Escape From Evangelicalism

7/30/2019 Escape From Evangelicalism

1/30

1

Escape from Evangelicalism

Reformation, Restoration or Resolution

Robert D. Couchenour

I speak in wide generalizations here, and surely only one perspective. I am not anacademic 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 GreatCommissioning 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 sidesof 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 asthey 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 isancient 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 afigure 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 thereligious ties to the original culture are much stronger.


2/30

2

There is no definable existing original Christian culture.

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 obviouslyis 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 theresponsibility 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 Isay 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 giveEnglish 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

(1373-1415). 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


3/30

3

Reformation may have failed. At the beginning of the Sixteenth Century conditions in

Germany rendered it receptive to reform. Papal taxation and interference had greatlyburdened 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 theReformation. 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 theReformation.

Martin Luther was born in Eisleben, Germany on November 10, 1483. He entered theUniversity 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 moreconvinced 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 whichoffended 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 toutedindulgences 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 thepowder keg of the Protestant Reformation.

Luther found many scholars and much of the German populace in sympathy with hisviews. 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 laterthat 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 anda 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.


4/30

4

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 theScriptures (II Tim. 3:16,17).

C. Permissive view of Scriptural silence. Luther reacted to the seeming excesses of hismore 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 tothe 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 reformatorymovement.

Zwingli's interpretive approach to the Scriptures was more stringent than Luther'sapproach. 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 hadundergone 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 ofreligion. 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


5/30

5

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 wentbeyond 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 theapplication 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 actupon 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 distinctivepractice. 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 notessential 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. Theysupported 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 incomefrom 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 anddramatic 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 hisfamousInstitutes 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 toremain 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


6/30

6

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 beappointed 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 toGeneva 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 Genevathe 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 ofMartin Luther in the Reformation. His disciples went everywhere to propagate his

doctrines so that practically every Protestant denomination in existence is heavilypermeated 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, thosewho 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 ofProtestantism 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, EdwardVI, 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


7/30

7

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 othersto 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 adoptedon 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 intolarger "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 takenfor 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 eventuallybecame 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. Calvinistand 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 from19 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


8/30

8

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 hadseveral 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 doctrinesof 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 ofexemplary 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. Sociniansregarded 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 JacobusArminius (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 outHis 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 Calvinisticidea 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 VIIIwhen he broke away from the Roman Catholic Church to establish the Church ofEngland. Henry wanted the Church of England to be free of organizational ties to the


9/30

9

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. Thisleft 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 ofthe 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 theChurch 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 practicescontrary 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 churchgovernment 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 thebishops 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 properform 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 eliminatingthe 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


10/30

10

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 ofJohn Smyth. From a study of the Scriptures he came to the conclusionthat 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 thefirst Baptist Church. Smyth also adopted the view that Christ died for all. He and thosewho 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 advocatedcongregational 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 wereCongregationalists.

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 onthe 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 ofWilliam and Mary's Act of Toleration in 1689. Before thattime 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 bestbe 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 faithto 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 theScriptures 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


11/30


12/30

12

to proclaim His Gospel. Often building upon and holding to diametrically opposed

theologies, yet God moved men who were used to move men. Often accompanied byerratic 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 causebefore the Virginia general court and enlisted the support of prominent English and

Scottish Dissenters. The government's preoccupations after the outbreak of the Frenchand 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 Daviesbecame 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 inthe 19th century.

George Whitefield (1714-1770) Church of England evangelist who by his popular

preaching stimulated the 18th-century Protestant revival throughout Britain and theBritish-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


13/30

13

was divided between evangelical preaching throughout the American colonies from

Georgia to Massachusetts and itinerant preaching in England, Scotland, Wales, andIreland. 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 ofeducation 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 hisfellowship, 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 calledthe 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 forthe Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Accompanied by Charles, who was

ordained for this mission, John was introduced to some Moravian emigrants whoappeared to him to possess the spiritual peace for which he had been searching . Themission 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 HolyCommunion. 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


14/30

14

Paul to the Galatians, which emphasized the scriptural doctrine of justification by grace

through faith alone. OnMay 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 theirdoors 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 membersof 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 BandSocieties in December 1738.

For a year he worked through existing church societies, but resistance to his methodsincreased. 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 theunchurched 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. Topromote new societies he became a widely travelled itinerant preacher.Because mostordained 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 ordainsome 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 enteredWestminster 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 toGeorgia, he accepted holy orders.


