The Shepherding/Covering Doctrine

[Paul Christensen]

The Shepherding movement was initiated in the 1970s by the "Fort Lauderdale Five" (Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, Charles Simpson, Don Basham, and Ern Baxter). It consisted of the requirement that believers should be place under a shepherd and discipled into order to come closer to God and develop in his Christian experience. This is the same as the "Covering" doctrine. where believers need to be "covered" by a discipler; or in the case of a small independent fellowship group, to be "covered" by an established church.

There is nothing wrong with this in principle, and the movement and doctrine started off okay, and proved to be a benefit for many young believers and small fellowship groups. But after a short while, those with a "power and control" attitude corrupted the movement and doctrine, making it a requirement , otherwise the believer, "would no longer be part of the body of Christ, but a wandering, rebellious star". This implied that being shepherded and under the covering were essential to retaining one's salvation.

This meant that believers were required to add Shepherding and Covering to their salvation. But this is in total contradiction to:

“Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of works? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law” (Romans 3:27-29) and “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness “ (Romans 4:5).

What this means is that those who accept Shepherding and being under the Covering for the purpose of establishing their salvation as an addition to their commitment to Christ, are actually insulting God by trying to "pay" for God's free gift. In fact, it is denying the salvation that Christ offers them, and adopting another "salvation" that includes "works" in order to remain acceptable to God.

And those who force the Shepherding and Covering doctrine on to believers, threatening them that they would not be part of the body of Christ if they refused, are promulgating another gospel which Jesus never brought to the world. In a real sense they are presenting another Jesus who requires works to be added to faith in order to remain saved. These people are preaching doctrines of devils and are not only bringing condemnation on themselves but on those they are brainwashing to accept their false teaching.

Derek Prince abandoned the Shepherding movement as soon as he saw the corruptions, and Bob Mumford issued a public apology and pleaded forgiveness from the Christian community.

As a result of the corrupted, demonised version of the movement and doctrine, multitudes of innocent believers have been harmed and damaged, some abandoning the church and even Christ.

My advice is to avoid Shepherding and Covering like the plague, especially if it is a requirement in your church. If it is, flee from that church for your spiritual life!

It is not wrong to voluntarily choose a mentor, especially if the Holy Spirit brings one across your path. A Holy Spirit mentor will not exercise "power and control" over your personal life, or which church to attend, where you should work, who you should marry, or how you should spend your money. But the "power and control" ones will, to your detriment.

Your salvation depends on your faith alone in the Christ who took upon Himself your sin on the cross and offered salvation to you as a totally free gift. Any other gospel is false and will not save you.

 

[Enoch111]

My advice is to avoid Shepherding and Covering like the plague,

Is this false movement not obsolete at this point?

 

[Stumpmaster]

Is this false movement not obsolete at this point?

"Heavy Shepherding" is still practiced in the Potter's House cult which we have in NZ. I would also put Destiny Church in the frame.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Is this false movement not obsolete at this point?

No. It is still around. I have a friend in Wellington who manages a ministry. He went to a local Pentecostal church with the thought of joining with them. They told him that his ministry needed to come under their covering and they will make all the decisions concerning the management of it. My friend calls it the "smothering" doctrine. He decided not to play their game and walked away from that church. It seems that the Life Church movement, in New Zealand anyway, is still hanging on to the doctrine.

 

[Paul Christensen]

"Heavy Shepherding" is still practiced in the Potter's House cult which we have in NZ. I would also put Destiny Church in the frame.

Any believer who knows his or her Bible and wants to keep away from "doctrines of devils" should avoid both of those churches like the plague!

 

[Pathfinder7]

The Shepherding movement was initiated in the 1970s by the "Fort Lauderdale Five" (Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, Charles Simpson, Don Basham, and Ern Baxter). It consisted of the requirement that believers should be place under a shepherd and discipled into order to come closer to God and develop in his Christian experience. This is the same as the "Covering" doctrine. where believers need to be "covered" by a discipler; or in the case of a small independent fellowship group, to be "covered" by an established church.

There is nothing wrong with this in principle, and the movement and doctrine started off okay, and proved to be a benefit for many young believers and small fellowship groups. But after a short while, those with a "power and control" attitude corrupted the movement and doctrine, making it a requirement , otherwise the believer, "would no longer be part of the body of Christ, but a wandering, rebellious star". This implied that being shepherded and under the covering were essential to retaining one's salvation.

This meant that believers were required to add Shepherding and Covering to their salvation. But this is in total contradiction to:

“Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of works? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law” (Romans 3:27-29) and “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness “ (Romans 4:5).

