A fundamental and simple question, surely? Yet one which some within The Westminster Tradition would be unable to answer. Those who give the officially endorsed answer of Elijah Chacko (that it’s a ministry) will probably struggle to substantiate why. This is because the whole construct is a chimera. Internally it supplants the ordinances and government of a biblically constituted church. Externally it maintains the veneer of a ministry.
Historically, Elijah Chacko did not believe in ministries e.g. children’s ministry, music ministry, ministry among the poor etc. He has always made a clear distinction between church and state. Ministries blur this distinction, being neither. Elijah has also repeatedly denounced Bible Colleges. One reason is that they are not usually administered by a church. Why then the apparent U-turn? Why is ‘The Westminster Tradition’ a ministry and not a church? Elijah Chacko is welcome to leave a Scriptural justification if he would like. But I believe it is because it gives him greater control. Christ might be the Head of His Church. But Elijah is the head of The Westminster Tradition. In ‘Our Special Mandate’, in which Elijah Chacko defines his ministry, he speaks of…
- ‘delegations dispatched overseas’: delegations are ‘persons deputed to act for another, or for others’ (Noah Webster 1828). They are dispatched by Elijah to act for Elijah.
- ‘leaders and representatives of our ministry’: these delegations, leaders, deputies and representatives are not representing the church, but ‘our ministry’.
- ‘unwisely mix the special mandate and the Great Commission’: the former is the supposed responsibility of ‘The Westminster Tradition’; the latter the responsibility of the church [N.B. ‘many delegations’ do this because they’re confused, having been taught that those in The Westminster Tradition are ‘the true church’. If so, they struggle to understand how they are not also bound to fulfil the Great Commission].
- ‘They are fulfilling their own agendas’: as opposed to Elijah Chacko’s agenda.
- ‘the corpus of doctrines he had given to them’: as Elijah individually and exclusively lays claim to the special mandate, the ministry and the agenda, so he lays claim to the doctrines [though he immediately contradicts himself stating they are not novel… and therefore how his?]. Though he says ‘our ministry’, it is only insofar as they associate with his ministry.
- ‘what he proclaims… is… what our Lord, Paul, the Apostles… had faithfully declared. Our restoration is founded on the Historic Faith… of our forebears… our goal is to admonish people all over the world to repent… our greatest emphasis is on the subjective aspect of the Gospel’: no wonder many unfortunate brethren (‘who do not have enough of the grey matter nor sufficient spiritual acumen nor special anointing’) are a little confused about the difference between Elijah Chacko’s special mandate and the Great Commission. No wonder most of them, professing to marvel at the depth and clarity of Elijah’s statement (which is in truth nonsense and contradiction), opt to quote ad verbatim from Elijah’s own words. It’s the safest option they had.
It is clear that those who carry out the Great Commission are representatives of Jesus Christ (Matt 28:20) and are sent out by the local church (Acts 13:3). Those who carry out the ‘special mandate’ are representatives of Elijah Chacko and are sent out by Elijah Chacko. The Great Commission is to the unbelieving nations. The special mandate is to ‘the Protestant constituency’. By making this distinction, Elijah seeks to validate such a ministry. Other churches would never accept him to be the head of the church. They are willing to recognise him as the head of The Westminster Tradition. Styling his special mandate as a function of ministry rather than church therefore gives him more legitimacy and screens him from the censure of all but the most discerning churches.
The Westminster Tradition’s manner of operating is to send missionaries (usually uninvited) to Protestant churches worldwide in order to correct their apostasy and ‘restore all things’ (Matt 17:11). What church or denomination would welcome such an intrusion – such an imposition? Therefore whilst privately Elijah professes the world is his parish (i.e. the worldwide Protestant constituency), his missionaries are publicly taught to say that they have come to help and to serve their Protestant brethren… that they have not come to make disciples (the Great Commission), but just to teach the historic doctrines of the Reformers and Puritans and to warn against presumption. Well, that’s a different matter! Many might be glad to accept help from a Protestant ministry which claims to be scriptural, orthodox and historic. Elijah states that ‘we are not there so much to start new churches… as far as it is possible’. But he knows full well that once the honeymoon is over and his particular heresies are conveyed, very few churches will receive such a ‘corpus of doctrines… given to him by the clear and special illumination of the Holy Spirit’. He knows that in the majority of cases it is only possible to cream off whatever proselytes he can. The rest can go to hell.
Having established some reasons why Elijah Chacko might style ‘The Westminster Tradition’ a ministry and not a church, it remains to highlight some contradictions.
- Why is Elijah Chacko called ‘pastor’ by those in his ministry? A pastor is a church officer, ordained by a single congregation. Who elected him? Who ordained him? Over which church does he have charge? In fact, he is not only called ‘pastor’, but ‘presiding pastor’ – indicating that he presides over many churches. Both title and office are unscriptural and popish.
- If ‘The Westminster Tradition’ is not a church, then why is it that every person within this ministry has separated from their former church? Where do they worship? “We worship with a local congregation,” they will say. They will likely cite Matt 18:20 as the definition of a church. And who leads you? “Our local pastors and elders,” will be the answer. And who appointed these pastors and elders? Elijah Chacko (or his deputies). Who oversees the local churches? Representatives of ‘The Westminster Tradition’! When is the Lord’s Supper convened? At Westminster Tradition conferences! When are the majority of baptisms performed? At Westminster Tradition conferences! Who resolves your church disputes and problems? Elijah Chacko or delegates of ‘The Westminster Tradition’! Where does ‘anointed preaching’ take place? Wherever Elijah Chacko is i.e. at Westminster Tradition conferences. Where are the majority of church tithes sent? To ‘The Westminster Tradition’!
- If ‘The Westminster Tradition’ is a ministry, then why is re-baptism essentially a surrogate for membership? The Westminster Tradition has released several baptismal publications, in which Elijah Chacko is credited before anyone else as being ‘administrator and overall supervisor’. No mention is made of local pastors, elders or deacons, but only of ‘those [officers] who assisted pastor in the administration of baptism in the waters.’ But why is it made very clear at baptism, that candidates are publicly identifying with Elijah Chacko’s person, ministry and doctrines? There is ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph 4:5). Therefore, if representatives of ‘The Westminster Tradition’ are baptising those who respond to their ‘special mandate’, they only prove that their ‘special mandate’ is a perversion and usurpation of the Great Commission, in which Jesus commands His disciples to ‘Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matt 28:19).’
Views: 415