Against Anarchy
One of the challenges we must grapple with in the Freedom protest movement is the complicated mix of elements involved. There is evidence of everything from statist infiltration in the movement, to some individuals that have held racist views. Not every part of the protests has been defensible. I have sprinkled sober warnings throughout my blog posts about some parts of these protests, but I think it has been lost on many. More than anything, Christians need to be aware that there are some false teachers who are involved.
Let me be clear: this is not an exercise in guilt-by-association. I fully believe in Christian liberty to participate in freedom protests thus far, and I have defended that. I despise the cancel-culture methods being used by many Christians to point fingers at one another. If a cause is righteous, Christians may take it up. Not every one is obligated to participate, but some will feel compelled in their conscience. That should, however, be done in distinctively upright ways.
Back to the main point. There have been several evidences that the movement was a collection of sinners, as all movements are. Some sinners, however, were all-too unashamed of their sin. I think it is helpful to summarize:
1. Some of the prominent voices in the movement proposed “revolutionary” solutions.
2. Some of the protestors used prominent **** Trudeau flags and other offensive messaging.
3. Some of the protestors were drunken, carousing, or disorderly at times.
4. Some prominent voices in the movement have espoused violence and racism in the past.
5. Some of the associated border blockades were troubling.
Now, in each case, those were the minority of a movement which clearly includes millions of Canadians. The diversity of the village and the field was brought to the city, which was not surprising to us "peasants." Even more, over time, much of the movement actually moved in the direction of restraint, peaceableness, and respect for government. This is what the detractors are missing. Cooler heads prevailed, and blockades dissolved. They laid off the horns. Many protestors attempted to make concessions, they moved out of certain neighborhoods. Neither the police nor property were substantially attacked. Revolutionary-sounding proposals were replaced by requests. The number of protestors using positive messaging or polite flags across Canada vastly outnumbered the more negative. A very diverse coalition of like-minded people formed, including many immigrants and minorities.
My main concern continues to be with some of the theological errors that are woven through the movement. Now, to be fair, many good things were preached from the stages. It would be very possible that people were genuinely converted at the protests. There was some very appropriate gospel preaching, and there were appropriate calls to prayer. The protest turned towards adopting more of a historically Christian stance towards government as it developed. Some of the prominent leaders are actually more balanced than some would assume.
Some other speakers, however, ranged from error to rank heresy. Some on the stages have a very high view of humanity, and of their own “moral compass.” They rely on their dreams, and their self-will rather than God’s Word. Some even seem to adopt messaging and approaches that give the appearance of a literal church-militant that is intent on dethroning government. There are those that need to be specifically warned about.
Especially the presence of Henry Hildebrandt and the Aylmer “Church of God Restoration” has been deeply concerning. I grew up in the St. Thomas area and I often worked in the Aylmer area, including at the Aylmer farmer’s market. I have been familiar with this group for decades. There have been a number of serious issues, including:
1. The Church of God Restoration has a "Chief Apostle,” Ray Tinsman, who is seen as infallible.
2. They are calling for Christians to “exit the system.” This is a direction towards anarchy.
3. They have had charges of child abuse against members of their community due to practices of spanking with sticks, whips, and electrical cords. This goes back decades.
What is the disease underneath such symptoms? Sadly, they have a high view of themselves. They believe that Christian perfection can be achieved on this earth. They assume that they are able to govern themselves, and can live by their own laws. In living “separate” from the world, they call for the church leaders to be their own pseudo-government. Their "apostles" are a government to themselves. Thus they also impose long lists of external rules on their communities, including how to dress, what to own, and in various other areas that should be matters of Christian liberty. Some of those rules are literally unmentionable. They assume that they have higher revelation than any other church. They think that they alone are the continuation of the church of the book of Acts. They often emphasize their particular understanding of the end times as authoritative. Their “Chief Apostle” is a false christ, he even takes the place of Christ in claiming to be able to add to the Word of God.
There is a theological system behind this movement that has existed for centuries. It has the same roots as those of the radical anabaptists behind the horrific events at Munster in 1534-35. It leads to the worldview that allows some in the Mexican “Mennonite” communities to rationalize working with the Mexican Mafia, and even being involved in drug smuggling. I put “Mennonite” in quotations, as I recognize that there are many in the actual Mennonite community who are much more Biblical and Christ-centered in their doctrines, and who are evidently not anarchists.
Resource: this video contains heretical or problematic statements by leaders in the church of God: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SQ_1M2S6Yw
Let me be clear: this is not an exercise in guilt-by-association. I fully believe in Christian liberty to participate in freedom protests thus far, and I have defended that. I despise the cancel-culture methods being used by many Christians to point fingers at one another. If a cause is righteous, Christians may take it up. Not every one is obligated to participate, but some will feel compelled in their conscience. That should, however, be done in distinctively upright ways.
For the record, over the past two years my writing and preaching has defended everything from wide open churches to more compliant churches, from jailed pastors to more compliant leaders. I have defended the liberty to be vaccinated and the liberty to be unvaccinated. I have defended each Christian's right and responsibility to make decisions out of a conscience that is bound only by the Word of God. How we respond to a crisis may legitimately differ depending on our career, age, geographic location, or even our culture to a degree. If you would rather stay home than protest, I’ll defend you as well. In reality, that “Christian liberty” tack has not made me particularly popular with some on either side over the past two years. It also seems to be easily misinterpreted. I do believe that over time, as the battle lines get clearer, the church will have to move in unity towards a more courageous counter-cultural stand. Churches that do not will atrophy and eventually lose their light.
Back to the main point. There have been several evidences that the movement was a collection of sinners, as all movements are. Some sinners, however, were all-too unashamed of their sin. I think it is helpful to summarize:
1. Some of the prominent voices in the movement proposed “revolutionary” solutions.
2. Some of the protestors used prominent **** Trudeau flags and other offensive messaging.
3. Some of the protestors were drunken, carousing, or disorderly at times.
4. Some prominent voices in the movement have espoused violence and racism in the past.
5. Some of the associated border blockades were troubling.
Now, in each case, those were the minority of a movement which clearly includes millions of Canadians. The diversity of the village and the field was brought to the city, which was not surprising to us "peasants." Even more, over time, much of the movement actually moved in the direction of restraint, peaceableness, and respect for government. This is what the detractors are missing. Cooler heads prevailed, and blockades dissolved. They laid off the horns. Many protestors attempted to make concessions, they moved out of certain neighborhoods. Neither the police nor property were substantially attacked. Revolutionary-sounding proposals were replaced by requests. The number of protestors using positive messaging or polite flags across Canada vastly outnumbered the more negative. A very diverse coalition of like-minded people formed, including many immigrants and minorities.
The movement increasingly also adopted the messages of “pray for Trudeau” and “turn the other cheek.” So much so that the police testified to the protestor’s peaceableness by arriving with big sticks and no riot shields. What does that say? It says that police knew ahead of time that they would not face projectiles or molotov cocktails. The lack of shields is a testimony of the relative righteousness of the protestors. Protestors were arrested peacefully. Despite tensions, mass violence did not break out. If anyone lost their temper, it would be the police officers who doled out beatings. We should be thankful for the level of restraint that was shown in the end. I am convinced that the "peasants" took the high road and put the government to shame in the end.
Here is the point: the truckers as a whole, and the protestors, did a remarkably good job in the end of proving that they are NOT anarchists. Even under great pressure. They are diverse, they are not perfect, they stepped on some toes, but they were not lawless as a movement. They learned along the way, and adjusted. They are not the "anarchists" in this post. I am not writing against the movement as a whole.
My main concern continues to be with some of the theological errors that are woven through the movement. Now, to be fair, many good things were preached from the stages. It would be very possible that people were genuinely converted at the protests. There was some very appropriate gospel preaching, and there were appropriate calls to prayer. The protest turned towards adopting more of a historically Christian stance towards government as it developed. Some of the prominent leaders are actually more balanced than some would assume.
Some other speakers, however, ranged from error to rank heresy. Some on the stages have a very high view of humanity, and of their own “moral compass.” They rely on their dreams, and their self-will rather than God’s Word. Some even seem to adopt messaging and approaches that give the appearance of a literal church-militant that is intent on dethroning government. There are those that need to be specifically warned about.
Especially the presence of Henry Hildebrandt and the Aylmer “Church of God Restoration” has been deeply concerning. I grew up in the St. Thomas area and I often worked in the Aylmer area, including at the Aylmer farmer’s market. I have been familiar with this group for decades. There have been a number of serious issues, including:
1. The Church of God Restoration has a "Chief Apostle,” Ray Tinsman, who is seen as infallible.
2. They are calling for Christians to “exit the system.” This is a direction towards anarchy.
3. They have had charges of child abuse against members of their community due to practices of spanking with sticks, whips, and electrical cords. This goes back decades.
What is the disease underneath such symptoms? Sadly, they have a high view of themselves. They believe that Christian perfection can be achieved on this earth. They assume that they are able to govern themselves, and can live by their own laws. In living “separate” from the world, they call for the church leaders to be their own pseudo-government. Their "apostles" are a government to themselves. Thus they also impose long lists of external rules on their communities, including how to dress, what to own, and in various other areas that should be matters of Christian liberty. Some of those rules are literally unmentionable. They assume that they have higher revelation than any other church. They think that they alone are the continuation of the church of the book of Acts. They often emphasize their particular understanding of the end times as authoritative. Their “Chief Apostle” is a false christ, he even takes the place of Christ in claiming to be able to add to the Word of God.
There is a theological system behind this movement that has existed for centuries. It has the same roots as those of the radical anabaptists behind the horrific events at Munster in 1534-35. It leads to the worldview that allows some in the Mexican “Mennonite” communities to rationalize working with the Mexican Mafia, and even being involved in drug smuggling. I put “Mennonite” in quotations, as I recognize that there are many in the actual Mennonite community who are much more Biblical and Christ-centered in their doctrines, and who are evidently not anarchists.
To be fair, there have been evil people and deeds in "Reformed church" history as well. Our confessional approach to the state, however, has never been one that allows us to be “stateless.” It specifically condemns such views. (Belgic Confession Article 36) We need a government, even if it is tyrannical. (Romans 13) That does not mean that there are not times to obey God and not men. (Acts 5:29) Such times are upon us, but we do so soberly and for the sake of the progress of the gospel.
The errors of the radical anabaptists are serious and manifest enough that I have publicly preached against them in our church recently. Including naming Henry Hildebrandt as a false teacher, which is an exceptional case. I will say the same here. If you are at a place where this man is preaching, or where people are calling to “exit the system” in the name of Christ, that is a satanic call. It is a parallel to the false promise that “you shall be as gods.” (Genesis 3:5) There is a time to turn your back and walk away from such teachers, even if they seem to share your views on freedom. Protestors, you need to reorient your protest so that it is free from such influences or associations. Hildebrandt leads his hearers away from being humbled under the mighty hand of our sovereign God, and towards a cult system. He may call for freedom, but it is in reality a "freedom" that none of us should want or need. It is a freedom to become a slave of another.
When I went to protests, my main goal was to be a witness. To see with my own eyes, to listen, to pray with people, and perhaps to be there for any who needed help. I have been public about my presence there largely due to media lies, and in order to stand against the tyranny and lies of the Canadian government. Statism is becoming a wet blanket over the lamp-stand of the church, and some of us must become public dissenters. So I will stand to show that I am not afraid to walk alongside protestors. I am also not afraid of the finger-pointing of some in the churches.
There are, however, some that must be publicly disassociated with. One may protest alongside a diversity of villagers, but we must remain distinctively separate from the influence of and reputation of groups such as the “Church of God Restoration.”
The errors of the radical anabaptists are serious and manifest enough that I have publicly preached against them in our church recently. Including naming Henry Hildebrandt as a false teacher, which is an exceptional case. I will say the same here. If you are at a place where this man is preaching, or where people are calling to “exit the system” in the name of Christ, that is a satanic call. It is a parallel to the false promise that “you shall be as gods.” (Genesis 3:5) There is a time to turn your back and walk away from such teachers, even if they seem to share your views on freedom. Protestors, you need to reorient your protest so that it is free from such influences or associations. Hildebrandt leads his hearers away from being humbled under the mighty hand of our sovereign God, and towards a cult system. He may call for freedom, but it is in reality a "freedom" that none of us should want or need. It is a freedom to become a slave of another.
When I went to protests, my main goal was to be a witness. To see with my own eyes, to listen, to pray with people, and perhaps to be there for any who needed help. I have been public about my presence there largely due to media lies, and in order to stand against the tyranny and lies of the Canadian government. Statism is becoming a wet blanket over the lamp-stand of the church, and some of us must become public dissenters. So I will stand to show that I am not afraid to walk alongside protestors. I am also not afraid of the finger-pointing of some in the churches.
There are, however, some that must be publicly disassociated with. One may protest alongside a diversity of villagers, but we must remain distinctively separate from the influence of and reputation of groups such as the “Church of God Restoration.”
They are no church of God. Live not by lies.
Picture: Captured Citizens Brought Before an Anabaptist Leader during the Münster Rebellion, Public Domain.