Escape From Evangelicalism ... Reformation, Restoration or Resolution ... A Challenge To Christian Leaders

Escape from Evangelicalism
Reformation, Restoration or Resolution

Robert D. Couchenour I speak in wide generalizations here, and surely only one perspective. I am not an academic or a scholar, and there are vast gaps in what I know. Absolutes except as proven in and through time and history, are often not what they appear, but shadows that may be glimpsed at and gleaned through the confusion of issues and temporal clutter that tends to opacity. The contemporary church is not secluded from this. To be exact, we are the product of this. The church is not a new entity. Depending on your perspective or Biblical interpretation and application, the church is at least 2000 year old, or may arguably be dated back to the patriarch Abraham. 2000 or 3800 years is not the issue. The fact remains since the Great Commissioning by Christ and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost; the Church has existed and has been on an apparent perpetual state of flux and change. Whether this flux and change would be defined as growth Im sure would find adherents to both sides of the argument. The fact remains the church has not remained stagnant. We in western cultures, and in particular the United States, think of history and the linear passage of time in the very short term. We think of things as they are now as being as they always have been. We have very little historical perspective out side of what is immediate to our current situation. You would almost think the world was created at the end of the Second World War if not at the election of Ronald Reagan. The Civil War is ancient history, and the American Revolution is prehistoric, the Great Depression is some big hole out west someplace, Oklahoma I think, the Renaissance is some fantasy place where all the guys wear tights, horns, horse tails and brag about the length of their swords. Eastern cultures, in particular Islamic cultures, have a long range perspective of historical states of affairs. George W Bushs use of the word crusade to describe the war on terror and justification of the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were taken by Muslims not as a figure of speech, as I believe it probably was, but as an act of Christian invasion and enforcement of Western/European/US values and dominance historically dating back nearly 1000 years. The Muslim world has long memories. Muslim culture is predominantly an Arab culture. I am not saying the Muslims in India, or Indonesia or the Philippians or other non-Arab nations are less Muslim, my point is the religious ties to the original culture are much stronger. There is no definable existing original Christian culture.
Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005
Initially born out of or through an ancient Jewish culture, dispersed from territorial homelands. Assimilated into, restructured and incorporating traditions of the Gentile nations. As the faith spread, it was not the culture that was superimposed. That obviously is an over simplification. The point is from nation to nation as Christianity spread; Germans were Germans, Celts-Celts. Culture was not the issue. Jewish culture and tradition were not the core and essence of Christian faith. I would hope that most of us in the church would have at least a minimal understanding of Biblical history. My intention is not to give that to you. I believe that would be the responsibility of local pastoral leadership and teachers. If you arent getting it ask for it. Besides that, it might be of some value to understand where we, the church, and in particular the evangelical church have come from. When I say evangelical, I am not necessarily talking about any particular denomination. There are evangelical Baptists, evangelical, Methodists, evangelical Lutherans, Episcopal, AME, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, Charismatics, Church of God, Church of Christ, and on and on, and dare I say it, may it even be conceivable to consider (dare I do) evangelical Catholics. That sucking sound was from the vacuum created by all those good religious fundamentalists choking for breadth at the thought of being associated with a Roman Catholic. For arguments sake, evangelical thought or theology can be thought to have begun with the Reformers, or even those known as pre-reformers. John Wyclif (1328?-1384) is probably the-best-known of these Early Reformers. He was an English theologian who came out in 1376 in opposition to clerical wealth and interference in civil government. Wyclif may be most remembered for his emphasis upon the Scriptures as the only law of the church. Consequently, he was determined to give English people a version of the Bible in their own tongue. Wyclif's popularity was reduced when he came out against the cherished doctrine of transubstantiation in 1376. Wyclif's teachings found their most fertile ground outside England in the country of Bohemia, where their greatest propagator was a theologian named John Huss (13731415). When the pope called for a crusade against the king of Naples in 1412, Huss declared his opposition to the pope's use of force and offering of indulgences. This incited the people burn the pope's decree. Consequently, Prague was placed under papal interdict and Huss himself was excommunicated and went into exile. Huss was later asked to present himself at the Council of Constance and was offered a "safe-conduct." However, the "safe-conduct" was ignored and he was imprisoned shortly after his arrival. On July 6, 1415 he was condemned and burned at the stake. The Moravians later became the spiritual descendants of the Hussite movement. Were it not for the economic and religious conditions of the time the Protestant Reformation may have failed. At the beginning of the Sixteenth Century conditions in Germany rendered it receptive to reform. Papal taxation and interference had greatly
burdened and aggravated the German people. The wealth, immorality, and tax exemption of the clergy, as well as the beggary of monastic orders, invited contempt. In the religious scene a revival of interest in salvation and a changing philosophical outlook caused by the new humanist movement left Germany with a climate responsive to the ideas of the Reformation. The political situation in Germany was also a crucial factor, for Germany was divided among territorial rulers who practically acted as independent sovereigns within their own domains and who would eventually act to insure the survival of the Reformation. Martin Luther was born in Eisleben, Germany on November 10, 1483. He entered the University of Erfurt in 1501 and intended to study law but, as the story goes, a narrow escape from lightning moved him to enter a monastery in 1505. He was ordained to the priesthood in 1507. Soon after a journey to Rome (1510-11), Luther began his professorship at the University of Wittenberg, which was thenceforth to be his home. Throughout his early life Luther had been burdened by a heavy sense of sinfulness. The rigors of monasticism had brought him no peace of mind. He became more and more convinced that the meritorious works of Roman Catholicism were not the means of salvation. Finally, focusing on Paul's statement, "The just shall live by faith" (Rom. 1:17), Luther came to a climax in his convictions. Men were saved by the grace of God manifested in the forgiveness of their sins and the imputation of Christ's righteousness. God's grace was given, not on the basis of good works, but on the basis of absolute faith in God's promises. However, this faith, Luther asserted, was wholly the gift of God. That which proved to be the catalyst of the Reformation was, not surprisingly, that which offended Luther's convictions concerning salvation, the sale of indulgences. In 1517 Johann Tetzel came to Germany to sell indulgences for the building of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. Indulgences meant the purchaser, or the dead for whom they were purchased, would not have to suffer temporal punishment in purgatory for their sins. Tetzel touted indulgences with great persuasiveness, but Luther found his activities reprehensible. On October 31, 1517 Luther nailed his famous Ninety-five Theses challenging indulgences to the Castle Church door in Wittenberg. This act was the spark which exploded the powder keg of the Protestant Reformation. Luther found many scholars and much of the German populace in sympathy with his views. Ordinarily, he would have been burned at the stake for heresy, but he enjoyed the protection of Elector Frederick the Wise. The political situation was such that neither the Holy Roman Emperor nor the pope felt confident in moving against Luther. However, on January 3, 1521 the final bull of excommunication was issued against Luther, and later that year he was placed under an imperial ban, which made him an outlaw. Under the protection of German princes Luther continued to advance Reformation ideas through vigorous writing and preaching. In 1524 he removed his monastic vestments and a year later married a former nun, Katherine von Bora. Six children were born to them. Luther and his wife lived in Wittenberg until his death on February 18, 1546. Luther's Teachings
A. Salvation by faith alone. This doctrine which came as a reaction to the system of salvation by works of merit in Catholicism is a foundation to Protestant theology. Moreover, Luther taught that faith was a gift of God (Eph. 2:8,9). B. Denial of papal and conciliary infallibility. This was a decisive and dramatic break with long-standing Catholic belief. For Luther final appeal could be made only to the Scriptures (II Tim. 3:16,17). C. Permissive view of Scriptural silence. Luther reacted to the seeming excesses of his more radical supporters by declaring that "what is not contrary to Scripture is for Scripture and Scripture for it." He evidently meant that what was not expressly prohibited by the Scriptures was allowable. This view led him to retain candles, crucifixes, and pictures in worship (cp. I Pet. 4:11; II Jn. 9). D. Denial of clerical celibacy (I Tim. 4:1-5). E. Priesthood of all believers (I Tim. 2:5; I Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6). F. Reduction in sacraments. Luther reduced the number of sacraments from seven to two: the Lord's Supper and baptism. Regarding the Lord's Supper, Luther offered the cup to the laity, doubted transubstantiation, and rejected the idea that the Lord's Supper is a sacrifice to God. Huldreich Zwingli, the foremost leader of the Protestant Reformation in Switzerland, was born January 1, 1484. Though he had been moving in the direction of the Reformation for several years, it was in 1522 when he came out in opposition to ecclesiastically imposed fasts that he threw himself vigorously into the reformatory movement. Zwingli's interpretive approach to the Scriptures was more stringent than Luther's approach. Zwingli believed that only that for which distinct authorization could be found in the Scriptures was allowable in religious practice. As a result, he and those of his persuasion rejected such things as the papacy, mass, saintly intercession, monasticism, purgatory, clerical celibacy, relics, images, and organs. Luther and Zwingli were in substantial agreement on many points, but there were also some basic differences between them. Luther was of a different temperament and had undergone a different religious experience. Consequently, Luther and Zwingli had different religious emphases. To Luther the primary concern was the relationship of the soul to God and the freedom the soul could enjoy by forgiveness of sin. To Zwingli the will of God as set forth in the Bible, and conformity to it, was the central feature of religion. Thus, Luther's approach was of a more emotional nature while Zwingli's was more intellectual. However, that which proved to be the most irreconcilable difference between them was the question of the bodily presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper.
