|
"Take
Heed" Ministries
|
|
Cecil Andrews, PO BOX 13, Ballynahinch, BT24 8AL, Northern Ireland. Telephone/Fax 028 9756 5511. E-MAIL - takeheed@aol.com WEB-SITE - http://www.takeheed.net |
|
The hidden ‘agendas’ of CARE and EVANGELICAL |
To fully understand
the background to this article I believe it will be helpful for those who come
to this article to first read the following articles that are posted elsewhere
on our web site. The articles and their links are as follows –
1. ‘Evangelical Catholic’ suggestions for
http://www.takeheed.net/Cafe%20Passion.htm
2. The ‘leaven’ in ‘POWER TO CHANGE’
http://www.takeheed.net/lcc.htm
3. POWER TO CHANGE ECUMENICAL OR NOT
ECUMENICAL?
In the article on the ‘Belfast Passion
Café’ I referred to an ‘unnamed person’
in these terms – ‘One of the committee for the café’- and explained how this ‘unnamed person’ had sought guidance from the so-called ‘Evangelical
Catholic’, Eugene Boyle. The rest of the
article was an exposure of the devious suggestions put forward by Eugene
Boyle and was not as some mistakenly thought a ‘condemnation’
of the planned café outreach to those who view
‘The Passion’ movie.
In the providence of God I have now been
put in possession of further information that shows just how premeditated both
this ‘unnamed person’ and Stephen
Cave, General Secretary of Evangelical Alliance [NI] (this is the same Stephen Cave mentioned in the ‘Power to Change’ articles listed above) were to try and ensure that their solicitation of ‘Evangelical
Catholic guidance and participation’ in the
‘Belfast Passion Café’ should not become public knowledge.
What you will read next is a series of
emails that passed between myself and the ‘unnamed person’ and I shall show later, biblically, why I believe it is now
imperative for the identity of this ‘unnamed person’ to be publicly revealed and to show his close link with Stephen
Cave of the so-called Evangelical
Alliance [NI].
|
||||||||||
Cecil,
Let
me introduce myself. My name is Hugh Marcus and I’m the chairman of the
Passionate café mentioned on your website.
I
note the comments on the site and whilst accurate in places I
feel you don’t tell the whole story.
It’s
a very dangerous thing to make accusations against fellow believers without 1st
asking them directly.
I’m
taking this opportunity of asking you whether you would permit me to post a
reply on your website stating the full story and correcting some of the inaccuracies.
Many
thanks
Hugh
Marcus
|
Dear Hugh,
Thank you for your email.
If you feel that there are 'inaccuracies' in the article that I
have posted to our web site I would be more than happy to receive written
details from you of what they are and if necessary I would be open to changing
the content of the article if I felt that I had written something that was not
'accurate'.
Your servant for Christ
Cecil Andrews
'Take Heed' Ministries
www.takeheed.net
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
Cecil
thanks for your reply.
There’s no doubt that we will differ on
many things, and let me state for the record, that the way your posted this
stuff on your website and then claiming to have ‘used a contact’ to influence
us is not God honouring (in my view).
I draw to your attention the added
paragraph on your site, where you assert that “workers will now be free etc”
might it not have been better to have made the call before you
wrote the article and wounded your brothers and sisters in the Lord? [you wrote]
After writing this article I made
a phone call to someone that I thought might have some contact and influence
with the group planning the café. Through discussions held following my phone
call I now understand that the ‘observations’ of Eugene
Boyle will not be adopted and workers in the café will be free to discuss
“doctrinal issues”. In addition, anyone professing saving faith
in Christ, will be positively directed to Christian churches that do recognise
both the true Biblical gospel of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone
in Christ alone and acknowledge “that the entire Scriptures are
the…final authority for believers”
This clearly presumes that you believed
that workers (your term) were not previously going to be free to discuss
doctrinal issues, bearing in mind that there has been no training of volunteers
yet. (This will take place this week). I feel this is inaccurate, no one was
ever told they would no be free to discuss doctrinal issues.
What we do want to
avoid in this café however, is ‘hot air’ about the movie. This misses the point
– people who go to see that movie will be confronted afresh with the truth that
Jesus died on the cross. We can use that as a conversation starter and
hopefully bring some to the ‘foot of the cross’ for
salvation
I’d also ask that you include our
statement of faith in your article.
1.
We
believe that there is one God, who is sovereign and eternal, and who exists in
three persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
2.
We
believe that the entire Scriptures are the inspired and trustworthy Word of God
and that they are the final authority for believers.
3.
We
believe that all human beings are born into a state of sin and separation from
God as a result of the Fall.
4.
We
believe that Jesus, the Son of God, had no sin of His own, but died on the
cross once for all to pay the penalty for the sins of others, making possible
the restoration of the relationship between God and human beings.
