by Steve | May 21, 1989 | Archive - 1989
Archive: What John Wesley Might Say to the United Methodist Church
By Rober Tuttle
“There is nothing new under the sun” (ECC. 1:9). The Hebrew Scriptures would seem to suggest that John Wesley’s words to the church of the 18th century are just as relevant now as they were in Wesley’s day. To be sure, he has just as much at stake.
Although United Methodism has not been a Wesleyan church for more than 75 years, Wesley’s words are gaining fresh authority among many Methodists today. Once again the Church in general and the United Methodist Church in particular seem ready to listen. After all, people today still need salvation; Wesley speaks to that. People today still need to fear sin as much as death and hell; Wesley speaks to that. People today still oppress each other; Wesley speaks to that. People today still need fellowship and accountability; Wesley speaks to that. People today still need to experience love as the beginning and end of their faith in Jesus Christ; Wesley speaks to that as well. Let me illustrate.
In the year that Wesley died (1791) he edited and reprinted the Large Minutes for circulation within the Methodist connection. With a few editorial adjustments for clarification we can use that document to test the theory that Wesley’s admonitions to early Methodism are just as relevant for United Methodism today as they were in Wesley’s time, perhaps painfully so:
“Personal religion either toward God or man is amazingly superficial among us.
“I can but just touch on a few generals. How little faith is there among us! How little communion with God! How little living in heaven, walking in eternity, deadness to every creature! How much love of the world, desire of pleasure, of ease, of getting money! How little brotherly love! What continual judging one another! What gossiping, evil-speaking, tale-bearing! What want of moral honesty!
“And the Methodists in general will be little the better, till we take quite another course with them [our people]. For what avails public preaching alone, though we could preach like angels? We must, yea, every traveling preacher must, instruct them from house to house. Till this is done, and done in good earnest, the Methodists will be little better than other people. Our religion is not deep, universal, uniform; but superficial, partial, uneven. It will be so till we spend half as much time in this visiting as we now do in talking uselessly.
“In ourselves there is much dullness and laziness, so that there will be much ado to get us to be faithful in the work.
“We have a base, man-pleasing temper; so that we let men perish rather than lose their love. We let them go quietly to hell, lest we should anger them.
“Some of us have also a foolish bashfulness. We know not how to begin and blush to contradict the devil.
“But the greatest hindrance is weakness of faith. Our whole motion is weak because the spring of it is weak.
“Lastly, we are unskillful in the work. How few know how to deal with men so as to get within them and suit all our discourse to their several conditions and tempers; to choose the fittest subjects and follow them with a holy mixture of seriousness, and terror, and love, and meekness!
“Too many of them [our people] will be unwilling to be taught, till we conquer their perverseness by the force of reason and the power of love. …
“And it is still harder to fix things on their hearts, without which all our labour is lost. If you have not, therefore, great seriousness and fervency, what good can you expect? And, after all, it is grace alone that must do the work.
“And when we have made some impressions on their hearts, if we look not after them they will soon die away.
“But as great as this labour of private instruction is, it is absolutely necessary. For, after all our preaching, many of our people are almost as ignorant as if they had never heard the gospel. I speak as plain as I can, yet I frequently meet with those who have been my hearers many years who know not whether Christ be God or man. And how few are there that know the nature of repentance, faith and holiness! Most of them have a sort of confidence that God will save them, while the world has their hearts. I have found by experience that one of these has learned more from one hour’s close discourse than from ten years’ public preaching.
“And undoubtedly this private application is implied in those solemn words of the apostle: ‘I charge thee, before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and dead at his appearing, preach the word, be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering.’
“O brethren, if we could but set this work on foot in all our societies and prosecute it zealously, what glory would redound to God! If the common ignorance were banished and every shop and every house busied in speaking of the word and works of God, surely God would dwell in our habitations and make us His delight.
“And this is absolutely necessary to the welfare of our people, many of whom neither believe nor repent to this day. Look round and see how many of them are still in apparent danger of damnation. And how can you walk and talk and be merry with such people when you know their case? Methinks, when you look them in the face, you should break forth into tears. … O, for God’s sake and for the sake of poor souls, bestir yourselves and spare no pains that may conduce to their salvation!
“What cause have we to bleed before the Lord this day, that we have so long neglected this good work! If we had but set upon it sooner how many more might have been brought to Christ? And how much holier and happier might we not have made our societies before now? And why might we not have done it sooner? There were many hindrances, and there always will be. But the greatest hindrance was in ourselves, in our littleness of faith and love.”
