ABILENE CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY

SUPERNATURAL? POWER AT CABIN CREEK: A SENIOR CASE BRIEF

SUBMITTED TO DR. CHRISTOPHER FLANDERS

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF BIBM 679: THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION IN PRACTICE

REVISED FOR SENIOR REVIEW

BY KIPP SWINNEYMARCH 4, 2014

REVISED MARCH 31, 2014

SUPER NATURAL? POWER AT CABIN CREEK

Richard McNemar is the lead pastor of a Presbyterian Church at Cabin Creek, Kentucky

in the early nineteenth century.1 The elders of his congregation have asked him to teach them and

the congregation about the nature of true religion in regards to ecstatic outpourings of the Holy

Spirit on people during worship. The need for this precipitated from local revivals demonstrating

these ecstatic outpourings and the demand from a powerful group of people that these

expressions cease due to their disorderly nature. If the church does not resolve the conflict, it

could create a split and bitterness between the two groups.

Theological Understanding

The elders inquired of McNemar about the nature of true religion regarding ecstatic

experience in worship. Christian religion2 is concerned about God, and the nature of God’s work

in the world. Beauchamp presented a position implying that God works through the human

mind.3 The enthusiasts4 have claimed that God works through ecstatic outpourings of the Holy

Spirit. The elders asked these questions in response to the claims of the enthusiasts and the

rationalists,5 and one may restate their question is “What is the nature of the work of God in the

world?” The question is not exclusively about religious practice, but it is theological in its nature.

McNemar must develop a way to answer their questions, and needs to determine what he thinks.

A helpful resource for making theological discernments available to McNemar was the Wesleyan

1 Although I provide a brief summary of the case addressed by this brief, in order to understand this case brief, one will need to read the case with the same name as this case-brief.

2 In the context of an early nineteenth century Presbyterian Church, the elders refer to Christianity as true religion.

3 Beauchamp did not explicitly claim that God works exclusively through the human mind, but his claim that the Holy Spirit is “not an enabler of emotion,” implies that God does work through the emotional experiences of ecstasy. Beauchamp claims God’s work aims for love, but that love is a matter of intelligence and the faculties of reason, thus he is implying that love, specifically divine love, is not emotional but intellectual.

4 The enthusiasts are the people claiming to experience supernatural outpourings of the Holy Spirit and are asserting that active work of the Spirit is necessary for true religion.

5 I am referring to those who align with Beauchamp as rationalists because they represent an exclusively rational perspective concerning worship and Christianity. They do not necessary follow rationalist philosophy.

1

Quadrilateral. The Wesleyan Quadrilateral recognizes four sources of theology, which are

scripture, reason, tradition and experience.6 McNemar would benefit from considering each of

the components of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral for the purposes of reaching theological

conclusions concerning the experiences of the enthusiasts and the work of God in the world.

Scripture and its Testimony

The Presbyterian Church views scripture as inspiration from God; the opening chapter of

the Westminster Confession of Faith7 explicitly expresses this.8 Thus, McNemar as a

Presbyterian minister has the obligation to consult biblical precedent and teaching on matters of

theology, ecclesiology and worship. McNemar’s Presbyterian Church will most likely accept

judgments and discernments based on biblical interpretation. The importance of biblical

precedent is self-evident in the case, as both the rationalists and the enthusiasts have cited

biblical passages to support their cases. The Bible is not the only source of authority for the

Presbyterian Church, thus it does not have the sole voice on matters of faith. However, it is of

paramount importance to the formation of doctrine and worship.9

Hebrew Bible

In the Hebrew Bible prophecy ( ָנָבא) caries ecstatic connotations. The term for prophet

relates to the verb meaning, “to bubble.”10 The concept is that a Prophet is someone from whom

God’s message bubbles. God takes control of the prophet’s mouth and temporarily incapacitates

the prophet. These experiences may or may not be analogous to the experiences of the

enthusiasts; the enthusiasts are not prophesying, but they are experiencing ecstatic outpourings of

6 The Wesleyan Quadrilateral is the intellectual work of John Wesley, who was an Anglican, but the United Methodist Church recognizes him as its intellectual forbearer. For a full breakdown of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, see Neil M. Alexander, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church, (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 1992), 76-82.