5.
We
believe that this salvation cannot be earned; it is the free gift of God's
grace and is received by the individual through repentance and faith in Jesus
who died and rose again.
6.
We
believe that God the Holy Spirit lives within the believer, transforming
him/her and giving him/her power to live as a Christian.
7.
We
believe that all believers have direct access to God through Jesus who is the
only mediator between God and human beings.
8.
We
believe that Jesus will return again in glory to judge the living and the dead.
9.
We
believe that at death each individual's eternal destiny is fixed by his/her
response in this life to the sacrifice of Jesus: heaven for those who have
accepted the salvation won by Jesus; hell for those who die unrepentant.
As you can see every person who
volunteers in this venture will have to be in agreement with this statement,
and it is standard evangelical stuff.
When I stand before God on that great day
it is to him I will give account - not Take Heed, or the Baptist assoc.
Finally let me say this, one of the
things we are trying to do in this venture is to avoid the ‘chill factor’ that
so many Catholics get when they converse with us evangelicals. Many get so
turned off they miss the very Christ we are trying to introduced
them to. I for one would do not want this to happen. This is why we sought
advice.
If seeking advice is
a crime then I’m guilty, but God is my judge on that (not man), it was me who
sought the advice from
Finally my big challenge to all those who
knocked P2C [‘Power To
Change’], and who
are knocking this café venture. What are you doing, to reach
the many people who never darken a church door in the 21st century?
It seems to me that our time as
Christians would be better spent winning people for Christ, than knocking each
other down.
Cecil,
I
thank you for allowing me this opportunity to respond,
May
God richly bless you in your personal walk with him.
Kind
regards
Hugh
Marcus
Dear Hugh,
Thank you for your further email and I have done my best to identify what you believe
were ‘inaccuracies’. The only one that I have been able to
identify was when you wrote concerning the ‘PS’ in my article –
‘This clearly presumes that you
believed that workers (your term) were not previously going to be free to
discuss doctrinal issues’
It is actually
you Hugh who, through your ‘presumption’, are being ‘inaccurate’ here, as you
appear to have misunderstood that what I wrote was based on the information
given to me that Eugene Boyle’s ‘observations’ would not be
‘taken on board’. If they had been ‘taken on board’ then those working in the
Café would not in consequence have been free to discuss doctrinal matters.
In relation to
your Statement of Faith I do not feel that any useful purpose would be served
by posting it – experience has taught me that often ‘Statements of Faith’ are
easy to write but much harder to adhere to. Your reference to ‘the Baptist
assoc’ left me somewhat puzzled in that you directed this comment to me –
should it not be directed elsewhere?
As to your
‘seeking advice’ – my article has identified the true nature of the ‘advice’
that was given to you. As regards people getting ‘turned off’ when you seek
to approach them with the truth of the Gospel perhaps I could direct you to the
article posted under the WORDS OF WISDOM section of our web site called ‘Earning
The Right To Tell People About Jesus’ by Willie Cowan. Willie, who
labours faithfully for the Lord in Belfast City Centre, certainly did not and
would not seek any ‘advice’ from someone like Eugene Boyle who remains
within and seeks to keep others within a system that “shuts up the kingdom
of heaven against men” [Matthew 23:13].
Finally, if you
can show me where in the following statement from my article that I was ‘knocking
this café venture’ I’d be glad to hear from you.
‘a
strategically located café that will afford opportunities to present the clear
message of the “Gospel of Christ” that Paul was “not ashamed
of” [see Romans
I am
certainly not one to ‘trumpet’ or ‘boast’ about efforts to reach the lost but
in the light of your question, anyone who reads our newsletters will know that
in recent years, thanks to the faithfulness of people who are practical and
prayerful in their support of ‘Take Heed’ etc we sent the testimony tapes of
two former Roman Catholic priests to every priest in Ireland [5688 priests I
think from memory]. At the Millennium we also sent a special gospel booklet to
every priest on the GB mainland – in excess of 6500 priests. In 2002 we sent
the creation video ‘A Question of Origins’ to every MP [659 in total]. As for
private ‘outreach’ well it is just that – ‘private’ but I can assure you very
regular.
In
closing let me say this. The enemy of men’s souls is clearly the motivating
force behind this movie and certainly no Christian should go to watch it as
other articles on our web site clearly show, However as I wrote elsewhere
'We must also of course use any openings provided to us by those
who do watch the film to FULLY explain the truth of The Gospel'.
Any such effort where the biblical truth of ‘Jesus Christ and Him
Crucified’ is faithfully and fully explained to
those lost either in the religions of Roman Catholicism or nominal
Protestantism or of no religion at all will certainly receive my prayerful
support.