Relevant? Not only for the United Methodist Church but for all of us! Is it not time to repent and renew our faith and trust in Jesus Christ that we might experience renewal in the church—beginning with me?
All quotations are taken from Wesley’s Works, Vol. 8, pp. 302 ff (Jackson, 3rd edition).
Robert Tuttle is professor of evangelism at Garrett- Evangelical Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois, and is a contributing editor to Good News.
by Steve | May 20, 1989 | Archive - 1989
Archive: On Holy Ground
This Indian-born lecturer removes his shoes to preach to people no one notices
By Sara L. Anderson
It has been said of Sam Kamaleson, “He has spoken in face-to-face encounters with more church leaders than anyone in the world.” “Sam who?” you ask. Through speaking for World Vision and his work in establishing pastors’ conferences around the world, Sam Kamaleson’s influence is widespread. Still, he is not well-known to the Church at large, partially because those to whom he ministers are not well-known.
It is with this grassroots level of leadership that Kamaleson, World Vision’s vice president for evangelism and leadership enhancement, works. “They roll up their sleeves and work in the mud and dust,” Sam says of the people to whom he ministers. “They are the crust, the salt of the earth. Whether we are there or not, they are going to go because the Lord has called them, and we learn from them. If we don’t relate to them, we are not relating to the Church.”
Yet it is with quiet humility that Kamaleson works, humility communicated by politeness and cultural sensitivity. While talking with individuals or groups he never crosses his legs, observers note, since in many cultures showing the sole of your shoe demonstrates contempt. His concern for individuals is obvious. Asbury College President Dennis Kinlaw says, “He’ll take my hand and speak to me, and when he’s through it’s as if I’ve been baptized in love.”
Kamaleson surreptitiously removes his shoes before he preaches, says Kinlaw, who has shared many a conference platform with him. When Sam is behind the pulpit “he’s standing on holy ground,” explains Kinlaw.
That holy ground, which has stretched around the globe, was consecrated in India. A sixth-generation Anglican, Kamaleson strayed from the Church when he left home to attend the University of Madras to study anatomy. “I didn’t think the Church and its message were so essential,” he recalls. However, his roommate, a Hindu, heard a street-preaching team and turned to the Lord. “It was his life and witness and his perseverance in prayer that led me to the Lord,” Sam says. Kamaleson became part of the struggling but vital Methodist congregation there because it was closest to the campus. Then Methodist missionary J.T. Seamands, now professor emeritus at Asbury Theological Seminary, visited Madras with his quartet. After leaving, J.T. continued to encourage Sam in his commitment to Christ, sending letters and sheet music. (Sam was a singer as well.) “I found that the range of J.T.’s voice was very similar to mine,” Sam says, flashing a wide smile. “So in my anatomy classes I was copying music instead of studying anatomy.”
J.T. Seamands was no stumbling block to Kamaleson’s education but instead persuaded Sam to attend Asbury Seminary. “I came because of the music,” Sam says, “then got hooked on theology.”
During his time in the United States, Sam worked with Mennonite farmers in northern Indiana in preparation for the veterinary work he hoped to do back in India. He saw that as a way to reach people in rural areas for Christ.
But when Sam returned to his home church J.T. Seamands, the appointed pastor, could not serve the parish because one of his daughters was ill, and the family had to return to America. So Sam promised the congregation of Emmanuel Methodist he would be its pastor for one year. That year eventually stretched to 13 incredible years.
David Seamands, J.T.’s brother and the Methodist district superintendent who had appointed him to Emmanuel Methodist Church, also greatly influenced Sam. Like his brother, David encouraged the young pastor through letter-writing, and he led Sam into what we call the “second experience of grace.”
Under Sam’s ministry Emmanuel Church blossomed. “In three months we couldn’t close the altar in any service, including prayer meeting,” Sam recalls. “People always came forward to receive the Lord.” During this time the church recorded 300 percent growth in attendance and giving. “We had to pull the walls down three times,” Sam says.
But Sam did not forget his commitment to rural ministry. He instituted the Salem Project in Banishpet, India, an agricultural project with a basic philosophy he developed at Asbury. The first goal was for the community, not just one person, to evangelize. Second, the community would live in the context of the country. For instance, since India is primarily an agrarian society, it should be an agricultural fellowship. Third, the community should be self-sufficient, contribute to and speak to its environment.
The Salem Project, officially known as Bethel Agricultural Fellowship, has met those goals for 21 years now. The list of its ministries seems endless:
- A hospital with 30 beds and 3 doctors. “We do complicated surgery; we have specialists visiting every week—skin, eye and surgical specialists, ” Kamaleson explains. Postnatal and prenatal counseling are provided, and skin diseases like leprosy are treated. Bethel also operates a government-recognized center for tuberculosis prevention, with free medicine and other assistance provided.
