In American culture there is a certain triumphalism which impacts almost every area of life. We are Americans. We can do it better. We are the brightest, the best generation. (I won't consider the error of this hubris here. However, we largely neglect, as a culture, to acknowledge that we stand on the shoulders of true giants like Paul and Luther!) Triumphalism is especially problematic in theological circles. It reasons something like this:
We are wiser than previous generations with their old fashioned ideas. We are more aware of the dynamics of interpersonal relationships. We have a better handle on the needs of the unchurched. We have new methods that are more in tune with the society at large. We can do it better. Our methods will bring more people into the church. Underlying this thinking is the unspoken criticism of the past. They were a bunch of stodgy old fuddy-duddies. They just didn't/don't get it. They were/are unwilling to change. They didn't/don't care about the lost. Notice that what is new, what brings change, what has cultural "relevancy," what can be measured numerically are given an automatic status of irrefutable truths, or undeniable good.
There is often a certain blindness in those afflicted with this malady. There is an irrational estimation of their own powers and their true situation. It is believing one's own PR. Turning a blind eye to problems. Thinking that one knows what is best for everyone else. Statements such as "we have never been more united," or "this is not your grandfather's church," or reaching "100 million unreached or uncommitted" by 2017 might be cited as indications of the triumphalist's PC-speak. We are marching to Zion! Look out, we are on our way!
(Note that the LCMS' Abalze program keeps a running count of their results on its home page. However, by their own numbers it averages 3500 people "reached" per event! This is as if we have had the day of Pentecost over 2400 times since Ablaze began! This seems kind of inflated, perhaps even to the point of being a lie. The other problem is that there is no evidence that those "reached" have been converted, baptized, or catechized. Does an Ablaze event always include a clear presentation of the Law and Gospel? Doubtful.)
This triumphalism toots its own horn. Look at us. We are more committed to the lost. We have better ideas. We are more faithful to mission. We have the vision. This is entirely a theology of glory. It looks good, it sounds good, so it must be good. But Luther warned us, "Although the works of man always appear attractive and good, they are nevertheless likely to be mortal sins." Heidelberg Disputation, Theses 3.
Since only the new, change, relevancy, and numbers count to some men, the supposed lack of growth in numbers previously implies a dishonoring of generations who have gone before. This isn't your grandfather's church. How do we answer such hubris? First, another theses of Luther says, "A theologian of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theologian of the cross calls the things what it actually is." Heidelberg Disputation, Theses 21. The Theology of the Cross demands that we recognize our sinfulness even when our works look good. The Theology of the Cross demands that we speak the truth about ourselves. Here is the truth.
The direction of the LCMS at the present time dishonors previous generations of faithful confessional Lutherans by despising their faithfulness to the methods given by Christ to carry out the mission of the church. "This isn't your grandfather's church." New methods are in vogue. Play down the old methods. Abandon the old hymnody. Get with the program!
Here are some passages in the Old testament I would like to consider briefly in relationship to this dishonoring of previous generations.
Deut. 19:14 You shall not move your neighbor’s landmark, which the men of old have set, in the inheritance that you will hold in the land that the LORD your God is giving you to possess.
Deut. 27:15 ‘Cursed be the man who makes a carved or cast metal image, an abomination to the LORD, a thing made by the hands of a craftsman, and sets it up in secret.’ And all the people shall answer and say, ‘Amen.’
Deut. 27:16 ‘Cursed be anyone who dishonors his father or his mother.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’
Deut. 27:17 ‘Cursed be anyone who moves his neighbor’s landmark.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’
Deut. 27:18 ‘Cursed be anyone who misleads a blind man on the road.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’
Deut. 27:19 ‘Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’
The book of Deuteronomy contains Moses' teaching to the Israelites just prior to their entrance into the land of promise. They were about to take possession of their inheritance. The land was a key part of God's teaching to his people. It foreshadows the New Testament teaching about the benefits given to us in Christ. One might say the land is to the Old Testament what the blessings of forgiveness, life, and salvation in Christ are to the New.
These passages warn the Israelites against moving the landmarks, that is the boundary markers. To do so would rob another person of their inheritance. God commands the people not to do this. In the litany of curses in chapter twenty seven those who do this are to be cursed.
In the Church our landmarks and our inheritance are the Word and the Sacraments. These have been given by the Lord to his people as both their inheritance and the means of carrying out the mission of the Church. The Word (spoken and visible) bestows what it says, forgiveness, life, and salvation. It creates faith. It accomplishes what it promises. It is the work of God, not our work. The means of grace are the way the Church grows. Here are some of the key authorizing texts for this view of the means of grace:
Matt. 28:19-20 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to rthe end of the age.
Augsburg Confession
V. [The Office of the Ministry]
To obtain such faith God instituted the office of the ministry, that is, provided the Gospel and the sacraments. Through these, as through means, he gives the Holy Spirit, who works faith, when and where he pleases, in those who hear the Gospel. And the Gospel teaches that we have a gracious God, not by our own merits but by the merit of Christ, when we believe this.
