Sunday, April 10, 2005 AD
Nehushtan
Some interesting comments to my post on Saddleback's "Pentecost". One in particular raised an important objection to Lutheran/Reformational hostility to decisionistic revivalism - namely, some of the positive results which that approach apparently produces:
But then equally, we all know people who have gone forward at evangelistic events, or who have been "baptised in the Spirit" during an Alpha "Holy Spirit Weekend", and who then show little or no sign of spiritual life afterwards.
Part of the problem is (as I said in the earlier comments) that people can "have the experience, but miss the meaning". In other words, people impose the wrong narrative on what has happened in their lives. Take the "party guy" described above, or our sons' godmother. What is it that has made the difference between them, and other graduates of evangelistic rallies or Alpha Courses who appear to have got no further?
The answer is lurking in the comment above: "He started going to Warren's church...". That's the point. It's not the one-off experience they had; it's the fact they started attending church, hearing the Gospel preached (even if only imperfectly) week after week. It's the Gospel that saves people: the proclamation that their sins are forgiven and they are accounted righteous on account of Christ, the proclamation that comes to us in the unimpressive forms of spoken words, water, bread and wine.
The problem is that people can become very attached to the particular human-devised means and circumstances by which they encountered the Gospel - an evangelistic barn-dance, an Alpha Course, an informal "contemporary" style of worship, a "vision" they had - to the extent of refusing to countenance the idea that those means may have been deeply flawed in many ways, and even to the extent of rejecting the divinely-ordained means of grace to the extent these are incompatible with "what worked for them".
This is why it is so important that we go back again and again to the divinely-ordained means of grace as the means by which we receive the Gospel and are brought into, and kept in, the true faith. As Article V of the Augsburg Confession says:
And that's why it's so important for the church to hold its nerve and stick to its ministry of preaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments according to Christ's institution, however boring and unimpressive that may feel, because every time we introduce a new gimmick we ensure there will be a group of people in the future who cannot bear to see that innovation reversed because "If we hadn't been doing that back then, I wouldn't be here now".
"The problem which always jumps out at me is that I know a guy who checked one of those little boxes. Not this year, but a couple of years ago.I feel the same way about the Alpha Course: however much I may deplore much of the content of the Alpha Course (which is really a charismatic discipleship course that has been pressed into service as an evangelistic tool), the fact is I know a number of people who have become wonderful Christians partly as a result of having done Alpha - indeed, one of the godmothers to our sons became a Christian by precisely this route.
"He was a total party guy, Vegas every weekend, completely nominal Catholic. He started going to Warren's church and has since become a passionate Christian, completely dedicated to learning Scripture, prayer and all the other hallmarks of maturity..."
But then equally, we all know people who have gone forward at evangelistic events, or who have been "baptised in the Spirit" during an Alpha "Holy Spirit Weekend", and who then show little or no sign of spiritual life afterwards.
Part of the problem is (as I said in the earlier comments) that people can "have the experience, but miss the meaning". In other words, people impose the wrong narrative on what has happened in their lives. Take the "party guy" described above, or our sons' godmother. What is it that has made the difference between them, and other graduates of evangelistic rallies or Alpha Courses who appear to have got no further?
The answer is lurking in the comment above: "He started going to Warren's church...". That's the point. It's not the one-off experience they had; it's the fact they started attending church, hearing the Gospel preached (even if only imperfectly) week after week. It's the Gospel that saves people: the proclamation that their sins are forgiven and they are accounted righteous on account of Christ, the proclamation that comes to us in the unimpressive forms of spoken words, water, bread and wine.
The problem is that people can become very attached to the particular human-devised means and circumstances by which they encountered the Gospel - an evangelistic barn-dance, an Alpha Course, an informal "contemporary" style of worship, a "vision" they had - to the extent of refusing to countenance the idea that those means may have been deeply flawed in many ways, and even to the extent of rejecting the divinely-ordained means of grace to the extent these are incompatible with "what worked for them".
This is why it is so important that we go back again and again to the divinely-ordained means of grace as the means by which we receive the Gospel and are brought into, and kept in, the true faith. As Article V of the Augsburg Confession says:
So that we may obtain this faith, the ministry of teaching the gospel and administering the sacraments was instituted. For through the Word and the sacraments as through instruments the Holy Spirit is given, who effects faith where and when it pleases God in those who hear the gospel...We need understand for ourselves, and to help other people understand, that it is this - God's Gospel brought to us using God's means - that makes us Christians; not the other more impressive and memorable events or experiences that we may associate with our conversion, almost (in some cases) to the extent of turning them into idols.
And that's why it's so important for the church to hold its nerve and stick to its ministry of preaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments according to Christ's institution, however boring and unimpressive that may feel, because every time we introduce a new gimmick we ensure there will be a group of people in the future who cannot bear to see that innovation reversed because "If we hadn't been doing that back then, I wouldn't be here now".
