My 2 cents on this discussion of CCC

Greetings to BillT Marie etc. I’ve been reading with interest the exchange regarding CCC & RTS (at least that is what the first post was about).

Let me say from the beginning that I am a full-time employee of CCC (Not a staff person) I work in the central office of Christian Leadership Ministries, which is the faculty outreach of CCC. I raise some of own financial support.

We have staff scattered around the country & seek to reach (primarily) professors at secular universities and minister to Christian professors at those same universities. I am in a support role, webmaster of our site for Christian professors primarily.

Now my comments on the previous posts. It seems to me that a couple of things need to be kept in mind. CCC is a broad organization. It has within it many reformed people, and many with arminian bent. It is a not a church, it is a movement. Or perhaps more accurately many movements. Frankly for every reformed person that critiques it, it probably has an arminian that does too. So my point is that CCC is not on one particular theology track.

I can think of several of our folks who are very reformed in theology and in practical application in their lives and ministry. I can also think of a few who have specifically stated they are not Calvinists. This fits in well with our strategy.

We as a ministry are trying to work across theological and denominational lines. We’re reaching Christian professors on campuses where they may well be the only Christian in their department. We don’t care what denomination or theology perspective he/she is, within the family of orthodox Christianity. If he/she can affirm the apostles creed, that’s all we need to know.

We are also not, as some might think, blindly accepting of any popular author (like Eldridge for example). We have some very sharp well-trained people who can discern the good from the bad.

I think Bill’s latest post to Marie pretty well states my position. The folks here at The Highway are much more specific in their theological wave length. CCC is much broader in the spectrum of orthodox Christianity. Both have their place.

As to your specific objections:
The new “Satisfied” booklet, here on the web

Seems to be a bit more acceptable than the original writing because it softens the issue of the “Carnal Christian”. Less of an emphasis on an almost optional sounding third type of Christian

The Four Laws: One can debate and debate Law 1. Personally I would probably rephrase to make it less universal sounding.

Partnerships like with RTS: This type of partnership might just help CCC grow spiritually. So let's look at it from a positive perspective.

Alpha Course: Can’t comment, have only heard of it.

Eldridge: Lots of good content, needs to be read discerningly.


Last edited by PaulRH; Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:44 PM.