2GB published the following:
Ray Hadley: Caller Wendy defends paedophile – audio player
Thursday October 9, 2014
One of the most ridiculous calls you’ll ever hear – Wendy defends late paedophile preacher Frank Houston
Source: Ray Hadley: Caller Wendy defends paedophile – audio player, http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/67546#.VDY2BPmSySp, 09/10/2014. (Accessed 09/10/2014.)
And so it begins……………the name of our Savior Jesus Christ gets dragged into disrepute. Frank Houston did not think of this while he was grovelling around in his sin obviously.
I don’t much care about Frank Houston nor his deceitful son but I do care that the name of the Lord and His Church gets besmirched in the main line media.
I think the 2GB talk back host got it right, so now how do we restore the name of the Lord and His Church? What a sad situation this has all sunk to.
May the Holy Spirit still do His work in the lives of all involved even now.
It’s really this simple – there needs to be some public demonstration by the churches of Australia that denounce these movements as cults. Australians can see that Hillsong does not carry the Christian teaching or behaviour of the Christian faith.
All Pastors need to give sound evidence to give society the eyes to see why these movements are indeed cults.
Unless the church continues to remain silent on this, people will continually associate these cults with Christianity.
@Churchwatcher: Do you think the thinking public needs to be educated as to what a cult really is? Hillsong for instance looks like a church and acts like a church in the eyes of the unsaved public. In the main it is only those who are saved and bother to give it some thought who recognize Hillsong as a cult?
How is the message conveyed to the average Aussie/Kiwi that the likes of Hillsong are not a church but a cult, and would they really care?
One problem with using the word “cult” is most people think of Hare Krishnas, Scientologists, Mormons etc. People have that image in mind so when Hillsong (or similar-styled “Christian” church/es) is/are classified as cults they reflexively dismiss that label.
Christians should know more than the average atheist but very few people want to take the time to search for such information, especially regarding their own favourite preacher. Perhaps Churchwatch should make a webpage similar to this one for Aussie/Kiwi readers and expand on the particular issues unique to Hillsong?
@Thinker – I agree – Cultwatch in NZ is an excellent site, but it is limited in its scope and, having had some email communications with them recently, I can see that they are under resourced. They don’t have the people power to do what is local and relevant for them, but then again they may have taken on a wider scope of ‘cults’ – not just the quasi-Christian ones that they advertise regularly.
I’m not sure that the Church watchers could take on another blog right now, but if so, maybe it could be more poster driven, rather than just responses to detailed articles?
Not a free for all (that would be a disaster,) but something more open, where people could post a short testimony of their involvements, taking care to keep it factual and relevant, not emotive or inflammatory…
That might be hard to do for some, who have been badly damaged, but I have found, as have many others, that in sharing their past, for the benefit of others, can bring about some healing and closure for at least some of those who are prepared to share…
Two factors become pertinent in defining a cult:
1. A clear expose of cult like behaviour – love bombing, money mindedness, ‘group think’ mind control etc. Just talking about theological differences wouldn’t quite cut it IMHO – arguing orthodox versus heterodox in front of unbelievers would not profit the unsaved… but would certainly educate many of the saved…
2. A clear explanation of the concept of “informed consent”, where the potentially new member is fully informed about the history, goals, aims, methodologies, of the group, who its leaders are, the history of the group, what is expected of each new member, and how money is handled and dispensed.
That is informed consent (preferably all of the above to be in writing) and anything less than those basic points outlined in an official publication, which is freely available to one and all, should raise some serious concerns about the authenticity and viability of that group.
In other words – if there was a significant amount of non disclosure as to that basic list of important points, that withholding of information could mean that the group might just be a CULT!!!
G’day Austin, I meant a webpage on this website similar to “about Hillsongchurchwatch”. Something quick for web-surfers explaining why Christians should view Hillsong as a cult, not just a denomination.
“…. and he changed the hearts of people in Sydney…” standard line yet again. If results look good then it *must* be from God…. NOT.
But even if people did come to genuine faith in Jesus Christ as a result of Frank Houston’s preaching, that shows the power of GOD HIMSELF to be able to still use an unrepentant paedophile. Others have said that God used the ass to speak to the false prophet Balaam https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+22%3A21-38&version=KJV. This “ass of a man” spoke to those whom God chose in the meeting. GOD saved them, NOT Houston (senior).
There are going to be hundreds of well-meaning people like this lady who are struggling to come to terms with the knowledge that someone they admired is indeed a criminal of the highest order and that the church they attend effectively hid this fact for 15 years. Attempting to rationalize this dilemma and minimize the horrific nature of what’s before them will be one of many ways that people will cope with the truth. Many people will feel betrayed and I hope others are there to lead them to a place where they can safely come to a knowledge of the truth. Others will go into staunch denial, while others will incorrectly justify this as an attack on the church. Many hopefully will come through to healing and freedom.
Claiming this is not our business, is a recipe for disaster. It is absolutely our business to protect children, which is above and beyond everything else, Brian Houston’s and Hillsong’s greatest failure, even above false doctrine. Suspending Frank for two years did not remove the threat to children, did not honour the laws of the land and did not bring about justice for his victims. Knowing that a crime had been committed, Brian Houston chose to put himself above the law and not to report that crime. A crime of the most heinous and intolerable nature.
As for the good works that Frank has done, if Franks’s good works can expunge his sins, as Wendy implies, then the gospel is nullified and Christ’s death is meaningless. Yes, good works can demonstrate faith, but this assumes that what we are seeing is the good works that are born of faith in God, not belief in oneself. Frank chose to hide his sins until he was ultimately exposed, that’s probably as self-serving as you can get.
God used a donkey to speak once, so the fact that Frank may have been used to do some good work is completely and utterly irrelevant. God was obviously working to protect the people who came into contact with Frank, especially the children, so if God’s presence was felt it was God’s covering over those around Frank, not Frank himself.
Could Frank be forgiven? Of course, he could. But one cannot conceal a sin and be forgiven of it at the same time. Light and darkness, as the Bible tells us, have no part in each other. Forgiveness requires that we admit our moral failure and accept the consequences of that failure. You can’t rob a bank, ask for forgiveness and then live off the proceeds of your theft! In choosing to hide Frank from the law, Brain Houston put himself above both the laws of the land and the laws of God. If someone would like to prove otherwise, I’d love to hear their argument.
To those who assert, as Brian does himself, that he is not responsible because he was oblivious to this evil until 1999. I leave you with a question. If Brian Houston is, as some assert a man of vision and spiritual discernment, how was he so utterly insensitive to the presence of the worst form of evil in his church and in his own father? I have dealt with this evil before and I can assure you that God is quick to make you aware of it in another person. Christians have access to the Mind of Christ, we’re generally the whistle blowers in this sort of stuff. To claim ignorance is to admit a spiritual dullness that is unacceptable in anyone professing to lead others into truth.
Finally, how could Brian allow a man who he now claims to have molested more children than we may ever know, to walk freely among the children of his own congregation? The fact that he and other leaders insisted that Frank receive treatment, is irrefutable evidence that he did not believe his father to be completely healed. So not only did Frank not answer, as the law and justice demands, for his past sins, he was free to commit further sin that would destroy even more lives.
No amount of white washing is going to make this anything other than a open tomb full of rotting bones.