- A training center, Bethel Bible Institute, which prepares people for missions.
- Provisions for needy children. “In a society where economic conditions can be very trying, children bear the brunt of it,” Sam says. The Bethel Community cares for destitute children, murderers’ children (society ostracizes them), children of leprous parents and orphaned children. The community cares for 600 children there and nearly 3000 in other locations in India.
- Agricultural projects. Young men with promise are brought in from the surrounding villages to stay on the campus for 10 to 21 days to learn everything they need to know about the cultivation of hybrid seeds. “At graduation they receive a packet of hybrid seeds and a Bible,” Sam says. “Most of them make commitments to the Lord before they leave. When they return to their villages they become the center around which to form a congregation.” This is how churches are built (with the help of World Vision).
- A vocational training institute. Young men with mechanical aptitudes are taught skills ranging from cabinetmaking to electronics, and use these skills to support themselves when they leave the community.
Bethel’s influence has produced marvelous results.
First scenario: “We’ve been able to influence murderers in prison,” Sam says. “Their children are our wards, and when they come to know the Lord they often write their fathers saying, ‘Although we can’t live together on planet Earth, there is a Father’s house. And there we will never be separated, Dad, if you’d only receive the Lord Jesus Christ.’
“That of course breaks even the hardest of criminals, and they will write to us and ask, ‘Can you send me the book?’ So we send the Bible,” Sam explains. “And in every major prison we’ve got a nucleus of believing prisoners who have caused a ‘revolution’ to happen there.”
Second scenario: Some of the children of leprous parents now have university degrees. “One fellow has specialized in Islamic studies. … He wants to be a channel to properly articulate the gospel,” Sam says. He adds that one girl has earned a degree in commerce. “These are children of lepers, who had no place to go except to contract the disease themselves.”
Third scenario: The Tamils, people deported from Ceylon, now Sri Lanka, had been involved in bloody and deadly conflicts with another group of people. World Vision projected a program to help rehabilitate those Tamils belonging to a militant group, the Tigers. “We started with 25 or 30 people at a time. They got converted.” Now back in Sri Lanka, “they’ve got congregations going, and I write to them regularly,” Sam says.
A majority of Sam’s activity now revolves around his work with two types of World Vision-sponsored pastors’ conferences. The first is by invitation. A group from any dot on the world map may ask World Vision to come and address some biblically-based theme. For instance, a group in the Pacific islands determined that one of its main problems was how the people, as Christians, could cope with tourist traffic. World Vision brought in speakers from around the world to address the issue.
It takes about two years to put together such a conference and develop the funding (World Vision pays different percentages, depending on the socio-economic condition of the area). The conferences have broad appeal. One held in Nairobi, Kenya, drew 1,700 pastors from 70 denominations; another in Bolivia drew the same number.
Sam, an Indian citizen, has an easier time gaining entry into some of these countries, and he has even been able to minister behind the Iron Curtain. “We get into corners where prominent teams cannot,” Sam says.
The second type of conference, a non-agenda conference, helps executives and top denominational leaders learn to build relationships with each other. Most regular conferences are centered around a rigorous agenda, but in these meetings discussion and worship are free-flowing.
In Ecuador, where united conferences had not taken place because denominational heads couldn’t agree with each other, World Vision hosted a three-day, non-agenda conference for 35-40 leaders. “The second evening we were speaking about the Holy Spirit in an informal way, and the Spirit going to Moscow. I’ve lost my son!’ He began to cry. Nobody knew what to do. I put my arms around him and intuitively responded, ‘I have two grown sons; I know what you are talking about. Brother, let me pray for you.’ Then one by one they put their hands on us. This was a breaking point.”
The session went on until 2:00 a.m. As a result, the first national pastors’ conference took place because the denominational leaders had come together. That has happened in more than one place. “Let the Holy Spirit work among us,” Kamaleson says. “Amazing things do happen.”
When asked what he admires most about Sam, Kin law’s response is immediate: “Integrity.” He explains that even in situations with hostile people Sam is not defensive, but he’s clear-headed and direct. Sam’s that way with people of any religious or political persuasion. Yet in his dealings “he is never unfaithful to Christ as the truth, even while asking others what he can learn from them.”
If we were to ask Sam the reason for his quiet success, he would immediately call attention to his wife. “My wife is more than a partner to me,” he says. “She is a teammate. And her understanding releases me to do all that I have done. Yet that is not my identity. Being a child of God is my identity.”