7 The Westminster Confession of Faith is the foundational document and expression of belief for the Presbyterian Church. The Presbyterian Church uses this document and the Westminster Catechism to instruct its adherents on issues of doctrine, belief and worship.

8 John Leith, Assembly at Westminster: Reformed Theology in the Making, (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1973), 75.

9 Ibid.10 H. P. Muller. “ָנִביא” (vol. 9 of TDOT. 15 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 129-50.

2

the Spirit of God, which are incapacitating them. The Hebrew Bible’s concept of prophesying

sets a biblical precedent concerning ecstatic experiences.

A helpful story to consider in relation to the nature of ecstatic experiences11 is in

Numbers 11. The elders of Israel had assembled, and the Lord caused all of them to prophesy.

Two elders, Eldad and Medad, failed to assemble with the others, but the Lord also caused them

to prophesy. Joshua asked Moses to stop these two elders, but he would not, stating that he

wished that God would make all the people prophets and put his spirit upon them (Num 11:26-

29). This example bears some similarity to the case. People were having an experience deemed

improper by another party. The party deeming the experience improper asked the leader of the

community to curtail the expressions of ecstasy. Moses refused the put an end to the

prophesying. This example is to allow people to experience the ecstatic outpourings of spirit,

even if they seem to be out of line from normal religious practices. However, Beauchamp

insinuated that enthusiast’s experiences were human or demonic in origin, which is a possibility

Numbers 11 does not consider for its story.

1 Samuel 10 and 19 describe events concerning Saul, the king of Israel, having an

ecstatic experience of prophesy. In each story, Spirit of the Lord comes upon Saul, and he is

unable to control himself.12 In the second story (1 Sam 19:22-4), the spirit of the Lord came upon

Saul with such force that he stripped his clothes.13 Although the stories bear similar content, the

presence of the Spirit of the Lord has opposite affects. The first story depicts the Spirit of the

Lord coming upon Saul as a sign of Saul’s election as king. The second story depicts the Spirit of

the Lord coming upon Saul as a means of frustrating his plans to kill David. These cases

11 Martin Noth. Numbers, (OTL 4, Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968) 89. 12 Walter Brueggemann, First and Second Samuel, (Interpretation, Louisville: Westminster John Knox

Press, 1990.), 75 - “Saul engages in self-transcending acts that sweep away conventional perceptions and usual categories of understanding. Saul becomes filled with energy and freedom beyond himself. The narrative strains to find words adequate for the new reality. This is the gift of the spirit. It is the power of God that works a newness in the face of established structures, order, and assumptions.” This is perhaps the most analogous event in the Bible to the experiences of the enthusiasts. While the enthusiasts in the case do not claim to be prophesying, both Saul and the enthusiasts experiences ecstasy and completely lose control of their bodies.

13 Brueggemann, 145.

3

illustrate that God employs ecstatic experiences, but they do not necessarily mean that the

experiencer is in the favor of God.

New Testament

The New Testament bears witness to ecstatic experiences. The members of the

enthusiasts group cited the example of the apostle’s speaking in tongues at the inauguration of

the church (Acts 2) to justify ecstasy in worship. However, the story of the inauguration of the

church does not follow the pattern of the experiences of the enthusiasts. In Acts 2, the Holy

Spirit descended upon the apostles, and they were able to speak to all the people in Jerusalem in

their own native languages.14 However, similarities end at that point. The text indicates that only

the apostles experienced the ecstasy, and it never appears that they lost control of their bodies.

The work of the Holy Spirit in the case of the inauguration of the Church enabled people, but the

experiences of the enthusiasts disable as much as enabled. Acts 2 is certainly an example of

ecstasy, but it is not the biblical example most analogous to the experiences of the enthusiasts.

