|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Going Forward
|
angelfish
Shipmate
# 8884
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
... one of the reasons, I suspect, that the altar-call thing gained in popularity was because Protestantism had largely taken the 'physical' aspect out of church services and replaced it with a largely cerebral response ... you simply sang some songs or Psalms and then sat and listened to someone preaching.
To an extent, the whole 'come forward' thing may have been an attempt to redress that by giving people something to 'do' - some kind of physical action to demonstrate intent of purpose. Although that's clearly an over-simplification.
I think this is what it's all about. The physical act of getting up and walking to a location as a way of declaring or demonstrating a change in our hearts can be a solidifying and galvanising thing. I believe the same thing lies behind the value of Communion and Baptism - that they are acts of faith, which declare and thus consolidate our beliefs - although I realise others have different views.
Years ago I was in an Anglican service where the minister invited people to respond to the sermon by walking from their pews and in through one door (which led to the vestry) then out through a second door leading from the vestry to the sanctuary and back down the central aisle to their pews. It was like a weird conga with half the church trooping through the building. Stuck in my mind though.
--------------------
"As God is my witness, I WILL kick Bishop Brennan up the arse!"
Posts: 1017 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm sorry SvitlanaV2, but you seem to think that churches should be monocultures - all the evangelicals in one, all the liberals in another, all the MoTR people somewhere else.
In practice, it doesn't work out as neatly as that.
No, it doesn't does it? Hence we all get terribly cross at having to tolerate church folk who aren't as evangelical (in whatever sense) as us or (more likely on the Ship) aren't as liberal (in whichever respect), or who don't like the right music, or aren't helping to move things fast enough in the 'right' direction, etc.! I think we rather like making life hard for ourselves!
I'd heard about the CofE benefiting from more vocations after Graham's visits. If I remember rightly, though, the bishop(?) who admitted it wasn't actually very keen on Graham's theology. I suppose it all proves that a hefty dose of pragmatism is an important theological rule. Get 'em in first and foremost. I can understand that.
It also kind of confirms for me that theology itself is a sort of game in which it's cool to be bedazzled by choice on the one hand, yet to be simultaneously frustrated by the choices of others on the other. It's a game because, in the end, what we choose, where we get it from, and how seriously we take it doesn't seem to be all that important. It's the taking part that counts, and participation demands choice.
(The above paragraph may not make much sense to you, so I apologise for that. It's more for my own reflection.)
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
OTOH, perhaps your Methodist church was non-evangelical, in which case, I wonder why your evangelical mother would have sent you there.
The tensions for evangelicals in deciding whether or not to separate from mainstream Protestant denominations infected by apostasy is of long standing, and goes back at least as far as Spurgeon and the Downgrade Controversy.
A classic expression of it was the 1966 disagreement between Martin Lloyd-Jones and John Stott.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Yes, I appreciate that.
You mentioned being in Australia. Would you say that Methodism in Australia has largely held on to its evangelicals, or did most of them end up leaving?
British Methodist theology became more liberal in the 20th c. and British Methodists are mostly a theologically moderate groups of people today. As Gamaliel says, some of the Northern circuits have historically been evangelical (mostly the descendants of the Primitve chapels, I think), but they're not especially visible to other Methodists in the way that evangelical Anglicans might be in the CofE.
Individual Methodist evangelicals in regular churches stick out if, for example, they're known to be against women in the ministry, but 'sticking out' isn't what Methodists do, on the whole. In fact, it's been said that British Methodist evangelicalism is more sociological rather than theological, though this might be changing.
BTW, does Australian Methodism still have circuits?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
My experience of evangelical Methodists (for quite a while I was an evangelical member of the Methodist church - near London - and regularly attended an evangelical Methodist church further north), and for that matter evangelicals in other mainly "liberal" denominations (I'm now a member of a URC church) is that we don't tend to focus on the same issues as evangelicals in the CofE. I've never known, for example, a problem with women serving as ministers of Word and Sacrament (which may reflect a different understanding of that role within Methodism/URC cf Anglicanism more than anything else).
As always, Evangelicalism is seen in a variation on emphasis more than anything else. So, within Methodism/URC evangelicals are more likely to organise Bible Study groups during the week, preachers (whether ministers or local preachers) are more likely to offer an exposition of the text read, ecumenical relations are more likely to be stronger with more evangelical churches rather than Catholic or liberal ones, the Youth Group is more likely to go to Spring Harvest than Taize ... and, yes, there's more likely to be a music group and you'll sing "Shine, Jesus Shine" ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
In relation to the sort of events with an "altar call" (sans altar) then I think there would be a tendancy for evangelicals in Methodist churches to be involved in such events - as organisers (if ecumenical - I would consider it very unusual for a Methodist church to organise such an event) and attendees. For the record, both Methodist churches I have been heavily involved in (near London and up north) have been actively involved in such rallies - albeit more than 20 years ago. I've never got an impression that in doing so people consider there to be anything wrong with Methodism (at least, not to the extent that more evangelical churches are better - if so, why stay?) but that there is value in a broader experience of the faith (which may explain why some members of independent evangelical churches I know are more likely to go to Taize or Iona than Spring Harvest). Yes, there is the evangelical emphasis (that word again) on 'conversionism' and going forward at a rally is a form of expression of that. But, most evangelicals I know within Methodism would consider other expressions more appropriate - for young adults, "reception into full membership/confirmation" provides a space for that and will often be taken as a more significant event than would be the case for the wider church. Mostly, and this would also be true of much of evangelicalism (even where public declaration of faith through baptism, testimony, "going forward" is considered the norm), "conversionism" is actually experienced through action - you demonstrate that you have new life in Christ (how you reached that point not important) by what you do - being part of the music group, becoming a local preacher and expressing your faith from the pulpit, opening your home for a Bible Study Group, helping run the youth group, organising the soup kitchen, helping out at the Spring Fair for Christian Aid Week ... I think if you rub any evangelical hard enough yuo will find that the foundation text for "conversionism" isn't Saul on the way to Damascus or the two on the road to Emmaus, it's "by their fruits you will know them".