Sara L. Anderson is associate editor of Good News and associate editor of Bristol Books.
by Steve | Mar 24, 1989 | Archive - 1989
Archive: The Missing Cross
Has the Church stopped preaching the message of Calvary?
By David F. Wells
The New Testament never says that Christ lived for us, thirsted for us, was tempted for us or became weary for us, true as all this is. What it says, and says repeatedly, is that He died for us.
More precisely it says that He died for our sins, bearing them as His own, assuming responsibility for them and suffering the full wrath of God in consequence. In view of the clarity and insistence of this apostolic witness, the fact that it is so commonly misunderstood is remarkable.
Protestant liberals expressed an optimism that grew out of their evolutionary understanding of life. They announced the coming kingdom that would consist of the realization of God’s universal fatherhood and man’s corresponding brotherhood. Jesus was the historic pioneer of this message, they said, and His pioneering in revealing God’s love is redemptive.
This concept evoked the scathing response from (H. Richard) Niebuhr that it offered a God without wrath who had brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through a Christ without a real cross. The shallow optimism that underlay it was shattered by the First World War in Europe and the Depression of the 1930s in America.
Salvation as Freedom from Societal Sin
Although the same optimism has not reappeared, there is nevertheless a widespread understanding of Christ’s death that is still classically liberal. For instance the 1973 Bangkok assembly of the World Council of Churches defined salvation as freedom from societal sins. Working back from the effects of sins, it then deduced from these the nature of the Atonement.
Sin was here conceived in a purely horizontal manner: what we need to be saved from is racial oppression, economic injustice, sexual prejudice, class distinctions and psychological inhibitions. Jesus is important because He exhibited freedom from and opposition to these evils. Indeed His example, by which the love of God was revealed, has provided our redemption. The Church’s mission is to call persons to a full humanity through Jesus, whose “salvation” brings liberty, unity, justice and peace.
During the last ten years the same model of understanding the work of Christ has been used in the so-called political theology that has refined the horizontal understanding of salvation in relation to the political order. Salvation means freedom from economic injustice, political corruption and class oppression.
Towards this end a Christian-Marxist dialogue has been established, and the cost of discipleship has been described in terms of revolution by Jurgen Moltmann or, at least, active resistance by Daniel Berrigan. Similarly James Cone has made black racial identity the basis for his assertion that “Black Power” demands are Gospel correlates. Different as these concepts may be in details, they agree that sin is a disruption of just horizontal relationships in society, that salvation is the rectification of these and that insofar as Jesus is important it is because He pioneered this movement as a revolutionary or at least a dissenter.
Sin undeniably has horizontal ramifications. While government exists to curb lawlessness, it is sometimes the vehicle of it; minorities are oppressed in spite of the laws and sometimes because of them. Given man’s inherent greed, it is a foregone conclusion that the American economic system, even if it is preferable to the alternatives, will never deliver equitable treatment to all who are embraced by it.
Denial of Vertical Dimension
The basic divergence in interpreting Christ’s death, then, does not arise because some think of sin societally (horizontally) and others think of it only religiously (vertically). New Testament faith acknowledges the horizontal dimension, but the new liberalism denies the vertical aspect.
Is sin most to be feared because it breeds distrust, foments greed, causes personality to disintegrate, fuels cruelty and leads to institutional corruption? Not according to the New Testament. It is most to be feared because it draws down the wrath of God. What makes our predicament hopeless on the one hand, and what necessitates a Gospel on the other, is not man’s inhumanity to man, ghastly as that sometimes is, but the fact that the world lies under God’s condemnation. Therefore the Atonement cannot be understood merely as the genesis of societal reform; it must be seen, centrally and primarily, as God’s provision for averting His own anger.
This vertical dimension of the Atonement gives God’s love its real sanctity, but for several reasons it has not been as prominent in evangelical thought and preaching as I believe it is in the New Testament.
Understanding the Wrath of God
It is obvious that the notion of God’s wrath is subject to serious misunderstanding, for it could be equated with human anger. Human anger is invariably tainted with and becomes the servant of evil. With anger comes malice, hatred, revenge, jealousy, distrust and uncontrolled passion. Clearly God’s anger is free of these defilements. What, then, is divine wrath? According to Frederick Godet it is:
… moral indignation in all its purity, the holy antipathy of the Good Being for that which is evil, without the slightest alloy of personal irritation or of selfish resentment. It is the dissatisfaction which is excited in a pure being by the sight of impurity. The wrath of God, so understood, is a necessary consequence of the profound difference which separates good from evil. To deny this would oblige us to consider evil not as the opposite, but simply an imperfect form of good [Godet’s Biblical Studies: Studies on the New Testament, ed. by W. H. Lyttleton, London, 1985, p. 152].
