Thread: Spiritual Coverings

I haven't heard anything in regards to spiritual coverings in a long time until I ran into this article yesterday. Do you agree, disagree...did the idea really originate in the 70's charismatic movement?


Why Pastors, Elders, & Husbands Are Not Your “Spiritual Covering”

-When I first began blogging and doing ministry online, I wrote something controversial on Facebook (imagine that). What I wrote offended one of my friends, and she asked me who my “spiritual covering” was.

In some recent movements in the Christian world, a “spiritual covering” is a person who supposedly has more spiritual authority than other Christians – normally a pastor, elder, or priest of some sort. I was taken aback by the question and at that point I did not know the biblical answer, so I wrote back and said,

“My dad is my spiritual covering. He has been a pastor and mentor my whole life.”

My answer makes me cringe now, because it’s not true.

The truth is that the Bible never mentions the need for any sort of “spiritual covering” to do ministry or to make life decisions. The idea of Christians needing a “spiritual covering” originated in the 1970s, out of the charismatic movement.

Many pastors, elders, and husbands have used the idea to manipulate, control, and spiritually abuse less knowledgeable and more vulnerable Christians.

Often, 1 Peter 5 is used to support the need for Christians to submit to their pastors, elders, and husbands as their “spiritual covering.” In the text, Peter is encouraging church leaders to care for their congregation, but there is no indication that leaders have more “spiritual authority” than other Christians.

Rather, there is indication that church leaders have been given a sort of “earthly authority” to do their job and Peter clearly writes, “Do not lord it over those in your charge, but be examples to the flock (1 Peter 5:3).” A godly leader leads by example and never seeks to control others.

“Spiritual authority” comes from the Holy Spirit who lives within every Christian (1 Corinthians 3:16). The Holy Spirit that lives inside of one’s pastor or elder is the same Holy Spirit that lives inside of all Christians.

Therefore, every Christian has an equal amount of “spiritual authority” to minister to the world and to make their own life decisions, with the Holy Spirit’s guidance.

Jesus commissioned and empowered all of us when He said...

http://www.jorymicah.com/why-pastors...tual-covering/

Good article. As I said in another thread, I refuse to call myself Charismatic. Too many abuses.

We were in two abusive churches during the "Shepherding movement" of the 1970s. The main guys were the "Florida Four." Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, Don Basham, and Charles Simpson.

One of the roots of the movement was based on Watchman Nee's book "Spiritual Authority." As with everything that gets abused in the church (deliverance, tongues, healing, etc.), there was a truth there that I believe God wanted to restore to the church, but man got his hands on it and it turned to abuse. The truth is that a lot of Christians are weak today and easy prey for the enemy because there is no accountability in their life. They are not submitted to godly authority in the way God designed it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepherding_Movement

Fundamentally, Christians were weak until Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was sent from heaven. Jesus told his disciples not to call anyone teacher except God. Then Jesus did what he saw the Father do and he sent the Holy Spirit to be with us in his stead. He also gave us his Word as a testimony of him and the Holy Spirit vivifies that Word and searches all things including the depths of God. Every believer is a servant and can only aspire to serve well in and through the Holy Spirit, including when serving others in bringing them to maturity.

All too often, the people I've seen who refuse to come under a "spiritual covering" are the ones who are a french fry short of a happy meal and can't be trusted. They want to do their own thang and be accountable to no one.

I read "spiritual covering" more as accountability but I also certainly get what the author is saying.

I've been in the place of having a "spiritual covering" -->pastor<-- who just about stomped the life out of me spiritually. But God wouldn't let us leave... We have a new pastor now, praise God, and we're so thankful for him and his lovely wife. Anxious to see what the next few years hold.

VERY INSIGHTFUL BOOK REVIEW FROM AMAZON:Reading this book puts you under such a heavy burden of fear and guilt that you forget that Jesus said His yoke is easy and His burden is light. Instead John Bevere repeatedly takes scripture out of context to get you to believe that you have to take full responsibility for other people's decisions but you have no ability to make your own decisions. Where's that verse in the Bible?

We were shocked that Bevere actually writes on page 159 "It doesn't matter what you believe you heard in prayer; you are rebelling against God's authority if it goes against the orders of authorities in your life." Ouch! How could Bevere teach that we are to obey man rather than God? Then he completely contradicts himself on page 195 when he describes disobeying the wishes of his parents when he dropped out of studying mechanical engineering in college to study for the ministry. Why would Bevere first say that you cannot disobey the wishes of the "delegated authority" in your life---including your parents---then say that the rules don't apply to himself? Because deep inside he knows that believers are supposed to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit over the wishes of our families and pastors.

