INCREMENTALISM; ONE OF SATAN'S DEVICES

Bill and Hillary Clinton accomplished much of their political agenda by a method described as incrementalism.   That which was unacceptable could not be passed in one large package was accomplished in several small incremental steps. This method of reaching unpopular goals has been effectively used by the feminists and the homosexual rights movement.  Observing the success of this approach in the volatile world of politics, the change agents at work among us have adopted this incremental approach to reach their goal of imposing major changes on the church.

In his book Women in the Church, Carroll Osburn quotes Mary Tolbert who writes, "Feminist hermeneutics stands over against patriarchal hermeneutics (its goal achieved CO) by small unnoticed acts of subversion. Numerous such incremental changes, like erosion, will eventually bring down the fortress" (p. 32). Those conversant with what is occurring in our churches and schools will immediately recognize some of those small acts of subversion that are transpiring today: a woman chaplain at one of our Christian Universities; a woman associate preacher here; a female co-teacher of an adult class there; schools offering women courses in ministry and featuring women preachers on their lectureship; books advocating expanded roles for women in church leadership.  At the end of the day one is not surprise to read that a church here and another there has a woman preacher in their pulpit.

Similarly, change agents are attacking the foundations of the church by a series of incremental changes that "like erosion will bring down the fortress." Many of the proposed changes are small and at first  seem of little consequence. But added together and in time a congregation one day awakens to find that they are no longer a church of Christ.  Few change agents are so confident or stupid as to try to grab control of a church in one bold move. It is a step by step process which they patiently pursue.  They might ridicule the efforts of past brethren, or seek to shame their hearers for their old fashioned faith and views. They propose more contemporary services, perhaps a praise team to improve the worship. Guest speakers are brought in to promote the proposed agenda. Young people are gently led to use instruments in their devotionals. Younger ladies who have absorbed feminist views are encouraged to reach for leadership roles in the church.  Collegiates and young adults are used as a leverage tool for accepting changes.  If we want them to stay or to bring their friends, some changes must be made.  Fun is poked at the old faith and practices long held by the church. The great success of certain denominational churches is held up as a worthy example.  Young people are taken to programs that offer new and unconventional activities for worship. New elders and deacons are proposed that will be sympathetic to the change agenda. Step by step the process advances until the foundations are totally undermined and finally the resistance crumbles.  The few hold-outs are encouraged to get with the program or leave. The results: another church has been subverted and changed into a denominational body.

Tragically many elders are totally oblivious to the incremental changes their preachers, youth ministers or campus ministers are initiating. The majority of their members sit in silence while a small handful who are committed to change step by step work their project. Brethren we are under  attack in every quarter.  If we continue with the current level of indifference and unconcern, we will surely be overwhelmed.  Remember the losses we suffered a century ago.  That generation of change agents swept away eighty five percent of our brethren and congregations; most of our mission work, all of our schools. Shall we suffer the same fate all over again?  Remember their goal; "one step at a time until the fortress falls."