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
You are making sense, SvitlanaV2 but I'm not quite sure we're on the same page in terms of how we understand these things to 'work' in practice.
I didn't say that altar-calls were icing on the cake - another Shipmate said that - what I said was that they are the tip of the iceberg - which is rather different. It is possible to have evangelicalism without altar-calls - and Alan has helpfully demonstrated how that can work in practice.
What you can't have is evangelicalism without conversionism.
I know plenty of evangelical parents who have tried to lead their offspring in the 'sinner's prayer' for instance or made vsrious attempts to encourage/induce some kind of conversion experience, for their youngsters.
Others might not do that directly themselves but encourage their kids to go to youth meetings or rallies where this might take place.
I am sure if Kaplan's mum hadn't have had a Billy Graham rally to hand she would have tried other 'means'. I do find myself wondering whether Kaplan's 'going forward' would have had quite the same impression if he hadn't had an evangelical mother to nurture and encourage him or if he hadn't subsequently become involved with a more avowedly evangelical style church?
As he's said himself, there is a process involved but that doesn't obviate or devalue the crisis-points along the way.
I'm afraid I'm falling back on the both/and thing again. There are other ways Kaplan could have found faith - hoeever in his case it happened to be in the context of an evangelical rally. That's not to enter into value judgements on the practice of altar-calls themselves.
There are a whole range of factors and influences - if we are theists we can surely see God working in and through them all.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
You are making sense, SvitlanaV2 but I'm not quite sure we're on the same page in terms of how we understand these things to 'work' in practice.
I didn't say that altar-calls were icing on the cake - another Shipmate said that - what I said was that they are the tip of the iceberg - which is rather different. It is possible to have evangelicalism without altar-calls - and Alan has helpfully demonstrated how that can work in practice.
What you can't have is evangelicalism without conversionism.
I know plenty of evangelical parents who have tried to lead their offspring in the 'sinner's prayer' for instance or made vsrious attempts to encourage/induce some kind of conversion experience, for their youngsters.
Others might not do that directly themselves but encourage their kids to go to youth meetings or rallies where this might take place.
I am sure if Kaplan's mum hadn't have had a Billy Graham rally to hand she would have tried other 'means'. I do find myself wondering whether Kaplan's 'going forward' would have had quite the same impression if he hadn't had an evangelical mother to nurture and encourage him or if he hadn't subsequently become involved with a more avowedly evangelical style church?
As he's said himself, there is a process involved but that doesn't obviate or devalue the crisis-points along the way.
I'm afraid I'm falling back on the both/and thing again. There are other ways Kaplan could have found faith - hoeever in his case it happened to be in the context of an evangelical rally. That's not to enter into value judgements on the practice of altar-calls themselves.
There are a whole range of factors and influences - if we are theists we can surely see God working in and through them all.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
You mentioned being in Australia. Would you say that Methodism in Australia has largely held on to its evangelicals, or did most of them end up leaving?
The Methodists amalgamated with the Congregationalists and most Presbyterians in 1977 to form the Uniting Church, which is largely liberal in its theology and, like so many of the old mainstream Protestant denominations in the West, in sharp decline.
Most evangelicals who were still in the Methodist Church in 1977 left then or soon after to join the Baptists, Anglicans and other denominations.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
This thread has raised various issues in my mind, such as the nature of regeneration in Christian terms and how and when we can be sure - if indeed we can - that it has taken place.
I suspect that might be an issue for another thread, but ultimately it's where I tend to fall back on the 'mystery' thing because I think it's possible to see the same kind of 'effects' - albeit expressed in different terms and theological frameworks - right across the board.
As post-evangelical as I can sometimes be accused of being - by Jamat and others - I certainly wouldn't deny the reality of conversions that take place in response to methods and practices that I might have some misgivings about myself.
I think this applies all ways round. I knew a chap who was led to faith by a couple who subsequently went well off the rails - morally, theologically and in every which-way as the Americans would say.
For a time he felt that his own faith and his own conversion had somehow been tainted and compromised by that ... I can understand why he felt that way - but eventually he came through that and realised that it was before his own Master he stood or fell - and that what had or hadn't happened with his spiritual mentors didn't effect his own standing ... although it clearly influenced the environment he was in.
The issue for me, I suppose, is a broadly traditional faith based around the great creedal formularies and which is found in common - to a greater or lesser extent - right across the board.
I may carp at fundamentalism and evangelicalism at times but at least there's a 'there' there, as indeed there is in the more sacramental traditions. Whilst I admire many individuals I know in the more MoTR and liberal traditions, I'm afraid I don't find a great deal of 'there' there in some of these outfits ... although the mileage varies and there are occasional flashes.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I knew a chap who was led to faith by a couple who subsequently went well off the rails - morally, theologically and in every which-way as the Americans would say.
For a time he felt that his own faith and his own conversion had somehow been tainted and compromised by that ... I can understand why he felt that way - but eventually he came through that and realised that it was before his own Master he stood or fell - and that what had or hadn't happened with his spiritual mentors didn't effect his own standing ...
This passage from Philippians seems relevant and reassuring ...
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure - the thing, of course, is that God is a lot bigger and wiser than we are and however much we fluff it is able to bring good out of it.
That, at least, is the hope.
In the light of that whether we do or don't have 'altar-calls' or whether we do or don't administer the sacraments or 'ordinances' properly or whether we do or don't do this, that or the other, is of rather less importance. I'm not saying these things aren't important - but in the greater scheme of things 'the wind bloweth where it listeth'.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
[In evangelical Methodism,] and this would also be true of much of evangelicalism (even where public declaration of faith through baptism, testimony, "going forward" is considered the norm), "conversionism" is actually experienced through action - you demonstrate that you have new life in Christ (how you reached that point not important) by what you do - being part of the music group, becoming a local preacher and expressing your faith from the pulpit, opening your home for a Bible Study Group, helping run the youth group, organising the soup kitchen, helping out at the Spring Fair for Christian Aid Week ... I think if you rub any evangelical hard enough yuo will find that the foundation text for "conversionism" isn't Saul on the way to Damascus or the two on the road to Emmaus, it's "by their fruits you will know them".