Acts 16 presents an ambiguous case concerning ecstatic experiences. In this chapter, Paul

and Silas enter a city and a young slave girl with a spirit, which allows her to predict the future,

greets them. She followed them around, proclaiming that they were servants of the most high

God. While the girl was doing nothing explicitly against the work of God, Paul rebuked the spirit

within her, and it left. While not necessarily negative towards the girl, this story shows that

ecstatic experiences are not always clearly positive. This case is ambiguous, but Paul ended the

ecstatic experiences.

Beauchamp and the enthusiasts each commented on 1 Corinthians 14, making it an

influential text regarding the ecstatic experiences in this case. Beauchamp cited 1 Cor 14:40 in

his letter to McNemar as an argument against the enthusiasts. The enthusiasts rejected

Beauchamp’s use of the verse claiming that it is for the “herd” and not for the elect. The

14 Johannes Behm. “γλωσσα – ετερογλωσσα,” (TDNT 1, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) 719-27.

4

intellectual and spiritual ancestor of the Presbyterian Church, John Calvin,15 has commented on

the passage. Calvin’s conclusions concerning this passage are that it is for the worship of the

church.16 1 Cor 14:23 makes the distinction between outsiders and insiders, and the commands

are for the Church, which is made up of Christians who are the elect, thus the enthusiasts’

objection is invalid. Calvin concludes that in worship ecstatic experiences are acceptable,

however, they are meant to be orderly rather than disorderly (1 Cor 14:40).17 Beauchamp and the

enthusiasts offer interpretations that are contrary to Calvin’s interpretation.18 Conclusions from

this chapter indicate that this is for the church, supernatural experiences are acceptable, but they

should happen in an orderly manner rather than disorderly.

Scriptural Conclusion

Biblical precedent on the matter of ecstatic experiences is that they can be a part of the

work of God, they do not guarantee that God approves of the experiencer, they can be part of

church worship,19 and they are meant to be orderly. Other texts that portray ecstatic experiences

positively, (e.g. Matt 17:1-13, Acts 10:44-48, 2 Cor 12:3-4) but the texts that I commented on

15 John Calvin’s books may not be accessible to people on the Kentucky frontier, but Calvin’s interpretation is somewhat authoritative for those in the Reformed tradition, and the Presbyterian Church is part of the reformed tradition.

16 John Calvin, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, (CC: 20, Grand Rapids: Bakers Books, 2005), 454.

17 Calvin, 474.18 I agree with Calvin’s interpretation of the verse. There is no indication that Paul intended the text for the

non-elect as the enthusiasts have claimed. Beauchamp’s implied understanding of the this text rules out ecstasy completely, but ecstasy is in the context of the chapter and discussed as a positive element. My conclusion is that both the enthusiasts and the rationalists have used the text incorrectly.

19 I assume that cessationism (the belief that spiritual gifts ended with the apostolic generation) is not self-evident and is therefore not a foregone conclusion. I do not rule it out as a possibility, but I do not consider it to be a valid position from which to condemn the experiences of others. This position has little scriptural support. Some cite 1 Cor 13:8 as a support of cessationism, but its connection is not clear, and that is not the rhetorical point the author was attempting to make in the context. The rhetorical point in 1 Cor 13:8 is about the superiority of love to other virtues, which are temporally bound to the present world. See Scott Nash 1 Corinthians. (SHBC 7, Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2009), 370. Also see Anthony T. Thiselton, The Holy Spirit – In Biblical Teach, through the Centuries and Today, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013), 448. Cessationism is consistent with my personal experience, but I have heard the testimony of trusted individuals who claim to have witnessed and experienced ecstatic gifts. I have no reason to doubt the authenticity of these individuals’ testimonies. Although there are conflicting traditions of the Church in regard to cessationism, the majority of Christianity has not taught cessationism and there have been examples of ecstatic gifts in the history of the Church. Considering the matter reasonably, I do not see any reason that God would cease to impart spiritual/ecstatic gifts to people. Beauchamp’s essential argument has not been from cessationism, thus in the remainder of the case brief I will not consider cessationism as an alternative.

