ACCC's Statement on the Death of Billy Graham

On the other hand - it’s timely and on the mark.

Carpe diem

Observation: Since this site is largely a young-person’s site, few were alive in 1957 when:

During the 1950s, as Graham’s appeal grew, he moved toward the strategic decision to make his crusades’ organization teams more diverse ecclesiastically

[TylerR]

Do the men at the ACCC have no decency?

It seems to me that with all the renewed focus and praise of Graham it may be a good time to remind people that not all was well. Delaying that to a later time when the attention has passed may be to miss the opportunity all together. As you say, their position was well known (at least to people familiar with the ACCC).

Graham was not some “hidden in a bushel” guy. He was well known, though uncritically accepted by many.

As Jim pointed out, there are a lot of people who have no idea of the issues with Graham over the years. The recent tributes by people who should know better are evidence that now is a good time to remind people that there were serious compromises and it doesn’t take the ACCC position to draw that line.

When I was on staff at Campus Crusade for Christ (early 70’s for 1 year), our area director wanted RC converts to say in RC churches to “influence”

I agree with Tyler. That happens occasionally. There may be a time to remind everyone about the compromises. Oh, wait, that has been done for many decades. So some may not be aware. I’m not sure they will be helped by reminders at his death. I just listened to BG who was given two minutes to speak to millions on a major television station in France decades ago. The translation and the gospel were clear. So I’ll remember that today and rejoice.

Upon reading this thread and the other one that announced his death and from the top, became yet another thread of why Billy Graham was “wrong” or “apostate” or whatever, I had several miscellaneous thoughts…

1. This….the constant diatribe regarding extent of separation and the need to use every occasion to announce distance and why….was one of the primary reasons I left the so-called “fundamentalist movement”. I remain a theological fundamentalist, but want no part of the “movement” or its records, institutions and particularly, it’s attitude.
2. I have personally met hundreds…at LEAST hundreds…of people who traced their spiritual heritage back to a book, message or crusade from Billy Graham. With great emotion and personal detail, they describe the moment of their conversion. Conversely, I have never, not a single time, met a single confused evangelical, Christ-denier, ex-fundamentalist or simple non-believer who has said to me, “I’m where I am today because I went to a Billy Graham crusade or heard him say “xyz” and became so confused I wandered off to my new direction.”
3. I live in Billy Graham’s hometown. I have heard the Gospel shared via personal testimony by local media celebrities, politicians, business icons, common citizens and strangers more this one week than all the other years of my life combined. This week may have been his greatest “crusade” ever in my region. I heard our former mayor and governor weep live on the radio recounting his testimony and the impact Billy Graham had on him during his public life.
4. I personally have a hard time distinguishing much difference in the tone or tactics of Fred Phelps and his followers using funerals to promote their message and that of those who would use the occasion of Graham’s death to once more rant about the differences with him already well known to anyone who actually cares. It is graceless, unkind and unseemly.

5. I grew up completely enveloped in the fundamentalist culture and mindset that saw Billy Graham, as Bob Jones, Jr., who once said Graham was “doing more harm to the cause of Jesus Christ than any living man,” according to the archives of The Greenville News and Time magazine. As a little boy, I saw my dad with Bible in hand sitting in our living room hanging on every word he preached on TV only to see him refuse to watch him ever again after hearing a fundamentalist firebrand attack him. My dad was NOT a better man for not listening to Billy Graham — he was a better man, because he HAD listened to him and the attitude that drove him away from him harmed him spiritually.
6. I love the study of theology and philosophy and orthodoxy and orthopraxy. I’ve heard many of the arguments and I don’t disagree with some of the finer points. But those conversations are best held in different forums and at different times than across the internet during the week of a man’s death and before his body is in the ground.

7. If one must play with Billy Graham’s memories by using the ol’…. “I have great appreciation for ………., BUT….” routine, then it really needs to be done for every single person who has ever declared the Word of God from a pulpit. I look back on 30+ years of ministry and truly wished I had made some better choices and said things differently. I’m also fully aware that as I age, articulating my beliefs and positions will become increasingly difficult and that I have or will undoubtably say things that don’t always reflect what I truly believe. Add to that my own ego, desire to be liked and frequent need to think on my feet and I’m sure there will be many MORE times in my life when I will look back and wish I had said things more wisely and perhaps not rationalized the way that I did when making some decisions that I thought, in the moment, would have more noble outcomes.