Ah - by their busyness you will know them! True Methodists, then! I find that MOTR Methodist churches too are very much committed to good works, but the problem is that they often have less money and manpower available to them. OTOH, although there's talk now of 'making disciples', 'conversion' is an idea to be avoided. I remember an old minister in the pulpit once stopping to ask the congregation if it was okay for him to refer to himself as having been 'converted'. And this was a preacher who usually had no problems just waffling on about his life!
Anyway, I always find it interesting to hear about diversity in Methodism, so your post was useful. It's not easy to get information about contemporary Methodist evangelicalism. The Methodist clergy and theologians I know have little interest in it. Can I ask you how evangelical Methodist churches deal with the circuit system? Are they happy to have MOTR lay preachers regularly in the pulpit, or are these churches sufficiently successful to be able to provide most of the preachers they need? I've read that evangelical churches in MOTR circuits can face challenges.
Re women ministers, I've heard recent stories of one or two Methodist churches in the circuit where at least a couple of the men have found the concept of women's ministry problematic. But that's probably quite rare. I think women's ministry in Methodism is likely to have a more pronounced liberal tinge anyway, so that's another issue.
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
The Methodists amalgamated with the Congregationalists and most Presbyterians in 1977 to form the Uniting Church, which is largely liberal in its theology and, like so many of the old mainstream Protestant denominations in the West, in sharp decline.
Most evangelicals who were still in the Methodist Church in 1977 left then or soon after to join the Baptists, Anglicans and other denominations.
So Australian Methodism itself didn't in the end benefit a great deal from the evangelistic campaigns. You might say that was unfortunate. Conversely it could be said that the Methodists were true to their more liberal contemporary identity rather than trying to be all things to all people.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I think these kinds of extra-church missions are populated by people from churches who do not practice like this in the normal way. Somehow the norms at home are forgotten when it comes to this kind of event - and behaviours which would be totally unacceptable at home become strangely acceptable under certain circumstances.
I think there are many examples of this in the last 40 years of British evangelical churches - and perhaps the only difference with today's affection with SoulSurvivor and the previous love-affair with Billy Graham is that there has been an effort to bring changes to local churches to make them more similar to those idealised spiritual events.
And I don't think it is just SoulSurvivor - for example for the constituency that goes regularly to Keswick, there is an effort to make the home church more like a Keswick conference.
Denominational and other differences tend to be downplayed at these events, and so the general impression within home churches is that there is much less difference between churches which attend SoulSurvivor than between them and churches attending Keswick etc.
[ 23. October 2015, 14:43: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that's true, mr cheesy - and well observed.
Picking up a few loose ends ...
On Anglican evangelicalism and women's ordination ... it has tended to be the more Reform end of the evangelical Anglican spectrum that has issues with this. There was barely a whimper from the broader evangelical camp within Anglicanism when Bishop Libby Lane became the CofE's first female bishop.
At one time, I'd have said that the presence of female Anglican clergy tended to denote a MoTR, liberal or liberal catholic tinge ... but that isn't necessarily the case now - there are female Anglican clergy of all stripes.
On UK evangelical Methodists ... it's a while since they've been a major force on the evangelical scene as a whole - was it Rob Frost who was one of the main evangelical Methodist guys? He had a high profile at one time.
By and large, I've found that evangelical and MoTR or more liberal Methodists tend to rub shoulders within the same congregation - although as Alan Cresswell has reminded us, there are avowedly evangelical Methodist congregations out there.
Up north, my perception was that the people in the pews, particularly the older ones, tended to be more evangelical than the ministers or lay preachers ... although many of the latter were happy to relate conversion testimonies as and when the need arose. That's certainly the case around here too - a fair number of Methodists in and around The Potteries seem to be evangelical in flavour even if they don't go round with stencilled capital letters on their foreheads proclaiming, 'I am a Methodist and I am an evangelical'.
Coming back to the OP, though, I think the main points we can make by way of observation is:
- The Billy Graham style 'altar-call' may not be as prominent now as it used to be but has morphed in several different directions.
- Evangelicalism can get by without 'altar-calls' and 'going forward' but it can't exist without conversionism (alongside the other Bebbington Quadrilateral -isms).
- The altar-call type system isn't the sole preserve of any one evangelical tradition but can be found in various forms across the spectrum - varying in intensity according to time, place and form of spirituality.
- In some quarters it is seen AS the moment of crisis or conversion - in others it's seen more broadly as a means to the end of creating opportunities for further investigation and exploration.
- There are a range of practices, some more overtly suggestible and manipulative than others. At one end it can be 'approach us afterwards for a chat over coffee or to take some literature' - at the other in can be bash, bang, wallop, get 'slain in the Spirit' and a hootin'and-a-hollerin'. There are grades and nuances between each extreme.
- The extent to which these things are seen in quasi-sacramental terms also varies.
Beyond that, I'm not sure there's much else to say.
Intriguingly, I once read of Anglo-Catholic priests in London's East End who did not baulk at using more 'revivalist' forms of meeting/service - complete with testimonies and appeals - for special missions and rallies - yet would continue to integrate people into their more sacramental bells-and-smells worship practices on Sunday mornings.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
One of the loose ends which this topic leaves dangling is an assessment of Billy Graham, who is now in his late nineties and could die at any time.
When I was in my early teens I regarded him as a giant, a hero and an oracle.
Later I veered to seeing him as boring, ordinary, conventional, and middle-brow because he was so theologically unsophisticated.
That might seem patronising and dismissive, but I still respect him as a decent person, particularly for the bigness of his enthusiastic and unapologetic Arminianism.
He has never been involved in the sort of money, sex and power scandal ("the gold, the girls, and the glory") to which other evangelists have fallen prey.
I think he will be remembered as one of the most influential Christians of the twentieth century.
The number of evangelicals in particular, and Protestants in general, in the Anglosphere at least, whose religious autobiographies were affected directly or indirectly by his preaching and crusades, is incalculable.