On October 1, 1529 Luther and Zwingli met in Marburg to consider their doctrinal differences and the possibility of the union of their forces. Luther and Zwingli parted without achieving union. Luther was even unwilling to accept Zwingli as a brother in the faith. Though Luther was content with a religious reformation, Zwingli's aims went beyond this. He also sought a revamping of the social and political order Among Zwingli's followers were those who felt he did not go far enough in the application of his principles. Because of the silence of the Scriptures on the administration of baptism to infants, some of Zwingli's followers began to doubt the validity of infant baptism. Efforts to suppress their views only encouraged them to act upon them. On January 21, 1525 a group of them received "baptism" during a meeting in a private home in Zurich. Initially, it seems that sprinkling was the mode used, but immersion soon began to be practiced. These views were soon spread to other places where they won converts. The groups thus formed separated themselves into their own communions and were called "Anabaptists" ("rebaptizers") due to their most distinctive practice. Anabaptists were bitterly opposed, even by Zwingli, and they were sometimes punished by drowning. Anabaptists were severely persecuted because their views were regarded as detrimental to social order. In some parts they were treated as seditionists. This was because they believed in separation of church and state and that uniform religious faith was not essential to public peace and order. They viewed government as a necessary evil and opposed any involvement in it. They also opposed oath-taking, the bearing of arms, religious coercion, and any form of church discipline beyond excommunication. They supported believers' baptism, common observance of the Lord's Supper, and congregational independence. One group, the "Hutterite Brethren," established a lasting communistic order. Various tenets of Anabaptist beliefs survived in the Baptists, Congregationalists, and Quakers. John Calvin was born July 10, 1509 in Noyon, France. Through the influence of his father Calvin was introduced to the upper strata of French society and received income from ecclesiastical posts. Initially studying theology, the influence of his father necessitated the study of law. Following the death of his father, he studied Greek and Hebrew. At some point in the years 1532-33 Calvin's attitude underwent a sudden and dramatic change. He became convinced that God's will as revealed through the Scriptures had to be obeyed, and from then on religion occupied first place in his thoughts. Because of his sympathy with Reformation views, he was imprisoned briefly and eventually had to flee to Protestant Basel in Switzerland. There he completed and published in 1536 his famous Institutes of the Christian Religion as a defense against the slanderous charges made against French Protestants. Calvin traveled to Geneva, where the fiery Reformer, Guillaume Farel, induced him to remain and assist in the reformation of that city's religious institutions. Calvin and Farel made it their aim to mold Geneva into a model religious community. To that end they made three proposals to the city council. (1) They proposed that the Lord's Supper be administered every month and that certain persons from the various sections of the city be
appointed to report the unworthy to the church for discipline. This was a means of enforcing church discipline and independence. (2) They proposed adoption of a catechism composed by Calvin. (3) They proposed imposition of a creed upon each citizen. These measures were adopted by the council with considerable modifications. However, the discipline and demands made by Calvin eventually aroused the opposition of many of the citizens, and the ensuing struggle for dominance finally resulted in the ouster of Farel and Calvin in April, 1538. In September, 1541 Calvin was invited back to Geneva to stay. He was now more powerful than ever and was able to secure many of the reforms he desired. Citizens were under the constant and strict supervision of the Consistoire, a body charged with ecclesiastical discipline. The aim was to make Geneva the perfect spiritual community. Protestant refugees flocked to Geneva from many parts of Europe. Despite severe challenges to his government in the years 1548-55, Calvin was able to maintain his mastery of Geneva until his death on May 27, 1564. Through his pattern of church government, his academy, and his commentaries and other writings, he has wielded a lasting influence upon religious minds second only, perhaps, to that of Martin Luther in the Reformation. His disciples went everywhere to propagate his doctrines so that practically every Protestant denomination in existence is heavily permeated with them. His Doctrines A. Total hereditary depravity. B. Unconditional election. C. Limited atonement. D. Irresistible grace. E. Perseverance of the saints. Protestantism in England got off to a slow and shaky start. This was primarily because the Reformation in England was born, not of popular religious conviction, but of political and social expediency. The central characters in the English Reformation drama, those who dominated and directed it, were politicians and their subservient ecclesiastical officials, who were moved mostly by political self-interests. Consequently, England's Reformation, subject to the whims of the country's changing political winds, came on, not as a flood, but as a tide with its ebb and flow. The triumph of Protestantism in Scotland is largely attributable to John Knox. Because of complicity with Protestant Scottish rebels, Knox spent nineteen months in France as a galley-slave. Returning to England, he became a chaplain to the Protestant king, Edward VI, but was forced to flee in 1554 by the accession of Catholic Mary ("Bloody Mary"). He made his way to Geneva and there became a devoted disciple of John Calvin. The Scottish obsession with independence provided Knox with the opportunity to return and plant Protestantism in Scotland. Many Scots resented the efforts of their queen and others
to bring Scotland into the fold of Catholic France, so that Scottish nationalism became more and more identifiable with Protestantism. With English help Scotland successfully revolted against France and Protestantism was firmly established. In 1560 the Scottish Parliament began to give the Calvinistic system legal status. Papal jurisdiction and the mass were abolished, and the Calvinistic creed was officially adopted. Knox also desired that the Calvinistic system of church government be adopted on a national scale. Known as "Presbyterianism," it directed that each congregation be under the supervision of a pastor and elders chosen by each congregation (Acts 14:23; Eph. 4:11), that pastors and elders organize into "presbyteries" and the presbyteries into larger "synods", and that all be under the "General Assembly" (Matt. 18:15-17; Acts 15; 20:28; I Pet. 5:2). Mary (Queen of Scots) eventually aroused the antagonism of her subjects, to the point that she was forced to abdicate in 1567, thus ensuring the final triumph of Protestantism in Scotland. From the beginning Protestant advances had been closely tied to political expediency. This inevitably led to civil strife and war. In France the Protestants, known as Huguenots, were multiplying rapidly. Persecution of them by alarmed Catholics led to eight devastating wars (1562-1592). A noteworthy instance of Catholic violence during this period was the infamous St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre which occurred on August 24, 1572. Tiring of their efforts to undo Protestantism in France by other means, Catholics arose on this day and slaughtered 8,000 Huguenots in Paris alone and many times that number in all of France (cp. Esther 3). Ultimately, the Catholics were unable to exterminate the Huguenots, so -the Edict of Nantes, granted by Henry IV in 1598, permitted them basic religious freedom. 'However, this edict was revoked by Louis XIV in 1685, thus forcing many Huguenots into exile. During this period the Netherlands, or at least the northern portion thereof, were taken for Protestantism. Led by William of Orange, a Calvinist, the Netherlands revolted against Spain and finally declared their independence in 1581. Yet, strong Spanish military efforts held the ten southern provinces for Catholicism, and they eventually became modern Belgium. The seven northern provinces, the Netherlands, extended to their citizens a degree of religious toleration unusual in that age and which made the Netherlands a haven for religious refugees. Germany also suffered great turmoil after the death of Luther. The Lutherans themselves were seriously divided over some points of doctrine, such as Melanchthon's views on the free will of man and the non-physical presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper. Calvinist and Jesuit advances in Germany also aggravated the situation. The Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), the ultimate military struggle between Protestantism and Catholicism, broke out in Bohemia but moved into Germany where it was fought out by German, French, Swedish, and Spanish factions on a scale which reduced the population of Germany from 19 to 6 million and left the land in ruins. The war closed with the lines drawn essentially where they were in the beginning. Germany was still divided between Catholics and Protestants with each territorial ruler given the right to determine, within certain limits, the religion of his subjects.