VII. [The Church]
... This is the assembly of all believers among who the Gospel is preached in its purity and the holy sacraments are administered according to the Gospel....
If a church abandons its heritage of the Divine Means of Grace to carry out its mission, it does so at its own peril and brings the curses of God's law upon it. Consider again the litany of curses cited above. The first five sins which are cursed are: idolatry, dishonoring parents, moving landmarks, misleading the blind, and perverting justice for strangers, widows, and orphans. In my opinion, some men are making an idol of an organization, the Synod and its programs. Some men are dishonoring their fathers and mothers, the previous generations of Lutherans who held fast to the Divine Means of Grace. Some men are pushing aside the landmarks of our inheritance, the same Divine Means of Grace which are presented in a God honoring liturgy. Some men are misleading the blind by misrepresenting the truth, leading them into the dead end reliance on human means to accomplish God's work. Some men are perverting justice by abusing their authority to push the widows and orphans (the small, old fashioned congregations) aside to make room for the new, progressive, relevant assemblies. A five-fold curse of God's law is upon us unless we repent and turn in faith to the Lord.
Joel 2:12-13 “Yet even now,” declares the LORD, “return to me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning; and rend your hearts and not your garments.” Return to the LORD your God, for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love; and he relents over disaster.
Amen.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Finney and the American Religious Mind-Set--Pragmatism Gone Awry
American Christianity is deeply impacted by revivalism. Hardly any "outreach" done by diverse groups such as Pentecostals, charismatics, Evangelicals, Baptists, Emerging/Emergent church, church growth cannot be traced in some manner back to Charles Finney. This short excerpt from a paper I wrote in Graduate School describes Finney's views at key points:
-----
Of all the revivalists of the nineteenth century, Charles Finney is probably the most famous. His methods were widely imitated and touted even among some Lutherans. However, Finney’s theology and practice has some serious problems for a confessional church. His theology is extremely man-centered. In his lecture, What a Revival of Religion Is, he states, “Religion is the work of man. It is something for him to do. It consists in obeying God.” [1] Later in this same lecture he says that the sinner’s actions are necessary for salvation and that conversion consists in obeying, doing, and acting.[2] In another lecture he asserts that Scripture ascribes conversion to men.[3] This ignores the depravity of man and his inability to do anything for his own salvation. Miyakawa notes that for Finney sin was voluntary self interest not an inherited depravity.[4]
Finney also considers a revival to be something that men have power to bring about. By simply using the appropriate means men can bring revival. These means have a “natural tendency to produce revival.” [5] His view is something like a cause and effect principle or the exercising of the powers of nature.[6] He goes further to denigrate the notion of the sovereignty of God in spiritual matters such as revival.[7] Revivals in this view are not the result of grace alone.[8]
Another aspect of his theology and practice is emotionalism. He says “. . . it is necessary to raise excitement among them, till the tide rises so high as to sweep away the opposing obstacles.” [9] Finney does wish for a time in which this spasmodic religion were not necessary. However, in the present economy of things this will remain essential.[10]
Finney’s view of how one should preach the Gospel is also problematic. He states that “All preaching should be practical.”[11] By this he means that all preaching should lead to action. This action is what brings about conversion as noted above. In this view he confuses the Third Use of the Law with the Gospel. His entire lecture How to Preach the Gospel is filled with words such as must, should, and ought.[12] His concept of how one preaches the Gospel has a law orientation. Related to this is the fact that Finney advocated perfectionism.[13]
-----
The methods of Ablaze, Willow Creek, purpose driven churches, Church Growth, the Emerging/Emergent church, and many Evangelicals all have a mind-set that derives from Finney's Lecutres: "...these means have a 'natural tendency to produce revival.' His view is something like a cause and effect principle or the exercising of the powers of nature." The term revival could be replaced by church growth, relevancy, meeting felt needs, or any other outcome oriented theological term.
The pragmatic oriented methods also make use of group psychology: "Another aspect of his theology and practice is emotionalism. He says '. . . it is necessary to raise excitement among them, till the tide rises so high as to sweep away the opposing obstacles.'" This is where pentecostals/charismatics have been very influential upon American religious ideas. The exciting music, the praise bands, the large arenas, the highly charge atmosphere all derive from Finney's New Measures. It is not the Word working by the Holy Spirit where He will in whomever He will that converts. It is the group dynamic.
I do not believe that many Lutherans are aware of Finney's heretical influence. Perhaps some Lutherans simply do not care. Methods do matter. By adopting the mind-set advocated by Finney, sound theologically based evangelism (Word and Sacrament ministry, personal witness) is replaced by a wide range of pragmatic methods. This pragmatism might get "results" but the unintended consequences in many instances will be the damnation of souls for whom Christ died. One cannot be saved by Christ plus something else! The Confessional principles of the Solas rules out the methods of Finney and his theologically bankrupt great-grand-children.