5

seem to be the most relevant to the case. Both parties have appropriated scripture contradicting

established biblical interpretation; however, McNemar must consider other sources before

coming to definitive theological conclusions.

ReasonArguments based on reason may affect the opposing parties differently. Beauchamp and

those affiliated with his position are more likely to be swayed by arguments made from reason.

Beauchamp’s letter claimed “The work of the Spirit is the reception of new ideas,

new objects to apprehend that engage human faculties of understanding and

draw the Christian into new aims…” Knowledge, enlightenment and reason are part of

the religious understanding of the rationalists. However, the enthusiast have expressed that “true”

religion must demonstrate strong emotion. While strong emotion is not an antithesis of reason,

they are apt to compete. As the strong nature of Beauchamp’s letter exemplifies, the rationalists’

position involves strong emotion.

If God be supremely sovereign,20 then it follows that God is able to use ecstatic

experiences for the purposes of the kingdom of God. It is not outside the scope of God to use

emotive experiences to change and shape people. God is able to shape people through the

experiences of similar to the enthusiasts. This does not mean that God uses such experiences, but

that God is capable of doing so, thus one cannot object to ecstatic experiences based on

impossibility.

To claim that something does not exist because it is outside the experience of the

observer is a logical fallacy. Thus, the rationalists may not make the claim that because they have

never experienced the Holy Spirit descending upon them, the Holy Spirit does not descend upon

20 The Westminster Confession of faith and Presbyterian theology affirm a supremely sovereign God. The sovereignty of God is an essential element of Reformed Predestination. In McNemar’s Presbyterian Church, the sovereignty of God would be a foregone conclusion. See Leith, 85.

6

the enthusiasts. However, a similar point may be made concerning the position of the enthusiasts.

The enthusiasts may not claim that because they have experienced supernatural outpourings,

others must also experience outpourings of the Spirit to be practicing “true” religion. Many of

the preachers and leaders of the enthusiasts practiced religion without these manifestations of the

Holy Spirit prior to the revivals beginning, and some of the leaders of the revivals taught that the

ecstatic experiences were not the primary act of conversion.21 It is reasonable to conclude that

God does not need to use these manifestations of the Spirit to shape and form people, and that

faithful people do not all experience these supernatural outpourings, thus they are not required

for “true” religion.

Conclusions from Reason

Little is discernable theologically about the ecstatic experiences of the enthusiasts from

reason alone. However, assuming a Presbyterian Theology for the rationalists and a Presbyterian

background for the enthusiasts at the Cabin Creek congregation provides common ground to

make the following conclusions: it is possible for God to use ecstatic experiences to transform

people, and it is not necessary for God to work in this way.

Experience

It may be difficult for McNemar to argue from experience because he has not

experienced the ecstatic outpourings himself. He has little experience with the subject, and the

case states that he had never considered “how to judge such a phenomenon.” I personally have

21 The logical conclusion of the enthusiasts’ position that true religion must demonstrate strong emotion and the active work of the Spirit is that the leaders of the revivals were not practicing true religion prior to the revivals taking place. Barton Stone, one of the preachers of the revivals found it hard to accept that ecstatic experiences were converting people to Christianity. Events that Stone perceived as the work of God convinced him that ecstatic experiences could help bring people to belief. However, Stone continued to believe that God gives faith through hearing the gospel, not through ecstatic experiences. Stone believed that it did not require a special act of the Holy Spirit to produce faith. Thus, this key revivalist preacher did not believe that the ecstatic experiences were necessary for conversion and therefore not necessary for “true religion.” See Paul M. Blowers, Douglas Foster and Newell Williams. The Stone-Campbell Movement: A Global History, (Ed. Scott Seay St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2013), 12-13.

