My last post (I Forgot That I Know That I Know) opened the door to some discussion about altar calls.
The Good
Sometimes, they work. A long imbroglio could follow about what the meaning of the word work is, and sometimes could be taken in the same sense as “sometimes, you win the lottery,” or “sometimes, you don’t.” Unfortunately, I don’t know how to be any more precise in this case.
The Bad
It widens the narrow gate. I wrote last year on this (The Wide and Narrow Gates): the benefits are tactical, the liabilities are strategic.
It is impulsive. Altar calls are odd. It’s a call to make a far-reaching, intensely personal commitment right-here-right-now about something that ought to change the rest of your life. Nowhere in life is that sort of impulsive decision commended as a Good Thing™.
It is confusing. Was my conversion the result of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? Or was it merely repentance for the acceptance of my teachers and peers? There’s also the dissonance created by those who come forward, receive the imprimatur of the evangelist, and are subsequently observed in ways of living that are at odds with the gospel they claim to have believed.
The Ugly
Charles Finney. Finney pioneered the idea of a “hot bench” of people ready to jump to answer the call, thereby eliciting the favorable response of everyone in the room who was susceptible to peer pressure. Phil Johnson concludes:
In short, Finney’s chief legacy was confusion and doctrinal compromise. Evangelical Christianity virtually disappeared from western New York in Finney’s own lifetime. Despite Finney’s accounts of glorious “revivals,” most of the vast region of New England where he held his revival campaigns fell into a permanent spiritual coldness during Finney’s lifetime and more than a hundred years later still has not emerged from that malaise. This is directly owing to the influence of Finney and others who were simultaneously promoting similar ideas.
The Western half of New York became known as “the burnt-over district,” because of the negative effects of the revivalist movement that culminated in Finney’s work there. These facts are often obscured in the popular lore about Finney. But even Finney himself spoke of “a burnt district” [Memoirs, 78], and he lamented the absence of any lasting fruit from his evangelistic efforts. He wrote, “I was often instrumental in bringing Christians under great conviction, and into a state of temporary repentance and faith… [But] falling short of urging them up to a point, where they would become so acquainted with Christ as to abide in Him, they would of course soon relapse into their former state.” [cited in B. B. Warfield, Studies in Perfectionism, 2 vols. (New York: Oxford, 1932), 2:24]
One of Finney’s contemporaries registered a similar assessment, but more bluntly: “During ten years, hundreds, and perhaps thousands, were annually reported to be converted on all hands; but now it is admitted, that real converts are comparatively few. It is declared, even by [Finney] himself, that “the great body of them are a disgrace to religion.” [cited in Warfield, 2:23]
B. B. Warfield cited the testimony of Asa Mahan, one of Finney’s close associates, “…who tells us—to put it briefly—that everyone who was concerned in these revivals suffered a sad subsequent lapse: the people were left like a dead coal which could not be reignited; the pastors were shorn of all their spiritual power; and the evangelists— ‘among them all,’ he says, ‘and I was personally acquainted with nearly every one of them—I cannot recall a single man, brother Finney and father Nash excepted, who did not after a few years lose his unction, and become equally disqualified for the office of evangelist and that of pastor.’
“Thus the great ‘Western Revivals’ ran out into disaster… Over and over again, when he proposed to revisit one of the churches, delegations were sent him or other means used, to prevent what was thought of as an affliction… Even after a generation had passed by, these burnt children had no liking for the fire.” [Warfield, 2:26-28]