as instructive to me as his classroom content.

The second, Myron Houghton, was George’s twin brother. Myron’s grasp of systematic theology exceeded anything that I had ever seen or thought possible. It seemed that he conversed with nearly every theological perspective, from multiple varieties of evangelicals to Roman Catholics to Adventists. He was constantly learning and constantly thinking. He significantly influenced my soteriology, but his real impact was on my ecclesiology. He made the case for ecclesiastical separation, including what is sometimes called “secondary separation.” Incidentally, it was substantially the same case that appears in Ernest R. Pickering’s book, Biblical Separation, of which Myron was later to become the editor. The key points of my understanding today do not depart from his ideas in any significant way.

My second year at seminary brought two more professors whose influence was both instant and profound. To this day, I consider Robert Delnay to be the best-rounded model for the life of the mind I have ever known. As a historian, he told a coherent story that provided a framework for understanding the current state of Christianity. As an exegete, he made the text of the Greek New Testament come alive for his students. As a homiletician, he taught a theory of rhetoric that could reach the affections without stooping to manipulate the appetites. From the beginning it was clear that he held the convictions of a fundamentalist, but he had a wonderfully sardonic and irreverent way of deflating the pompous self-appointed gatekeepers of the faith. Beyond all of this, he introduced a kind of spiritual urgency and intimacy with God that one can only label (as A. W. Tozer did) mysticism.

My second year also brought Ralph Turk to teach on our campus. Turk had spent most of his ministry as a pastor, but his intellectual curiosity took him into some unusual places. Ours may have been the only fundamentalist seminary ever to offer a seminar course on the thought of Kierkegaard—much of it taught in Turk’s living room. I’m grateful to this day.

Other professors on that campus were also influential. Robert Myrant taught me to love historical theology in addition to church history. R. Bruce Compton not only taught me Greek and Hebrew, but also modeled valuable lessons in the meaning of friendship. Gary Gordon was the friend who first drew me to the lectern and who guided me through the faltering early stages of teaching.

As I reflect back upon those formative years, I can see where my experience of fundamentalism differed from the experience that I hear so many describe. In fact, it differed in several ways. Among the most important are the following.

First, the men who most influenced me were utterly honest. They hid nothing, either about fundamentalism or about themselves. They were willing to admit their own faults and weaknesses, just as they were willing to admit the faults and weaknesses of the fundamentalist movement. Since they created no illusions for me, they left me little room for disillusionment.

Second, these were people who valued the life of the mind and the broad pursuit of learning. They loved and pursued an increasingly deep grasp of the Scriptures, of the system of theology, and of the life of faith. They also displayed and fostered an inveterate curiosity about ideas with which they did not agree. They were willing to travel outside of their own intellectual neighborhoods in order to make sense of other points of view. They showed me that dispassionate understanding was fundamental to a strong and clear defense of the faith—the only dividing line between polemics and mere propaganda.

Third, these people were genuinely humble. They might be gripped by big ideas, but they never aspired to be big names. They were not climbers, politicians, gatekeepers, or power mongers. Somebody once pressured me to name my heroes. In a sense, that’s what I’m doing now. The problem is that my heroes are all people who are unknown to the people who want to know who my heroes are. My heroes were content to be who they were and to minister in the calling that God had given them.

Fourth, my mentors gave genuine evidence of the fruit of the Spirit and of a personal walk with God. Since the institutions that they served were smaller, I had the opportunity to observe them in a very personal way. Where I went to seminary, the faculty and staff were constantly subject to real hardships and afflictions. They proved themselves in the midst of adversity and displayed the character of Christ with all sincerity.

Two of their virtues stand out. One is that they were temperate men, not given to bombast or overstatement. The other is that they were gentle men. Even when standing firmly for the truth, they evidenced a commitment to the care of souls. The consequences of their words and deeds mattered to them, and they were deeply concerned to use power judiciously and rightly. They refused ever knowingly to manipulate people, let alone to coerce them.

Through the years I have met more of their kind: Donald Brong in Iowa, for example, or Douglas McLachlan in Minnesota. Because God graciously brought such men to me at the crucial decision points in my life, my experience of fundamentalism has been dramatically different than the stories that I hear other men tell.

To be sure, I’ve seen my share of power-hungry, manipulative, idiosyncratic, truth-twisting, unethical, and even pathological fundamentalists. Ever since that conversation with George Houghton, however, I’ve believed that they do not genuinely represent what fundamentalism is. Rather, they are like an infection within the body of fundamentalism.