7

never had such an experience either, so I am unable to make direct conclusions about the ecstatic

experiences. However, in my experience God uses situations that are discomforting to shape

people and use them for the purpose of spreading the Gospel. Additionally, the work of God is

not always fun. In my understanding of the work of God, rationalists cannot object on the basis

that the ecstatic experiences are strange and uncomfortable, and the enthusiasts cannot claim that

the outpourings are from God on the basis that they are fun and energetic.

Tradition - Testimony of the Church

This was not the first time in America that ecstatic experiences of the Holy Spirit

manifested themselves in revival. During the “First Great Awakening,” Jonathan Edwards and

other revival preachers had similar experiences in their churches. This “First Great Awakening”

had taken place sixty years earlier in America. Although the center of that great awakening was

New England, the Presbyterian Church was involved in that religious movement too.22 The

revivals of the First Great Awakening did not experience the full range of outpourings of the

Spirit that the second revivalist movement experienced; therefore, people did not associate it

with the ecstatic experiences to the same extent. However, “Houling, screeches, yelling and

sobbing” were common experiences at the revivals of Jonathan Edwards and the other revivalist

of the First Great Awakening.23 Jonathan Edwards appears to have encouraged such behavior.24

The events of the First Great Awakening were formative for the nascent American

identity in the decade of 1740-1750, and its affect was very positive from the perspective of

involvement in religion from the American people. Similar events seem to be playing out in the

frontier of Kentucky at this time. While I do not know how McNemar or Beauchamp considered

the events of the previous Great Awakening, I assume that they would consider them to be

positive events. While it is possible that Beauchamp is correct that these kinds of experiences

lead to “mushroom” Christians, history indicates that similar experiences were beneficial for the

22 Douglas L Winiarski. “Jonathan Edwards, Enthusiast? Radical Revivalism and the Great Awakening in the Connecticut Valley” CH 74 (2005) 683-739.

23 Winiarski, 684.24 Winiarski, 683.

8

state of religion in America.25 Additionally, Edwards was well educated and a profound

theologian.26 While the tradition of these types of ecstatic experiences does not reach far back in

the testimony of the church, they played a positive role in the church where they do appear. It is

wrong to condemn ecstatic experiences as an incorrect expression of Christianity on the basis

that they produce shallow Christians.27 However, they are not necessary for the true religion

because they are limited to a narrow sliver of the history of the church and not universal within

Orthodox Christianity.

Concluding Theological Remarks

Returning to the question of “How does God work in the world?” and attempting to

answer it in light of reason, experience, scripture and tradition leads to the following

conclusions: 1) Ecstatic experiences and outpourings are not essential for true religion. 2) God is

able to use ecstasy for the building up of the church, and it is not sinful or out of the experience

of the church. Neither group practices a type of religion that is illegitimate, and both fall into the

category of true religion. However, both groups need to recognize the validity of the other.

Pastoral Considerations

To avert the crisis, the congregational elders cannot completely defer to McNemar. The

elders must be a vital part of what McNemar decides to do, and their leadership should be

instrumental in determining the course of action. McNemar and the elders need to be able to

agree and should be in close communication during the process. Because the congregation and

the Presbyterian Church have entrusted McNemar with the care of souls of the Cabin Creek

congregation, the main pastoral concern of McNemar and the elders should be for the majority of

the congregation, which does not have a strong opinion concerning the matter. McNemar should

not make actions that alienate him from the neutral middle.

25 This fact should refute Beauchamp’s suggestion that the ecstatic experiences are of demonic origin. Jesus reports that demon do not work against Satan in Mark 3:20-26. Unless the rationalists see that the experiences of the first Great Awakening were the work of Satan, they should not see the ecstatic experiences of the Kentucky revivals as negative.