-----------------
[1] Charles Grandison Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion, edited by William G. McLoughlin (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1960), 9.
[2] Ibid., 18.
[3] Ibid., 194.
[4] Scott T. Miyakawa, Protestants and Pioneers: Individuality and Conformity on the American Frontier (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1964), 171.
[5] Finney, 13, 15.
[6] Ibid., Introduction, by William G. McLoughlin, xxiv; Miyakawa, 171.
[7] Finney, 14.
[8] The Oxford Disctionary of the Christian Church, 3rd edition, s.v. “Finney, Charles Grandison.”
[9] Ibid., 9-10.
[10] Ibid., 11.
[11] Ibid., 198.
[12] Ibid., 194 passim.
[13] The Oxford Disctionary of the Christian Church, 3rd edition, s.v. “Finney, Charles Grandison.”
-----
Of all the revivalists of the nineteenth century, Charles Finney is probably the most famous. His methods were widely imitated and touted even among some Lutherans. However, Finney’s theology and practice has some serious problems for a confessional church. His theology is extremely man-centered. In his lecture, What a Revival of Religion Is, he states, “Religion is the work of man. It is something for him to do. It consists in obeying God.” [1] Later in this same lecture he says that the sinner’s actions are necessary for salvation and that conversion consists in obeying, doing, and acting.[2] In another lecture he asserts that Scripture ascribes conversion to men.[3] This ignores the depravity of man and his inability to do anything for his own salvation. Miyakawa notes that for Finney sin was voluntary self interest not an inherited depravity.[4]
Finney also considers a revival to be something that men have power to bring about. By simply using the appropriate means men can bring revival. These means have a “natural tendency to produce revival.” [5] His view is something like a cause and effect principle or the exercising of the powers of nature.[6] He goes further to denigrate the notion of the sovereignty of God in spiritual matters such as revival.[7] Revivals in this view are not the result of grace alone.[8]
Another aspect of his theology and practice is emotionalism. He says “. . . it is necessary to raise excitement among them, till the tide rises so high as to sweep away the opposing obstacles.” [9] Finney does wish for a time in which this spasmodic religion were not necessary. However, in the present economy of things this will remain essential.[10]
Finney’s view of how one should preach the Gospel is also problematic. He states that “All preaching should be practical.”[11] By this he means that all preaching should lead to action. This action is what brings about conversion as noted above. In this view he confuses the Third Use of the Law with the Gospel. His entire lecture How to Preach the Gospel is filled with words such as must, should, and ought.[12] His concept of how one preaches the Gospel has a law orientation. Related to this is the fact that Finney advocated perfectionism.[13]
-----
The methods of Ablaze, Willow Creek, purpose driven churches, Church Growth, the Emerging/Emergent church, and many Evangelicals all have a mind-set that derives from Finney's Lecutres: "...these means have a 'natural tendency to produce revival.' His view is something like a cause and effect principle or the exercising of the powers of nature." The term revival could be replaced by church growth, relevancy, meeting felt needs, or any other outcome oriented theological term.
The pragmatic oriented methods also make use of group psychology: "Another aspect of his theology and practice is emotionalism. He says '. . . it is necessary to raise excitement among them, till the tide rises so high as to sweep away the opposing obstacles.'" This is where pentecostals/charismatics have been very influential upon American religious ideas. The exciting music, the praise bands, the large arenas, the highly charge atmosphere all derive from Finney's New Measures. It is not the Word working by the Holy Spirit where He will in whomever He will that converts. It is the group dynamic.
I do not believe that many Lutherans are aware of Finney's heretical influence. Perhaps some Lutherans simply do not care. Methods do matter. By adopting the mind-set advocated by Finney, sound theologically based evangelism (Word and Sacrament ministry, personal witness) is replaced by a wide range of pragmatic methods. This pragmatism might get "results" but the unintended consequences in many instances will be the damnation of souls for whom Christ died. One cannot be saved by Christ plus something else! The Confessional principles of the Solas rules out the methods of Finney and his theologically bankrupt great-grand-children.
-----------------
[1] Charles Grandison Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion, edited by William G. McLoughlin (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1960), 9.
[2] Ibid., 18.
[3] Ibid., 194.
[4] Scott T. Miyakawa, Protestants and Pioneers: Individuality and Conformity on the American Frontier (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1964), 171.
[5] Finney, 13, 15.
[6] Ibid., Introduction, by William G. McLoughlin, xxiv; Miyakawa, 171.
[7] Finney, 14.
[8] The Oxford Disctionary of the Christian Church, 3rd edition, s.v. “Finney, Charles Grandison.”
[9] Ibid., 9-10.
[10] Ibid., 11.
[11] Ibid., 198.
[12] Ibid., 194 passim.
[13] The Oxford Disctionary of the Christian Church, 3rd edition, s.v. “Finney, Charles Grandison.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
