Moving Together Beyond the Fringes:

EMNR’s Paradigm for Viability
in an Age of Religious Pluralism
By John W. Morehead

Abstract
Introduction
A Brief History of EMNR
Noteworthy Accomplishments
The Search for Identity
Counter-Cult Ministry: An Ailing Community
Raising Our Standards -- A New Paradigm
Additional Thoughts: Methodological Reconsiderations
Member Engagement
Conclusion

 

Abstract

Since it’s inception in 1982, EMNR [Evangelical Ministries to New Religions] has struggled with conceptions of self-identity and purpose. As a result, it has undergone a number of changes of foci that have resulted in a variety of differing activities over the years. Over the last twenty years EMNR has achieved several noteworthy accomplishments. Along the way it has also experienced a continuing search for identity. This is in part related to the experiences of the ministries EMNR serves. As a membership organization, the struggles of EMNR’s constituency are reflected in EMNR itself. A look at the evangelical “counter-cult” community reveals not only areas of promise, but many areas of concern as well. EMNR’s self-identity and future direction must be forged in light the contemporary landscape of religious pluralism and the state of affairs in the “counter-cult community.” By adjusting its ministry paradigm in response to contemporary challenges EMNR shows great potential for continued ministry service and organizational viability. In addition, EMNR members, and non-members in the larger “counter-cult” community, may also wish to reflect on issues of ministry methodology that have been used in the past with an eye toward possible change. At the beginning of the twenty-first century EMNR members are invited to greater levels of participation within EMNR in key areas of critical engagement.

Introduction

            It has been my privilege to be a part of the evangelical “counter-cult” community for a number of years now. Over the last couple of years I have also enjoyed the privilege and responsibility of serving the membership of Evangelical Ministries to New Religions (EMNR) as a member of the board, and for the last year serving as president. In my time within this community of ministry, and as a member of EMNR, I have made a number of observations and engaged in a lot of reflection with an eye toward improvement. Much of that reflection has been critical, not only of my own individual ministry, but also of the “counter-cult” community as a whole. EMNR does not operate in a vacuum, and as a membership organization, the successes and struggles of this organization will by necessity reflect the success and struggles of that segment of evangelicalism that it represents. In response to these challenges faced by this constituency EMNR has tried various models for ministry over the years. These different models have come about as board members have tried to forge an identity and purposes for the organization. In my opinion, over the last few years EMNR has suffered something of an identity crisis and faced very real questions of ministry viability. This has resulted in a lot of fruitful discussion on the part of the board.

            From time to time organizations, especially those dealing with the ever-changing landscape of human religious experience, need to “look in the mirror” to see where they have been as an organization, where they are, and where they hope to go. Such self-examination and critical reflection is a sign of the honesty, integrity, and desires for the health of the organization. Ministries that are thoughtful in their self-analysis, and which make the necessary adjustments that must come as situations change and develop over time, are organizations that show an interest in ensuring their viability as they plan for the future.

            I believe healthy organizations are also those that keep in contact with those that they serve. Members of EMNR are our constituency. As members you need to know how the organization is doing, where it is going, and how it intends to accomplish its goals. In essence, you need a “state of the association” address. It is my hope that the following presentation will provide you with helpful background information, a better understanding of our history, a look at the challenges that lay ahead, an idea of EMNR’s current model for ministry, and a vision for what we can accomplish together.

           

A Brief History of EMNR [1]

           

Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization

In June 1980 the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization sponsored the “Consultation on World Evangelization” in Pattaya, Thailand. Dr. Gordon Lewis was a participant in this consultation. The purpose for this consultation was to develop strategies for reaching various unreached people groups. One of those groups was called “Mystics and Cultists,” now referred to as new religious movements. The consultation formally recognized new religious movements as unreached people groups comprising frontier missions yet to be encompassed by the Great Commission of Christ. [2]

