The Cadets. 

The Van Groningens. Trowel & Sword, September 1965

Preamble: Four week’s ago we published “Jesus Christ Lord of Life and Cadets” by Prof. George van Groningen, which appeared in T&S in November 1967. It was a passionate defence of the Cadet movement introduced into Australia two years earlier, also by Prof V.G. This article tells the story of how it all came about – at the suggestion of one of his sons. It is interesting to note that the churches across “the Ditch” in New Zealand had beaten Australia to the punch (again) and already had Cadets up and running when van Groningen started Cadets in Geelong. It would be interesting to know how and when Cadets started in New Zealand. Does anybody know/remember?

The Cadets.

Geelong youth leaders made four attempts in the past seven years to plan and develop a programme of instruction, youth activities and fellowship for the boys and girls.

The first attempt was the Saturday Morning School. This received the backing of the parents, good support from the session. The Saturday Morning school is still functioning.

The second attempt was to form a Junior Youth Club. The club was intended for boys and girls from 10-15 years of age. Bible study, craft (hand work), games, outings, etc. were on the schedule. A few leaders worked hard. But slowly on attendance dropped and ere long there were more leaders present at a meeting than boys and girls.

A third attempt was made. It was an attempt to revive the afternoon club. Junior choir practice was added as a feature. However, this new attempt did not succeed either. For a few years the youth aged 10-15 had nothing in the way of Christian fellowship and specific youth activities. The two Saturday afternoon clubs were, it seems, patterned too much after the Senior youth clubs, emphasis on study, discussions, etc. “The youth were expected to act older than they were”, might be a way to sum the matter up. Probably it is still better said this way: “The former attempts did not properly allow for the broad range of interests that 10-15 year old boys and girls have.

In 1963, when we visited in the U.S., our boys visited Cadet clubs. They were enthused about the meetings. One of our sons said as we were preparing to return to Australia, “I’d be completely ready to go back if we had Cadet meetings in Australia.” As parents we resolved to see what could be done to satisfy the boy’s desires.

We made a visit to the Cadet Headquarters in Grand Rapids. (200 Commerce Ave.; S.W. Grand Rapids, Mich, U.S.A.) We learned there, and subsequent to that visit, that the Cadet Corps is both international and interdenominational, though it is and remains a strongly Reformed youth movement. Cadet clubs were functioning in the U.S.A., Canada, Argentina and New Zealand. We learned that an Australian Council could be formed. As a Council the Australians would be part of the greater international Corps, drawing supplies from the headquarters in the U.S. The Council would be allowed latitude and freedom to develop the Cadet work in such a way that the Cadet programme would best suit Australian needs and yet remain within the broad framework of the Cadet Corps.

Soon after our arrival in Geelong in 1964 we called the parents together to discuss the possibility of organising a Cadet club. The parents were enthusiastic. In mid-winter the club was formed. Nineteen boys became Cadets. Four counsellors began to prepare for the meetings. In September ’64 the Geelong club became members of the Cadet Corps – club No. 440. A special Council patch – with the Kangaroo on it – was prepared in Grand Rapids specifically for the Australian Cadets.

Tasmania folk heard of the attempt in Geelong and ere long a Cadet club was formed in Kingston. Meanwhile a Cadet club was (also) formed in Brisbane.

The specific emphasis of the Cadet Corps is to train boys for Christian leadership. To do this, the spiritual, social, physical and cultural aspects of a boy’s life are combined into a beautifully balanced programme. Bible study, hikes, discussions, hand work, games, outings and projects are all included in the schedule.

Good leaders are very necessary as counsellors. Requests for a Cadet and Calvinette leaders meeting has been suggested. Some preliminary discussion is now being held about a long weekend camp for leaders. This “training camp” , if it is held, will be in Victoria late January or early February 1966.

The Cadet movement thus is geared to fill a real part in the boy’s life. The Cadet Corps received strong support from the Synod of the Christian Reformed Church (U.S.) in 1951. A synodical committee made a study of the Boy Scout movement and found it to be thoroughly humanistic, even if it was adjusted to a church organisation or sponsored by a local congregation. The committee also heard that young boys who became enthusiastic scouts while young were often lukewarm and cool to the church as they grew older. These factors may well apply in Australia also.

Some parents, when they first hear of the Cadet programme, think it quite expensive. In Geelong we have found that 36 sh(illings – $3.60) per boy, as an initial outlay, provides each boy with a kerchief and slide, a cadet guide book, cadet emblem, council patch and recruit stripe. A Cadet flag for the club was purchased. One shilling and sixpence (15 cents) per week after that pays for general expenses and the CRUSADER, the monthly boys magazine – containing Bible studies, stories, craft helps, merit badge explanations, jokes, etc. The uniform is the plain grey twill shorts and shirt, grey socks and plain shoes.

In the first year of operation, the Cadet club in Geelong has been enthusiastic, lively and most helpful. The Cadets have cheerfully paid their dues to date and all have been able to pay their initial expense. Truly, they paid little money compared to the immense benefits they received in spiritual growth and fellowship and in terms of plain good boys’ fun and activity.

