Dictatorial Preacher Rule - Where It All Began

illinoisguy

Well-known member
Elect
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
1,083
Reaction score
507
Points
113
Joel Carpenter, in his book "Revive Us Again - The Reawakening of American Fundamentalism" (1997) describes the fundamentalism of the 1930s as characterized by combativeness, by "militancy," "machismo," "aggressiveness," and "pugnacity." He notes nicknames that were "more appropriate for boxers than for preachers," such as J. Frank Norris (Texas Tornado) and a number of "Fighting Bobs" (Ketcham, Shuler, etc).

He says, "Fundamentalism's penchant for militancy turned inward in another way as well. Especially among the separatists, for whom the sense of cultural alienation grew deepest, pastors became increasingly authoritarian and at times bullying in their relationships with their congregations. Pastors saw themselves as the Lord's anointed and viewed the world as filled with sinister forces, so the sheep in their fold needed herding. Brow-beating from the pulpit, a common practice in separatist circles, was one of the most obvious indications of this growing dictatorial spirit."

He states that John R. Rice "exemplifies the accusatory, intimidating thrust of such rhetoric. . . . By example, and by explicit teaching in his publications, Rice taught thousands of fundamentalist pastors how to boss others around." (pp. 66-67)

Carpenter implies that the principle of "preacher rule" arose during the 1930s and was rare, if present at all, prior to that time. Which raises the question, how in the world did true Christianity survive before that time, without strong-willed preachers to boss, bully and browbeat the layfolk?
 
Pastors saw themselves as the Lord's anointed
The congregations saw them as such too. Therein lies the rub.

Joel Carpenter, in his book "Revive Us Again - The Reawakening of American Fundamentalism" (1997) describes the fundamentalism of the 1930s as characterized by combativeness, by "militancy," "machismo," "aggressiveness," and "pugnacity." He notes nicknames that were "more appropriate for boxers than for preachers," such as J. Frank Norris (Texas Tornado) and a number of "Fighting Bobs" (Ketcham, Shuler, etc).
Probably a reaction to Feminism. It was just the previous decade in which the 19th Amendment was ratified.
 
The emphasis on "preacher rule," as a reaction to feminism and giving the vote to women (19th Amendment), is an interesting possibility. Even today, there are some "Patriarchy" preachers who say that women should not vote. If this principle was to be generally, voluntarily adopted by Christian women, it would reduce the strength of the "Christian Right" vote by more than 50%. I don't think that would be such a good idea.

Another possibility is that many pastors today believe it is their duty (part of their job description) to compel their parishioners to do the right thing (as defined by the pastor), which means the lay people must be under complete control of the pastor, by bossing and bullying if necessary.

Dallas Willard addressed this attitude in an essay in the recently published book "The Scandal of the Kingdom" - "There are people who want nothing to do with Christ and His church because they've had their soul torn apart by well-meaning Christians who pressured them to comply with what they think it means to become a Christian. . . .

"Now I have abandoned trying to get anyone to do anything. It's not my business. It is the Lord who adds daily to the church. . . .

"You don't have to make it happen. . . . Instead of trying to compel people into heaven, we do what the farmer did
[in Mark 4:26-27], sow the seed and then abandon it. You lay the seed down whether it's what you say to your children or to the students in a class you teach. I have found that if people weren't so anxious about MAKING people think a certain way or do a certain thing, they would do a much better job of presenting the gospel of the kingdom of God. Their strained efforts to get people to do these things make it difficult for others to truly hear the Word of God." (pp. 66-68)

Authoritarian pastors would be very uncomfortable with this type of approach. They believe that the only way that church members will do the right thing is for the pastor to get them under complete submission and control, by force and bullying if necessary. This means that mature adult church members will find themselves treated like unruly children in such churches. If they have a problem with that, they will leave, or be thrown out.
 
Last edited:
At my age if a pastor tried this I’d tell him to go kick rocks. And I’ve tried teaching this to my children.
 
Back
Top