[NeitherFirstnorLast]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Statement from The Prosecution (taken from DCP's website):
"Sadly, there were (in the late 70's) a few Christians who for various reasons opposed this speaking (that all believers should be living and functioning members of the Body of Christ). Some held a concept of the Christian faith that was strictly objective and doctrinal. Uncomfortable with the entirely Biblical stress on the need to experience the indwelling Christ, they labeled it as an un-Christian and even as Eastern mystical teaching. Others were motivated by a desire to maintain some level of prominence in Christian work. They felt threatened by a teaching that opposed the hierarchical clergy-laity system of today’s Christianity, encouraged all of God’s people to learn to speak for and serve God as priests, and presented a simple way for believers to meet together in the oneness of the Body of Christ..."

I excerpted this directly from DCP's website, and directly there from the portion pertaining to the trial in question. This was published as their justification for the lawsuit. I just want to take a look at it again.

DCP here is alleging that the reasons that SCP printed their books were any one of the following:

1) They opposed the speaking that said that all believers should be functioning members of the body.

If you click on the reference link for SCP, you will see that it grew out of the Christian World Liberation Front (CWLF). It was a group of ex-hippies (or still-hippies) who came to Christ from lives that were tangled in the drugs and the counter-culture movement of that era. These were "Jesus People" - not Baptists or Catholics or Presbyterians. They were believers who WERE functioning members of the Body. They met in peoples homes and read the Bible together - they were not a part of ANY establishment and did not build their own "church". Remember that they were/are a parachurch organization: "Parachurch organizations are Christian faith-based organizations that work outside of and across denominations to engage in social welfare and evangelism, usually independent of church oversight. These bodies can be businesses, non-profit corporations, or private associations" (wikipedia). That being the case, I have to say this charge doesn't logically apply to SCP.

2) Some held a concept of the Christian faith that was strictly objective and doctrinal.

Strictly objective and doctrinal? As used here, I believe "Objective" means "(of a person or their judgment) Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts" (wikipedia). And "Doctrinal" means "Concerned with a doctrine or doctrines" (wikipedia).
In the case of a secular lawsuit, Objective is a good thing. It disproves malicious intent. In the case of Doctrinal, I would think that would be hard to prove of a parachurch organization which presumably is made up of members who may come from different churches with different theological doctrines - but the case may prove me wrong. Let's keep an open mind on this one.

3. Uncomfortable with the entirely Biblical stress on the need to experience the indwelling Christ, they labeled it as an un-Christian and even as Eastern mystical teaching.

This statement would need to be proven, and perhaps it can be through the course of our reading.

At this point (just as an aside), let me point out that DCP is couching things in LSM-speak here quite a bit. It becomes apparent early on that this defense of their right to litigate is published for their own members, rather than for the public at large. I also find it interesting to note that they accuse SCP of relating what they do to "Eastern mystical teaching". I haven't encountered that charge by SCP (yet) - but IF true, I find it an interesting one. SCP, again, rooted in the counter-culture movement, had numerous members who were Saved from the eastern mystical religions found on the campuses in those times. In fact, SCP did a great deal of work exposing "gurus" - so they are intimately familiar with "Eastern Mystical Religions".

Now let me ask a question quickly - and I haven't seen this in the book: But what is the difference between calling on the Lord as is done in the Meeting Halls, and using a Mantra? Just a question.

4) Others were motivated by a desire to maintain some level of prominence in Christian work.

Does or did SCP have such a prominence? This is a charge that DCP would have to prove.

5) They felt threatened by a teaching that opposed the hierarchical clergy-laity system of today’s Christianity.

Again, this group didn't come from "that day's Christianity" - they were "Jesus people", folks that most straight laced, suit wearing, Sunday church going families (not that there's anything wrong with that) wouldn't know what to make of, let alone what to do with. They met in houses, read the bible together, went to many different churches, weren't affiliated with any particular church, didn't subscribe to any particular doctrine (that we've read or that I can yet find), and didn't have a hierarchical structure. This claim by DCP seems more than far fetched. On the contrary, the Jesus People sure sound like they did a whole lot of what the early members of the LC did.