At the beginning of the Seventeenth Century there arose two noteworthy doctrinal systems which ran contrary to what was regarded as orthodox Reformation thought. Though these two doctrinal systems had some fundamental differences, they also had several similarities which suggest that they be considered together. Not only did they develop at approximately the same time, but they also found receptive hearts in the same place - the Netherlands. They were most alike in their opposition to some basic doctrines of Calvinism. Finally, both doctrinal systems denied that Christ's death served as an atonement for men's sins. Though Socinianism was characterized by contradiction of some basic doctrines of Calvinism, it is best remembered for its rather unorthodox Christology. The system derives its name from an uncle and nephew, Lelio (1525-1562) and Faustus (1539-1604) Socinus. Socinians accepted the Scriptures as the source of truth on the basis of the miracles which attested to them. Therefore, the Socinians believed in prayer, renunciation of the world, humility, patient endurance, and human free will. They rejected the doctrines of original sin and unconditional predestination. However, they believed Christ to be only a man (Jn. 1:1), albeit a man who led a life of exemplary obedience. As a reward for His obedience, Christ was granted wisdom, a resurrection, and divinity. Hence, the purpose of Christ's life and death was to set an example for men. Connected with this was the Socinian view of atonement. Socinians regarded forgiveness of sin and satisfaction for sin (as by the death of Christ) as opposite and mutually exclusive conceptions. If God forgives sin, why does satisfaction for sin need to be made? Furthermore, Socinians believed it to be absolute injustice to make the innocent suffer for the guilty, as Christ suffered for sinners (I Pet. 3:18). Hence, Socinians denied the need for Christ's death as an atonement for their sins. Salvation could be obtained merely through a life of obedience. Arminianism is notable as a reaction to Calvinism. In 1589 a theologian Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609), was appointed to defend the proposition that God decreed election and reprobation and then allowed the fall to take place as a means of carrying out His decree. As a result of his studies Arminius came to the conclusion that the doctrine of unconditional predestination was untrue. He and his followers eventually came to reject other cardinal features of Calvinism - limited atonement, irresistible grace, and the impossibility of apostasy. Oddly enough,-however, Arminians retained the Calvinistic idea that men are unable to do anything good of themselves. The seventeenth Century was a time of great religious and political upheaval in England. This turmoil had its roots in the uncompleted religious revolution begun by Henry VIII when he broke away from the Roman Catholic Church to establish the Church of England. Henry wanted the Church of England to be free of organizational ties to the Catholic Church but he himself remained a Catholic in much of his religious sentiment. Consequently, the Church of England was neither fully Protestant nor fully Catholic. This
left England in a rather unsettled religious condition. This condition was exacerbated by the religious ambivalence and shifting attachments of succeeding monarchs. Queen Elizabeth I, though Protestant, tried to steer a very moderate course. As much of the old Roman order of organization and worship as Protestant sentiment would permit was retained. Naturally, then, there were those who felt that Elizabeth was not sufficiently aggressive in pressing the Protestant cause. These wanted to purify the Church of England of all vestiges of Roman Catholicism. Therefore, they were known as "Puritans." Among the changes that they desired to make was the procurement of genuine Protestant preachers in every parish, rejection of clerical vestments (Matt. 23:5 , 8), kneeling at the reception of the Lord's Supper, the wedding ring (because it was thought to be indicative of matrimony as a sacrament), crossing, and sabbath-like observance of Sunday with a commensurate suspension of amusements such as games and dances (Gal. 4:10; Col. 2:16,17; Acts 20:7; I Cor. 16:1,2). English officialdom was not prepared for such far-reaching changes and thus proscribed religious practices contrary to them and punished those who did not submit by imprisonment or deprivation of ecclesiastical positions. Another important focus of controversy between the Puritans and Anglicans (Church of England) was the form of government the church should have. The Church of England was ruled by a form of government known as episcopacy. This theory of church government asserts that the church should be ruled by bishops who oversee a whole diocese. This theory further maintains that bishops are direct successors of the original apostles and thus wield the powers of the apostles (Acts 1:22; I Cor. 15:8). Under the bishops are presbyters (or priests) of local congregations, and deacons. Thus, the episcopal form of church government is hierarchical and monarchical in nature. Some Puritans, on the other hand, believed that Presbyterianism was the only proper form of church government. Presbyterianism is also hierarchical in nature but differs from episcopacy in some important respects. Firstly, local church leaders are appointed by the congregation they oversee and not by superior officers outside the congregation (although they may be ordained or approved by them). This eliminates the idea of apostolic succession and powers for church leaders. Secondly, leadership and decisions were conciliar in nature in the Presbyterian form of church government, thus eliminating the tendency toward the supremacy of the episcopate. Most Puritans were satisfied to introduce as much of their system as the prevailing situation would permit and wait for civil government to put the rest in place. However, English monarchs preferred episcopacy and the old order in worship. Some Puritans thus despaired of attaining what they felt was a Scriptural system by waiting on the government to implement the necessary changes and took the more radical approach of separating themselves from the Church of England to form their own congregations. They were known as "Separatists," and some of them advocated total congregational independence. Disliked by Anglicans and Puritans, they were persecuted so severely that some had to seek refuge in the Netherlands. Puritans petitioned James I, the successor of
Elizabeth, for the changes they sought, but he only granted them a new translation the "Authorized" or "King James Version" of 1611. Among the Separatists who sought refuge in the Netherlands was a congregational leader by the name of John Smyth. From a study of the Scriptures he came to the conclusion that church membership was given by baptism on the basis of repentance and faith. In 1608 or 1609 he therefore "baptized" himself and others by pouring, thus forming the first Baptist Church. Smyth also adopted the view that Christ died for all. He and those who shared his belief were known as "General Baptists." Those who believed Christ died only for the elect were known as "Particular Baptists." They adopted immersion as the proper mode of baptism (Rom. 6:4). Those among the Separatists who advocated congregational independence and religious freedom but who did not adopt Baptist positions were known as "Independents" or "Congregationalists." The "pilgrims" who crossed the Atlantic in 1620 to establish the Plymouth colony in Massachusetts were Congregationalists. The Society of Friends, or Quakers, was founded by an Englishman named George Fox, who believed that the Lord granted every man an Inner Light to guide him to truth. Thus, revelation was not confined to the Scriptures but was given directly to each individual (II Tim. 3:16,17). Fox also rejected a professional ministry, oaths, servility in speech or behavior, military service, slavery, and the sacraments. A consecrated life on the part of Quakers was demanded and formalism in worship was opposed. Quakers were severely persecuted in England and America, some even unto death, but eventually received the benefits of William and Mary's Act of Toleration in 1689. Before that time a prominent, William Penn, received a grant from Charles II in Pennsylvania and established a Quaker colony there. The Protestant Reformation partook so much of past and future theology that it may best be viewed as a transition between the medieval and modern periods in church history. As such, it was a significant break with the past. One of the most remarkable aspects of the Reformation's break with the past was its emphasis upon the Scriptures as the sole source of authority and rule of faith in the believer's life. This was a radical departure from the medieval attitude that tradition, as well as the Scriptures, as interpreted and promulgated by the Roman Catholic hierarchy is the rule of life. Although the early Reformation leaders did not fully appreciate or apply the implications of their principles, the effect of their movement was to unfetter man's mind and allow him to think for himself. No longer was it enough for man to simply obey what he was told God's word said; he had to understand God's word for himself. No longer was his faith to be in a hierarchy of men but in Jesus Christ and His written revelation of Himself. The consequences of this new attitude were immediately evident in the proliferation of sects within Protestantism. Not realizing that freedom to interpret and follow the Scriptures involved religious freedom, early Reformation leaders worked almost as hard to suppress what they considered heretical sects as the Catholic Church had worked to suppress them. They failed to see that the only weapon given to Christians for the eradication of error is the word of God (Acts 17:2,3; II Cor. 10:3,4; Eph. 6:17). In any
10