Emil Brunner, who speaks of wrath as “the negative aspect of holiness,” goes on to say that it [wrath] is necessarily an “objective reality” that stands between God and man. The price of affirming all this may be the appearance of “foolishness,” as Paul said—a lack of sophistication; but it is that kind of “foolishness” in which God excels.
And is it really so unsophisticated? What the divine judgment tells us is that good and evil are not equally ultimate. They are not on the two ends of a cosmic seesaw tilting up and down eternally. The days when error can be on the throne and when truth can be condemned to the scaffold are numbered. The time is coming when God’s zeal will “burst into flames.” What opposes His will on earth and in heaven will be destroyed.
This fact alone gives us both a mandate and a rationale for interpreting life in moral terms. This is what provides a major incentive to be moral; and this is why the New Testament, which is so intensely ethical, insistent upon our choosing good, is so often eschatological. To speak of God without acknowledging His wrath is to assume His ethical indifference. More than that, it is to require man’s ethical indifference too. What at first sight may appear to be rather cross, and has no doubt been treated crassly in innumerable “fire and brimstone” sermons, is actually of the essence of the nature of God and the whole moral order. Inevitably, then, it is of the essence of the Atonement too.
The Full Work of Christ
The work of Christ is a complex mystery, and the New Testament writers ransack their vocabulary to find language to express it. Their chief words are: redemption, by which Christ delivers sin’s captives from their bondage at the ransomed price of His life; sacrifice, by which our guilt, both as subjective shame (its psychological dimension) and as objective blame (its metaphysical dimension), is dealt with; propitiation, the way in which God’s wrath is diverted; and reconciliation, the restoration of fellowship between God and man.
The theme of reconciliation probably takes in as much of the work of Christ as any. Reconciliation presupposes a prior hostility between two parties. At first sight it may appear that man is hostile toward God but that God is not hostile toward man, for in Romans 5:10 and 2 Corinthians 5:20 only man’s reconciliation is mentioned. And in 2 Corinthians 5:18, Ephesians 2:16, Colossians 1:20 God is spoken of as reconciling us to Himself. If this were the case, then Christ’s work would be directed only toward changing our distrust of God and not toward changing God’s disapproval of us.
In the other instances of reconciliation in the New Testament (Matt 5:23, 24; 1 Cor. 7:10, 11), however, the focus actually falls not on the enmity of the offending party but on the need to assuage the anger of the person against whom the offense was committed. This pattern is duplicated precisely with respect to the Atonement. In Romans 5:8-11, for example, what is underlined is not primarily that Christ has changed our feeling about God but rather that He changed God’s feelings about us. The enmity to which Paul refers (v. 10, “For if while when we were enemies, we were reconciled. … “) is clearly God’s, not ours; otherwise He would have said: “If, when we felt enmity toward God, we were able to lay it aside through Christ’s death. … ”
On the contrary what Paul affirms is that in reconciliation no less than in justification we are helplessly passive; we must be reconciled and we must receive rather than effect our reconciliation (v. 11).
We are, therefore, separated from God by sin, and God is separated from us by wrath. For reconciliation to be effective God must be able to look on us without displeasure, and we must be able to look on God without fear. And what was required has been done, as the words of that well-known hymn affirm:
“Bearing shame and scoffing rude/In my place condemned he stood/Sealed my pardon with his blood/Hallelujah. … ”
In the reconciliation of Christ sin is expiated, wrath is propitiated and our alienation from God is overcome.
The Church’s Only Message
Our redemption is not achieved by Christ’s revealing God’s love to us; rather, Christ reveals God’s love to us by achieving our redemption. Indeed the apostle John goes so far as to say that we would not even know the real nature of love (1 John 3:16) unless God had undertaken to shoulder our guilt and make common cause with us in our sin.
Divine love, therefore, is not even understood outside the context of this Cross. It is with the Cross that we must begin, and it is with the Cross that we will end (Rev. 5:9, 10). The simplest message of the evangelist and the most profound message of the theologian are the same: Christ bore our sins, mediating between the estranged parties. There was no other Gospel known in the early Church; there should be no other Gospel known in ours.