Such men stand under the judgment of the idea of fundamentalism. If fundamentalism is a biblical idea (and I believe it is), then they also stand under the judgment of the Word of God. They are best dismissed with incredulity, held at a distance, and otherwise ignored. You might call that “separation.”

The genuine leaders of fundamentalists do not go to extremes. Instead, they go back to basics. They do not huff and puff. They do not romp and stomp. They are not given to full-auto verbal assaults. If they bare their teeth and draw their swords, it is only when the innocent and powerless need to be defended. Rather, they faithfully and quietly minister in the callings that God has given them.

Hold such in esteem.

Psalm II
John Milton (1608-1674)

Why do the Gentiles tumult, and the Nations
Muse a vain thing, the Kings of th’ earth upstand
With power, and Princes in their Congregations

Lay deep their plots together through each Land,
Against the Lord and his Messiah dear?
Let us break off, say they, by strength of hand

Their bonds, and cast from us, no more to wear,
Their twisted cords: he who in Heaven doth dwell
Shall laugh, the Lord shall scoff them, then severe

Speak to them in his wrath, and in his fell
And fierce ire trouble them; but I, saith hee,
Anointed have my King (though ye rebel)

On Sion my holi’ hill. A firm decree
I will declare; the Lord to me hath say’d,
Thou art my Son I have begotten thee

This day; ask of me, and the grant is made;
As thy possession I on thee bestow
Th’ Heathen, and as thy conquest to be sway’d

Earths utmost bounds: them shalt thou bring full low
With Iron Scepter bruis’d, and them disperse
Like to a potters vessel shiver’d so.

And now be wise at length, ye Kings averse,
Be taught ye Judges of the earth; with fear
Jehovah serve, and let your joy converse

With trembling; kiss the Son least he appear
In anger and ye perish in the way,
If once his wrath take fire like fuel sere.

Happy all those who have in him their stay.

Discussion

Alex, who said anything about wholesale endorsement of CE? There is obviously a reason why you aren’t a Fundy. I guess that would lump you in the CE group, to which McCune applauded. Pure gold.

1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.

Huh? What does your comment have to do with this post, Alex?

-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)

Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA

Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University

James:

I frequently surf SI for things that interest me, and quite infrequently post a comment on things I think I understand. But your responses on this thread cause me nothing but frustration because they come across, to me at least, as one of the biggest collections of convoluted nonsense I’ve ever seen. How a story, which “may or may not be true,” purporting to give “another side” to a previous post or account of a deceased fundamentalist leader and his ministry (Response # 43), ever be justified or commended is indeed troubling. Response # 47 is so esoteric and apocryphal that it defies untangling. I’ve been told that my intelligence is normal but I’m stumped on this one. I guess I’ll have to stay on the porch for a while and ponder the “gold” in the thought of “McCune applauding a CE group.” At this point it appears to be nothing but good old fashioned iron pyrite. If I ever understand these things, I may sally forth again on SI.

Rolland McCune

Rolland,

1. Saying the story “may or may not be true” had to do with the fact that I do not personally know anything about it.

2. It was certainly another side or perspective on the ministry of Clearwaters from what you personally experienced.

3. Response 47 was pointing out the irony of you, a secondary separationist, applauding a self identified nonfundamentalist.

As for your intelligence, I have no doubt that it is amazing. Anyone with the knowledge to put together the works you have is an incredible feat. I hope you didn’t get the impression I was calling that into question.

I hope that clears things up and we can all move along.

1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.

[James K] Alex, who said anything about wholesale endorsement of CE? There is obviously a reason why you aren’t a Fundy. I guess that would lump you in the CE group, to which McCune applauded. Pure gold.
I don’t know James, who did say anything about wholesale endorsement? You are responding as if I asserted someone did say something about it, I didn’t. Show me where I did, but you cannot. Pure gold.

Let’s see, if I am not a Fundy I have to be a CE as if no other theological identification exists. Now this would be called “Fool’s Gold”.
[Greg Long] Huh? What does your comment have to do with this post, Alex?
Huh? Huh? (Let me double the gratuitous fun!) It was a response to a post. The poster who made the post recognized it and responded to it. If you are still stuck on “huh?” let me know and I will give you the exact post.

But in the case you are dissatisfied with my responding to a comment (heaven forbid I do this and not just respond directly to the OP as if we may not respond to one another in a thread) here is the relevant section of the OP to which I was responding:
He significantly influenced my soteriology, but his real impact was on my ecclesiology. He made the case for ecclesiastical separation, including what is sometimes called “secondary separation.”
The issue? Separation. Now from here, if you remain confused or unappreciative of what I see as a connection between this portion of the OP and my comment well, it is just going to have to be that way.