event, they had opened the door, and slowly but surely the idea and practice of religious freedom spread and in its wake increasing realization of the truth. The broadening of man's horizons in science, philosophy, and geography also influenced, and was influenced by, Reformation thinking. With men's advances in exploration came an awareness of other cultures which Europeans had to fit into God's scheme for men. Likewise, scientific discoveries opened men's eyes to the fact that natural law ruled the workings of nature. Natural phenomena occurred because they were dictated by natural law. They were predictable, to a degree. Nature seemed to be edging God off his throne. A remarkable instance of men's reaction to new and threatening scientific discoveries was Galileo's enforced abjuration of his heliocentric theory. Medieval thought had tied man's importance to the belief that the earth was the center of the universe. New scientific discoveries not only enhanced man's comfort in life but also his appreciation of human potential and reason. It was becoming increasingly evident that it was to man's benefit to reason and understand. With this realization came the need to determine the proper place of human reasoning in man's life. The philosophies of the early post-Reformation period dealt with this issue - how to relate and balance faith and reason. Gone was the blind, unquestioning faith of the medieval period. Men were now free to doubt and deny. Those who believed in Christ and His claims found themselves increasingly shifting to a defensive stance and trying to accommodate human reason. Perhaps the strongest and most prominent attack upon orthodox religion from the philosophical community of this period was Deism. Deism took a variety of forms, some moderate and some extreme. Most Deists were theists and some even believed in continuing divine providence, while others approached atheism, to say the least. Deism's greatest impact was in the place it gave to human reason in religion as opposed to revelation. The central idea of Deism is that every man is born with a certain religious knowledge or may acquire it through the use of reason. This is sometimes called "natural religion." Written revelation and ecclesiastical instruction are unnecessary and may be misleading and hurtful. Hence, Deism essentially ejected revelation, God's word, from its place of supremacy and put human reason in its place. Revelation could still be important and helpful but because traditional religion and its Scriptures, including the Bible, had become corrupted with errors it was necessary for human reason to sit in judgment and sift through it and extract that which was worthy of acceptance. Religion had digressed far from its primitive purity. Religious leaders had added corruptions to benefit themselves, though from time to time certain religious leaders, such as Socrates, Buddha, Muhammad, and Christ, arose to call men back to simple, primitive religious faith. Some Deists viewed God as the "master clockwinder" of the universe who, having set His creation in order, left it running under its own energy and laws never to interfere again. Deism began in England where it enjoyed its heyday from about 1689 through 1742. It soon spread to France, Germany, and America. Into this fury of competing protestant theology and humanistic thought God moved men to proclaim His Gospel. Often building upon and holding to diametrically opposed
11
theologies, yet God moved men who were used to move men. Often accompanied by erratic behaviors, unexplainable manifestations except as signs and wonders, but ultimately, in the observations of Jonathan Edwards, resulting in beneficial effects to the community as a whole for prolonged periods. These are the men who have led us into the modern protestant era of evangelicalism. I include a few of the major players, I know there are more. Samuel Davies (1723-1761) Presbyterian preacher in colonial British America who defended religious dissent and helped lead the Southern phase of the religious revival known as the Great Awakening. Davies was educated at Samuel Blair's log college at Fagg's Manor, Pa., and was ordained in 1747. His work during the Great Awakening centred at Hanover, Va.; in Virginia, where Presbyterians were persecuted as Nonconformists by the established church leaders, he became a chief defender of the Dissenters. He argued their cause before the Virginia general court and enlisted the support of prominent English and Scottish Dissenters. The government's preoccupations after the outbreak of the French and Indian War (1754), however, diminished concern over Davies, especially when his war sermons helped rouse Virginians to defend the frontier. Davies further enhanced his reputation as the outstanding preacher of his day by sermons given in England and Scotland during a trip with the evangelist Gilbert Tennent. Soon after his return Davies became the first moderator of the first presbytery of Virginia, Hanover, in 1755. On the same trip Davies raised funds in England for the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University) and was its fourth president from 1759 until his death. The stress that Davies placed on religious rights and freedoms resulted (after his death) in the lobbying of Presbyterian leaders who, during the formation of Virginia's state constitution, helped to defeat a provision for an established church. Davies, whose sermons were printed in some 20 editions, was also one of the first successful American hymn writers. Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) greatest theologian and philosopher of British American Puritanism, stimulator of the religious revival known as the Great Awakening, and one of the forerunners of the age of Protestant missionary expansion in the 19th century. George Whitefield (1714-1770) Church of England evangelist who by his popular preaching stimulated the 18th-century Protestant revival throughout Britain and the British-American colonies. In his school and college days Whitefield experienced a strong religious awakening that he called a new birth. At Oxford he became an intimate of the Methodists John and Charles Wesley, and at their invitation he joined them in their missionary work in Georgia in 1738. He was already known as an eloquent evangelist. The rest of his career was divided between evangelical preaching throughout the American colonies from
12
Georgia to Massachusetts and itinerant preaching in England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. He believed that every truly religious person needs to experience a rebirth in Jesus; aside from this, he cared little for distinctions of denomination or geography. He played a leading part in the Great Awakening of religious life in the British-American colonies and in the early Methodist movement. John Wesley (1703-1791) Anglican clergyman, evangelist, and founder, with his brother Charles, of the Methodist movement in the Church of England. John Wesley was the second son of Samuel, a former Nonconformist (dissenter from the Church of England) and rector at Epworth, and Susanna Wesley. After six years of education at the Charterhouse, London, he entered Christ Church, Oxford University, in 1720. Graduating in 1724, he resolved to become ordained a priest; in 1725 he was made a deacon by the Bishop of Oxford and the following year was elected a fellow of Lincoln College. After assisting his father at Epworth and Wroot, he was ordained a priest on Sept. 22, 1728. Recalled to Oxford in October 1729 to fulfill the residential requirements of his fellowship, John joined his brother Charles, Robert Kirkham, and William Morgan in a religious study group that was derisively called the Methodists because of their emphasis on methodical study and devotion. Taking over the leadership of the group from Charles, John helped the group to grow in numbers. The Methodists, also called the Holy Club, were known for their frequent communion services and for fasting two days a week. From 1730 on, the group added social services to their activities, visiting Oxford prisoners, teaching them to read, paying their debts, and attempting to find employment for them. The Methodists also extended their activities to workhouses and poor people, distributing food, clothes, medicine, and books and also running a school. When the Wesleys left the Holy Club in 1735, the group disintegrated. Following his father's death in April 1735, John was persuaded by an Oxford friend, John Burton, and Col. James Oglethorpe, governor of the colony of Georgia in North America, to oversee the spiritual lives of the colonists and to missionize the Indians as an agent for the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Accompanied by Charles, who was ordained for this mission, John was introduced to some Moravian emigrants who appeared to him to possess the spiritual peace for which he had been searching. The mission to the Indians proved abortive, nor did Wesley succeed with most of his flock. He served them faithfully, but his stiff high churchmanship antagonized them. He had a naive attachment to Sophia Hopkey, niece of the chief magistrate of Savannah, who married another man, and Wesley unwisely courted criticism by repelling her from Holy Communion. In December 1737 he fled from Georgia; misunderstandings and persecution stemming from the Sophia Hopkey episode forced him to go back to England. In London John met a Moravian, Peter Bhler, who convinced him that what he needed was simply faith, and he also discovered Martin Luther's commentary on the Letter of Paul to the Galatians, which emphasized the scriptural doctrine of justification by grace
13
through faith alone. On May 24, 1738, in Aldersgate Street, London, during a meeting composed largely of Moravians under the auspices of the Church of England, Wesley's intellectual conviction was transformed into a personal experience while Luther's preface to the commentary to the Letter of Paul to the Romans was being read. From this point onward, at the age of 35, Wesley viewed his mission in life as one of proclaiming the good news of salvation by faith, which he did whenever a pulpit was offered him. The congregations of the Church of England, however, soon closed their doors to him because of his enthusiasm. He then went to religious societies, trying to inject new spiritual vigour into them, particularly by introducing bands similar to those of the Moraviansi.e., small groups within each society that were confined to members of the same sex and marital status who were prepared to share intimate secrets with each other and to receive mutual rebukes. For such groups Wesley drew up Rules of the Band Societies in December 1738. For a year he worked through existing church societies, but resistance to his methods increased. In 1739 George Whitefield, who later became a great preacher of the Evangelical revival in Great Britain and North America, persuaded Wesley to go to the unchurched masses. Wesley gathered converts into societies for continuing fellowship and spiritual growth, and he was asked by a London group to become their leader. Soon other such groups were formed in London, Bristol, and elsewhere. To avoid the scandal of unworthy members, Wesley published, in 1743, Rules for the Methodist societies. To promote new societies he became a widely travelled itinerant preacher. Because most ordained clergymen did not favour his approach, Wesley was compelled to seek the services of dedicated laymen, who also became itinerant preachers and helped administer the Methodist societies. Many of Wesley's preachers had gone to the American colonies, but after the American Revolution most returned to England. Because the Bishop of London would not ordain some of his preachers to serve in the United States, Wesley took it upon himself, in 1784, to do so. In the same year he pointed out that his societies operated independently of any control by the Church of England. Toward the end of his life, Wesley became an honoured figure in the British Isles. Charles Wesley (1707-1788) English clergyman, poet, and hymn writer, who, with his elder brother John, started the Methodist movement in the Church of England. The youngest and third surviving son of Samuel and Susanna Wesley, Wesley entered Westminster School, London, in 1716. In 1726 he was elected to Christ Church College, Oxford, where he translated Greek and Latin classics into English verse. During the winter of 172829, he underwent a spiritual awakening and initiated, with two other undergraduates, the Holy Club. In 1735, in order to aid his brother John in a mission to Georgia, he accepted holy orders.