Dr. David F. Wells is professor of historical and systematic theology at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He received the Ph.D. degree from the University of Manchester, England.
by Steve | Mar 23, 1989 | Archive - 1991
Archive: Great Expectations
By Sandi Kirk
A young man walked slowly along a cobblestone pathway toward Oxford. As he walked, his heart burned within him, for he was reading Jonathan Edward’s absorbing narrative of revival in America.[1]
The whole town of Northampton “seemed to be filled with the presence of God,” wrote Edwards. Beer taverns closed down; the church was flooded with new converts; and even young people talked continuously of the dying love of Jesus Christ. Like a spreading flame, the power of the Holy Spirit had come and was sweeping through New England with the fires of revival.[2]
A brisk autumn wind whipped through the young man’s coat as he walked; golden leaves tumbled across his feet. But he was unaware, so rapt was he in the wonder of revival. The fires of his own faith had been kindled at a place called Aldersgate, but now those fires were being fanned into flame as he read of revival in America.
That young man, of course, was John Wesley.
As Wesley read the heart-stirring words of Jonathan Edwards, he thought to himself, “A revival in North America? If God is one God, then surely He will bless this people as well.”[3]
From that moment on, says Dr. Robert G. Tuttle, John Wesley began to expect revival. Less than three months later it happened. In his own journal, Wesley writes:
“About three in the morning as we were continuing instant in prayer, the power of God came mightily upon us, insomuch that many cried out for exceeding joy, and many fell to the ground. As soon as we were recovered a little from that awe and amazement at the presence of His majesty, we broke out with one voice, ‘We praise Thee, O God; we acknowledge Thee to be the Lord.’”[4]
Now, at last, the revival had come. This would be a revival that would sweep like a wildfire through all of England, becoming one of the greatest outpourings of God’s Spirit since Pentecost.
What has happened to us?
This is our Methodist heritage. John Wesley was a man who lifted up the message of salvation through the Cross of Jesus Christ and prayed down the power of the Holy Spirit.
But what has happened to us today? Why are we no longer seeing such powerful demonstrations of the Holy Spirit in our church? One of our bishops has suggested that the United Methodist Church is like a great, beached whale, languishing on the shores of extinction.
Then why don’t we get back in the water? Why don’t we plunge back into the great ocean of God’s Spirit? Why don’t we boldly pray for a deluge of the Holy Spirit that will bring us back into the waters of revival where the great beached whale may come alive again?
We need a fresh visitation of the Holy Spirit in the church today.
We saw it coming
We’ve heard such admonitions many times before. But does revival sound too idealistic now? Have we lost all real hope of ever experiencing the fresh touch of the Holy Spirit?
Let me share how we saw revival come to a women’s group at St. Luke’s UM Church in Lubbock, Texas.
It all started in a weekly women’s meeting; we didn’t study the Holy Spirit. We studied the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and the exaltation of Jesus Christ. But in every meeting we asked the Holy Spirit to come and open our eyes to help us see Jesus more clearly.
Week by week we were aware that as we were beholding Christ, the Holy Spirit was coming upon us. Gently, almost imperceptibly He came. We knew that as we were looking at Jesus, the Holy Spirit was coming, for as Charles Spurgeon has said, “There is Life in a look at the Lamb.”[5]
All this time my husband, R.L., who is pastor of the church, and I knelt every night by our bedside and earnestly asked God to send the power of His Holy Spirit to our people.
Then it happened
Women had gathered for a retreat. It was 11:45 a.m. One of the speakers had just completed a beautiful message, mentioning our need to repent of unbelief. The leader led the group in a prayer of repentance over unbelief and invited the Holy Spirit to come. Then we waited.
Suddenly, like a soft summer breeze, the Holy Spirit came. He had been with us before, but not like this. We knew He dwelled in our hearts, but this was different. This was something more. It was power from on high. It was streams of divine glory. It was the breath of God blowing in gentle majesty into our midst. Every woman there knew she was standing in the holy presence of God.
Yet there was no emotionalism. There was no loud singing or clapping. We had simply repented, asked Him to come, and waited. In the holy stillness of complete silence He came. Each of us knew it was an awesome visitation from God.
Tears flowed. Hard hearts softened. Women who had longed to know God personally knew they had met Him face to face. Those who had yearned to be filled with the Holy Spirit were undeniably filled. Those with hidden sins were broken in deep, cleansing repentance. Guilt and sin melted away like morning dew in the rising sun, as hearts were cleansed and filled and set aflame for Jesus Christ.
One woman who had for years hidden the agony of two abortions, while under the Holy Spirit’s conviction, confessed her sin to one of the leaders. She cried tears of deep remorse as she repented before God and received His complete forgiveness. With her heart cleansed, she asked Jesus to fill her with His Holy Spirit—and He did, beautifully. Now everywhere she goes, people remark about what a radiant Christian she has become.
