DISCERNING EVANGELICALISM - Revivals, Altar Calls, & Special Music

Revivals, Altar Calls, & Special Music:
The Church as Theater

Michael Horton, at the White Horse Inn, has recently delivered an radio address on the "New Measures" of Charles Finney and their influence upon the Evangelical church (HT: The Voice of One Crying in the Wilderness).

For many Baptists, a church isn't truly 'Baptist' unless is holds regular altar calls and revival meetings. From personal experience, I remember how one newcomer stormed out of the church when he discovered the upcoming missions conference at the church wasn't going to be a "revival meeting". For many, particularly in the fundamentalist factions of the Baptist and Methodist movements, revivals and altar calls are equated with the Gospel itself.

Ian Murray has written a wonderful book entitled Revivals and Revivalism where he distinguishes between the revivals held by men such as Wesley, Whitefield, and Edwards with the revivalism of men like Charles Finney. The former understood revivals as an act of God that one could not program, plan or make preparations for. There was no attempt to "set the mood" with music. Certainly they prayed for revival, but they understood true revival was something that human beings couldn't orchestrate. Finney, on the other hand, was the first great pop-psychologist. His manual, Lectures on Revival in Religion, advocated the "managing" (e.g. manipulation) of the 'revival event' in order to produce the maximum effect. Finney bragged about his ability to reduce people to emotional hysteria and claimed that a 'miraculous revival' was simply the 'right use of means' by an individual. Exit God, stage right; enter Finney, stage left. The end result of Finney's method was a redefinition of the word revival. Revival ceased to be something that God alone does, and became something that we do. We 'hold revivals' instead of pray for revival.

Finney also introduced (or popularized) the use of the 'altar call' (in his day it was called the 'anxious bench'). A bench at the front of the auditorium was the place where those 'under conviction' would flock. The entire service was oriented towards this final emotional appeal. Instead of people coming under conviction by the power of the Spirit, the preacher would stage and arrange the entire service towards this final climax. Emotional begging, both verbally by the pastor and in the use of 'altar call hymns', where used to nudge the sinner out of the pew.

Emotions are wonderful and God-given. As a professional counselor, I work almost entirely in the emotional realm of the human person. However, God designed emotions to enhance and be under the yoke of our minds. For example, I do not simply "love" my wife. I choose to love my wife (a mental act), and my emotions thus enhance this choice. If my emotions become the controlling mechanism, then my marriage would fall into danger every time I was emotionally drained or angry with my life. In fact, the marriage simply could not survive. Even when my emotions are negative towards my wife, my choice of loving her remains the controlling mechanism. Our relationship with God works in a similar fashion. Finney reversed the process (or some would even argue removed the mental act all together). Emotions became the controlling mechanism, and the emotional appeal became primary. Is it then surprising that so many of these "conversions" didn't last, most emotionally-based decisions rarely do.

Another effect of these 'new measures' was the confusion between church and theater. Although the fundamentalist movement accuses the 'seeker-sensitive' and contemporary church of being entertainment oriented, the finger points back on the accuser as well. For the most part, the methodology of fundamentalism is simply the style of entertainment for the culture prior to the 1950's (but now permanently crystallized). All are equal guilty of an entertainment-driven ideology (the contemporary church is simply better at it). Consider the issue of special music. What biblical justification do we have for this? The congregation becomes an audience who listens to a performer on a stage. At the end, the crowd gives applause (something I loathe) and showers the performer with verbal praise after the service. A few years ago I was actually rebuked (by a very sweet elderly lady) because when I rose to preach I didn't praise and thank the special music performer. Huh? Though we give lip service to the idea that special music is "for God", in reality it is usually more about the individual singing. This doesn't necessarily mean special music has no place in our services, but we should certainly be cautious and careful how we use such things.

Stop and consider the methodology of the contemporary church, and then read the book of Acts. Compare and contrast. Perhaps you will see, as I have, how we have abandoned the simple God-centeredness of the apostolic church for a programmed, professional, entertaining weekly event.