26 Some historians have heralded Edwards as “America’s Greatest Theologian.” See Winiarski, 688.27 This was a key component of Beauchamp’s argument. However, the First Great Awakening proved that

ecstatic experiences could have a positive lasting effect on people.

9

Unity of the Church

The church in Kentucky experienced a large amount of disunity prior to the revivals.

Some of the pastors of congregations were discouraged for the state of religion in the region. For

McNemar, an important consideration is the unity of the church within his area, and this includes

unity that extends beyond the Presbyterian Church, and to all the churches in the region. The

revival had promised to bring unity among the various denominations, but the present situation

has threatened to cause a rift in the congregation. McNemar’s actions should be to promote

unity; however, McNemar and the elders need to consider when it is more poisonous to keep

opposing factions together in one church than to split the church.

The unity of the church was of supreme importance for the New Testament authors. The

author of Ephesians writes strongly to the church to be one in Christ in 2:11-20, and again the

author stresses this at the beginning of chapter 4. The author of Ephesians argues that since all of

the Christians have shared in Jesus then they also should be united in the church.28 The subject of

unity for the church arises in John 17:11 and 1 Cor 12:12-13. The New Testament authors could

not have predicted the amount of division that has taken place in the church in the subsequent

history of the church, and there is much history of fracturing and dividing in the Protestant

tradition. The division of the church is one of the greatest failures of the leadership of the church.

Unity of the church should be a high priority for McNemar. However, unity exists at various

levels.

Organizational Unity

A high goal for the Elders and the Congregation would be organizational unity, meaning

that both groups continue to exist within the Cabin Creek Congregation. A helpful tool for

McNemar in managing a church that has opposing viewpoints within it is the work of Barry

Johnson on polarity management. Johnson’s work indicates that managing opposing views does

not necessarily finding a middle point between the two views and resting on it, but rather finding

28 Ralph Martin. Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon. (Interpretation, Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1989), 36-7.

10

a way to employ the strengths of both side of the polarity.29 If McNemar could construct a model

where the church is able to teach sound doctrine and helps form its members in deep ways, it will

avoid the production of what Beauchamp calls “mushroom” Christians. However, if the church

can also find ways to implement the excitement and the enthusiasm of the revivals, it will be able

to make a broader impact on the lives of people rather just on the present members of the church.

This solution may not be acceptable to either the rationalists or the enthusiasts, but if the sides

would be willing to cooperate, it may have extended benefits.

Paradigmatic Unity

If McNemar and the elders determine that they can unite the congregation in paradigm,

then they will need to exhibit strong yet Christ centered leadership. McNemar can best

encourage the congregation to follow his leadership in the matter if he can successfully

demonstrate how the chosen course of action will benefit the mission of the Church. Peter

Steinke writes about congregational change and framing it in terms of the mission of the church

in A Door Set Open. The congregation is already on the brink of change, and significant change

in any situation brings about anxiety.30 Similarly, McNemar should make decisions with the

interest of the mission of the church in mind, as mission is a chief concern of the Gospel.31 This

may be the only way that McNemar can keep the church together. If he can persuade both sides

that the path he has chosen will best benefit the mission of the Church, they will be more willing

to make concession to their positions.

Congenial Unity

If the elders, McNemar and the congregation are unable to achieve a higher form of unity

them must seek congenial unity. The two groups need to recognize the validity of the other group

as Christians. A type of spiritual elitism has arisen in both parties. The rationalists have

29 Barry Johnson, Polarity Management, (Amherst :HRD Press, 1996).30 Peter Steinke, A Door Set Open, (Herndon: Alban Institute, 2010), 25-29.31 Missionary work is central to the work of Jesus and the apostles. See Matt 28:18-20, Mark 6:6-12, Luke

10:1-12 et al.

11

determined that the enthusiasts are shallow and out of line, while the enthusiasts have elevated

their practice of Christianity to a superior status and claimed that without religious fervor and

strong emotion true religion is not possible. Each side has concluded that the other is in error and

only their group is practicing true religion. Philippians 2:5-11 urges believers to imitate Christ in

his humility. Neither party has expressed the humility of Jesus in the matter; both have alienated

and demonized the other. Addressing the spiritual elitism of the two groups is greatly important.