Evangelical Ministry to Cultists

            Following this conference several conferences on “cults” were held by various evangelical organizations in the United States, including one in San Diego in 1981, and Santa Barbara in 1982. Following Dr. Lewis’ involvement with Lausanne, he along with other participants at the Santa Barbara conference, voted to organize a ministry known as Evangelical Ministry to Cultists (EMTC). The organization held on to this name until 1984. Charter board members of this organization included Dr. Lewis, the late Walter Martin, James Bjornstad, and Ronald Enroth. EMTC was originally promoted as an organization affiliated with Lausanne, however, Lausanne later asked EMTC to cease referring to itself in this capacity in promotional materials. EMTC was created as an organization serving on behalf of a consortium of ministries dealing with “cults” and new religions. In this capacity EMTC’s purposes included fostering cooperation between ministries, facilitating research on new religions, and some type of credentialing for its membership. We should note an important development in the ministry at this point. Having coming out of Lausanne with its original emphasis upon mission and evangelism of new religions, EMTC saw its primary role as one of administration and membership assistance with virtually no emphasis upon mission to new religions that Lausanne held so dear. As we will see, this represents the first step in EMNR’s struggles with a sense of identity and purposes.

Evangelical Ministries to New Religions

            In 1984 the founders of EMTC voted to change the name of the organization to Evangelical Ministries to New Religions (EMNR), a name it has kept to the present time. There appear to be several reasons for this name change. First, during this time the evangelical world was beginning to address the New Age movement. The founders of EMTC wanted the organization to address not only what were considered “cults” of Christianity, but the New Age as well. This desire for expanded focus, coupled with the pejorative connotations of the term “cult,” proved to be influential in the organizational name change. EMNR also took additional steps as an organization and was incorporated in the state of Colorado.

            EMNR’s primary emphasis during this point of its history seems to have been an apologetics emphasis in dealing first with the New Age movement, and secondarily with a variety of “cults” or new religions, with special emphasis upon the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. This focus upon the “Big Three” in “counter-cult” circles continues to this day, although EMNR, as well as individual “counter-cult” ministries, have addressed a wider variety of groups as well.

            One of EMNR’s successes during this period was the development of cooperative efforts between various “counter-cult” organizations. As an area of ministry that seems to attract Lone Ranger personalities seemingly more concerned about ministry “turf” building rather than Kingdom building, this should be seen as a significant accomplishment. It is an accomplishment that the organization will need to repeat in even greater measure through cooperation with like-minded ministries and individuals in the near future.

Noteworthy Accomplishments

            As EMNR looks back on twenty years of ministry it can point to several noteworthy accomplishments.

• Directory of Cult Research Organizations (DCRO). Long-time board member Eric Pement produced the first DCRO in 1985 on a limited basis, and then issued the first published edition in 1986. The last edition was published in 1996 by Mr. Pement in cooperation with Keith Tolbert. As you may know, the DCRO was a listing of hundreds of individuals and organizations internationally that addressed “cult” studies and new religions. The 1996 edition was broken down by differing approaches to new religions, including evangelical, Roman Catholic, behavioral, and sociological. This edition also incorporated a number of appendices, including one that listed Christian study centers on Islam. The DCRO was a helpful resource tool for referrals as well as networking and cooperation among various individuals and agencies. Although EMNR did not publish the DCRO, the hard work of one of EMNR’s board members on this project helped produce a valuable resource that is sorely missed.

• The Denver Statement on the New Age Movement. EMNR was successful in bringing together a number of evangelicals to produce a statement on the New Age that was later reviewed by a larger body of Christian researchers and eventually released to the evangelical community, the general public, and the media. The creation of the Denver Statement serves as an example of EMNR’s ability to facilitate various projects on behalf of its membership as well as the evangelical world.

• Annual Conferences. EMNR has sponsored annual conferences addressing “cults,” as well as new and world religions. The creation of these conferences began in 1985, and while some conferences have been better attended than others, significant conferences include those in Rockford, IL (1989), Philadelphia, PA (1994), Atlanta, GA (1995), St. Louis, MO (1996), Birmingham, AL (1997), and Chicago, IL (1998). EMNR’s board is putting renewed emphasis upon annual conferences as a service to members and to make a contribution to evangelical responses to new religions. After January 2003 we hope to add the upcoming conference at Biola University as yet another example of a significant conference.

• Tapes and Books. EMNR’s annual conferences have included plenary sessions and workshops by a number of individuals over the years. These sessions are taped and made available during conferences and throughout the year. EMNR also produced the book Contend for the Faith, edited by Eric Pement, consisting of a collection of essays by various contributors from the Rockford Conference on Discernment. Recently, EMNR has discussed the possibility of soliciting workshop papers from conference presenters for possible collection and distribution as a conference proceedings volume. This growing collection of resources and materials are of benefit not only to members, but to the wider evangelical world as well.