Your servant for Christ
Cecil Andrews
‘Take Heed’ Ministries
www.takeheed.net
|
||||||||||
Cecil
Thanks
for your comments.
It’s
unfortunate you didn’t take what I said in the sprit in which it was meant.
I’d
suggest your work and website would be taken more seriously by the church at
large, if you gave people the public right of reply no your website.
I’m
not in the business of naming names, but I think you know the reference to the
Baptist assoc ok, I’m glad he persuaded you not to publish your original
personal comments about me.
In any case I
don’t want this to de-generate, we won’t agree on some things, lets just accept
(as sinners we can’t possibly know the mind of God and that even our best
endeavours fall short, however I for one am grateful that His grace is
sufficient to cover my weaknesses)
Best
regards
Hugh
Marcus
|
Dear
Hugh,
I acknowledge receipt of your further email - once more I am baffled by
comments you make such as
'you didn't take what I said in the
spirit in which it was meant'
- perhaps the fact that I am not 'taken in' by Eugene Boyle, Paddy Monaghan etc
doesn't sit well with your spirit. I'm also amazed that once more you have been
'presumptuously inaccurate' when you wrote
'I'm glad he persuaded you not to publish your original personal
comments about me'
- you are well wide of the mark with this comment. As a result of all
our exchanges I have the assurance that what I have written is completely
'accurate' and is in obedience to Jude 3-4.
You say 'lets just accept as sinners we can't possibly know the mind
of God' - I don't accept what you say for God's Word says "But
we [Christians] have the mind of Christ" and "the mind
of Christ" reveals clearly that Roman Catholicism is not Christian and
should not be 'courted' when seeking to reach the lost for Christ.
In conclusion let me say that there is nothing 'degenerative' about discussing
facts and issues - in fact it can be very healthy in some cases if, as a
result, truthful facts find a home to reside in.
Your servant for Christ
Cecil Andrews
'Take Heed' Ministries
www.takeheed.net
|
||||||||||
Cecil
May
you know the blessing of the Lord in your life
Bye
Hugh
|
Dear Hugh,
May you know the Lord's conviction for the inaccurate accusations [there were no
'inaccuracies' in my article] and statements [no one 'persuaded'
me to drop your name from the article] that you made during our
exchanges and that you apparently see no need to apologise for or repent of.
Your servant for Christ
Cecil Andrews
'Take Heed' Ministries
www.takeheed.net
|
||||||||||
As I
said before God bless you Cecil, now I’ve got work that I need to be getting on
with
Hugh
These
then were the exchanges between myself and the ‘unnamed
person’ who willingly identified himself to me as Hugh Marcus. In
the title of this article I made reference to CARE and set out now is
some information on this organisation and the involvement that Hugh Marcus has
with it.
The
following information is taken from the web site of CARE – the link to it is http://www.care.org.uk/about/
Depending on your needs, there are a number of
ways to find out more about who CARE is and what we're about.
You may find our Annual
Report a useful, yet concise, guide to the services and ethos
CARE espouses. A complete picture of the work of CARE is presented, together
with our accomplishments in the year ending 2002, and our objectives for the
forthcoming year. Perhaps you already know CARE, but you need to get in touch
with us and yet are unsure of the right way. You might find our Contacting
Us section of use. It has been specially designed so that you
may find who you need to speak to as swiftly as possible. In addition, we offer
a contact page where you may fill in your request and it will be routed through
to the right CARE personnel.
If you are working in the media, and are seeking to find
out more about CARE's position on a certain issue, be sure to check out our Media Centre.
Here you will find details on all our latest press releases, whom to contact
for more information and some general statements on our position on key topical
issues of concern to CARE and its supporters.
CARE is unable to make the changes to society it would like
to see by itself. It depends on a large contingent of enthusiastic supporters
to help with the work. If you would like to become more involved in a practical
sense, why not have a look at our Get Involved! section.
You can show your support for a key issues by signing
a relevant petition. Perhaps you would like to consider working for CARE and
are interested in the latest job vacancies and possible roles for volunteers. A
full list of events that CARE is either
hosting, attending or supporting is also available for perusing.
Finally, the work of CARE is very much dependent on the financial goodwill of
our supporters, so please do take a moment to consider making a financial donation.
We are here to help, resource and equip you - if you still cannot find what
you are looking for, call us during office hours on 020 7233 0455 for friendly
help and assistance. Alternatively, send an email to communications@care.org.uk.