What this means is that those who accept Shepherding and being under the Covering for the purpose of establishing their salvation as an addition to their commitment to Christ, are actually insulting God by trying to "pay" for God's free gift. In fact, it is denying the salvation that Christ offers them, and adopting another "salvation" that includes "works" in order to remain acceptable to God.

And those who force the Shepherding and Covering doctrine on to believers, threatening them that they would not be part of the body of Christ if they refused, are promulgating another gospel which Jesus never brought to the world. In a real sense they are presenting another Jesus who requires works to be added to faith in order to remain saved. These people are preaching doctrines of devils and are not only bringing condemnation on themselves but on those they are brainwashing to accept their false teaching.

Derek Prince abandoned the Shepherding movement as soon as he saw the corruptions, and Bob Mumford issued a public apology and pleaded forgiveness from the Christian community.

As a result of the corrupted, demonised version of the movement and doctrine, multitudes of innocent believers have been harmed and damaged, some abandoning the church and even Christ.

My advice is to avoid Shepherding and Covering like the plague, especially if it is a requirement in your church. If it is, flee from that church for your spiritual life!

It is not wrong to voluntarily choose a mentor, especially if the Holy Spirit brings one across your path. A Holy Spirit mentor will not exercise "power and control" over your personal life, or which church to attend, where you should work, who you should marry, or how you should spend your money. But the "power and control" ones will, to your detriment.

Your salvation depends on your faith alone in the Christ who took upon Himself your sin on the cross and offered salvation to you as a totally free gift. Any other gospel is false and will not save you.

Good post.
I remember.. 'Fort Lauderdale Five.'
----
Original concept/idea was okay.
- Especially for helping new believers.
It was inevitable..what happened later.
- When it became.. power focused system/establishment.
----
'Well known college ministries' used similar concept/idea.
- Discipleship.
- Sometimes..it got into trouble.
---
Some churches still have 'shepherding/covering' concept..nowadays.
- For power, manipulation,etc..

 

[Hidden In Him]

No. It is still around. I have a friend in Wellington who manages a ministry. He went to a local Pentecostal church with the thought of joining with them. They told him that his ministry needed to come under their covering and they will make all the decisions concerning the management of it. My friend calls it the "smothering" doctrine. He decided not to play their game and walked away from that church. It seems that the Life Church movement, in New Zealand anyway, is still hanging on to the doctrine.

I would like to think it was over myself, but I see milder versions of it to this day, especially among the Hispanic community and especially concerning things like where people's money goes. My wife told me of a church a friend started going to recently that won't allow her membership until she shows them copies of her tax returns, so they can know if she's tithing the full amount of her income or not.

It's really sad. The saddest part is how people are still so weak-minded and easily led that they will submit to such control over their personal lives. Then they want to blame God when they get taken advantage of, when they should have listened to Him from the start and learned to recognize the True Shepherd's voice well enough to avoid all that nonsense to begin with.

 

[Pearl]

We are covered by the blood of Jesus. Something made me re-consider the story of the prodigal son the other day. The younger son went his way but repented and returned to his father. The father did not condemn his young son but welcomed him home with rejoicing. He placed a cloak over him to cover his tattered and dirty garments and placed a ring on his finger. Now I know that many of you will already have seen this but I believe that God shows us truths at different times and I suddenly saw that the ‘cloak is the cloak of righteousness and the ring is like the seal of the Holy Spirit which guarantees our inheritance.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

I'm to the point now I don't think Christians should attend anything beyond a Bible study that includes prayer, and praise and worship.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

The Shepherding movement was initiated in the 1970s by the "Fort Lauderdale Five" (Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, Charles Simpson, Don Basham, and Ern Baxter). It consisted of the requirement that believers should be place under a shepherd and discipled into order to come closer to God and develop in his Christian experience. This is the same as the "Covering" doctrine. where believers need to be "covered" by a discipler; or in the case of a small independent fellowship group, to be "covered" by an established church.

There is nothing wrong with this in principle, and the movement and doctrine started off okay, and proved to be a benefit for many young believers and small fellowship groups. But after a short while, those with a "power and control" attitude corrupted the movement and doctrine, making it a requirement , otherwise the believer, "would no longer be part of the body of Christ, but a wandering, rebellious star". This implied that being shepherded and under the covering were essential to retaining one's salvation.

This meant that believers were required to add Shepherding and Covering to their salvation. But this is in total contradiction to:

“Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of works? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law” (Romans 3:27-29) and “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness “ (Romans 4:5).