• Website <www.emnr.org>. Through the efforts of Watchman Fellowship in Texas and Alabama, and EMNR’s executive director, Bob Waldrep, EMNR has a presence on the Internet. Through the website individuals can download membership applications, download a copy of the Manual of Ethical and Doctrinal Standards, order tapes and other resources, pursue links to member and important non-member organizations, learn about upcoming conferences, read the organization’s e-mail newsletter, and soon, download a number of important general, missiological and academic monographs addressing various aspects of new and world religions. Over the last year the website was redesigned by EMNR’s new “webservant,” Kevin Rische, of The Walter Martin Religious InfoNet.

• Manual of Ethical and Doctrinal Standards (MEDS). One of the most significant accomplishments of EMNR was the production of the MEDS. This booklet was published in 1997 as a means of providing accountability in the area of ethical and doctrinal issues in the “counter-cult” community. An article in Christianity Today in 1991 insightfully asked “Who watches the cult watchers?” [3] The MEDS helps provide a partial answer to that question, at least for members, who willingly submit themselves to the manual thereby providing much-needed accountability in this controversial ministry. An important part of the MEDS involves guidelines for conflict resolution among individual members and member ministries.

The Search for Identity

            As mentioned previously, over the course of EMNR’s existence it has struggled with its sense of identity. In a document entitled “What Evangelical Ministries to New Religions Could Become,” the organization listed the following eight conceptions of activities: [4]

1. A missionary agency
2. A sponsoring agency
3. An accrediting agency
4. A discernment board
5. A referral agency
6. A computerized reference center and network
7. A future planning board
8. A preventive agency

Despite listing eight possibilities for organizational activities, the history of EMNR indicates that it has primarily emphasized three different aspects of ministry. First, from 1980-1981, due to the birth and influence of Lausanne, EMNR saw itself as some type of mission organization. Second, for a brief period in 1987, EMNR saw itself as a political action group interested in influencing political thought and legislation related to new religions in American life. Third, from 1982 to the present, EMNR has seen itself as an association or membership services organization. In this capacity EMNR produced a “Statement of Purposes” listed as follows:

People and organizations associated with EMNR purpose to:

1.              Clarify essential principles of doctrine, ethics, and ministry by which movements may be distinguished as sub-Christian, cultic, or non-Christian.

2.     Evaluate the doctrine, ethics, and ministerial practice of controversial groups.

3.     Recognize the qualified and credentialed ministries reaching the unreached in the new  religions and cults.

4.     Maintain worthy theological, ethical, and missiological standards among members.

5.     Encourage mutual understanding and cooperation among evangelical Christian agencies.

6.     Assist in avoiding unnecessary duplication of effort among these evangelical mission agencies.

7.     Stimulate research and writing on neglected aspects of strategies, methods, and materials important to reaching these unreached people groups.

8.    Provide centralized storage of reliable and relevant information for pre-evangelism, evangelism, and rehabilitation of people from non-evangelical worldviews and ways of life.

9.     Recommend to the public, churches, and schools those agencies and materials which meet these standards and may help as a protective to involvement with a non-Christian or inauthentically Christian religious movement.

The purposes initially outlined by EMNR are worthwhile activities. But the arrival of a consensus on the purposes of EMNR did not end its struggle for identity. This was to continue for many years. As mentioned previously, on more than one occasion the board has met to discuss this crucial question within the context of the organization’s continued viability for the future. EMNR’s search for a sense of identity is crucial, not only for the future success of the ministry itself, but also for the role it serves on behalf of its membership, and the influence it can have in the wider field of “counter-cult” ministry.

“Counter-Cult” Ministry: An Ailing Community

As we noted above, EMNR has operated as a ministry providing services to its members. If EMNR is to maintain this facet of ministry it can only perform this function if it adequately understands the challenges facing its members. It is to a brief assessment of the broader “counter-cult” community that we now turn.