Formation of Believers

A key issue, which Beauchamp brought up in his letter, is the formation of individuals.

While Beauchamp believes that this is primarily through the intellect and not through the

emotions, Christian history has taken a broader perspective on the formation of people into the

image of Christ. This involves far more than emotive expressions of intellectual assent, but the

whole person. Philippians 2:5 exhorts the church to have the same attitude as Christ, but then

expresses that in actions rather than concepts. The task of becoming like Christ is one that is

central to the church and to Christians. The enthusiasts would also profit from expanded

understanding of spiritual formation. Some of Beauchamp’s accusations are legitimate, and they

enthusiasts need to improve their formational approaches. The apostle Paul had extensive

catechetical practices, which included confession,32 but extended beyond confession.33 The

enthusiasts need to work to form individuals and not to just give them experiences.

Prescription

Before McNemar can make strong actions, he must consult with the ruling elders of the

congregation. McNemar is not the sole leader of the church and the elders need to be part of the

solution to the problem. If the elders defer to McNemar, the church will not see solidarity among

the leadership. If some of the elders belong to one of the factions,34 McNemar and the eldership

need to come to consensus first. It is my belief and recommendation to McNemar and the elders

32 The ecstatic experiences were leading people to confess and seek forgiveness of sin.33 James Thompson, Moral Formation According to Paul, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011) 87.34 The case does not indicate that there are elders in either of the factions, but it claims that the rationalists

are an influential minority. It is possible that some of the rationalists are elders of the Cabin Creek congregation, and that some of the enthusiasts are elders.

12

that true religion encompasses both the practices of the rationalists and the enthusiasts, the

church should strive for congenial unity at the least, organizational unity is possible, and

paradigmatic unity is unlikely at this point.

The first task of McNemar and the elders is to dispel the explosive situation between the

two groups. As soon as McNemar establishes leadership unity among the elders, he needs to

meet with the leaders from each of the groups, and make sure that each side feels that they have

been heard. To the enthusiasts, McNemar and the elders need to emphasize that they are not

practicing the only form of true religion and that the religion of rationalists is acceptable.

Prominent leaders of the revivals, such as Barton Stone, do not think that the ecstatic experiences

are necessary for true religion. McNemar needs to emphasize to them that he is highly interested

in unity, and that does not mean suppression. The Presbyterian Church has recognized people in

the past, who have had similar experiences, to be within orthodoxy, and as long as McNemar is

lead pastor of the church, they will not be condemned at Cabin Creek.

If Beauchamp is able to be present at a meeting, he would be a good representative of the

rationalists, but McNemar and the elders need to meet with as many of the rationalists as

possible. To the rationalists, McNemar and the elders need to emphasize that the revivals are not

going to take over the church. The church will continue in the tradition of the Presbyterian

Church and will shape people with sound biblical teaching. McNemar and the elders will not try

to alienate them. Ecstatic experiences are with the traditions of the church and the Bible. Ecstatic

experiences led to positive results and last impact in the first Great Awakening. The revivals are

ecumenical in nature and McNemar and the elders do not have the authority to stop them. The

revivals will continue, but their activity will not dominate the Presbyterian Church.

If the sides are going to be peaceable for the moment, McNemar ought to teach and

preach about what the Bible and Christian tradition has taught concerning the ecstatic gifts. He

needs to remind people about the life and work of Jonathan Edwards and the way that his

ministry led to a Great Awakening. However, McNemar also needs to instruct those involved

with the revival meetings that they need to take stronger precautions against people being hurt or

13

injured due to the different ecstatic experiences in the revivals. They need to include and involve

the formation of people into the image of Christ rather than scaring them into repentance.