He will be criticised for popularising the appeal system, by those who don't like it, but any serious gospel presentation is going to involve some sort of potentially offensive confrontational challenge to commitment.
Actually, his gospel preaching was quite domesticated ("God loves you, and sent Jesus so you could be with him forever instead of going to hell, which he only ever intended for Satan, not for human beings") compared to that of earlier evangelists (Sinner In The Hands Of An Angry God, anyone?)
He can also be criticised for being too close to American presidents and American foreign policy, but he was never outside the spectrum of political views that can legitimately co-exist under the Christendom umbrella.
In deciding to go with what he saw as biblical Christianity, despite his inability to answer the doubts which it raises, he simply did what every Christian has to do in some form or other.
The alternative is atheism or agnosticism, which his early colleague Chuck Templeton turned to.
Graham had no answers to Templeton's questions, so had the choices of doing likewise; living in a state of constant debilitating indecision; or (as he saw it) trusting God and his revelation and getting on with his ministry, and he chose the last.
Graham's worst action was his criticism of Jews on the Nixon tapes.
I don't think that he was anti-Semitic, and believe that in context he was only criticising certain influential figures who happened to be Jewish whom he saw as damaging American society through what they were pushing in the media and showbiz, but I can't prove that.
His comments were inexcusable whatever the reason for them, and will unfortunately remain the major blot on his reputation.
[ 24. October 2015, 00:25: Message edited by: Kaplan Corday ]
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Anyway, I always find it interesting to hear about diversity in Methodism, so your post was useful. It's not easy to get information about contemporary Methodist evangelicalism. The Methodist clergy and theologians I know have little interest in it. Can I ask you how evangelical Methodist churches deal with the circuit system? Are they happy to have MOTR lay preachers regularly in the pulpit, or are these churches sufficiently successful to be able to provide most of the preachers they need? I've read that evangelical churches in MOTR circuits can face challenges.
First off, I've been north of the border where Methodist churches are less common, and therefore switched denomination to Congregational and then URC (through merger, not church swap) almost 20 years ago, so I wouldn't claim my knowledge is contemporary either.
Neither of the churches I mentioned would probably identify as an Evangelical Church, they both had significant proportions of their congregations who were evangelicals, or theologically inclined in that direction. The nature of the Circuit system and itinerant ministry meant that both churches frequently had non-evangelical preachers in the pulpit and were sometimes appointed non-evangelical ministers. Of course, both churches included several local preachers, some who were more evangelical than the national average, who frequently led worship elsewhere. Personally, that contributed to a strong faith drawing from a range of theological traditions while retaining my evangelical emphasis.
It seems many circuits are dominated by one or two larger churches. In both my examples, the church in question was one of those larger ones. In one case not the largest in the Circuit, but with a relatively large and active teenage group at the time tended to have influence above it's size. In the other case, the church was easily the largest in the Circuit, with a decent representation across all age groups, a large number of children, students, young adults (many of them parents of aforementioned kids) through to the retired folks. Just before I left a few of the families (with mid teen children who had left the Sunday School at that time) moved to some of the smaller struggling churches in the circuit to add some new life and vitality. Which has resulted in strengthened relationships across the Circuit, regular all-circuit services (using the chapel at the local university because none of the churches themselves would be big enough) and more frequently joint services for the three churches in the circuit that are closest geographically to the one I was with.
Now, if there was a single small church that was predominantly evangelical they might see things differently from a large church that gets to influence the Circuit more significantly.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
And as you will know, there is a small but fairly vociferous and well-organised Evangelical group within the URC ... they have certainly made loud noises over the recent debates on Sexuality. I can certainly think of a couple of URC churches round here (one is actually URC/Methodist) which might describe themselves as Evangelical ... and several more which would definitely say that they are NOT Evangelical!
I'd be surprised if any of these used altar calls though, at least on any regular basis. I would be interested to know the if such calls are still an integral part of Salvationist liturgy, though?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Neither of the churches I mentioned would probably identify as an Evangelical Church, they both had significant proportions of their congregations who were evangelicals, or theologically inclined in that direction. The nature of the Circuit system and itinerant ministry meant that both churches frequently had non-evangelical preachers in the pulpit and were sometimes appointed non-evangelical ministers. Of course, both churches included several local preachers, some who were more evangelical than the national average, who frequently led worship elsewhere. Personally, that contributed to a strong faith drawing from a range of theological traditions while retaining my evangelical emphasis.
It seems many circuits are dominated by one or two larger churches. In both my examples, the church in question was one of those larger ones. In one case not the largest in the Circuit, but with a relatively large and active teenage group at the time tended to have influence above it's size. In the other case, the church was easily the largest in the Circuit, with a decent representation across all age groups, a large number of children, students, young adults (many of them parents of aforementioned kids) through to the retired folks. Just before I left a few of the families (with mid teen children who had left the Sunday School at that time) moved to some of the smaller struggling churches in the circuit to add some new life and vitality. Which has resulted in strengthened relationships across the Circuit, regular all-circuit services (using the chapel at the local university because none of the churches themselves would be big enough) and more frequently joint services for the three churches in the circuit that are closest geographically to the one I was with.
Now, if there was a single small church that was predominantly evangelical they might see things differently from a large church that gets to influence the Circuit more significantly.
Interesting, yes. It's easily the case that the larger congregations in a circuit have more influence, and therefore have an advantage in terms of producing their lay preachers, and committing to youth work, etc.
The problem for British Methodism is that although there may be quite a few individual low-key evangelicals knocking about, and even a few evangelical congregations (whether this label is recognised or not), there's not enough of either to have a significant influence on the trajectory of Methodism as a whole.
As for altar calls, I hope they continue in the churches that need them and use them effectively. From this thread and elsewhere I get the impression that these days they might be more helpful in terms of renewal rather than conversion, since most of the people likely to hear them will already consider themselves to be Christians. But in that case, they should not be presented as a chance to 'give your life to Christ'. It seems to be a question of context, which is different in every church.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
And as you will know, there is a small but fairly vociferous and well-organised Evangelical group within the URC
Yes, and they seem to be preoccupied with promoting a particular set of views on sexuality that I disagree with.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
The problem for British Methodism is that although there may be quite a few individual low-key evangelicals knocking about, and even a few evangelical congregations (whether this label is recognised or not), there's not enough of either to have a significant influence on the trajectory of Methodism as a whole.