The twenty-first century promises to be both exciting and challenging for evangelicals in religious studies. While new religious movements continue to grow dramatically around the word, few evangelicals are aware of this phenomenon. As a result of this situation the phenomenon of religious pluralism represents one of the greatest challenges and opportunities for evangelicals to address. Many evangelical ministries have risen to meet this challenge. For many years the “counter-cult” community has done a great deal to help the evangelical world understand the differences between heretical sects of Christianity, or “cults,” and how they compare to biblical orthodoxy. “Counter-cult” ministry has also had its evangelistic successes. But unfortunately, many in ministry to what was once called the religious fringe often hover on the fringes of evangelical ministry priorities, and face significant criticisms both inside and outside evangelicalism. While some may dismiss this assessment of the current state of affairs, I believe a little careful reflection will demonstrate that this accurately represents the facts of the matter. On more than one occasion colleagues in ministry have approached me and lamented that churches simply aren’t interested in having them come and give presentations on “cults” and new religions. Usually the reason why more churches aren’t interested is blamed on the church itself, which is seen as putting more emphasis upon feeling and experience, and not enough emphasis upon doctrine and discernment. There is surely an element of truth in this explanation. However, I do not believe that the blame for the church’s general lack of interest in the “counter-cult” community, or our present marginalization within evangelicalism, can be solely laid at the doorstep of the church. This marginalization has arisen from a variety of factors, but in this writer’s opinion, it may be unknowingly self-imposed as the direct result of the broader “counter-cult” community’s failures in ministry.

“Counter-cult” ministry is controversial, and not simply because of the nature of discernment, or the activities of a few notorious individuals. While EMNR’s membership would not exemplify such problems, we should take note of the area of ministry we operate in and how problematic activities color perceptions of all involved in the “counter-cult” community. We are all familiar with various criticisms raised by friend and foe alike: poor scholarship, reliance upon secondary or tertiary research sources rather than upon primary source materials, the resulting lack of accuracy and balance in representation of new religions, the often inflated resumes of those in ministry to new religions, concerns about the validity of our educational background and degrees related to religious studies as applied to new religions, the problem of plagiarism, faulty reasoning, and distortion of data (whether knowingly or unknowingly) to fit a particular agenda.

These issues will be the focus of a forthcoming book in 2003. Dr. Douglas Cowan, Assistant Professor of Sociology and Religious Studies at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, is completing the manuscript for the book with a title that should give us reason for pause and concern: Bearing False Witness?: An Introduction to the Christian Countercult. Again, while I am not saying that EMNR members have engaged in activities labeled as bearing false witness, we will be painted with the same brush as those who do. Some health self-reflection may be in order. But unfortunately, often times those in “counter-cult” ministry are quick to raise criticism against various new religions, and at times, against other personalities in the “counter-cult” community, they are slow to accept criticisms themselves. It is my hope that evangelicals will actually read Cowan’s book and resist the temptation to quickly dismiss its criticisms without interacting with the ideas and considering where change may need to be made. The goal here is not to earn praise or good press from a critic of the “counter-cult” community, but rather, to do the right things in the right way because we want to do the best we can. But regardless of how the book is received, the elements of criticism listed above demonstrate areas of concern within the evangelical “counter-cult” enterprise.

As evangelicals involved in ministry to new religions look to the future we must do so with an awareness of the challenges before us. The ostrich with its head in the sand may have a sense of comfort and ease that things are going well, but it does so at the expense of honesty and truth, two cherished values within evangelicalism. Our present lack of resources for ministry, financial and otherwise, may in fact be a direct result of the marginalization we are experiencing through a credibility gap, as well as possible methodological shortcomings. Evangelicals interested in moving “counter-cult” ministry out of the evangelical ghetto may wish to reflect carefully and critically upon the present state of affairs and consider changes that can be made not only as individuals, but also by working together in membership as well.

Raising Our Standards – A New Paradigm

            In response to the contemporary situation facing the “counter-cult” community, EMNR has entertained some changes in ministry over the last year. Having struggled with a sense of identity in the past, EMNR seems to have a renewed sense of what it is, and what it can be. EMNR’s identity is one of a professional membership association for evangelicals in ministry to new religions. This would mean that EMNR is an organization similar to what the Evangelical Theological Society is for evangelical theologians, and the Evangelical Missiological Society is for missiologists.

            We noted earlier that if EMNR was to function as a membership association, its strengths or weaknesses will be a direct reflection of the experiences of the constituency it serves. Having noted the challenges facing the evangelical “counter-cult” community, EMNR has implemented a series of modifications over the last year that I would like to share with you now.