The Calvinette programme is organised somewhat differently. An article on Calvinettes will appear in a later issue. 

The van Groningens

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com Don’t forget to “Like” the article. It helps to spread the word to a wider audience.

Leave a comment

What Does Our Youth Think Of The Ministry?

Stephen Voorwinde. Trowel & Sword, March 1977

Preamble: When speaking of “The Ministry” it has been generally understood that one is referring to a pastor/minister of a church, so it is interesting that the questionnaire mentioned below was given to both male and female participants at a state camp, particularly as fifty years ago the question of women pastors in the Reformed Churches would not even have been considered. It could however be argued that women married to or considering being married to a man thinking about the ministry should be aware of how this would also affect her life. It’s a tough gig for both and not one that should be entered into lightly. So the outcomes of this “research” makes for interesting reading and the questions asked should be thoroughly considered by anyone thinking about whether God has called them to enter “The Ministry”.

What Does Our Youth Think Of The Ministry?

When you stop to think about it this is a question that should make you hold your breath. “Humanly” speaking the future of our churches might well depend on the answer. What if our young people thought negatively of the ministry? Or, perhaps worse, didn’t think of it at all? Well (and again we’re speaking “humanly”) you need have no fears if all the Reformed youth of Australia are as serious, dedicated, spiritual and perceptive as are many of our young people in N.S.W.

At one of our State camps in 1976 they were presented with a questionnaire entitled “If You Were a Minister…….” This questionnaire was answered by 64 young people – 29 males and 35 females. Of these approximately 55 were members of a Reformed Church. Their ages ranged from 15 to 27 years; the average age was 20.

As you read their answers given below, you might keep in mind at least three facts that this survey tells us about these young people:

Firstly, their answers will reflect how they have been taught.

Secondly, their response will let their ministers know what is expected of them.

Thirdly, it will indicate whether or not they have at all considered the call to the ministry for themselves.

Here then are the results of the questionnaire. (The questionnaire itself is in bold print, the answers in ordinary type).

WHAT WOULD YOUR PRIORITIES BE? (LIST ORDER OF PREFERENCES) 

Visiting church members   3 

Evangelism 14 

Preaching 39 

Church Administration   1

Catechism and youth work   3

Community service   1

Other   3

2.  WHAT WOULD BE THE OVERALL GOAL OF YOUR MINISTRY?

As might be expected, the answers given here tied in closely with those to the previous question. The overall goals were seen mainly in terms of preaching and evangelism, sometimes with remarkably clear insights into the relationship between the two. Here are some examples:

“To arouse an interest in the study of God’s Word and to orientate the Church towards its aim of obeying Jesus’ commission.”

“To provide for the spiritual needs of the congregation and to give counsel and comfort in matters of their faith. I feel this is paramount because these are God’s people and they have to be led. Then would come evangelism to others.”

A sixteen year-old’s reply was to the point: “Helping people meet God.”

3  HOW LONG, ON THE AVERAGE, WOULD YOU SPEND PREPARING EACH SERMON?

0-5 HOURS 5

6-10 hours 23

11-15 hours 21

16-20 hours.   6

Over 20 hours   5

4. FOR WHAT REASONS WOULD YOU VISIT CHURCH MEMBERS?

Here an equal priority was given to social and problem-oriented approaches. Each of these was given as a reason by 26 of the young people. Considerably less emphasis was placed on counselling (12) visiting the sick (11) and discipline (6). Again some samples:

“Coffee, cake, closer relationship.”

“To keep in contact with them, build up a relationship where they feel free to bring any problems they may have to you. Fellowship.”

“To help in problems concerning understanding of the Bible and personal relationship to Jesus; to urge them on in personal devotions.”

5. WHAT WOULD YOU EXPECT SUCH VISITS TO ACHIEVE?

The recurring trend in each answer was basically to retain communication and a closer relationship. Once this was established, then to move on to various other issues. These included: better understanding, sharing concern, counselling opportunities and encouragement. At the bottom of this list (surprisingly) were such diverse replies as: “solving problems” “ability to assist.” and “no achievement.”

6. WHAT PERSONAL QUALITIES WOULD YOU AIM TO HAVE?

What struck me in the answers given here was an almost complete absence of the heroic, the dynamic and the charismatic. The emphasis was much more on the “quieter’ side of the minister’s character. The qualities most frequently mentioned were: understanding (24), communication abilities (23), wisdom (19), patience (19), Christian love (13) the ability to listen (12) and knowledge of the Bible (12). On the other hand, leadership ability was mentioned only 8 times and boldness and enthusiasm each occurred only once.

7. WHAT WOULD YOU EXPECT FROM YOUR WIFE? YOUR CHILDREN?

“To be a normal Christian family!”

“Co-operation with your daily work, good family relationships.”

“For her to love me in my work, to be ordinary children, but to be true Christians.” “That they love the Lord, help you with your work, be patient, and that my wife would be able to cope with my sudden disappearances.

These answers were fairly representative. Again “understanding” was the quality given top priority for both wives and children.