What this means is that those who accept Shepherding and being under the Covering for the purpose of establishing their salvation as an addition to their commitment to Christ, are actually insulting God by trying to "pay" for God's free gift. In fact, it is denying the salvation that Christ offers them, and adopting another "salvation" that includes "works" in order to remain acceptable to God.

And those who force the Shepherding and Covering doctrine on to believers, threatening them that they would not be part of the body of Christ if they refused, are promulgating another gospel which Jesus never brought to the world. In a real sense they are presenting another Jesus who requires works to be added to faith in order to remain saved. These people are preaching doctrines of devils and are not only bringing condemnation on themselves but on those they are brainwashing to accept their false teaching.

Derek Prince abandoned the Shepherding movement as soon as he saw the corruptions, and Bob Mumford issued a public apology and pleaded forgiveness from the Christian community.

As a result of the corrupted, demonised version of the movement and doctrine, multitudes of innocent believers have been harmed and damaged, some abandoning the church and even Christ.

My advice is to avoid Shepherding and Covering like the plague, especially if it is a requirement in your church. If it is, flee from that church for your spiritual life!

It is not wrong to voluntarily choose a mentor, especially if the Holy Spirit brings one across your path. A Holy Spirit mentor will not exercise "power and control" over your personal life, or which church to attend, where you should work, who you should marry, or how you should spend your money. But the "power and control" ones will, to your detriment.

Your salvation depends on your faith alone in the Christ who took upon Himself your sin on the cross and offered salvation to you as a totally free gift. Any other gospel is false and will not save you.

Reminds me of the Accountability Groups movement in the 90's. Sounds good at first but ends up being intrusive. Since our opinions differ widely about what constitutes the obedient Christian life I think it best that we just read the Bible, pray for each other, and praise and worship together in small groups, kept in line by recognized leaders within the body and leave each person's individual private life to sort out between them and God.

 

[marks]

We are covered by the blood of Jesus. Something made me re-consider the story of the prodigal son the other day. The younger son went his way but repented and returned to his father. The father did not condemn his young son but welcomed him home with rejoicing. He placed a cloak over him to cover his tattered and dirty garments and placed a ring on his finger. Now I know that many of you will already have seen this but I believe that God shows us truths at different times and I suddenly saw that the ‘cloak is the cloak of righteousness and the ring is like the seal of the Holy Spirit which guarantees our inheritance.

Amen!!

 

[Paul Christensen]

I would like to think it was over myself, but I see milder versions of it to this day, especially among the Hispanic community and especially concerning things like where people's money goes. My wife told me of a church a friend started going to recently that won't allow her membership until she shows them copies of her tax returns, so they can know if she's tithing the full amount of her income or not.

It's really sad. The saddest part is how people are still so weak-minded and easily led that they will submit to such control over their personal lives. Then they want to blame God when they get taken advantage of, when they should have listened to Him from the start and learned to recognize the True Shepherd's voice well enough to avoid all that nonsense to begin with.

I think the church friend should get out of that church as fast as her little legs can carry her! These spiritual abusers pick on vulnerable people, especially women, who find it difficult to stand up for themselves against abuses like that.

I heard the story of a victim in a Bible college whose "shepherd" would collect tithes from him. That's thieving in my book!

 

[Paul Christensen]

Reminds me of the Accountability Groups movement in the 90's. Sounds good at first but ends up being intrusive. Since our opinions differ widely about what constitutes the obedient Christian life I think it best that we just read the Bible, pray for each other, and praise and worship together in small groups, kept in line by recognized leaders within the body and leave each person's individual private life to sort out between them and God.

I've heard of the Accountability doctrine as well. I never personally experienced it because I was away from direct involvement in a Pentecostal church since the late 1970s.

I am in the process of writing a book about the Shepherding/Covering doctrine and when it is finished, proofread, and commented on by my trusted mentor author, who encouraged me to write Christian books and has been very helpful and encouraging without making me alter the content except where he can see a glaring error, which is rare given quite a number of books that I have had him proofread for me. It is always good as an author to have a trusted proofreader who can offer suggestions, points that I might have missed, and ensure that quotes are accurate. Even though he may have differed in theology, he has never coerced me to change mine. Having mentors like that is very good, and nothing like the Covering/Accountability type.

 

[Pearl]

I would like to think it was over myself, but I see milder versions of it to this day, especially among the Hispanic community and especially concerning things like where people's money goes. My wife told me of a church a friend started going to recently that won't allow her membership until she shows them copies of her tax returns, so they can know if she's tithing the full amount of her income or not.