EMNRs Paradigm

Raising the Standard

            In response to the challenges facing the membership, and potential membership, of EMNR, this year’s conference theme reflects a new commitment and emphasis by the organization. This year we meet with the theme title “Refining Evangelical Responses to New and World Religions.” Our plenary sessions address various aspects of this refinement process of raising the standard for ministry, including a look at the need to awaken the evangelical world to the challenge of religious pluralism, refining scholarly approaches to new religions, developing mission strategies to their adherents, and improving practical ministry “in the trenches.” Each of these plenary sessions reflect various components within EMNR’s new paradigm that will help strengthen member ministries.

Conference Changes

            At our annual conferences we have added two new tracks for workshops. In addition to the more general track that we have had for a number of years we have added academic and missions tracks. The reasoning for the addition of the academic track was so that we could benefit from various academics who have studied new religions. It is hoped that we will grow in our understanding of new and world religions by interacting with good scholarship, and that the “trickle down” effect will result in improved responses to new religions on a practical level. The addition of the missions track represents EMNR’s rediscovery of its roots in Lausanne, and the important place that missions and evangelism plays in the evangelical interaction with adherents of new religions. Over the last couple of years we have been privileged to have established a working relationship with the Evangelical Missiological Society. The sharing of research and methodologies within a context of cross-fertilization of ideas regarding missions will make an important contribution to EMNR’s future success as an organization.

Some in EMNR’s membership may wonder whether the incorporation of an academic element within EMNR’s conferences signals a move away from practical ministry. Nothing could be further from the truth. The multitude of practical “mom and pop” ministries will continue to be the backbone of EMNR’s constituency. The board and the organization are not abandoning you. The addition of certain elements have been included as a means of providing greater service to members. I envision EMNR with a “big tent”constituency. In addition to our core of “mom and pop” ministries to new religions, we can also welcome evangelical academics, missionaries and missiologists, sociologists, pastors, laypeople, and others, all working together to share their strengths and gifts to improve our responses to new religions. The broadening of our model and potential constituency means real benefits for membership working in partnership.

            To partly address the question of credibility in the “counter-cult” community we are pursuing a seminary-based conference model. In the past EMNR has held conferences in a variety of locations, including churches and seminaries. For the next few years we will hold our conferences at various evangelical seminaries throughout the U.S. January 23-25, 2003 we will be meeting on the campus of Biola University in La Mirada, CA. In 2004 we will be meeting on the campus of Midwest Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, MO. Some of the benefits of meeting at seminaries will be the opportunity to influence seminary students to consider the study of new and world religions, to involve seminary faculty in the presentation of workshops, and to learn from this segment of the evangelical academy.

Revised Purpose Statement

            We noted earlier the eight purposes formulated by EMNR. Over the last year the board of EMNR has had the opportunity to re-examine this purpose statement. After deliberation and review the board of EMNR revised and streamlined EMNR’s purposes as follows:

1. Missions - Facilitate mission to new religious movements through networking and the stimulation and formulation of mission strategy to new religions as frontier mission to unreached people groups.
2. Accountability - Maintain worthy theological, ethical and missiological standards among members.
3. Scholarship - Stimulate the scholarly and popular production of research and writing on neglected aspects of strategies, methods and materials important to reaching these unreached people groups.
4. Recognition - Recognize the qualified and credentialed ministries reaching the unreached in the new religions and cults.
5. Networking - Encourage mutual understanding and cooperation among evangelical Christian agencies and individuals, as well as secular organizations where appropriate.
6. Referrals - Recommend to the public, churches and schools those agencies and materials which meet quality standards and may help as a protective to involvement with a non-Christian or pseudo-Christian religious movement.

Of particular note is purpose number one. In reviewing EMNR’s origins related to Lausanne and concerns for the evangelization of unreached peoples in new religions, it seemed a glaring omission that EMNR did not have missions listed as one of its purposes. While EMNR will not serve as a missions agency, or missionary sending agency, nevertheless EMNR has a significant contribution to make in the stimulation and formulation of mission strategy related to new religious movements.

In addition to inclusion of a missions purpose, this revised purpose statement demonstrates EMNR’s desire to focus upon the main activities the organization can and should be involved in for the immediate future. These purposes, accomplished by the organization in concert with its membership, will go a long way in improving the effectiveness of those associated with this ministry.

Listening to Our Critics

            EMNR’s new paradigm for ministry also includes another facet which may not be very popular: Listening to the concerns of our critics. We have invited two guests as workshop presenters that are not usually regular participants in the evangelical “counter-cult” community: Dr. Douglas Cowan and Dr. J. Gordon Melton. I have already mentioned Dr. Cowan’s forthcoming book that critiques “counter-cult” ministry. His Ph.D. dissertation on this subject was not well received by those few evangelicals who bothered to read it. We will see how his book is received. Of course Dr. Melton is no stranger to those of us in ministry to new religions. Among some of our colleagues he has a reputation that has him derogatorily labeled as a “cult apologist.”

            Perhaps you have seen the critical comments in AR-Talk or AR-Forum about the involvement of “counter-cult” critics to this conference. Why have we done it? Can we really learn anything from those who have so readily shared criticisms of the ministry near and dear to our hearts and made positive, perhaps even supportive comments about new religions?

            They have been invited because they have some criticisms that we need to hear. No one has a corner on truth, including evangelicals in the discernment community. It just may be that after giving Melton and Cowan a hearing and engaging in a moment of self-reflection and self-criticism that we may find that we have made some mistakes in what we do and how we do it. In the interests of truth and integrity we should be willing to at least give them a hearing and to consider the concerns that they bring. I would submit that to refuse to listen, to dismiss them with the label “cult apologists” is to engage in the closed-mindedness that many evangelicals decry in many “cults” or new religions. To dismiss them with derogatory labels is inappropriate for open-minded evangelicals. By listening to their criticisms, and making changes in our ministries in light of any valid criticisms they may bring will only serve to make us more credible and more effective. You represent an intelligent and discerning membership. Can we not come together, listen respectfully and attentively, and consider the possible merits of their presentations?

Additional Thoughts – Methodological Reconsiderations

Before moving to an invitation to member involvement in the activities and purposes of EMNR, please allow me a few moments to address another area where we might reassess in the immediate future.

Earlier I noted the marginalization of the “counter-cult” as it continues to hover on the fringes of evangelicalism. Another facet of this marginalization may revolve around our primary model for responding to new religions. Evangelical responses to new religions have largely been framed by the perspective and needs of the evangelical “counter-cult” community as it attempts to clearly mark the doctrinal boundaries between evangelical Protestantism and various new religions. This “boundary maintenance” is characterized primarily as an apologetic paradigm. This model emphasizes a contrast between biblical orthodoxy and heresy, moves to a refutation of the doctrines of new religions, and often incorporates an appeal to adherents of new religions to consider not only the unbiblical nature of their beliefs, but also the irrationality of their doctrine or worldview as well. As I argued in my presentation last year, “Tired of Treading Water: The Necessity of Rediscovering and Reapplying a Missiological Paradigm for ‘Counter-Cult’ Ministry,” our re-assessment of the doctrinal refutation paradigm may result in a transition in our self-understanding from “counter-cult” apologists to frontier missionary-apologists to unreached peoples. [5] While “counter-cult” ministry has certainly seen converts using the doctrinal refutation model, a change of identity and our model of ministry may result in greater fruitfulness. A re-examination of the apologetics paradigm with an eye toward missions will not mean the abandonment of apologetic responses to new religions. This will remain a crucial aspect of ministry. A missions response to new religions works hand in hand with apologetics hopefully providing a more holistic and balanced model.

A re-evaluation should begin with consideration of the needs of the receptor in new religious movements. While it is beyond the purposes of this presentation to explore the details of what this new ministry methodology might look like, a revised methodology developed in the light of receptor needs might include a new understanding of the evangelistic task beyond present conceptions which view adherents of new religions as theological combatants, consideration of the use of non-pejorative terminology with reference to heretical sects of Christianity, increased familiarity with academic treatments of new religions, the exploration of neutral criteria for evaluating alternative worldviews in inter-religious contexts, and the incorporation of additional insights gleaned from missiology, anthropology, and communication theory.