This book gets really disturbing when Bevere goes even further and slams American values by talking about how wrong our American system is "that is not the way of God's kingdom" (page 187-188) and how much better life was under the absolute rule of kings. Bevere writes on page 107 "do we live by democratic rule or by the laws of the kingdom of Heaven?" Hang on a second. Look at President John Quincy Adam's famous quote that "the highest glory of the American Revolution was that it combined in one indissolvable bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity." In other words we are truly blessed to live in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Bevere doesn't seem to understand how horrible life was under the ancient system of feudalism where the peasants were bound to the land---they had no rights at all. Why is Bevere recommending the system that our forefathers overcame in the Revolutionary War?

Moving right along, Bevere has some personal opinions on scripture that don't make any sense at all. For example...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-re...SIN=0785269916

Totally agree with the article sort of disagreeing with "...Husbands Are Not Your “Spiritual Covering”. Just depends on what she means by that. I think 1 cor. 11:3 is saying that a husband covers his wife, just like Jesus covers the husband and the Father covers Jesus. But maybe covering isn't the right word, although Paul does then talk about covering there.

Originally Posted by LionHeart

VERY INSIGHTFUL BOOK REVIEW FROM AMAZON:Reading this book puts you under such a heavy burden of fear and guilt that you forget that Jesus said His yoke is easy and His burden is light. Instead John Bevere repeatedly takes scripture out of context to get you to believe that you have to take full responsibility for other people's decisions but you have no ability to make your own decisions. Where's that verse in the Bible?

We were shocked that Bevere actually writes on page 159 "It doesn't matter what you believe you heard in prayer; you are rebelling against God's authority if it goes against the orders of authorities in your life." Ouch! How could Bevere teach that we are to obey man rather than God? Then he completely contradicts himself on page 195 when he describes disobeying the wishes of his parents when he dropped out of studying mechanical engineering in college to study for the ministry. Why would Bevere first say that you cannot disobey the wishes of the "delegated authority" in your life---including your parents---then say that the rules don't apply to himself? Because deep inside he knows that believers are supposed to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit over the wishes of our families and pastors.

This book gets really disturbing when Bevere goes even further and slams American values by talking about how wrong our American system is "that is not the way of God's kingdom" (page 187-188) and how much better life was under the absolute rule of kings. Bevere writes on page 107 "do we live by democratic rule or by the laws of the kingdom of Heaven?" Hang on a second. Look at President John Quincy Adam's famous quote that "the highest glory of the American Revolution was that it combined in one indissolvable bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity." In other words we are truly blessed to live in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Bevere doesn't seem to understand how horrible life was under the ancient system of feudalism where the peasants were bound to the land---they had no rights at all. Why is Bevere recommending the system that our forefathers overcame in the Revolutionary War?

Moving right along, Bevere has some personal opinions on scripture that don't make any sense at all. For example...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-re...SIN=0785269916

Yeah, that book is so off it isn't funny.

Originally Posted by Bookman

We were in two abusive churches during the "Shepherding movement" of the 1970s. The main guys were the "Florida Four." Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, Don Basham, and Charles Simpson.

One of the roots of the movement was based on Watchman Nee's book "Spiritual Authority." As with everything that gets abused in the church (deliverance, tongues, healing, etc.), there was a truth there that I believe God wanted to restore to the church, but man got his hands on it and it turned to abuse. The truth is that a lot of Christians are weak today and easy prey for the enemy because there is no accountability in their life. They are not submitted to godly authority in the way God designed it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepherding_Movement

hey book we didn't experience the shepherding movement until the early and mid 80's here in the carolina's with the covenant churches. it didn't hit the raleigh area until 82 mid 83. needless to say alot of people were hurt by the movement here. the spiritual covering was oppressive causing many to reject christianity. at the church we attended we had small group leaders follow men and women around grading them on their spirituality and then they had to meet with the pastors once a week to be criticed and corrected. the women criticized my wife because she wasn't giving me babies. they didn't bother to ask her why she was not getting pregnant. they thought she was being selfish when she was told she could never conceive. it was not until the mid 80's a young man named meheshe chavda prayed for her that she conceived. i will not sit under anyones covering but i do have a Paul, a Barnabas and a couple of others who guide me in my ministry that i really trust.

Originally Posted by fuego

Totally agree with the article sort of disagreeing with "...Husbands Are Not Your “Spiritual Covering”. Just depends on what she means by that. I think 1 cor. 11:3 is saying that a husband covers his wife, just like Jesus covers the husband and the Father covers Jesus. But maybe covering isn't the right word, although Paul does then talk about covering there.

Paul is discussing a custom that the Corinthians had that they apparently tried to apply within a Christian context and Paul is pointing out that they dont make any sense. This part of it :

14*Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?

directly contradicts the Nasiree vow from the law and general Jewish customs from that time. He goes on to sum it up :

16*But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor*do*the churches of God

meaning that noone else was attemtping to apply such a custom within a Christian context. Which implies that we should be very careful with applying what he is discussing in that chapter directly.