14
Charles was subject to greater extremes of emotion than his brother, and his spiritual despair and physical exhaustion in Georgia led him to return happily to England after only a few months' stay. With the help of the Moravians, like his brother John, he found spiritual peace. On Whitsunday, May 21, 1738, he found himself at peace with God. He became a very eloquent preacher for the Methodist cause and translated the gospel message into hymns, which became important means of evangelism. In 1749 Charles married Sarah Gwynne; two sons and a daughter survived out of eight children born to the marriage. Though Charles was active in Bristol and London, his interference with his brother's proposed marriage to Grace Murray caused an estrangement between the two, and Charles withdrew from active leadership of the Methodist societies. Also, he was more deeply attached to the Church of England and did not approve of John's ordaining preachers. His work as an evangelist and hymn writer for Methodism, however, had already made its permanent mark. He published more than 4,500 hymns and left some 3,000 in manuscript; George Frideric Handel wrote music specifically for some of them. Among Wesley's best known hymns are Love divine, all loves excelling; Hark, the herald angels sing; Christ the Lord is ris'n today; Soldiers of Christ, arise; Rejoice, the Lord is king; and Jesu, lover of my soul. Charles Grandison Finney (1792-1875) American lawyer, president of Oberlin College, and a central figure in the religious revival movement of the early 19th century; he is sometimes called the first of the professional evangelists. After teaching school briefly, Finney studied law privately and entered the law office of Benjamin Wright at Adams, N.Y. References in his law studies to Mosaic institutions drew him to Bible study, and in 1821 he underwent a religious conversion. Finney dropped his law practice to become an evangelist and was licensed by the Presbyterians. Addressing congregations in the manner he had used earlier in pleading with juries, he fomented spirited revivals in the villages of upstate New York. His methods, carried into the Congregational and Presbyterian churches of larger towns, were soon dubbed new measures and aroused intense criticism from men such as Lyman Beecher who had been educated in the sterner traditions of eastern schools. Such opposition lessened as Finney's methods became more polished. His revivals achieved spectacular success in large cities, and in 1832 he began an almost continuous revival in New York City as minister of the Second Free Presbyterian Church. His disaffection with Presbyterian theology and discipline, however, led his supporters to build for him the Broadway Tabernacle in 1834. The following year he became a professor of theology in a newly formed theological school in Oberlin, Ohio, dividing his time between that post and the tabernacle. He left New York in 1837 to become minister of Oberlin's First Congregational Church, closely related to Oberlin College, where he was president from 1851 to 1866. Finney's theological views, typically revivalist in their emphasis on common sense and humanity's innate ability to reform itself, were given expression in his Lectures on Revivals (1835) and Lectures on Systematic Theology (1847).
15
Charles Hadden Spurgeon (1834-1892) English fundamentalist Baptist minister and celebrated preacher whose sermons, which were often spiced with humour, were widely translated and extremely successful in sales. Reared a Congregationalist, Spurgeon became a Baptist in 1850 and, the same year, at 16, preached his first sermon. In 1852 he became minister at Waterbeach, Cambridgeshire, and in 1854 minister of New Park Street Chapel in Southwark, London. Within a year a new structure had to be built to accommodate his following, and almost immediately an even larger church was required. From the opening in 1861 of the tabernacle, which held 6,000, until his death, he continued to draw large congregations. The editor of a monthly magazine, Spurgeon also founded a ministerial college (in 1856) and an orphanage (1867). His sermons, which he published weekly, ultimately filled more than 50 volumes in the collected edition. An ardent fundamentalist, he distrusted the scientific methods and philological approach of modern biblical criticism and in 1887 left the increasingly liberal Baptist Union. Dwight L. Moody (1837-1899) prominent American evangelist who set the pattern for later evangelism in large cities. Moody left his mother's farm at 17 to work in Boston and there was converted from Unitarianism to fundamentalist evangelicalism. In 1856 he moved to Chicago and prospered as a shoe salesman but in 1860 gave up business for missionary work. He worked with the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA; 186173), was president ofthe Chicago YMCA, founded the Moody Church, and engaged in slum mission work. In 1870 he met Ira D. Sankey, a hymn writer, and with him became noted for contributing to the growth of the gospel hymn. They made extended evangelical tours in Great Britain (187375, 188184). Moody shunned divisive sectarian doctrines, deplored higher criticism of the Bible, the Social Gospel movement, and the theory of evolution. Instead he colourfully and intensely preached the old-fashioned gospel, emphasizing a literal interpretation of the Bible and looking toward the premillennial Second Coming. Moody's mass revivals were financed by prominent businessmen who believed he would alleviate the hardships of the poor. Moody himself ardently supported various charities but felt that social problems could be solved only by the divine regeneration of individuals. As well as conducting revivals, he directed annual Bible conferences at Northfield, Mass., where he founded a seminary for girls in 1879. In 1889 he founded the Chicago Bible Institute (now the Moody Bible Institute). These men became the benchmark of the modern Evangelical Revivalist. In the wake of these ministries, and as the fervor began to wane, and an institutionalized acceptance was entered upon, new, emotionally charged and vibrant movements arose. Azusa Street.
16
The modern-day Pentecostal movement has its roots in the late 19th century, a time of mounting indifference to traditional religion. Denominations that were known for revivalistic fervour became subdued. Emotional modes of religious expression enthusiastic congregational singing, spontaneous testimonies, prayer in unison, and extemporaneous sermons on simple biblical themes by lay preachersgave way to ordered, formal worship services that were conducted by reverends, ministers trained in homiletics (preaching skills), who were influenced by higher biblical criticism. Lecture centres and elegant sanctuaries replaced camp meetings and crude wood-frame tabernacles. As the large popular Protestant denominations became the churches of the upper-middle class, people of limited means began to feel out of place. They yearned to return to a heart religion that would satisfy their spiritual desires and their emotional, psychological, and physical needs. Pentecostalism, like its precursor, the Holiness movement (based on the belief that a second work of grace following conversion would sanctify Christians and remove the desire to sin), fulfilled these needs for churchgoers and nonchurchgoers alike. Moreover, Pentecostal churches, though open to all levels of society, spoke to the special needs of the disaffected. Notwithstanding the charismatic outbursts in some 19th-century Protestant churches, the watershed of contemporary Pentecostalism came in the early 20th century at Bethel Bible College, a small religious school in Topeka, Kansas. The college's director, Charles Fox Parham, one of many ministers who were influenced by the Holiness movement, believed that the complacent, worldly, and coldly formalistic church needed to be revived by another outpouring of the Holy Spirit. He instructed his studentsmany of whom already were ministersto pray, fast, study the Scriptures, and, like the Apostles, await the blessings of the Holy Spirit. On January 1, 1901, Agnes Oznam became the first of Parham's students to speak in an unknown tongue. Others soon had the same experience, and Parham claimed that glossolalia was the initial evidence that one had been truly baptized with the Holy Spirit. Parham and his students understood these recurrences of Pentecost prophetically, interpreting them as signs of the imminence of the last days, or End time. Imbued with this sense of urgency, they set out on an evangelical mission. Their initial efforts were unsuccessful, and the movement nearly collapsed as it encountered disbelief and ridicule. In 1903 its fortunes were revived when Parham returned to the practice of faith healing. Borrowed from several Holiness churches, notably the Christian and Missionary Alliance, faith healing became a hallmark of Pentecostalism. Parham was the first in a long line of Pentecostal evangelists (Mary B. Woodworth-Etter, Charles Price, Aimee Semple McPherson, and, more recently Oral Roberts, Kathryn Kuhman, and Benny Hinn) who taught that Christ's atonement provides deliverance from sickness and is, therefore, the privilege of all who have the requisite faith. Attracting new converts, the movement enjoyed success in the American South and Southwest, especially in Texas, Alabama, and Florida. In Texas alone, 25,000
17
people had embraced the Pentecostal faith by 1905, according to Parham. Kansas and Missouri also became hotbeds for Pentecostalism. Wider national and international expansion, however, resulted from the Azusa Street revival that began in 1906 at the Apostolic Faith Gospel Mission at 312 Azusa Street in Los Angeles. Its leader, William Seymour, a one-eyed Holiness church pastor and former member of the African Methodist Episcopal church, had been exposed to Parham's teachings at a Bible school in Houston, Texas. Under Seymour's guidance, the old frame building on Azusa Street became a great spiritual centre that for many years attracted rich and poor, blacks and whites, Anglos and Latinos, as well as many preachers whose own ministry had become staid. Spiritually energized and convinced that they had been charismatically endowed, scores of men and women from Azusa and other Pentecostal churches began extolling the reality of speaking in tongues. Pentecostal Christians were linked only by an amorphous spiritual union, in part because no thought was given to forming a separate Pentecostal branch of the Christian church. As members of the historic Protestant churches embraced Pentecostal beliefs and practices, they did so without any intention of withdrawing from their own churches. They merely wanted to be agents of reform and revival, helping to rid their churches of formalism and worldliness. They strove to transform their congregations into Spirit-filled communities like those described in the New Testament book Acts of the Apostles. Moreover, they fully expected the prophetically promised latter rain (from the Book of Joel, an outpouring of the Spirit of God before the final judgment) to fall upon their churches and make them wholly Pentecostal. (followed up below) In one or two cases churches did sever their mainstream ties and become Pentecostal (e.g., the transformation of the Christian Union to the Church of God, headquartered in Cleveland, Tennessee). But the triumphant conquest of the Protestant churches by Pentecostal ideas during those early years never materialized. In fact, the movement became the object of widespread opposition. Pastors who endorsed Pentecostal practices were relieved of their pulpits; missionaries who were sympathetic toward the charismatic movement lost their financial support; and parishioners speaking in tongues were expelled from their churches. Resolutions were passed and anathemas (the harshest form of excommunication) were pronounced against Pentecostals in traditional churches. Charismatic Christians found it increasingly difficult to practice their faith within the institutional framework of conventional Protestantism; consequently, many Pentecostals withdrew from their churches to form new ones. By the beginning of World War I, new congregations had emerged as storefront missions, small tabernacles in sparsely populated rural areas, and upper-story lofts in squalid urban neighborhoods. These modest dwellings, found across North America, housed poor but lively groups of Pentecostal believers under such names as the Pentecostal, Apostolic, Latter Rain, or Full Gospel churches. Although many Pentecostals were wary of administrative institutions and unwilling to subject themselves to external ecclesiastical control, various divisive issues drove them into denominational fellowships.