[Alex Guggenheim] The issue? Separation. Now from here, if you remain confused or unappreciative of what I see as a connection between this portion of the OP and my comment well, it is just going to have to be that way.
I guess it will, indeed, have to be that way.

-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)

Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA

Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University

Alex, you aren’t a fundy but are evangelical and conservative. If you prefer to cast off the idea of conservative evangelical, maybe you would prefer evangelical conservative. I hope you weren’t terribly offended over it. Even if you were, I am content to just move along on this as well.

1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.

James,

Seeing that I hold to a wide range of views, I no longer employ these terms in describing my theological orientation. I attempted CE for a while but discovered it included many compromising considerations and the tolerance of awful theology. No offense was taken, by the way.

I realize that sites such as SI have a way of leveling the playing field. Sometimes that’s good, but not in this case. I have been a student of Dr. McCune for many years at DBTS where I received both my M.Div. and Th.M. while pastoring a very busy and demanding church. I usually arrived at DBTS in Allen Park, MI from Troy about 6:30 in the morning to get ready for my first class. I think in the ten or more years I attended there I can count on two hands the days I didn’t see Dr. McCune at 6:00 AM in his office studying, reading, or praying. I had no intention of pursuing those degrees at DBTS when I took my first class from Dr. McCune. After that class, however, I was hooked. Not only did I take every class that Dr. McCune ever taught at DBTS, I traveled several thousand miles to another seminary in order to take a class from him that he had not taught at DBTS.

In all my years at DBTS, I have never known another student, graduate, faculty member, staff member, or local pastor to ever address him in a public venue as “Rolland”. All of us without exception had and have such enormous respect for the man’s education, teaching, books, syllabi, character, integrity, work ethic, history, longevity, graciousness, and courage that we would never view or address him in such common terms in a public venue.

I realize that some individuals’ ignorance is only surpassed by their arrogance, but in this case if I had ever said something so careless so as to evoke a public and stern rebuke by such a man as Dr. Rolland McCune, I would simply take a quiet seat in the back of the room and consider deeply what I had said.

Pastor Mike Harding

I completely agree with what Mike said, and I’d also like to add that just because someone is complimented on this site doesn’t mean that we should necessarily feel compelled to balance that out with stories that reflect poorly.

I should hope that after I’m dead and gone, people will be able to say nice things about without having to recall all the times I messed something up or was wrong.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

James:

Thank you for the interpretive notes provided in # 50. However, in the common interests of total transparency and acknowledgment of risidual depravity, I must clarify my claim to normal intelligence in # 49. I was told I have a normal IQ later in life, after I was kicked out of the first grade for shaving. I relate this for the benefit of all while I’m still a living fundamentalist who is not perfect.

Rolland McCune

Mike and Jay, I can appreciate what you are saying. I do not believe for a second that Rolland wishes anyone to even slightly bow to him because he sees himself superior to anyone. Yet many do in fact elevate those with degrees. As a baptist, a fundamentalist, and more important a fellow believer, I choose to not follow your choice on this. I personally never thought that calling someone by their first name would be mistaken as some kind of slight. I know many godly men who intentionally do not want to be referred to as Dr,. even though they have earned the title as well. It is my personal position to refer to fellow believers by their first name. No believer is elevated over any other. Your preference is just that. So is mine.

Now I’m done.

1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.

We really hate to close threads, but I’m sort of wishing we’d closed this one after the first dozen posts or so.

Not one of our finer moments.

Nobody is against kindness and gentleness in their place and nobody is against taking firm stands that have to be taken. Nobody here is even against aggressively denouncing serious error.

And surely everyone here knows that discerning when it’s time for kind and gentle and when it’s time for firm stands (though these can sometimes occur simultaneously) is sometimes quite difficult.

The OP isn’t even about relationships with non-fundamentalists. It’s about character and good examples.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

[Aaron Blumer] We really hate to close threads, but I’m sort of wishing we’d closed this one after the first dozen posts or so.

Not one of our finer moments…The OP isn’t even about relationships with non-fundamentalists. It’s about character and good examples.
I’m still wondering how and why in the world this happened on a post that was originally dedicated to celebrating some less-well-known-than-they-should-be professors to whom honor is due. I would have preferred 10 posts by their former students giving them such honor rather than 60 going off in all directions discussing various aspects of all that is good and bad about fundamentalism.

It’s really quite discouraging. I feel bad for the men listed in the article — I kind of hope they don’t read this thread.

Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry