Cru compromises...again

DanSSwing

DanSSwing

Puritan Board Freshman
As former Campus Crusade for Christ staff, this saddens me. Cru has apparently gone full "Side B" on homosexuality and continues to compromise with the modern culture.

 
itsreed said:
Might you be able to summarize key points?
(Can’t find time to watch 97 minutes.)
Thx.
Click to expand...
(1) They've gone totally side-B if not B+ on homosexuality. They insist that homosexual orientation is not a part of the sin nature to be mortified, but beyond this they are so compromised on this that they would give much time for a student leader to come to an orthodox position on the issue, even while they as an organization still hold to an orthodox view. i.e. they believe homosexual behavior is a sin, but they behave as if it's an acceptable sin; they seem ashamed of the gospel in this respect.
(2) They continue to deceive donors, putting out one position to them while practicing a nauseatingly nuanced position on college campuses. Video contains a link to internal documents supporting this.
 
Side A: orientation plus practice is acceptable for a credible profession of faith.
Side B: orientation, but not practice, is acceptable for a credible profession of faith.

Simple differentiation, disguising that there is a wide variety of definitions on what orientation involves, what practice involves, and therefore where one draws the line b/w godliness and wickedness.

The PCA debate around TE Greg Johnson (Memorial Pres, St Louis) demonstrates the fullest working out of the confusion marking both “sides” as doctrines of demons.
 
DanSSwing said:
As former Campus Crusade for Christ staff, this saddens me. Cru has apparently gone full "Side B" on homosexuality and continues to compromise with the modern culture.

Click to expand...
It’s only sad in that it is not surprising in the least. “God loves you and has a wonderful man for your plan” is not the gospel, they are not a church (in fact often anti-church), and have been openly hostile to using the law in evangelism for decades, if not from the beginning.
 
Thanks for posting this. I was on staff with Athletes in Action (sports ministry of Cru) for 11 years working in Australia and New Zealand. AIA USA in particular pushed the race narrative a lot but were always clear on this issue. I left staff in 2016 for the core reason of the lack of ecclesiology.
I sat through many global strategy sessions on how Cru was seeing many students not continue in their faith after leaving university. The answers and strategies to "fix" this were not deeper connections with the local church. Yes there was a desire for deeper biblical understanding. But, sadly, often the answers were staying connected with cru longer.

My heart breaks that this is the direction of Cru in the USA. As where that ministry goes so does the global Cru, but a lot of countries will not accept this. Especially in Africa and eastern Europe. So perhaps there is hope there.
 
I worked a bit with Cru while I was at the Moody Bible Institute. There were faithful people who served, trying to keep their heads down with regard to the politics. In the end, I stopped working with Cru due to the seemingly pragmatic nature of the operation. It's the sort of pragmatism seen in a lot of Evangelical operations where theological distinctions are minimized for the sake of evangelism. It ends up having the opposite effect in the long run.

I say that to echo not being surprised by the compromise.
 
Last edited:
Eyedoc84 said:
It’s only sad in that it is not surprising in the least. “God loves you and has a wonderful man for your plan” is not the gospel, they are not a church (in fact often anti-church), and have been openly hostile to using the law in evangelism for decades, if not from the beginning.
Click to expand...
That's borderline, if not outright, bearing false witness. They were very clearly committed to Lordship salvation when I was involved with them at multiple levels and regions in the '90s. Don't look at what they are doing now to try to discredit everything they've EVER done.
 
J.L. Allen said:
I worked a bit with Cru while I was at the Moody Bible Institute. There were faithful people who served, trying to keep their heads down with regard to the politics. In the end, I stopped working with Cru due to the seemingly pragmatic nature of the operation. It's the sort of pragmatism seen in a lot of Evangelical operations where theological distinctions are minimized for the sake of evangelism. It ends up having the opposite effect in the long run.
Click to expand...
Exactly. That excessive ecumenicalism led to a theology which was more than milk but definitely not solid food either. Maybe oatmeal.
 
DanSSwing said:
That's borderline, if not outright, bearing false witness. They were very clearly committed to Lordship salvation when I was involved with them at multiple levels and regions in the '90s. Don't look at what they are doing now to try to discredit everything they've EVER done.
Click to expand...
What exactly was false witness? My tongue-in-cheek reinterpretation of “The Four Spiritual Laws”?
 
This is where the road of sloppy soft theology leads. I was not overly impressed with their theology as of late.
 
DanSSwing said:
What re-interpretation? It was a bald-faced misrepresentation.
Click to expand...
No, it was tongue-in-cheek, given the culture and atmosphere in which they operate. I stand by my statement regarding their shallow presentation of the gospel and hostility to the Law and the church. Witnessed it as a student leader and in interactions with leadership at the campus and regional levels 20 years ago. You obviously disagree with my assessment, but that doesn’t amount to bearing false witness.
 
Eyedoc84 said:
No, it was tongue-in-cheek, given the culture and atmosphere in which they operate. I stand by my statement regarding their shallow presentation of the gospel and hostility to the Law and the church. Witnessed it as a student leader and in interactions with leadership at the campus and regional levels 20 years ago. You obviously disagree with my assessment, but that doesn’t amount to bearing false witness.
Click to expand...
Anyone can read the Four Spiritual Laws right here: https://campusministry.org/docs/tools/FourSpiritualLaws.pdf

Page 9 is crystal clear that Christ must be on the throne and self must be yielding to Christ. 180 degrees opposite from your claim that suggests Jesus just supports "your plan" for your life. I have no further comment since the tract speaks very clearly for itself.
 
I'm guessing their Unity and Diversity lunch was not for discussing the problem of the One and the Many...

Well, I'm sure I share similar thoughts to everyone else here. In fact I did support a couple on staff with Cru until about 10 or so years ago, due to done issues with ecclesiology and putting cru over the local church.

While the church is guaranteed to always exist (and overcome!), the same is not true of para church orgs as such. For them to continue to be a going concern they have to appeal to the each successive crop of incoming freshman, each cohort being more liberal than the last, if reports are to be believed.
 
DanSSwing said:
Anyone can read the Four Spiritual Laws right here: https://campusministry.org/docs/tools/FourSpiritualLaws.pdf

Page 9 is crystal clear that Christ must be on the throne and self must be yielding to Christ. 180 degrees opposite from your claim that suggests Jesus just supports "your plan" for your life. I have no further comment since the tract speaks very clearly for itself.
Click to expand...
That is not what I meant. And I know what the booklet says.
 
@Eyedoc84 @DanSSwing since you both have significant experience working with Cru in the past, is it possible that you both have valid points? The 4 Spiritual Laws are good as far as they go, but not exactly all that comprehensive. I'm sure that plenty of antinomians would feel perfectly comfortable signing on to such a statement.

Just wondering if we need to make these insinuations... no doubt Cru was doing some good a couple decades ago and no doubt there were latent problems back then as well. Mileage may vary also depending on the particular chapters and personnel each of you interacted with? Olive branch, anybody? I'd offer to light up a peace pipe, but in light of other recent threads...
 
I was involved in Cru relatively recently, since I graduated in 2019. I second the idea that it varies a lot by campus. At my school (uiuc) intervarsity might as well have been a Black Lives Matter chapter, and they would tell people God made them gay and loves them as they are, etc. And Cru, on the other hand, was pretty solid and evangelical. I never heard a gay word from anyone. I know in Wisconsin Sam Allberry's book was and is recommended reading in Cru. Think of that what you will.
I have the same problems as most Reformed folks with parachurches that don't leave much room for the church, but it's clear to me that, by and large, Cru has a sound view of the gospel and a desire to spread it.
 
Charles Johnson said:
I was involved in Cru relatively recently, since I graduated in 2019. I second the idea that it varies a lot by campus. At my school (uiuc) intervarsity might as well have been a Black Lives Matter chapter, and they would tell people God made them gay and loves them as they are, etc. And Cru, on the other hand, was pretty solid and evangelical. I never heard a gay word from anyone. I know in Wisconsin Sam Allberry's book was and is recommended reading in Cru. Think of that what you will.
I have the same problems as most Reformed folks with parachurches that don't leave much room for the church, but it's clear to me that, by and large, Cru has a sound view of the gospel and a desire to spread it.
Click to expand...
It would not surprise me a bit if Cru varies by campus (though my personal experience on campuses in three different regions 20+ years ago happened to be similar). My only dispute was against the suggestion that the "Four Spiritual Laws" as written supports easy-believism. There are some valid criticisms of that tract, but this is not one of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
The Stealth Crusade
Replies
1
Views
2K
Leslie
L
M
  • Locked
Campus crusade and How forceful should we be with reformed faith
Replies
15
Views
8K
MichaelGao
M
P
  • Locked
Against hyper-contextualization
Replies
2
Views
2K
Pergamum
P
P
  • Locked
Case study: reacting against a tribal fight
Replies
0
Views
1K
Pergamum
P
P
  • Locked
Shopping mall churches - a defense against intimidation
Replies
9
Views
2K
Pergamum
P
Back
Top