18
The issue of Holiness divided members of the new faith. Parham, Seymour, and other early Pentecostals came from the Holiness tradition that taught Christians to seek sanctification. They built upon that heritage and taught that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was for people who had already experienced sanctification. On the other hand, Pentecostals from Baptist backgrounds disagreed and taught that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was for every believer. This doctrinal division drove Pentecostals into two warring camps. The Holiness Pentecostal belief is represented by such groups as the International Pentecostal Holiness Church; among the groups that emerged from a Baptist background are the Christian Church of North America and the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel. Although Pentecostal fellowships generally emerged as the result of doctrinal differences, nonreligious factors, such as the outbreak of World War I, also contributed to their development. For example, the majority of Pentecostals were pacifists when the war started, but they and even those who were not pacifists found themselves without a voice in Washington, D.C., on matters of armed service. The Assemblies of God, an organization of independent Trinitarian Pentecostals, was founded in Hot Springs, Arkansas, in 1914 in response to the need for better relations between the churches and the government. Racial issues also affected the Pentecostal movement. For instance, the Azusa revival was led by an African American minister who welcomed worshipers regardless of their race, and the first formal Pentecostal denomination, the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, was organized as an interracial fellowship (and remained such). This liberal racial attitude bred controversy, however, and as Pentecostalism spread into the Deep South the movement became segregated along the same racial lines as had the older denominations. I have allowed for a substantial depiction of the Pentecostal Movement, not because I am Pentecostal which technically I am not, although I cannot deny charismatic experiences, but because as a movement, it, and its estranged step children, the Charismatic movement and successive New wave or Prophetic movements, have carried on the evangelical zeal and mission, where the more traditionalized denominations born in Evangelicalism have grown content in their institutionalism. The one major and significant exception to this evangelical waning would be the Rev. Billy Graham. There would probably be argument that there are others, but I do not believe there would be argument that he would rank as the most significant and free of compromise and/or controversy surrounding or concerning his ministry. Although of primacy as the foremost Evangelical preacher of his time, Graham added nothing in the way of dimensional broadening of what is understood as evangelical theology. Evangelical theology has embraced and been represented by virtually all theological streams, whether predestination or free-will, Presbyterian, or Methodist, Baptist or Pentecostal, congregational or presbytery, sprinkling or dunking. Regardless of our ability or inability to associate with each other, we all like to look back at the traditions that formed us and claim that to whatever extent they are ours.
19
A recurring theme or impetus which continues to resurface and animate Evangelicals is the embrace of the quest for a return of the church to its first century roots or state of spiritual purity and governmental structure and social organism. The desire is for the restoration of the church to what it was. The church has experienced Reformation, and perpetual reformation since seems to be the norm. Each new outpouring of the Spirit in Awakenings, Revivals or Movements tends to lead to a reformation of sorts in a segment of the church. Eventually the new theology spreads, or becomes, if not embraced by the entrenched denominationalist, at least subject for discussion. Of course there are those who have it all together and what could possibly replace burning a heretic at the stake. After all, its a church tradition. As members of the historic Protestant churches embraced Pentecostal beliefs and practices, they did so without any intention of withdrawing from their own churches. They merely wanted to be agents of reform and revival, helping to rid their churches of formalism and worldliness. They strove to transform their congregations into Spirit-filled communities like those described in the New Testament book Acts of the Apostles. Moreover, they fully expected the prophetically promised latter rain (from the Book of Joel, an outpouring of the Spirit of God before the final judgment) to fall upon their churches and make them wholly Pentecostal. Deja Vu. We people human beings Christian believers the faithful the called out ones the Church, suffer from near sightedness. We believe, understand and accept that which is immediate to us. With little understanding of how God has moved in the Church in the past, of the desires and visions, purpose and hopes of the multitudes of believers who have preceded us, we presume to think of ourselves as the culmination of what it is to be faithful, and the end product of Christ building His Church. It would be ludicrous to deny that we in this current age are not blessed with resources to research, study, communicate, evangelize and do whatever else may be necessary to propagate the Gospel than generations prior. Our technological superiority does not elevate us or in any other way establish us as a superior form of Christian than any previous saint in the course of history. The fact that diverse signs and wonders are the experience of many in our contemporary age does not make this generation peculiarly credentialed. Signs and Wonders, tongues, prophecy, and I would include each and every other enumerated spiritual gifting and endowment have been an ongoing vestment to the body of believers enabling Christ to build His church. The primary thing that distinguishes this current generation from prior generations of believers is our ability and the tools opportune to us to understand and communicate the word entrusted too us. Yes this means the Bible the scriptures. It also means the immediate prophetic endowment as given by the Spirit through those the Spirit wills.
20
The Spirit has always been with us. He has not left. In our ignorance we may not have understood. In our ignorance we may have even denied Him. But God has not left us in our ignorance and with better understanding, insight and attentiveness to what God manifests, and has manifested, we are particularly blessed to embrace what God is doing. That does not mean we toss out all our reason and common sense. This has also been a product of our ignorance, and can be seen as evident in the errors that have arisen and still propagate within segments of the church. To strive to transform our congregations into Spirit-filled communities like those described in the New Testament book Acts of the Apostles is not a motion towards maturity as the body of Christ. The community of believers as described in the book of Acts was only the beginning. Within a historical context, as led by the Holy Spirit, and as to the best of their knowledge as taught by Jesus Christ, and as interpreting Old Testament Scriptures, the church, under apostolic leadership, functioned as they were best able. We have a few verses upon which to dissect and infer our own romanticisms regarding how we in our current situations should see these principles applied. There is yet to be a consensus of any kind within Evangelical Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox churches as to what this actually looks like, and at best the striving to implement this vision of what the church should be merely establishes a new denomination with their own particular distinctive as suits a usually narrow understanding of what is being communicated in the verses in Acts in question. The tendency is to establish a particular form, rather than understand the need that was to be met by the form utilized and mentioned as a historic application. There is a need to be met. The situations, circumstances, and conditions surrounding the need in any historical context will differ. Within the context of changing situations, circumstances and conditions, forms must be adaptable. To fail to adapt to the historic context will inevitably end in failure to meet the need and establish any form. History does not move backwards. We have a naive conception of what was the first century church. We tend to impose on the early primitive church a spiritual perfection and ideal social order and long to recover this ideal. We are not willing to accept the notion that this ideal church in its primitive form never existed. We have limited knowledge of what they did, with very few details. We do have significant understanding in Acts and through the epistles that there were substantial problems. The evidence as presented through the entirety of the New Testament Scriptures tends to lead to a conclusion that the early church was every bit as human and spiritually challenged as we in this current generation. Every historical movement that has produced effectual change of some nature has emphasized some, or possibly a few, new perceptions or applications of scriptural truth as it could be applied in their own historical context. These new applications, which were ultimately the conveyors of spiritual truth, eventually became the institutionalized traditions of the body embracing them. As originally inaugurated they served the need.