This was only a taste of a spiritual outpouring. We barely got our toes wet in the waters of revival. But it was a start, and we all knew we would never be the same.
Have we welcomed the Holy Spirit?
It all began as we invited the Holy Spirit to come. In the process we learned something vitally important about the Holy Spirit: He only comes when He is wanted. He is a Gentleman. He waits to be welcomed.
But have we truly made the Holy Spirit feel welcome in the United Methodist Church today? Have we invited Him into our church services, our Sunday school classes, our Bible studies? Or have we been afraid?
If so, have we grieved Him away with our fear?
If we have grieved Him from the church, then perhaps true repentance could be the gateway to a mighty outpouring of the Holy Spirit—a prelude to revival.
Interestingly, the Holy Spirit didn’t come to our women’s group until we sincerely repented of our unbelief, which is the real root of fear. Perhaps we need to humble ourselves at the foot of the Cross and tell God we are sorry. If we would deeply repent of our fear and unbelief and welcome Him back to our church, I believe He would come in a powerful new visitation.
Let’s give the United Methodist Church “back to God!”
In a time of thickening spiritual darkness in England, John Wesley lifted his voice and thundered: “Enemy beware! If I could find 30 men totally committed to Jesus Christ…I would give England back to God!”[6]
In a time of increasing darkness in Methodism today, can we not say the same: “Enemy beware!” We have many more than 30 men and women totally committed to Jesus Christ. Let’s return to our Wesleyan roots; let’s invite the Holy Spirit to come—and let’s give the Methodist Church “back to God!”
Sandi Kirk is a freelance writer from Lubbock, Texas.
[1] John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1872), p. 160.
[2] Jonathan Edwards, “A Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God in the Conversion of Many Hundreds of Souls…,” The Works of Jonathan Edwards (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1834), Vol. I, pp. 347-349.
[3] Robert G. Tuttle, John Wesley, His Life and Theology (Orlando, Florida: University of the Air, 1941), p. 214.
[4] Wesley, Works, p.170.
[5] Charles H. Spurgeon, “On the Cross After Death,” Spurgeon’s Expository Encyclopedia (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), Vol. Iv, p. 362.
[6] Tuttle, Wesley, p. 196.
by Steve | Mar 23, 1989 | Archive - 1989
Archive: The People’s Pulpit
Preaching is not a spectator sport. It is up to you to help your pastor preach better.
By John Brokehoff
In his best-selling Lake Wobegon Days Garrison Keillor describes his pastor’s sermons: “He mumbles, he murmurs. It’s a lot of on-the-one-hand-this, on-the-other-hand-that. He never comes straight out. He never puts the hay down where the goats can get it. It’s a lot of talk, and many a Sunday I’ve walked away with no idea what he said. Can’t remember even where he started from. You never had that problem with the old preachers. There never was a moment’s doubt. It was ‘repent or be damned.’ We need that. This guy, he tries to please everybody. Just once I wish he’d raise his voice and pound on the pulpit. That way I’d know he wasn’t talking in his sleep.”
Does this describe your preacher? If so, it helps explain why our denomination lost 70,000 members in 1987.
But whose fault is it? Is it the preacher’s? Is it the seminaries’? And what are the people doing about this kind of preaching?
One thing they are not doing is going to hear a sermon. Only 30 percent of the UMC’s membership bothers to worship. Empty pews are a sign that something is wrong with the sermons in that church.
In addition, many people are dropping out of church. In 1985 a survey asked 782 Lutherans who had become inactive why they had dropped out. Forty-two percent said it was because of irrelevant sermons. Many still attending church endure dull sermons but do not know what to do.
Protestants believe in a free pulpit—no one but God should tell a preacher what to say.
But preaching is not a spectator sport. The people in the pews are as responsible for effective preaching as the person in the pulpit. But what can they do to make their pastor a better preacher? What is the people’s part in preaching?
Be In Church
If a preacher puts 20 hours into preparing a sermon, it is discouraging to have less than a church full of people to hear it.
Pierce Harris of First Methodist Church, Atlanta, was one of the most popular preachers in the South during the 1900s. His church was packed at both morning and evening services. He claimed the secret to his success was a packed church.
In a crowded church you get the feeling something wonderful is happening. More people mean more enthusiasm. The singing sounds like thunder. The prayers are more fervent.
A half-filled church is depressing, and it discourages the preacher. But when a service is well-attended the preacher will likely be determined to do an even better job the next Sunday. Understanding the responsibility of bringing so many to the knowledge of Christ drives the preacher to his/her knees.
To help your pastor be a better preacher, be in church every Sunday.