It's really sad. The saddest part is how people are still so weak-minded and easily led that they will submit to such control over their personal lives. Then they want to blame God when they get taken advantage of, when they should have listened to Him from the start and learned to recognize the True Shepherd's voice well enough to avoid all that nonsense to begin with.

That is despicable.

 

[Paul Christensen]

A point that I want to make about Accountability. We are not required by the Lord to be accountable to anyone but Him. The Scripture says that we must all give account to the Lord. But it does not include giving account to any man or woman/

Now this does not apply to how husbands and wives spend the family income, or the church treasurer accounting for income and expenses, or an employee accounting to his employer seeing that the employer is paying for his time at work.

However, there is an Accounting requirement in the church. That is in the giving of prophecies. The Scripture says that people can prophesy and the others judge. This means that anyone getting up and giving a prophesy must be prepared to account for it to the others. This includes preaching. Accountability is important to ensure that our preaching is on the basis of sound doctrine, therefore every prophet and preacher needs to be teachable. When I was preaching in my Auckland Presbyterian church I was thankful to have three good, mature men who were not afraid to correct me on method of delivery and doctrine. They gave me valuable support and advice over the years, and I'm sure it made me a better preacher and worship leader.

Paul had to deal with married women in the Corinthian church interrupting speakers with loud questioning, disrupting the flow of the meeting. His instruction was that these nuisance women should keep silence and ask their husbands at home if they had questions about the prophecies or teaching in the meeting. It seems that these women thought that the speakers and prophets were accountable to them!

But I am not accountable to anyone concerning where I go to church, what I wear, who I married, what I do at home, where I work, what I read, how much money I put in the plate, what church meetings I decide to attend, or whether I attend any meetings at all! Or whether I decide to go to the doctor, or not, when I get sick.

There are busybodies in all our churches who think that everyone has to be accountable to them, and they don't hesitate to criticize, gossip, and make an overall nuisance of themselves.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Can anyone give me some background on the Accountability requirement in some churches? References in Google are hard to find.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

But I am not accountable to anyone concerning where I go to church, what I wear, who I married, what I do at home, where I work, what I read, how much money I put in the plate, what church meetings I decide to attend, or whether I attend any meetings at all! Or whether I decide to go to the doctor, or not, when I get sick.

What especially irked me was how churches would devote themselves exclusively to the one gift and calling of evangelism and they shamed you for not being excited about it and not being involved in their misguided evangelism efforts.

 

[Stumpmaster]

Can anyone give me some background on the Accountability requirement in some churches? References in Google are hard to find.

After branching out from my Anglican heritage in the 1980's I began hearing a lot about Accountability in the charismatic movement, mainly Christian Fellowship/New Life, AOG, & Apostolic, but also the Full Gospel Businessmen's Fellowship International. Although based on Scripture there is a mix of pop-psychology and a patronising element in quarters where the doctrine is taken to extreme.

1Cor 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
2Cor 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether you be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know you not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except you be reprobates?
Jas 5:16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that you may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much.

 

[Paul Christensen]

After branching out from my Anglican heritage in the 1980's I began hearing a lot about Accountability in the charismatic movement, mainly Christian Fellowship/New Life, AOG, & Apostolic, but also the Full Gospel Businessmen's Fellowship International. Although based on Scripture there is a mix of pop-psychology and a patronising element in quarters where the doctrine is taken to extreme.

1Cor 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
2Cor 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether you be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know you not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except you be reprobates?
Jas 5:16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that you may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much.

Trouble is that the movement got corrupted by "power and control" leaders who used "spiritual authority" to gather disciples to themselves. I am in the process of writing a book called, Are You Sure Your Shepherd Is Not A Wolf In Disguise? I will publish it once my friend has proofread it.

 

[Pearl]

My church started off in somebody's home and grew from there as part of the Restoration Movement. Anybody was welcome to come to the gatherings but to join we had to do what they called commitment classes in groups of twelve.

Most of us had come from all the other more traditional church backgrounds but the classes were so that we could find out what the the church was about and so that they could also get to know us. The women wore head coverings and we were taught about 'authority' and were encouraged to talk to one of the four leaders before making big decisions. I remember when we planned to move house we went to talk to one of the leaders who discouraged it but we went ahead anyway and it was okay. It was a wonderful time with so many members that you had to get there early to get a seat in a 400 seater hall.

It was great for a while but there was some sort of falling out within the movement and it split and our bit became independent and less strict. Somewhere along the line I think they lost their vision for a while but our pastor has seen that and is now seeking God to get us back on track.