21
They were the useful tools of the Spirit in time and space to add another building block in the construction of this spiritual entity we know as the church. As these new perceptions or applications became institutionalized, a denomination evolved and the emphasis becomes not meeting the need but this is the way we do it. Evangelicalism is only one segment of the church. Many evangelicals would argue that the true church is only evangelical. Still others would argue only particular denominations or otherwise segmented portions of evangelicalism are worthy of Christian status. Some express apparent attitudes of spiritual superiority as evidenced in the manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Still others perceive their Christian religious heritage as a sanctified political right. Christ building His church is not just what is happening now. Christ has been building His church for the last 2000 years. Christ building His church was in Spirit directed motion from the time of the Holy Spirits initial outpouring at Pentecost, through the Roman persecutions, the Dark and Middle Ages and into the Reformation to now. As the contemporary church we need to get the big picture. Yes God is moving now, and pouring out the Spirit in unprecedented measure, and we can for all rational purposes and Biblical understanding expect this to be an increasing means of God. But, simply because we are the recipients of this outpouring, and have our own perception of what we believe God is doing, does not validate our perception or our theology or all of our actions and methods as being Gods. Much of what we find ourselves a part of as God, by the Spirit, continues this maturation process of the church is temporal. The method that serves us well today may in short term become the bondage of the church of the future. The political ideology we embrace today may well be the servant of our own selfish interests and the foundation upon which future injustices may be perpetuated and freedoms curtailed. All in the name of Jesus. The fundamental difference between what we call spiritual and what we call religious is, what we do now is spiritual, what they did back then is religious. What we must be aware of is that the Spiritual realities we find ourselves intimate in today become the religious of tomorrow. The religious spirit is that which refuses to change. It is that which fails to adequately access the changing times and adapt. The religious spirit also finds security in fortified theology, and not just what may be conceived as orthodox theology, but also that which may be newly espoused as renewal theology. The idea that we as finite human beings can have all the truth and understanding of God is to buy into the lie of the serpent in the garden that you shall be as gods. As Francis Schaeffer stated we can have true truth although not necessarily full truth. The idea that any theology embraces it all and is complete is an illusion and deception. As God continues to work with and in us our theologies will change as we are able to receive and perceive in a state of maturity. My state of maturity in Christ is not a fact of having all my theology together.
22
The Evangelical church has developed to a place that it must be faced, are we relevant as the body of Christ, in all our spiritual or religious expressions, or have we degenerated to the position of a political, religious self interest social organization? How do we differ from the political right? Is this observed alliance a matter of Biblical or Spiritual mandate, or is it the result of past issue alliances that have tended to allow spill over of other self interest issues, and embraced as Christian? How much of our politic is self interest? How much of or religion is self interest? Is the political left our only choice? Are there societal issues that go deeper than Republican or Democrat that need addressed? Are we satisfied as political Christians or are there spiritual and social levels of Christian faith expression that we have chosen to neglect? What is the substance of our rhetoric? Are we comfortable in our religion? Matt 16:18 Jesus said I will build my church. Have we taken it upon ourselves to do this for Him? What is the value of remaining in an evangelical church fellowship? I can hear multitudes of responses addressing all points and addressed with Biblical proof texts. But I would render that for every proof text supplied that a means and method to accomplish meeting that need or command if you prefer can be met and accomplished in a more efficient and compelling way other than being bound to an organizational monolith whose apparent prime reason for being is to sustain itself or provide a political block. We are not being nurtured to restoration. The church we would be restored to never existed. We pull our proof texts, develop our models and fill in the blanks with romantic notions conceived in our imaginations. Granted many of these are very complexly developed. Most pull from this text, and adapt it to another text, seldom taking into consideration the differing contexts of each. So a theology of church life is synthesized and syncretised from the contextually unrelated parts. Our first century church becomes our Frankenstein monster. Biblically supported and justified, but still a dead body. As can be seen since the initial nail of the 95 thesis on that Wittenberg church door, reformation has been a constant state in the church. Every new denomination is a reformation or sorts. Some justified, some probably the results of human nature more so than the will of God. Im not their judge. Too some degree or another we are all the products of this. Most of these reformations are as much the result of the political environment of the time as much as they may be of some spiritual process or development. Most seem a matter of the providence of God. He moves when He chooses and sets the circumstances in place and alignment and acts as He wills. God is not moving us to restoration, or to reformation. God is moving us to resolution. The political corporate entity that we refer to as the local church, whether, its sign on the door says Baptist, or Methodist, or Presbyterian, or Pentecostal, or AME, or any of the other possible denominational or independently conceived entities as they are, is not the church. These political and corporate entities may be a means of organizing and providing a corporate relationship to the state under the law of the land, but this
23
organization and corporate association is not necessarily the church. They may be organizational containers of the church, but they are not the church itself. The church is a spiritual entity, not a politically recognized tax deductible corporate entity. Regardless of what the state may say, the state is not the definer of the church, Christ is. The state may recognize organizations, and grant privileges in relation to the state, but the state is not God. God is moving us to resolution. Resolution is the resolving of what we are to be. Christ will build his church. He is building that church into something. Romans 4:21-24 explains that our faith in Christ is essentially equated to or a facsimile of the faith of Abraham trusting God some 1800+ years prior to Christs propitiatory acts. Ephesians 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love. Ephesians 4:11-16 This is resolution and contemplating the apparent state of things, resolution apart from Christs miraculous intervention would seem inconceivable. But I admit I am making a human judgment and looking at the church with natural eyes. for the equipping of the saints for the work of service until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ Apostolic, Prophetic, Evangelistic, and Pastoral and teaching authority derives from Christ as responsibility is issued to see this work accomplished.
24
The nature of man lusts for positions authority but shuns the accompanying responsibility. Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment. I am a layman. I write as a layman. What does that mean? Essentially it means that in 30+ years as a believer, most of that period, actively involved in church activities, and much intensive Bible studies, worship team involvement and other peripheral activities, I am a nobody. As it suits denominational leadership or church leadership depending on church government and polity, I am a pawn to be shuffled around as best fits the prevailing nature of the particular churches state of affairs. I have also come to realize that in this thirty plus years of faith in Christ and seeking His will and direction, even as faithfulness and loyalty are not reciprocated, this does not nullify the work of Christ, and my faith was not and is not in those who may have been beneficiaries of my loyalty. Corporations do not constitute the church. CEOs do not equate to pastors. A janitor or grounds keeper may well be closer in spiritual reality to the nature of a pastor than the man with the title. This is not a fact I figured out on my own. When I first came to the Lord I traveled with an evangelist who tutored and interned a number of young people in spiritual disciplines. He told a story that conveyed this truth. It has taken me a while to actually experience and embrace its truth. the work of service the unity of the faith the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming speaking the truth in love grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head You are a pastor, you call yourself an evangelist or a prophet, in some circles you may be regarded the status of Apostle specifically how does your calling, your ministry in Christ tend towards the accomplishment of this end in the body of Christ, the work of service the unity of the faith the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming speaking the truth in love grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, or are you adding to the confusion, the alienation, the waves and every wind of doctrine, are you part of the trickery, the craftiness, the deceitful scheming? How does your ministry build up the body to the ends described in Ephesians four? These are rhetorical questions. I dont actually expect answers. I am not addressing any one person or ministry in particular, although I believe I am addressing actualities and there are ministries I personally believe are suspect. Suspect does not constitute fact, but warrants concern and scrupulous observation. What warrants suspicion? Unwillingness to accept responsibility for ones own words and declarations. Unwillingness to be part of working out the solution as declared by ones own words and declarations. The tendency to deny the possibility of human error in ones own words and declarations. The tendency to believe ones own prophetic infallibility. A speak and run modes operandi.
