“The early Christians,” Bishop Stephen Neill has said, “argued about everything except evangelism.” Twentieth-century Christians seem to have gone them one better. We seem to spend much of our time arguing about evangelism. Our style of mission (which should have priority: preaching crusades? or open housing? or neither?) is most certainly shaped by our understanding of what evangelism is.
Current commitments in evangelism tend to cluster in three groups.
Evangelism is “institutionalized” in many denominational programs. The key word here is “recruitment.” The typical action is membership visitation. The aim is focused on church extension.
Radicals have “secularized” evangelism. Their key word is “involvement” and their typical action “demonstration” or “community organization.” Evangelism is politics, and the aim of mission is focused in response to revolution.
The evangelical camp has often been guilty of “atomizing” or individualizing evangelism, focusing on “decision” as the key word, proclamation as the typical action, and individual salvation resulting from an isolated religious experience as the end result.
While conservatively oriented groups are all gung ho for traditional soul-winning efforts, many old-line denominations have been marking time as they agonize through an evangelistic stocktaking.
The moderately conservative Presbyterian Church in the United States (Southern) called a virtual halt to new evangelistic endeavors while a blueribbon task force labored to bring forth a theological basis for the work of evangelism that would speak to the present condition of the Church. After two years the task force was so divided that it seemed for a while it would be unable to agree on a one-position paper. Eventually a middle way was chosen and a report issued that tried to bridge over such tensions as the relation between deed and word evangelism, and to give new directives. The report has been greeted with groans, cheers, and puzzled glances.
Similar ferment is evident in Canada’s largest Protestant denomination, the United Church of Canada. Although such mainline groups as the Anglicans, Presbyterians, and convention Baptists seem content with the fairly traditional stance, the United Church, according to the editor of its official magazine, has presently opted to be “less concerned for winning converts,” and instead to attempt to “witness … by promoting positive social action.” Its Board of Evangelism and Social Service was led in this social-activist role by its late secretary, Ray Hord, until his untimely death this past winter. Hord was characterized in a front-page article in Toronto’s Globe and Mail, Canada’s national newspaper, as the archetype of “the new evangelist” for whom “salvation is a liveable income, adequate housing, racial integration, peace in Viet Nam, national unity, and sensible divorce legislation.”
The severe tension illustrated in these two churches came into focus at the World Council of Churches’ Uppsala assembly this summer in the section on renewal in mission. “New humanity”—the theme of the section statement—was used seventeen times without definition in the original draft. The accompanying commentary made it clear that the drafters saw the goal of mission not as “Christianization” but as “humanization.” After sharp debate the theme was retained but given a more God-directed, Christ-centered, and biblical basis.
These current debates reveal above all that the so-called old and new evangelism operate with very different meanings of such key terms as “Church,” “world,” “mission,” and “salvation.”
A picture (or perhaps a caricature) of the “old” evangelism might show two separate circles, one standing for the world, the other for the Church. Mission would imply more or less regular forays into the world to rescue individuals from death in the world to eternal life in the Church.
A picture (or perhaps a caricature) of the “new” evangelism might show two concentric circles, the inner one standing for the world, the other for salvation (showing reconciliation already a reality). The Church would be a part of the inner circle, that part of the world which recognized that salvation is an accomplished fact. Its mission is to point to and identify with those secular humanizing events (politico-social action, revolution) where God is at work in the process of history.
Certain basic questions underlie this tension and must be the subject of increasing theological reflection. Is evangelism basically for the sake of the Church? the individual? the world? or the glory of God? Is the gospel call in some sense out of the world into the Church, or is it to be fully human in the world? Is it to salvation as well as to service? Is Christ the Saviour of all as well as Lord of all? Is it more proper for the evangelist to say “be reconciled” or “you have been reconciled”?
In this brief space we cannot address ourselves to these important questions. But as preparation for thinking about them we must, it seems to me, see clearly that our evangelistic mission depends on God’s purposes as revealed in Scripture.
God has a purpose—a dual purpose. His will is to bring righteous judgment and peace to a disobedient world (Ps. 85:10; Isa. 2:2–4; 11:1–9) and to create for himself a holy and obedient people who will glorify him and serve his purpose in this world and the world to come (Eph. 1:10–14).
God’s purpose centers in Jesus Christ. In his career, a model for true humanity has appeared, and God’s rule has been inaugurated in power (Mark 1:15); both reconciliation (for those who receive) and judgment (for those who reject) have been initiated (Luke 3:16,17; John 3:16–18); and final peace and judgment are anticipated at Christ’s return (Matt. 24; Phil. 2; Titus 2:13).
God’s purpose has been entrusted to God’s people. Those who have turned to him in repentance and faith are called and equipped by the Holy Spirit to proclaim the Good News of salvation to every creature (Luke 24:46–49). They are to demonstrate the reality of the Gospel “through holy lives, genuine love, devoted service to all men, and patient suffering.”
God’s purpose aims at “God’s glory, man’s peace.” Evangelism is ultimately motivated not so much by concern for the Church or the world or the individual as by concern that as men acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour (some willingly, some stubbornly; some in salvation, some in judgment) God may be glorified.
Evangelism today means the presentation of Jesus Christ, by word and deed, in the power of the Spirit, so that as men turn to God, follow Christ as Lord in the fellowship of the Way, and serve him in their daily lives, God may be glorified by the coming of his kingdom of justice and peace in this world and the next.
Would that around such common conviction Christians might be committed with one heart and one mind, desiring to see men become truly “men in Christ” that they might be fully “men for others.”—LEIGHTON FORD, associate evangelist, Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.