Then
in relation to the involvement of Hugh Marcus we read the following from the from the CARE [NI] web site on
this link – http://www.care.org.uk/press/26-06-2003.htm
CARE for
Hugh Marcus, Manager
of CARE for
'I am delighted by
the news that Nigel Williams has been appointed as the first Children's
Commissioner. This is a good day for the vulnerable children of
Why then have I now felt it necessary to make public these
exchanges between Hugh
Marcus
and myself
and also to mention
once more
To back up my assertion that Hugh Marcus sought ‘Evangelical
Catholic guidance and participation’ the following is part of an email that Hugh Marcus sent to Eugene Boyle –
'The attached document is an application form, could you please
run your eye over it and see if there's any language that would create
difficulties for volunteers from Catholic backgrounds. (We'd love it if there
were some who could join us so spread the word)'
Information that is now in my possession shows that there was no
‘naïveté’ on the part of Hugh Marcus but rather this was a calculated strategy and ‘agenda’ on the part of both Hugh Marcus and Stephen Cave and their aim was to keep their hopes for ‘Evangelical Catholic’ involvement hidden from the public.
Earlier you will have read how Hugh Marcus when writing to me said in his first email
to me –
‘whilst accurate in places…I’m taking this opportunity of
asking you whether you would permit me to post a reply on your website stating
the full story and correcting some of the inaccuracies’.
From the information now in my possession Hugh Marcus wrote the following to his fellow workers
–
‘What concerns me most when one looks at
the website, is that all he has there is accurate’
By this statement Hugh Marcus has in effect admitted that he made a false accusation against me
and that in spite of my request for him to ‘apologise for or
repent of’ it he has done
neither.
Hugh
Marcus goes on to further impugn my
character when he wrote the following to his fellow workers –
‘You’ll remember me mentioning this man a while ago. He is very
dangerous…The devil will try (via people like Cecil) to fling mud at us…Most
mainstream leaders see him as a crank’
So, according to Hugh Marcus I am ‘dangerous’, being
used by ‘the
devil to fling mud’ and ‘a
crank’
– whether comments like these about professing Christians are quite in the
spirit of CARE only they will be able to decide.
So, where does the involvement by Stephen Cave of Evangelical
‘We also need to remember that we gave
Hugh Marcus and
‘Hi Hugh, Cecil’s up to his tricks…he’s
done a very devious article, building up an argument to poke holes in, which he
acknowledges at the end is not actually happening, but has a go anyway…’
The reality is
that there was nothing ‘devious’ about my article for as I said earlier ‘the article
was an exposure of the devious suggestions put forward by Eugene Boyle and was
not as some mistakenly thought a ‘condemnation’ of the planned café outreach to
those who view ‘The Passion’ movie’.
However, events surrounding the preparation and publication of my
article have in fact brought to light those who were really being ‘devious’ as they sought to keep hidden from public
knowledge their desire for this venture to be ‘ecumenical’ through ‘Evangelical Catholic’ involvement.
I wrote earlier - ‘I shall
show later, biblically, why I believe it is now imperative for the identity of
this ‘unnamed person’ to be publicly revealed and to show his close
link with Stephen Cave of the so-called Evangelical Alliance [NI]’.
In Paul’s letter to the Galatians he publicly identified
the error of Peter who was co-operating with those who were according to Paul
preaching “another gospel which is not another” [Galatians 1:6-7] and he went on to openly and publicly
challenge Peter [Galatians
Paul had no hesitation in publicly naming and warning
against those who by their beliefs and practices would seek to divide the true
Body of Christ and he wrote in Romans 16:17 “Now I
beseech you brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary
to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them”.
Hugh
Marcus and Stephen
Cave are those who sought to “cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine” of God’s infallible Word by seeking to engage
in fellowship and partnership with those who preach “another
gospel which is not another”
[Galatians 1:6-7] and
so it is quite legitimate according to that same Word to publicly “mark them” as
I have done in this article. [This link will give
further helpful thoughts - http://www.takeheed.net/whentol.htm]
There are many today who claim to be ‘Christian’ and ‘Evangelical’ but
they bear no resemblance to such from former days. Historically ‘Evangelicals’ SEPARATED from error
but the ‘New Evangelicals’ INTEGRATE with error. Historically ‘Evangelicals’ REJECTED error but the ‘New Evangelicals’ TOLERATE
error. Historically ‘Evangelicals’ CONFRONTED error but
the ‘New Evangelicals’ CO-OPERATE with error.
There are sincere Christians seeking to reach the lost
through this ‘Belfast Passion Café’ outreach [I know this through other email
exchanges] and I pray the Lord will bless their endeavours but nowhere in
Scripture is the cause of Christ to be willingly and knowingly linked to those
who may say what appears to be ‘the truth’ but who are in reality guided by “another spirit” –
those are the lessons to be learned from a close study of Acts 16:16-18 and 2 Corinthians 11: 3-4 & 13-15.
Cecil Andrews – Take Heed’ Ministries –