Several years ago, a mainline theologian told me of his experience at
an evangelical megachurch. He was visiting his children and
grandchildren during spring break and then Easter Sunday arrived.
Nothing visibly suggested that it was a Christian service, but this
distinguished theologian tried to reign in his judgments. There was no
greeting from God or sense that this was God’s gathering. The songs were
almost exclusively about us, our feelings, and our intentions to
worship, obey, and love; but it was not clear whom they were talking
about or why. He concluded, “Well, evangelicals don’t really have a
liturgy. They put all of the content into the sermon, so I’ll wait.”
His patience, however, was not rewarded. Although it was Easter, the
message (with no clear text) was on how Jesus gives us the strength to
overcome our obstacles. Lacking even a benediction, this theologian left
discouraged. He had come to an evangelical church at Easter and instead
of meeting God and the announcement of a real victory over sin and
death by Jesus Christ, he encountered other Christians who were being
given fellowship and instructions for making their own “Easter” come
true in their life.
Pressed with leading questions by his
son-in-law as to his reaction to the service (like, “Did it touch your
heart?”), the theologian broke his silence: “I assume you’re trying to
‘evangelize’ me right now,” he said. “But there was no ‘gospel’ anywhere
in that service that might convert me if I were unconverted.” He
concluded, “Not even in the most liberal churches I’ve been in was the
service so devoid of Christ and the gospel. It’s like ‘God who?’”
Since then, a mainline Methodist theologian told me of an almost
identical experience-curiously also at Easter-in a conservative
Presbyterian church that was known around the university for its
“Bible-believing” and “Christ-centered” ministry. He too left
disappointed (the sermon was something about how Jesus overcame his
setbacks and so can we), further substantiating his appraisal that
evangelicals are as likely as mainliners today to talk pop-psychology,
politics, or moralism instead of the gospel.
Over a century ago, Princeton theologians Charles Hodge and B. B.
Warfield observed that according to the system of revivalism associated
especially with Charles Finney, God was not even necessary. If
conversion and revival are “simply the philosophical result of the right
use of means” rather than a miracle of God’s grace, all you have to do
is find the right techniques, procedures, and methods that work across
the board: in business, politics, and religion. Continue at Michael Horton
No comments:
Post a Comment