I will be writing in my next few blogs on the topic of Evangelism. When I served on the Standing Committee in the Diocese of Dallas, I would ask those in the ordination process an important question related to evangelism. First I would tell them that the question that I was about to ask was not a pass or fail one, but rather that I genuinely wanted to know their response. Here is the question:
“As you know from your
theological studies, there are several ways in which the Doctrine of the
Atonement has been expressed. Which one
of these best expresses your own personal understanding?”
The reason I
asked the question was because I believe there is a direct relationship between
what an ordained person believes about the Atonement and how they would do the
work of Evangelism. Almost all the
candidates gave a similar answer. They
would say that they believed that Jesus had on the cross paid the price for
their sins and that they believed they were forgiven and saved by his death and
resurrection. This, of course, is a
standard answer based on The Substitutionary Doctrine of the
Atonement. Now even though we were a
conservative diocese, we had folks who had studied at a number of different
seminaries. A number of candidates went
to Southwest Theological Seminary which is generally on the Progressive side of
the theological spectrum, yet even these candidates gave similar answers.
One would have
expect at least some of them to suggest that Jesus’ act of self-sacrificial
love that he modeled on the cross showed us God’s love and that we who follow
him are to live out a life of love, forgiveness and self-sacrifice for others
particularly for the hurting, lost, and marginalized in our world. This would be more consistent with a
Progressive Theological view point. I
never heard it. One very high church
candidate who had gone to Nashotah said that he knew that he was a sinner and
that Jesus’ death paid the price of his blood for his sins. Most any American Evangelical would say the
same.
With this
the standard answers, one could expect that such people would be active advocates
of people repenting of their sins, accepting Jesus’ death, and his blood as a
covering for them. Then they might ask
others to make such a profession by repeating, say, “the sinner’s prayer” which
is a standard tool among Substitutionary Atonement Evangelicals. In my time, no rash of evangelical altar
calls or invitations were taking place in the diocese, and neither were more
Progressive calls for people to follow after the example of Jesus’ love; “his
way, truth, and life” as a Christian.
What I found
was a disconnect between what our clergy were professing and any behavior that
would follow logically from such professions.
Indeed, I would observe around the wider church where Progressive
Theology dominates, that there is no active recruiting of new Christians based
on this view. Episcopal Clergy on the
Progressive side seem content to find those who wish an inclusive and
non-judgmental denomination to join their churches. If you notice, not very many are doing this,
in fact, even less each year.
There are
clergy in our church of differing theological perspectives that are genuinely
interested in the growth of their congregations especially with newer and
younger members. Some will even buy my
books on congregational development seeking to be user-friendly and seeker
sensitive. However, they do not seem
interested in actual evangelization.
Some clergy have
told me that they are not interested in numbers and some rather strongly that
they do not want to proselytize other people.
These folks seem to have moved so far out into the Universalist arena
that they see no value in bringing others to Christ and the Church. Personally, I believe that such people should
be denied a pension, but perhaps I am too judgmental.
At the heart
of all this is what I see as four dynamics that hinder our effectiveness in
evangelism even when clergy think there is really something in this Atonement
business that speaks to us personally.
Why?
1. Episcopal clergy see ourselves as generous and
accepting people who through our willingness want to show others Christ’s love and
acceptance so that they will eventually come around to a Christian point of view.
2. There is a detachment between our
liturgical and parish life from the acts and opportunities for evangelism. For example, what better Sunday for an altar
call or public decision than on Palm Sunday?
Yet clergy believe that having people observe the liturgy is enough. “They will get it,” we rationalize.
3. In addition, many clergy would never
interrupt the beauty of the service and its liturgical acts and symbols with
such an action. In summary, many clergy
were taught and believe that participation in the Church’s liturgy will bring
folks into a decided and deeper relationship with Christ. They fail to hear the prophetic warning, “These
people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me!”
4. There is a lack of willingness of our
clergy to create opportunities for evangelism.
Even at the end of confirmation instruction, few clergy actually ask
people if they are ready to make a commitment or a more intentional commitment
to follow after Jesus as Lord and Savior.
Many people believe that a confirmation they are merely joining the Church.
Before I go
on, let me remind my reader of the Episcopal definition of evangelism. “To present Jesus Christ in the power of the
Holy Spirit in ways that people are led to believe in him as Savior and follow
him as Lord within the fellowship of his Church.”Ironically we fail to
do such a presentation even though we ourselves admit to an experience, or
event, or moment when we led to do so!
For six
years, I was Rector of an Episcopal Church that had a weekly evangelistic
service. I led and have seen hundreds of
individuals make a conscious and prayerful decision to accept Jesus as Savior
and to follow him in the power of the Holy Spirit as Lord. I am not bragging at this point, but stating
a fact. I would be the first to admit
that I had never done such a thing regularly in a parish before I became the
Rector of that Church. What I want to
say is this. I learned to do it. And I want to suggest the following to my
fellow clergy and lay leaders who are interested. I learned the following:
1. Never assume that you know where a person is
in her or his relationship with Christ until you hear it from them. And NO ONE has a greater right or opportunity
to inquire about a member’s spiritual life and relationship to Christ than the
Rector.
2. There are many church members who
love the Church, its liturgy, its parish life, its Anglican style, but who are
not disciples of Jesus Christ. I have
had so called “life-long members” of the Episcopal Church say to me that they
see no reason for them to ever have to make a decision to follow Christ: note
that we teach that Confirmation is an adult affirmation of our Baptismal Vows
to do just such a thing.
3. In our subtle way of presenting the
Gospel, we fail to understand the importance of a conscious moment of
commitment. As a lay evangelist once
told me, clergy in our church seem reluctant to “close the deal.”
Here is what
I think is both a pastoral and spiritually valid way of closing the deal. “Have you come to a place where you are
comfortable accepting Jesus as Savior and following him as Lord? If not, why not?”
Notice that “No”
is an acceptable answer to the question, and that a no answer allows up to
speak to any objections the person may have.
What I find is that there is a real spiritual value in a person honestly
admitting (even if a Church member) that he or she is not yet at a place where
that person is comfortable with this. I
have had many people come back to me at a later time and say that NOW they are
now ready to do it.
I did not write this blog to make
anyone feel bad especially my fellow clergy.
I had to learn how to do evangelism.
What I am suggesting is that clergy need to connect our view of the
Atonement with a practical way of applying this. This is the work of evangelization. If you want to discuss this with me more
directly, feel free to email me at deankevinmartin@gmail.com I would be happy to reply.
In my next
blog, I want to suggest a fuller understanding of the Doctrine of the Atonement
and how I apply this to our increasingly more secular world.
No comments:
Post a Comment