8. I am deeply grieved, that I have seen more restraint on my social media outlets, from my atheist, homosexual and agnostic friends as the conversation has focused on Billy Graham than I have by many of my fundamentalist friends — even on this board. Sometimes waiting and sometimes saying nothing is the best option.

“The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones.”

This rule is sometimes reversed by the admirerers of those gone on, both fundamentalists and non-fundamentalists.

As the dad of one (soon to be two) young ladies who are (will be) attending college in a town without a good fundamental church, I’ve taken a look at a number of church statements of faith, and the claim that Graham left evangelicalism “bereft of any unyielding theological moorings” is absurd. Pretty much every church we looked at had a statement of faith they stand by, and hence to claim that evangelicalism has no moorings simply has no basis. Really, if you look at the trajectory of churches since Graham started his ministry, you’re going to see more firmly held theological moorings. The Southern Baptists have (mostly) repented of theological liberalism/modernism. The “death warmed over” Southern Presbyterians have largely been supplanted by the PCA, and new affirmations of Reformed theology are influential enough to get routine mockings in the Babylon Bee. Here in Minnesota, Lutherans are no longer the biggest group—it’s evangelicals.

All of this is good stuff. Although it’s not quite, theologically speaking, where I am, it’s a huge shift away from the theological liberalism that ruled the roost in the first half of the 20th century. Even those remaining in mainline churches are increasingly using books from evangelical publishing houses—because there are only so many ways one can say “I don’t believe that” before people say “hey, I’ve read this before, let’s go elsewhere for good books about God”. Catholic churches are now using the Alpha Course and teaching their members Scripture in an intensive manner for really the first time since the Dark Ages.

And with all that happening, the ACCC thinks their biggest purpose is to (rhetorically) throw spit-wads at a man who just died. Absurd. Get in the game, ACCC!

[AndyE]

<Tyler’s comment snipped>

It has been assumed by many here and elsewhere that it is inappropriate at this time to discuss or mention any negative aspects of a man’s legacy so soon after he has died. Is there a Biblical principle that teaches this? I’m honestly wondering about this.

It is an example, not a command, but witness how David mourned Saul and Abner. Neither was particularly Godly, as far as I can tell, but David praises them. Also, you’ve got several passages where it’s noted how important it is to get a good burial, and notice that when Saul’s mutilated body is hanging on the wall, men of Gibeah risk their lives to give Saul a decent burial. It is then a shocking curse when one’s body is left to the buzzards and such as well. And of course, remember Joseph of Arimathea?

Command? Not quite, but I think we ignore the implications of this narrative at our own risk. We might infer that when a man is beyond the possibility of repentance, we lay off for a while.

Amen to DLCreed’s post. Agree with others here that the ACCC’s statement is terrible and terribly timed, and although I do not agree with the FBFI on many things, their statement was terrific and worthy of contemplation.

4. I personally have a hard time distinguishing much difference in the tone or tactics of Fred Phelps and his followers using funerals to promote their message and that of those who would use the occasion of Graham’s death to once more rant about the differences with him already well known to anyone who actually cares. It is graceless, unkind and unseemly.

It seems to me, as a partial response to an earlier post about dealing with the timeliness of addressing Graham’s issues, that the principles in Matthew 5:43-48 ought to apply:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Christ’s command is to love our enemies. Graham isn’t an enemy, no matter how problematic some of his statements may be, and it is not loving to attack a man over theological issues literally two (!!) days after his passing. If I were Boz Tchividjian, Franklin Graham, or someone else in his family and I read this statement by the ACCC, I’d be livid. At least have the decency to let Graham’s body be interred before releasing statements trumpeting his flaws in a press release / blog post, for goodness sake.

Here’s another passage that might apply as well, from Mark 12:30-31:

And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Maybe the wisdom of Solomon is the main guiding principle here (from Ecclesiastes 3:1-8):

For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted; a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; a time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace.

“Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints” - If the Lord feels that way about BG’s homecoming, I will as well.