Pray For The Preacher
The best thing you can do for a preacher is pray. Ask God to give your preacher insight into the meaning of the Word and to enable him/her to articulate the truth so that it is understandable. Above all, pray that the Holy Spirit empowers your preacher. To be enthusiastic, sincere, earnest, zealous and concerned for the souls of people, a preacher needs the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Don’t wait until Sunday to pray. Ask God each day to fill your pastor with wisdom and unction.
When I served as a pastor, I had the congregation pray silently just before the sermon while the organist played a stanza of a hymn. The people prayed that they would rightly hear the Word, and they prayed for the one who would preach.
Respect your preacher’s need to pray before the service. Often just before the worship service church people come to the pastor with information, complaints or a joke. Your preacher needs at least 10 uninterrupted minutes before the service to be alone with God and to get in the spirit of worship.
Confine The Preacher
Many pastors are too busy doing things they should not have to do. Roy M. Oswald, director of training at Alban Institute, claims that one of every five clergypersons in the United States is burned out. The health insurance program of one denomination reports that heart attacks among clergy have increased 67 percent in the last few years.
A pastor is commissioned to preach the Word and administer the sacraments; he is to be the congregation’s theologian-in-residence. The pastor is not called to manage the church property, raise the annual budget, lead the youth, type stencils for the Sunday bulletin, enlist church school teachers and attend every meeting of the auxiliaries.
The average preacher spends only a few hours each week getting ready to preach; the minimum time needed is 20 hours. Many pastors admit they do not get to read one serious book in a year. Is it any wonder that today’s preaching is hardly worth listening to?
You can help your pastor by protecting him/her from the rat race of church activities. Jethro advised Moses not to try to handle all of the people’s problems but to turn them over to able men. Your pastor, like Moses, is to deal only with great matters.
Methodist Bishop Arthur J. Moore was known internationally as a great preacher. What was the secret of his success? After his six o’clock breakfast his wife would give him a bottle of milk and lock him in his study until lunchtime.
The people who want better preaching must insist that their preacher spend his/her mornings, five days a week, in the study praying, thinking, studying, planning, writing and reading. The church should budget a certain amount each year for books and the preacher’s continuing education.
The leaders of the church should encourage a new pastor not to feel guilty about taking time for study. They should emphasize, “Spend time with God. Learn what His Will is, and tell us Sunday mornings. Study so that you may lead us into deeper understandings of the truth of God’s Word.”
Dialogue
Dialogue with the people is vital to good preaching. In recent years some pastors have invited worshipers to participate in pre-service or post-service dialogues.
In the pre-service dialogue a representative group of six to eight persons meets with the pastor to discuss the text and subject for the next Sunday. The purpose of the dialogue is not to tell the preacher what to say but to help in the preparation of the sermon. The group faces questions like
- What are your needs? Does this portion of scripture address those needs?
- What are your problems? Does this text or any other passage solve that problem?
- If you were writing the sermon, what would you emphasize?
- Can you think of any illustrations or life situations that speak to this subject?
- As you face this text, what questions come to mind?
In an hour’s discussion, the participants help put the text into daily life. They suggest fresh insights and applications. The dialogue helps the preacher immeasurably; his sermon will likely be more relevant to the needs of his congregation.
A post-service dialogue, held with or without the pastor, is open to anyone to discuss the sermon. It is not a gripe session. It provides participants with further explanation or corrects any misunderstanding about the sermon’s points. In turn, the preacher learns how to improve. The discussion leader asks,
- Did the congregation get the central theme?
- Was the congregation able to grasp the main points?
- Did the pastor get the message across?
- Were there any points that needed further clarification?
- In what ways could the pastor improve?
Respond
If there is no response to the sermon the preacher feels the effort was futile. When John the Baptist preached, “the multitudes were questioning him, saying ‘Then what shall we do?”‘ (Luke 3:10). When Peter preached on Pentecost, the people asked, “Brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37).
On their way out of church people often tell the pastor, “I enjoyed It.” But it would be more helpful to look for some good in the sermon and say, for example, “That was a thoughtful sermon,” “That was creative” or “The sermon made me think.” Such commendations would inspire your preacher to do an even better job the next Sunday.
The best response to a sermon is to re-dedicate your life to Christ. A sermon is not intended to entertain or even primarily to educate; a sermon is intended to motivate people to give their lives to Christ.
Both the people and the preacher are responsible for the quality of preaching. We have blamed the preacher for dull, ineffective sermons; but perhaps the people are not doing their part.
John Brokhoff is professor emeritus of preaching at Candler School of Theology in Atlanta. His wife is a UM evangelist in the Florida Conference.
