The Modern Megachurch and the Wisdom of J.C. Ryle

Paul Thompson blogs at “The Bridge” and is a pastor between here and Japan somewhere!  He was our second place blogger in the Blue Collar Blog Madness tournament this year.

Last night I read two interesting pieces. One from Medical News Today, the other from J.C. Ryle Quotes.

Medical News Today: Like A Drug: The Rise Of American Megachurches

This article was about recent research by University of Washington about the rise of the American Megachurch. I found the article interesting… I think the observations by researcher, James Wellman could be spoken of more than just the megachurch. The article begins with the following statement…

“American megachurches use stagecraft, sensory pageantry, charismatic leadership and an upbeat, unchallenging vision of Christianity to provide their congregants with a powerful emotional religious experience,

J.C. Ryle wrote a book entitled “Warnings to the Churches”, in it he warns…

The church’s doctrine and practice are in constant danger of being corrupted from their original divinely-given character. Seeing this, Ryle felt compelled to utter a warning, however controversial this might prove. As he observes, ‘There are times when controversy is…a benefit. Give me the mighty thunderstorm rather than the pestilential malaria. The one walks in darkness and poisons us in silence…The other frightens and alarms us for a little season. But it is soon over, and it clears the air’ (p. 111).

Here are some quick quotes from the article “Like A Drug: The Rise Of The American Megachurch” compared with some of Ryle’s warnings to the church from over a hundred years ago.

Like A Drug: ”Megachurch services feature a come-as-you-are atmosphere, rock music, and what Wellman calls a “multisensory mélange” of visuals and other elements to stimulate the senses, as well as small-group participation and a shared focus on the message from a charismatic pastor.

Ryle’s Warnings:  ”There is a great appearance of learning and theological knowledge: many fancy that such clever and intellectual men must surely be safe guides.”    Continue at Paul Thompson

IMAGE

Freedom of the Will and the Five Finger Death Punch of Theology

At some point in nearly every debate about “who does what” in salvation a certain phrase is dropped which strikes fear into the heart of all involved. “I believe men have free will.” Like a triple dog dare issued on a schoolyard, people back up to give the concept space. The discussion of free will is an intensely polarizing subject. It’s more often put forward as a theological trump card against Calvinism than any other concept. “More moderate” theological constructs may take refuge within its walls. For many it is the final and insurmountable fall back defense against the logical minions of Reformed theology. Free will is the mother of all theological comebacks.

In the realm of debate the issuance of free will is a classic emotional appeal intended to play upon the sympathies of the listener. For certain, it is palpable. Within this discussion it is the emotional equivalent of setting a basket of puppies in front of an oncoming and uncaring steamroller of hard determinism. Who would dare advance against a reality as noble as man’s capacity to freely choose and love God? Who would dare trample over the treasured premises that underlie free will?

Free will as a doctrine (men have/retain the capacity to choose God) is intended to protect the quality of love between God and sinner. If it is not a free choice it cannot be real love. If it is not real love it was not a real choice. This sequence eventually leads to the five-finger death punch of theological debate, “Are we just a bunch of robots?” Free will and its corollaries pin the opponent down in an (apparent) inescapable contradiction between sincere love and unfeeling predestination. How can one possibly object to freewill without appearing as the Ebenezer Scrooge of theology? Debate over. Right? Not hardly. “Bah humbug!”  Keep Reading >>>

IMAGE