I guess the question is which trajectory. There is a theological trajectory that is for a broad church including a wide range of theological positions. The continuing presence of evangelicals, as well as other positions, is consistent with that and I hope they continue to maintain a non-dominant position - the same for the other theological groups within the church.
The other trajectory is membership numbers, which is on a very definite downward track and has been for a long time. If there is any group within the UK churches that might be resisting that trend it's the Charismatics not the Evangelicals.
The signs of conversionism within Charismatic churches isn't "going forward" nor any intellectual assent to beliefs of recitation of the "sinners prayer", nor even the fruit of active engagement in the work of the church. For Charismatics the signs of vital faith are found in manifestations of the Spirit - tongues, prophesy etc. And, as those fall on the congregation where they stand and fall, there is little point calling people forward.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
There are really two questions here. The first, is the simple one about 'going forward', 'I want you to get up and come out of your seats .... etc' as a way of getting people to repent, turn to Christ, be converted or whatever phrase one wants to use. That was very much a feature of the 1950s and 60s. It's unusual these days. It might not work now. Yet I know of at least one significant professional theologian of that generation, writer of theological books, commentaries etc whose walk of faith traces back to his doing just that.
There's a second, more theological question. Do we believe in and approve of presenting the Christian message as something which demands of people that, they choose whom they will serve, i.e. that they repent, turn to Christ, be converted, amend their lives - again or whatever phrase one wants to use. This is irrespective of whether this is instant or over time.
I don't know enough church history to know how the Wesleys did it. I don't know whether the altar call goes back to them or not. But that challenge was at the core of what they did.
Svitlana, you may feel entitled to regard me as abrasive for saying this. Irrespective of the exact way the challenge is put, if that is not at the core of Methodism, I am inclined to query why be a Methodist? What otherwise would the modern Methodist Church be there for?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think Graham is a significant figure by any standards - whether or not we feel comfortable with his theology.
In answer to Enoch's question about the Wesley's - no, they didn't use altar-calls, those came later - but they certainly expected a response.
FWIW, these days I'm not in the least bit interested in the Calvinist vs Arminian controversy - perhaps because I've been influenced by the Orthodox on that score - in just strikes me as a waste of time and effort.
I do, however, maintain a strong conviction about the neccesity of a personal response to the Gospel and crude as they can be, altar-calls do at least convey that necessity.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
I know at least a couple of Anglican nuns who went forward/had some kind of conversion experience at a Mission England rally - so not just vocations to the priesthood that increased Gamaliel!
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
There is a [Methodist] theological trajectory that is for a broad church including a wide range of theological positions. The continuing presence of evangelicals, as well as other positions, is consistent with that and I hope they continue to maintain a non-dominant position - the same for the other theological groups within the church.
The other trajectory is membership numbers, which is on a very definite downward track and has been for a long time. If there is any group within the UK churches that might be resisting that trend it's the Charismatics not the Evangelicals.
The signs of conversionism within Charismatic churches isn't "going forward" nor any intellectual assent to beliefs of recitation of the "sinners prayer", nor even the fruit of active engagement in the work of the church. For Charismatics the signs of vital faith are found in manifestations of the Spirit - tongues, prophesy etc. And, as those fall on the congregation where they stand and fall, there is little point calling people forward.
I was referring in particular to the declining Methodist membership and attendance figures. Interesting theological work seems not to have much impact in this respect.
With regards to Methodism being a 'broad church', research suggests that it's less broad than the CofE. There's little likelihood of evangelicalism becoming culturally dominant in Methodism, whereas this is within the realm of possibility in the CofE.
I'm aware that 'going forward' is not the hallmark of all charismatics and evangelicals, but this thread has admittedly clarified that for me. I'm interested, though, that you say that growth in the church is down to charismatics rather than evangelicals. Firstly, I understood that charismatics were part of the evangelical 'family' in any case (at least on the Arminian side?), so the division you make would appear to be unhelpful here. Perhaps you mean that Charismaticism has taken over from classical Pentecostalism, which does seem to be the case? (Of course, there are many new, independent Pentecostal churches on the British landscape also.)
What with all the changes in the British Christian landscape I suppose it would be interesting to know whether the number of Christians attending churches that have altar calls has increased. Since there are now more Pentecostals than Methodists this could well be the case. OTOH, perhaps there's also a trend for some 'Pentecostal-type' churches to reduce altar calls or drop them entirely?
[ 25. October 2015, 01:06: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I repeat and reinforce an observation I made earlier, this isn't about altar-calls in and of themselves - it's about altar-calls as one particular representation of conversionist tactics and a general conversionist ethos across all forms of evangelicalism.
Just as you couldn't hang out with RCs for very long without realising that they believe in the Real Presence in the eucharist and hold Mary in high regard, so it would be impossible to knock around with evangelicals without realising that they expected you to have some kind of conversion experience - whether in a crisis form or as part of a more protracted process.
All that an altar-call does is seek to provide a platform or opportunity to facilitate that.
The issue isn't altar-calls or whether or not evangelical churches still use them, it's more about the underlying ethos and expectation for which altar-calls and appeals are just one outward manifestation.
My own experience of evangelical and charismatic churches which practice these methods is that the growth and conversions don't tend to come from the set-piece rallies as such, but these provide a unifying structure and single purpose for them to focus on and it puts them into the right mode and mindset, if you like, to create an atmosphere where conversions take place.
There is a deliberateness and intentionality about it that attracts people in a way that is less apparent in the more laid-back, take it or leave it, MoTR settings.
We shouldn't take any of these 'means' and methods in isolation. We should see them in context. The context is that of a deliberate and intentional ethos or policy of setting out to be converted oneself and to convert and transform others - and, hopefully through that, the wider society. The altar-call is simply a visible and public expression of that intention.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I repeat and reinforce an observation I made earlier, this isn't about altar-calls in and of themselves - it's about altar-calls as one particular representation of conversionist tactics and a general conversionist ethos across all forms of evangelicalism.