15/30

15

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 afteronly 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 himselfat 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, hisinterference 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 didnot 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; andJesu, 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. Finneydropped 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 dubbednew

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 ministerof 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 andhumanity's innate ability to reform itself, were given expression in his Lectures on

Revivals (1835) and Lectures on Systematic Theology (1847).


16/30

16

Charles Hadden Spurgeon (1834-1892) English fundamentalist Baptist minister andcelebrated 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 aneven 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 forlater 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 andprospered 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 premillennialSecond Coming.

Moody's mass revivals were financed by prominent businessmen who believed he wouldalleviate 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 theChicago 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 wasentered upon, new, emotionally charged and vibrant movements arose. Azusa Street.


17/30


18/30

18

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 toParham'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 preacherswhose own ministry had become staid.

Spiritually energized and convinced that they had been charismatically endowed, scoresof 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 ofwithdrawing 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 totransform 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 whollyPentecostal. (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 practiceswere 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 formof 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 Pentecostalswithdrew 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 urbanneighborhoods. 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 ecclesiasticalcontrol, various divisive issues drove them into denominational fellowships.


19/30

19

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 seeksanctification. 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 warringcamps. 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 thewar 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 foundedin 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, theAzusa 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 Propheticmovements, have carried on theevangelical 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 ofcompromise 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 traditionsthat formed us and claim that to whatever extent they are ours.


20/30

20

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 ofspiritual 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 segmentof 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 ownchurches. They merely wanted to be agents of reform and revival, helping to rid their

churches of formalism and worldliness. They strove to transform their congregationsinto Spirit-filled communities like those described in the New Testament book Acts of

the Apostles. Moreover, they fully expected the prophetically promisedlatter 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 whohave 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 toresearch, 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 anyprevious saint in the course of history.

The fact that diverse signs and wonders are the experience of many in our contemporaryage 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 theimmediate prophetic endowment as given by the Spirit through those the Spirit wills.


21/30


22/30

22

As these new perceptions or applications became institutionalized, a denominationevolved 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 particulardenominations 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 religiousheritage as a sanctified political right.

Christ building His church is not just what is happening now. Christ has been buildingHis 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 andBiblical 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 believeGod 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. Thepolitical 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 religiousof 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 andunderstanding 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 areable 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.

The Evangelical church has developed to a place that it must be faced, are we relevant asthe 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


23/30

23

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 ofother 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 levelsof 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 apparentprime 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 intoconsideration 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 sothan 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 ordevelopment. 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 theother 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

organization and corporate association is not necessarily the church. They may beorganizational 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


24/30


25/30

25

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 muchintensive 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 thisthirty 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. Corporationsdo 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 withan 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 amature 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 ofdoctrine, 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 beregarded the status of Apostle specificallyhow 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 manthe 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 andthere 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 tendencyto 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.

There are cultural tendencies that spill over in the way we organize and function as thechurch. The fast food model, the high school model, the synagogue model, the

college lecture model, the concert model, the cell group model, the infomercial


26/30

26

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 areuniversally 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 contemporaryevangelical 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 someadaptation 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-Evangelistwas born.

During this period, mid twentieth century, most local churches where organized and

functioned essentially in a synagogue model, with varying types of church governmentdepending 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 thehorizon. 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 theparticular generation, the containers are perishable and subject to disposal.

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-boator 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


27/30


28/30

28

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 moremen. 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 thanpummeling 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 isbetter 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 churchfellowships. 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 inand 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 endand 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.

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 amature son, I may visit my parents, and spend time there and fellowship. My parents

should not be my source of support and sustenance.


29/30

29

The purpose of the church is to raise you for the work of service. The purpose of thechurch 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 toDO IT.

In Evangelical churches as much as there is a tendency on the part of sheep to remainsheep, and sheltered and dependant on pastoral umbilical cords, 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 nurturingthem. 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 bywhich 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 localcongregations. 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 hasbeen 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 relationshipsand 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 thework 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 andacting. 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.

Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers Get us there! Were not your toys oryour security. Dont keep us bound to religious monstrosities that only serve temporarily.


30/30

30

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.

Escape From Evangelicalism

Documents

Transcript of Escape From Evangelicalism