Member Engagement

            We have seen above that EMNR has made changes in its model for ministry. These changes have been made in response to contemporary challenges facing the “counter-cult” community and its membership. EMNR has a history of providing quality resources and services to this membership. In the future, we want to provide an even higher quality of service to our members. But a membership organization is only as strong as the members who get involved in the organization. In response to EMNR’s efforts at being a more focused, viable organization for the future, we need our membership to get involved in key areas of engagement. I’d like to invite your active participation and involvement in these areas.

1.          Get excited! We hope that you are passionate and excited about your ministry, and the ministry of EMNR. As Hanz and Franz used to say on Saturday Night Live I want to “pump you up” about EMNR and the part you can play in active ministry with this organization.

2.          Renew your membership. We need the faithful renewal of memberships on an annual basis. If you haven’t renewed your membership for 2002 we would be happy to help you take care of that before you leave the conference.

3.          Recruit new members.  Perhaps you know of friends and colleagues who are ministering in the area of new religions but they are not members of EMNR. A store chain we used to have in California, Alpha Beta, used to close each commercial with the line “tell a friend.” If you find value in the sense of community, purposes, activities, and services of EMNR please consider telling your colleagues about this ministry and directly solicit their membership.

4.          Consider membership in professional associations. In addition to renewing your membership in EMNR, and soliciting new members, consider additional memberships in various professional associations, such as the Society for the Study of Alternative Religions (SSAR) within the Evangelical Theological Society, or the Evangelical Missiological Society. Broadening our professional associations can be an avenue for additional personal growth in ministry, and can provide additional benefits through networking.

5.          Present a paper at the EMS national conference. EMNR’s ongoing relationship with the Evangelical Missiological Society has resulted in a wonderful opportunity in October 2002. EMS will be hosting its annual conference in Florida and will be discussing Christianity and world religions. EMS has extended an invitation to EMNR to coordinate a special track on mission to new religions. This track provides us with an opportunity to inform the missions community about new religions, and to learn from them how we can adapt missions methodologies to new religious movements. [6]

6.          Interact with scholarship. We noted earlier that one of the criticisms we face is an inadequate understanding of the complexities of new religions, poor scholarship, and sloppy reasoning. I would encourage you to interact with a variety of academic perspectives on new religions, both evangelical, secular, and those coming from academics within the new religions themselves. Such interaction will improve our ministries, give us new credibility, and make us stronger.

7.          Reflect on new paradigms for ministry. Many evangelicals are considering new opportunities for increased fruitfulness in ministry to adherents of new religions. While this will not mean the abandonment of apologetic responses to new religions, it might be worthwhile to consider new paradigms for ministry to new religions. [7] As Gordon Lewis noted:

“The connotation of ‘countercult’ is too negative to represent missionary’s loving outreach to unreached people in need of the good news of God’s grace. It is not enough for evangelical leaders primarily to react against non-Christian religious world-views, epistemologies and ethics. We need to present a better way. Missions to Muslims would not call themselves CounterMuslims. This plays into the hands of those who dismiss any, even well-reasoned refutation of their views, as anti-Mormon, anti-Muslim, etc.” [8]

He has also suggested that, “Evangelical ministers to NRMs will remain alive and well insofar as they change their primary identity from mere counter cult agents to missionaries—frontier type missionaries to unreached people in alternative religions and cults.” [9] Consider exploring a new identity and new paradigm for ministry as a missionary-apologist.

           

Conclusion

            You may find some or many of the ideas presented in this paper objectionable. Hopefully you will also find a few things to think and pray about. At the very least I hope you share with me a sense of excitement about the opportunities before us in this new century. While we face many significant challenges, none of them represent things that cannot be overcome. I firmly believe that after twenty years of ministry Evangelical Ministries to New Religions has its best days and most fruitful ministry ahead of it. Although it might be difficult at times, we can and must work together to raise our standards for ministry. Together, in membership, we can move beyond the fringes.

---

---

John Morehead works with Watchman Fellowship as a missionary and researcher, and is a former member of the Reorganized Latter-day Saints. He has over ten years of experience in researching, writing and teaching on cults and various new religious movements. John is an adjunct faculty member at Capital Bible College, does substitute teaching at Trinity Life Bible College, both in Sacramento, CA, and is currently President of Evangelical Ministries to New Religions. The preceding paper was presented to the EMNR Board and other interested parties.