Just as you couldn't hang out with RCs for very long without realising that they believe in the Real Presence in the eucharist and hold Mary in high regard, so it would be impossible to knock around with evangelicals without realising that they expected you to have some kind of conversion experience - whether in a crisis form or as part of a more protracted process.
All that an altar-call does is seek to provide a platform or opportunity to facilitate that.
The issue isn't altar-calls or whether or not evangelical churches still use them, it's more about the underlying ethos and expectation for which altar-calls and appeals are just one outward manifestation.
My own experience of evangelical and charismatic churches which practice these methods is that the growth and conversions don't tend to come from the set-piece rallies as such, but these provide a unifying structure and single purpose for them to focus on and it puts them into the right mode and mindset, if you like, to create an atmosphere where conversions take place.
There is a deliberateness and intentionality about it that attracts people in a way that is less apparent in the more laid-back, take it or leave it, MoTR settings.
We shouldn't take any of these 'means' and methods in isolation. We should see them in context. The context is that of a deliberate and intentional ethos or policy of setting out to be converted oneself and to convert and transform others - and, hopefully through that, the wider society. The altar-call is simply a visible and public expression of that intention.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
There is a deliberateness and intentionality about it that attracts people in a way that is less apparent in the more laid-back, take it or leave it, MoTR settings.
Indeed, such churches may be extremely disparaging of "conversionism" and denigrate it as mere emotionalism or "high-pressure" persuasion.
Isn't the crux of the issue basically that Evangelicals say that you are outside the Church (or Kingdom) unless you've specifically opted in, while the MOTR folk say that you're in unless you've specifically opted out?
And - without wanting to steer this thread too obviously into you-know-who's territory - doesn't that have something to do with one's view of "Christendom" and state churches which tend to imply that "all the British" (or whoever) are Christians unless they've clearly stated that they're not? (In such churches I suggest that "altar calls" may be couched less in terms of "coming to faith" and more as "affirming the vows made on one's behalf at baptism").
[ 25. October 2015, 07:33: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Gamaliel, as so often, I've agreed with both your last two posts. I think your analysis is right.
In passing, I also feel that one of the reasons why Orthodoxy is so attractive to middle aged and older UK Christians is that it enables one to stand temporarily outside a lot of the polarisations that we have grown up in and are fed up with. It isn't just Protestant v Catholic, but as you point out, some of the bickerings within the Protestant side - like tulipism.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, I think that's the case, Enoch, but Orthodoxy has plenty of internal controversies of its own, of course ...
@Baptist Trainfan, I'm not sure that churches with a largely paedo-baptist polity or which see conversion in terms of the renewal - or personal affirmation or appropriation - of baptismal vows made on their behalf would go in for altar-calls as such ... but that doesn't mean they don't go in for conversionist tactics or use measures like Alpha courses etc.
Our local Anglican parish is evangelical, with some efforts to become more charismatic and New Wine-y - but they don't go in for altar-calls as such - they would steer people towards Alpha courses or to house-groups and such where things can be discussed and where people can - hopefully - be led to make a 'decision' to own and follow Christ for themselves.
If they've already been baptised/christened as infants then - subsequent to a profession of faith - they may be confirmed or else - as I've seen at times here - even dunked in a mobile baptistery by way of acknowledging/renewing those baptismal vows in a ceremony that looks to all intents and purposes like credo-baptism but which the CofE - as is its wont - can accommodate by clever and wriggly use of words ...
But no, they wouldn't issue an 'altar-call' as such during one of the services - but they'll certainly use conversionist means and tactics to encourage people towards an evangelical conversion experience.
But then, that's an evangelical Anglican parish and not a MoTR one.
My own experience of MoTR and liberal churches is that whilst some might be disparaging about emotionalism and conversionist tactics, they don't tend to be as disaparaging towards people who have been converted in such settings. If anything, in my experience anyway, they can be quite warmly disposed towards such people, pleased for them that they've found faith and certainty - even if they are wary or reticent of some of the 'packaging' that accompanies that.
Other Shipmates may have different experiences and find such churches to be universally disparaging about anything that smacks of evangelicalism or enthusiasm ... but that's not been my experience.
Nor is my impression of liberal and MoTR churches one that these churches universally believe everyone to be a Christian simply because they live in an apparently 'Christian' country ... in fact, I don't think I've met many people involved with any kind of church who actually believes that ... although I daresay quite a few unchurched people do.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Svitlana, you may feel entitled to regard me as abrasive for saying this. Irrespective of the exact way the challenge is put, if that is not at the core of Methodism, I am inclined to query why be a Methodist? What otherwise would the modern Methodist Church be there for?
A good question. However, I imagine that many Methodist churches and many CofE congregations would be quite similar in this regard. Which is to say that 'the challenge' isn't necessarily something that enervates the church in a particularly obvious way. The emphasis, in practice, is to meet the needs of those in the church (and in Methodism pastoral work is highly regarded; my old minister found it preferable to leading worship), and to serve the community, which ideally creates a sense of belonging. 'Coming to faith' isn't a term that's banded about (IME), although baptisms, confirmations, membership (for the Methodists), and active participation, in whatever order, are obviously hoped for.
Faith will be a part of that - although it seems to be accepted that faith will mean different things to different people. For example, in the Methodist context, studies carried out in the last few years suggest that Methodists are not accustomed to talking about their faith with each other, and that they also tend to be less comfortable with the idea of evangelism than certain other denominations.
There have been recent attempts to refocus on encouraging discipleship and on making disciples. I remember the 'Time to Talk of God' report in particular, but there have been people employed as circuit evangelism enablers, Back to Church Sunday, FEs (messy church is popular), and other initiatives. The healthiest churches (and these may be the the kinds churches that most of the commentators here are aware of) are often able to make the most of these initiatives.