25
There are cultural tendencies that spill over in the way we organize and function as the church. The fast food model, the high school model, the synagogue model, the college lecture model, the concert model, the cell group model, the infomercial model, the TV Talk Show model. Some may have more in the way of Biblical grounding and others are more culturally derived, but none in and of themselves are universally absolute. Martin Luther adapted the college lecture model. This was natural, and it fit the times. Martin Luther was a university professor. Lecture was the way he worked. It made sense. John Wesley was one of originators of the cell group. Charles Finneys camp meetings are actually precursors to the traveling tent revivalist that traveled the early and into the mid twentieth century. These tent revivals are romantically nostalgic to evangelicals. Dwight L. Moody and Ira D. Sankey play strongly into establishing the hymn-sign then preach the word model of doing evangelical worship service. Charles Spurgeon loved singing but disliked the use of instruments in worship. Billy Graham, the contemporary evangelical father figure, drew on these early models, incorporating Hymns and contemporary music, as well as testimonies of notable believers in sports, music, motion pictures, politics and virtually all types of celebrity. Although primarily a stadium evangelist, grown out of the tent revivalist tradition, Graham was one of the first to bring these meetings onto the small screen and on a world wide basis. His format with some adaptation was picked up by other television savvy ministers drawing on the late night TV host model of Johnny Carson (the Tonight Show) and others and the Tele-Evangelist was born. During this period, mid twentieth century, most local churches where organized and functioned essentially in a synagogue model, with varying types of church government depending on the denomination. But essentially the service was similar one to the other. A mix of sedated camp meeting and lecture. As the TV generation grew, what was expected as part of the church experience began to evolve. The concert, TV talk show, infomercial, high school models and varying adaptations surfaced and congregations willing to accommodate the expectations of the technologically communications sophisticated grew, and the mega church was on the horizon. Even churches satisfied to stay smaller and more local community oriented are pressured to adapt to the changing times. In all this restructuring and adapting the technological innovations to the tried and true models of evangelicalism, none of this constitutes the church. Going back all the way to Martin Luther, and further, the medieval Roman Catholic and early primitive church, none of this constitutes the church. These organizational forms, governmental structures, the church political, do not constitute the church Christ is raising. These may be temporal containers, structured to interface with a secular and fallen world, but as easily as these structures may become corrupted and subject to the whims and political devises of the particular generation, the containers are perishable and subject to disposal.
26
This is true as applies to individual ministers as well. Much is revealed. Much good teaching is made available. The fact that a particular minister has learned to show-boat or grand-stand the gift God has endowed them with, does not invalidate the gift. There is a judgment and accounting that will be required, but I am not that judge. The human nature to want to exploit what ever may be perceived as an asset is a temptation all men face. Where the line is crossed as regards ministry and exploitation may be difficult to define. Regardless of the human impurity that accompanies that pure gift, the dross will be burnt away, and there is no reason to presume that any of us operate free of imperfections, or assume that everything we would see implemented is more the Lord then our own works. We do not know. We are called to be faithful. Faithful to what, that which we know. As with Abraham, sometimes that means we act impetuously, presumptuously and screw up. The point is that we act in faith. We move. We trust. We will screw up. Our faith is not in our own ability or the doubts that would immobilize us. Our faith is not in the keeping of a code or rules but in the one who has fulfilled the law. Our faith is not in temporal organizations, buildings or social or political ties. I'm a Christian, not a political plaything. My faith and hope is in Jesus Christ, not some rhetorically shallow self proclaimed and defined 'Moral Majority', or other self interest off shoots. My 'religion', my faith, and its exercise, encompasses a broader strata than the proselytization of some 'mark'. People, human beings, are individual persons, created in the image of God, with capacities of spirit, soul and body. As such they are not religious targets, but worthy of individual respect and acceptance. As persons created in the image of God, they are accounted the dignity of hearing and responding to the prompting of the Spirit as God touches them, not as I may determine is in best alignment with my religious dogma. People are not containers for me to pour into and fill with my religion. Jesus Christ is the risen, living Son of God. He manifests to us, and through us, in this world, in the Person of the Holy Spirit. The Bible is the one infallible source of objective criteria guiding our minds, thoughts and actions as we seek discernment of Gods will and moving in our midst. There are many things that are subject to controversy, interpretation and reinterpretation. One temporal interpretive perspective, may express elements of truth, but may not necessarily hold as an absolute in the broader, long term out working of Christ building His church. Movements come and go, Christ remains. Movements are rhetorically rich, but shallow in depth. Parroting Bible verses, or religious doctrine and dogma, does not establish the reality of the fact or experience of the doctrine as born in and manifest in ones life. Polly wanna Bible verse?
27
After the speechifying is stripped, what does faith look like? How is Christian faith manifested apart from the hype? Evangelicalism has degenerated to that of catching men, proselytizing to the confession of a rhetorical declaration, and then catch more men to catch more men to catch more men. Faith is reduced to the function of ones ability to argue, debate, or sell a Christ that we are indoctrinated to assume no one wants. We are indoctrinated to argue Christ, the consideration that we are to be Christ hardly ever enters our conscious thought. If we ever begin to be Christ, rather than argue Him, we may find that being attracts better than pummeling some one with our religious stuff. We are being matured. Maturity is not fitting into the prevailing evangelical model. Evangelicalism has no absolute model. Evangelicalism has no absolute theology. Evangelicalism has no absolute definition of what constitutes maturity in Christ. I do not presume that either Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox systems have anything greater. A fundamental problem in Evangelicalism is a Protestant instability and the ease at which outside influences can divert us from Christ and hold us captive to the prevailing political winds based on our own self interests as opposed to those of Christ. And we are too eager and ready to rationalize and construct a Biblical theology that can support our status quo and sanctify a political conservatism via a religious conservatism essentially because it is better for us. What value the church political? Can the title church even be justified? PAC church In light of all this, what do I advocate? I do not advocate dismantling evangelical church fellowships. I do not propose a new theology be developed. There is enough theology. Evangelicalism has been a powerful and positive force in the world. It may have reached its limit though. It has served well as a source of spreading the Bible and communicating fundamentals both within its walls and through missions. It is not well suited as an end in and of itself. Our problem as we have grown and matured is we look to the church to be the end all of what we as the mature should be a part of and ministering too. It is not. As mature in Christ our place is not in the church. It is in and to the world. Christs ministry was not well accepted among the congregations of his own. Neither will ours be. This is not a rejection of the church but is recognition that nurturing must and will end and ministry begin. There comes a time I must end relying on the nurturing of my parents and make my own way. My faith and resource must become that which is reliant directly too Christ and not on the church. My pastor can not feed me indefinitely. If I have not learned to feed myself, to go directly to God in faith and dependence and sustenance, there is a problem. It may be a pastoral problem. Pastors deal with it.
28
What do I advocate? I do not advocate complete and final mass migration from church fellowships. I do advocate cessation of dependence on the church fellowship. Like a mature son, I may visit my parents, and spend time there and fellowship. My parents should not be my source of support and sustenance. The purpose of the church is to raise you for the work of service. The purpose of the church is to bring you to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man. The purpose of the church is to prepare you to make your way, to not be tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming. Eventually, as mature, its time to DO IT. In Evangelical churches as much as there is a tendency on the part of sheep to remain sheep, and sheltered and dependant on pastoral umbilical chords, there is a tendency for pastoral leaders to cling to and hang on to what they perceive as theirs. There are security issues on the part of members of the body and those who are presumed to be nurturing them. There is a time, if this entity we call the body of Christ is to function as the body of Christ, to let go. Bless em and send em off. Finish your job. There is a trend of believers leaving the church because of numerous reasons including a perceived lack of relevancy, lack of ministry opportunity, and the mechanical nature by which churches eventually become entrenched in and on and on. These are not immature, new converts, but mature believers with years of faithful service and participation in local congregations. They are not deserting Christ and their faith cannot be described as shipwrecked. The church, and pastoral leadership need to recognize there are new phases of body life being entered into that do not include their direct pastoral oversight and responsibility. As the parent figures, pastoral leaders need to recognize that their job has been accomplished and provide a means of transitioning out of their immediate pastoral care without the expectation that a new church relationship is to be entered into. Failure to adequately transition out of church life may lead to unnecessary broken relationships and damage that could be avoided. Pastoral maturity to let go is equally important as the maturity to go. Faith in action hears God, and acts accordingly. The role of the pastor is not to define the work of service but to see their charge mature to the place of listening and hearing God for themselves. As God speaks and personally communes, the work of service will be the result of the intimacy of relationship with God. Jesus heard His father and acted. Abraham heard the word of God, trusted and acted. It will be no different with us. We may not attain the perfection of Jesus in hearing and acting. We most assuredly have more objective knowledge and information to assess our subjective promptings than Abraham. We have the history of God amongst men. They call it the Bible. As we hear, act, we will walk in our work of service. Maturity is not applying the code. Maturity is listening, hearing, acting and walking with God.
29
Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers Get us there! Were not your toys or your security. Dont keep us bound to religious monstrosities that only serve temporarily. Enoch walked with God, and he was no more, because God took Him. Enochs last words Im out of here Lead us to the place of Enoch.
30

Escape From Evangelicalism ... Reformation, Restoration or Resolution ... A Challenge To Christian Leaders

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Escape From Evangelicalism ... Reformation, Restoration or Resolution ... A Challenge To Christian Leaders

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Escape from Evangelicalism

Reformation, Restoration or Resolution

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

Escape from Evangelicalism - Robert D Couchenour September 16, 2005

S-ar putea să vă placă și