McNemar needs to remain as neutral as he can in his teaching and preaching, so that he does not

alienate one side or the other. A best case scenario would have the two sides remaining in the

church and employing their strengths to best serve the church and the kingdom of God.

If the sides are unwilling to cooperate and they will not continue to worship together,

McNemar needs to consider the neutral majority as the highest priority. The neutral majority is

part of the Presbyterian Church and McNemar should continue to operate the church as a

Presbyterian Church. This will may alienate the enthusiasts and appear to be a victory for the

rationalists, but McNemar must then help the enthusiasts either find a church, which they can

belong to, or help them establish a new church where they can worship. McNemar should

consult with other area pastors to find if there is a church that would be best for the enthusiasts to

join. It would be preferable for the enthusiast to join an existing church rather than founding a

new church, so that the church may not be fractured to an even greater degree in Kentucky and in

Cabin Creek.

In the event that the two sides are not able to coexist in the same congregation, both sides

still need to accept the validity of the other as Christians and servants of the kingdom. If

McNemar and the elders of the church continue to operate the church as a Presbyterian Church,

it is likely that McNemar will have more influence over the rationalists. McNemar should use

this influence to help the rationalist see the validity of the enthusiasts. McNemar also needs to be

sure that there is someone to meaningfully minister to the enthusiasts.

Conclusion

The situation at Cabin Creek may be contentious, but resolution without completely

severing relationships is possible. In keeping with sound reason, experiential understanding, the

traditions of the Church and the Bible, true religion encompasses both parties’ practices. Neither

party should condemn the other and both need repentance from their spiritual elitism and to

14

imitate the humility of Christ. Cabin Creek should remain within the tradition of the Presbyterian

Church as the majority of members still adhere to Presbyterian practices. The church should

explore organizational unity, but should consider the health of the entire church to be of greater

importance. The church may not be able to continue as one church, but the congenial unity of the

Church as a whole should be the most important goal of the church in the situation.

There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling,  one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all. Ephesians 4:4-6 (NRSV)

15

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, Neil M. The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church, (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 1992.

Behm, Johannes. “γλωσσα – ετερογλωσσα,” 719-27 in volume 1 of The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 10 vols. edited by Gerhard Kittle, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans ,1964.

Blowers, Paul M., Douglas Foster and Newell Williams. The Stone-Campbell Movement: A Global History, Managing editor Scott Seay St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2013.

Brueggemann, Walter First and Second Samuel, Interpretation, Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1990.

Calvin, John. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentaries XX, Translated by John Pringle, Grand Rapids: Baker’s Books, 2005.

Conzelmann, Hans. 1 Corinthians, Hermeneia 46, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.

Fitzmeyer, Joseph. Romans, Anchor Bible Commentary 33, New York: Doubleday, 1993.

Johnson, Barry. Polarity Management, Amherst :HRD Press, 1996.

Leith, John. Assembly at Westminster, Louisville: John Knox Press, 1973.

Martin, Ralph. 2 Corinthians, Word Biblical Commentaries 40, Waco: Word Books Publisher, 1986.

________. Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon. Interpretation, Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1989.

Muller, H. P. “ָנִביא” pages 129-50 in volume 9 of The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. 15 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.

Nash, R. Scott. 1 Corinthians. Volume 7 of Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary, Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2009.

Noth, Martin. Numbers, Volume 4 of Old Testament Library , Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968.

16

17

Peterson, Eugene. First and Second Samuel, Westminster Bible Companion, Louisville: Westminster John Know Press, 1999.

Steinke, Peter L. A Door Set Open: Grounding Change in Mission and Hope, Herndon: Alban Institute, 2010.

Thiselton, Anthony T. The Holy Spirit – In Biblical Teach, through the Centuries and Today, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013.

Thompson, James. Moral Formation According to Paul, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011

Winiarski, Douglas L. “Jonathan Edwards, Enthusiast? Radical Revivalism and the Great Awakening in the Connecticut Valley” pages 683-739 in Church History 74 (2005).