In his book 'Clergy: The Origin of the Species' Rev Martyn Percy, a CofE vicar, makes some interesting comments about the problematic issue of what modern Methodism is 'there for'. He thinks it would do better if it reverted to being a movement rather than remaining the church it's become. In effect, it would cease to be an independent denomination.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I've heard others suggest as much, SvitlanaV2 - that Methodism would be better off as a 'movement' or even an ethos rather than a denomination.
I'm not sure how that would work in practice - we can't turn back the clock. The question would also be, 'What exactly IS the distinctive Methodist ethos these days? How does it differ from MoTR URC and Anglican settings?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
In terms of Methodist distinctives, Rev Percy notes that he regularly meets Methodists who are deeply concerned or even passionate about ecumenism, social justice and equality. That they rarely celebrate the Methodist Church itself is, he suggests, a sign that even from its birth Methodism was always more focused on the world than on its own 'interiority'.
He also notes that Methodism was founded to marry both heart, mind and experiential religion, to connect faith and feeling with action. In recent history this has been successful in the ways in which Methodists have continued to connect their faith with radical social teaching. He sees postmodern potential in a movement in which the medium is the message: theology as expressed through the 'reflective space and the responsive arena of song' has something to say about the working of the Holy Spirit.
However, he also feels that there should be an element of rediscovery for Methodism to enjoy an authentic identity. There should be a re-discovery of evangelism, of the liberation afforded by being a movement rather than a church, of a return to discipline and holiness and of the importance of transforming grace.
I should correct myself here. Looking further down the text in front of me, Percy isn't necessarily suggesting that Methodism merges with another denomination, but that it could be like Quakerism, for example, to which one may belong exclusively or also exercise dual membership with another church. He refers to the potential of being both a Methodist and an Anglican.
Since the book was published public statements from Presidents of Conference and the ongoing numerical decline of the denomination suggest that if the Methodism does take on a role as the 'leaven in the lump' it's likely to be as a result of a merger with the CofE rather than through some other 'de-churchifying' arrangement.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Thanks SvitlanaV2 - that's helpful.
I'm not sure I'd regard any of those as necessarily Methodist distinctives - one meets people who are passionate about ecumenism, social action and so forth in all manner of settings.
I think there is a definable Wesleyan spirituality, for sure - and to an extent this is perhaps more apparent among those groups which have roots in Methodism but subsequently evolved along different lines - I'm thinking of the Church of the Nazarene and the Salvation Army primarily - but arguably they derive more from early to mid-19th century developments in Methodism rather than the more 'primitive' and original form that they would claim to espouse.
Anyhow, that's a tangent ... but it's got me thinking whether Methodism could become an 'ism' rather like 'evangelicalism' or 'charismaticism' or 'sacramentalism' insofar as it can span a range of spiritualities and churchmanships.
The Quaker thing is an interesting one too ... one can be a Quaker and a member of another church or no church at all ... or not even be a theist ...
We're straying away from the OP and into a more general discussion about Methodism and the legacy/contribution of streams and denominations in general ... so perhaps there's room for another thread on that topic?
FWIW, my brother-in-law, brought up a Pentecostal (his father was an AoG pastor) and with many years in the restorationist 'new church' ambit - is finding his local Methodist church very conducive indeed. They recently moved to a large city in the north of England which has some well-known big-hitter charismatic evangelical churches and soon found these weren't to their taste.
So far, they've enjoying the emphasis on social action, the practical expression of concern, the friendliness of their local Methodist church and the Wesleyan hymnody.
So perhaps there's hope for Methodism yet?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think there is a definable Wesleyan spirituality, for sure - and to an extent this is perhaps more apparent among those groups which have roots in Methodism but subsequently evolved along different lines - I'm thinking of the Church of the Nazarene and the Salvation Army primarily - but arguably they derive more from early to mid-19th century developments in Methodism rather than the more 'primitive' and original form that they would claim to espouse.
I'm sure that's right although, as I'm sure you know, the "Primitives" (capital P!) were not the original Methodists who, ISTM, married working-class spirituality to highish Anglicanism. That, I suspect, is the historical past of which Percy would like to remind them.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think there is a definable Wesleyan spirituality, for sure - and to an extent this is perhaps more apparent among those groups which have roots in Methodism but subsequently evolved along different lines
Yes, in fact Percy begins his discussion of Methodism with a section on the Independent Methodists, arguing that 'in order to grasp something of the originating spirit of Methodism, one really needs to begin from somewhere outside the movement as it is today.'
quote:
FWIW, my brother-in-law, brought up a Pentecostal (his father was an AoG pastor) and with many years in the restorationist 'new church' ambit - is finding his local Methodist church very conducive indeed. They recently moved to a large city in the north of England which has some well-known big-hitter charismatic evangelical churches and soon found these weren't to their taste.
So far, they've enjoying the emphasis on social action, the practical expression of concern, the friendliness of their local Methodist church and the Wesleyan hymnody.
So perhaps there's hope for Methodism yet?
There may be hope for Methodism in northern cities where there are ex-Pentecostals looking for friendly and successful alternatives!
If the Methodist Church ceases to function as a denomination the most popular congregations will no doubt continue to exist, either within the CofE or via affiliation to some other church organisation. But the rationalisation process that's already pronounced in Methodism will continue regardless. Between 2005 and 2010 the denomination closed more than one church every week, and on current trends the sociologist Steve Bruce calculates that the Methodist Church will fold by 2031.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I wouldn't necessarily regard Steve Bruce as an impartial student of secularisation, and so I think that his figure may be unduly pessimistic. Nevertheless it ought to make Methodists sit up and take note. The same trend is true for the URC too.
[ 27. October 2015, 13:49: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, I've heard that too, SvitlanaV2.
It'd be sad if the Methodists do peter out.
@Baptist Trainfan - yes, I was aware of the Prims ... I live almost in the shadow of Mow Cop where the first camp-meetings were held in 1806.
What I meant was that later revivalist and reformist groups within Methodism considered themselves to be going back to the fountain - hence 'Primitive Methodism' - when in fact they were being selective about which aspect of early-ish Methodism they were wanting to revive or emulate.
The Prim's were a grass-roots, working-class movement and probably the 'lowest' in terms of churchmanship - if we want to use 'high' and 'low' church terms in relation to Methodism.
As for original Methodism being a fusion of 'working class spirituality' (whatever that is) and relatively high-ish Anglicanism ... well, I'm not sure it's as simple as that.
Both John and Charles Wesley were true-blue Tory High Church-and-King Anglicans - and bear in mind the term 'High Church' back then didn't have the ritualistic connotations it was to take on after the rise of the Oxford Movement the following century.
No, what it meant was having a high view of the authority of the Church - there were plenty of High Church Calvinists back in those days too ...
Nor was the practice of having 'religious societies' to develop the spiritual lives of the members particularly novel either - there were around 40 such societies across London when John Wesley established his first on Fetter Lane. There were also plenty across Yorkshire at the time - some of them connected with Benjamin Ingham who was influenced by the Moravians - and some which even attracted both Anglicans and non-conformists. 'Mad Parson Grimshaw' of Haworth helped establish a number of those.
What was novel in the Wesley's approach was open-air preaching - which smacked somewhat of the 'conventicles' of the Commonwealth and Restoration period and which drew unwelcome attention and suspicion for that reason. This is where some of the more revivalist aspects were apparent and this is what the Prims and later Methodist revivalists sought to recover.
The revivalist phenomena that accompanied the Wesleys' preaching was fairly sporadic and often short-lived - they did try to dampen it all down where possible - although there were 'outbreaks' at various points during their long ministry.
Anyhow - that's all by the by.
The Methodists did remain the most 'sacramental' of the non-conformist denominations, though - particularly among the better heeled and more middle-class Wesleyans. However, for most of the 19th century the Methodists in general would have regarded themselves as something of a bulwark against resurgent Romanism either in the form of the re-enfranchised RC Church or Anglo-Catholicism.
There is a 'High Church' or more sacramental strand within contemporary Methodism - the Methodist Sacramental Fellowship - although whenever I've mentioned this to Methodist friends they've tutted and shaken their heads ...
I've known a few former Methodist ministers who've become Anglican and they've all gravitated straight to the higher end of the candle. Which makes sense ... otherwise why not stay where they were?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Baptist Trainfan
It's a hard subject to be impartial about!
Still, there are important denominational voices claiming that Methodist/CofE unity is getting closer, which would lead to more or less the same outcome that Bruce is proposing from his secular perspective.
As I said above, attempts are being made in the Methodist Church to re-engage with evangelism, and it seems to be something that every new President of Conference talks about these days. The URC can't be much different.
[ 27. October 2015, 14:11: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Gamaliel - Yes, all that makes a great deal of sense. I suspect that the Bible Christians were another group right down there with the Primitives. And I have certainly come across Methodist ministers who, from their dress and demeanour, one would assume were High Church Anglicans or Catholics.
In our area there are quite a number of Methodist/URC (ex-Congregational) churches and I suspect that the fundamental differences between "New" and "Old" Dissent can still sometimes obtrude! Even after several centuries the spiritual DNA is different.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
One church I know that has been growing steadily through conversations for the last seven-odd years never go for alter calls. Within their usual preaching they always take some time to explain what becoming a Christian means (regularly have people asking that question in the crowd) then invite them to a short introductory course (bit like Alpha). The idea to avoid emotional on-the-spot decisions and to give people time to really think through the consequences of conversion.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that's always happened, Truman, in one form or other - even in churches which have gone in for more ostentatious forms of altar-call and 'invitation'.
In fact, the quieter and less ostentatious work is often going on - almost unnoticed in the background.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Altar calls can range from "if you want to know more" to full-on "commit your life to the Lord". But, even in the latter case it would almost never be in a vacuum of no previous exploration of the faith. People are there to hear the call because they already have a connection to people in the church, they have already heard enough that an invitation "to come hear this great bloke say more" isn't immediately met with "but, I'll miss Strictly". The altar call and any response may be a very visible thing, but it's built on a lot of foundational work, most of it unseen by anyone other than those directly involved.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
People are there to hear the call because they already have a connection to people in the church, they have already heard enough that an invitation "to come hear this great bloke say more" isn't immediately met with "but, I'll miss Strictly".
Do you remember how, in Billy Graham crusades, they always assured people that "your coaches will wait", thus assuring the non-goers-forward a longish wait for those who had so gone (although there was a bit more congregational singing etc. as the counsellors dealt with the responders anyway).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I'd forgotten how much the Hammond sound was inextricably linked to the Altar Call ... ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Re. revivalism - didn't Steve Martin as the charlatan get it perfectly in "Leap of Faith"?
Yes indeed. Up to and including the fact (and this is what really gets me about this movie) that amidst the blatant, cynical manipulation, God answers prayers (both for the whole town and for the kid) and there appears to be at least one actual conversion as a result.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
People are there to hear the call because they already have a connection to people in the church, they have already heard enough that an invitation "to come hear this great bloke say more" isn't immediately met with "but, I'll miss Strictly".
Do you remember how, in Billy Graham crusades, they always assured people that "your coaches will wait", thus assuring the non-goers-forward a longish wait for those who had so gone (although there was a bit more congregational singing etc. as the counsellors dealt with the responders anyway).
I missed out on Billy Graham. I did a Luis Palau stadium meeting, and smaller events with J John, Eric Delve and Rob Frost (that's my Methodist heritage showing!). I think they did have similar reassurances about people waiting.
Looking back, I wonder if anyone took the opportunity to slip out the back and into the pub? "We were waiting for you", "It's OK .. I was having a spiritual experience" (no need to mention the spirit in question was in honour of Clan Graham).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I did hear of a Morris Cerullo meeting where people were encouraged, as ever, to delve deeply into their pockets and give generously. A bunch of people in the rows front of my brother-in-law's sister were so taken with the appeals for funds and the promise of divine blessings to come, that they emptied their pockets, purses and wallets into the offering buckets as they passed by.
Consquently, this particular group of family and friends had a long, slow walk home afterwards as they had no money for the bus fare from Bristol to whatever they'd come from ...
Fortunately, unlike my brother-in-law's sister, they hadn't travelled over specially from South Wales.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