8. HOW MANY HOURS A WEEK WOULD YOU SPEND ON EACH OF THE FOLLOWING? PERSONAL PRAYER 10.2 HOURS (average) 

Bible study 10.5 hours

Sermon preparation 12.5 hours 

Being with your family 29.3 hours

Visiting church members 9.4 hours 

Evangelism 8.4 hours 

Church administration 6.4 hours

Involvement in the community 9.0 hours

If we leave out “Being with your Family,” we have a fair indication of the minister’s

working week. Here the average was 66.4 hours, with a range in responses from 35 to 136 hours! The latter would leave a whole 32 hours for eating, sleeping and being with the family. What a life!

9. WHAT OTHER SKILLS WOULD YOU AIM TO HAVE APART FROM PREACHING?

Strangely enough two of the most common replies were “communication” (15) and “teaching’ (10) – which shows that the respondents either misunderstood the question or the nature of preaching. Other skills frequently mentioned were: social work (18), organisation (11), understanding (11), listening (7). Two young people also indicated that the minister should be a good motorist. If the shoe fits, wear it, brother!

10. HOW WOULD YOU INVOLVE THE YOUTH OF YOUR CHURCH

Top priority was given to participation in youth services (21 replies). Next came Bible studies (17), evangelism (16) and community involvement (15). Only a handful of young people mentioned such customary activities as catechism classes, cadets and Calvinettes. Sunday School teaching was also mentioned.

11. HOW MUCH LEISURE TIME WOULD YOU HAVE AND HOW WOULD YOU SPEND IT?

Here there were some interesting differences in replies between males and females. Average weekly leisure time for male respondents was 24 hours. For females it was 17.2 hours. Spending time with the family either at home or on outings was a leisure activity mentioned by 28 females but by only 17 males. Various sports, however, were mentioned equally by both sexes. Except for house maintenance, other activities received almost no mention.

12. WHAT FORM WOULD YOU EXPECT A CALL TO THE MINISTRY TO TAKE?

“Feeling that doing something for God is right for you.”

“I feel that it would be intrinsic – a voice from within (the Holy Spirit), and that if I didn’t yield to it; it would hound me until I did.”

“Suddenly hitting upon something in the Bible and being so inspired so as to want to take up the ministry.”

You may be relieved to learn that these respondents answered the next question in the negative. Those who answered it affirmatively had obviously given this question much deeper thought:

“Long months of prayer, talk, and thought about it. It must not be a snap decision. Of course, the Lord will have put the thought into your mind in the first place and will guide the end decision.”

Looking at your talents, gifts, and opportunities; being interested in the field; seeing a need in the Church; and being prepared to study.”

It was encouraging to discover that those who said “yes” to question 13 generally had a clear, sensible and Scriptural view of the call to the ministry. Others, however, often gave answers that were vague and confused. Some said they simply did not know the answer. Amidst our present shortage of ministerial manpower, could this not be an area where greater pastoral concern and guidance is called for?

13. HAVE YOU HAD SUCH A CALL? 

Nine answered “yes”. 46 answered “no”. Six were unsure and three gave no reply.

14. HAVE YOU EVER PRAYED ABOUT IT?

30 said “yes” 29 said “no”.

Again it is encouraging to see how many young people are taking these matters seriously. But now, my reader, how would YOU answer the last two questions?

STEPHEN VOORWINDE

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com Don’t forget to “Like” the article. It helps to spread the word to a wider audience.

Comments on previous articles:

I wholeheartedly subscribe to the comment of T&S Revisited editor(s) with regard to the book “Things we could not say”. I bought it for myself and have encouraged some of my children and grandchildren to read it and become more a ware of what actually happened in Western Europe in these war years. Family members of my parents’ generation were actively involved in various resistance activities during that time and suffered for it in various ways. (Pieter v.d.W.)

I loved the article written by Allan Quak!  We may not be able to go to church twice on a Sunday to worship and praise God but we can be thankful that we can go at least once and that we are not hampered in our freedom to worship. I think the principles in this article could/should be highlighted in our Church Newsletter so that, hopefully, our congregation would be encouraged again to read why we make time to stop what we’re doing during the week and honour God and be obedient to His Word to keep the Sabbath Day holy…  Why has playing sport (especially) become such a big thing, such a big distraction? Do we realise what we are doing, teaching our children/young people when we allow them to substitute their game to take the place of attending church to worship God? It is pure idolatry! Nothing else! We should be repenting of this sinful attitude. There maybe a time coming that God will say to us, ” You had no time for me on that weekly special day? I don’t know you! Go away from Me…”  (Henriet V.)

Leave a comment

The Debate Goes On

Rev. J.W. Deenick. Trowel & Sword. December 1976

Preamble: Bill Deenick was passionate about many things and Parent Controlled Christian Education (PCCE) was high on his list of priorities. To him Christian Education was never about creating schools that ran parallel to the state system with a bit of Bible teaching thrown in as an added extra. Back in 1976 the question was being asked: What is Christian Education really all about? This was not an easy question to answer back then and if the truth be told that debate still continues today. In the interim, state education has to a large extent become a political football, but can the same be said about PCCE? As J.W. writes in his closing paragraph, “….we need all the talent we can muster to work together and to find biblical ways for the development of a Christian school curriculum.” Have we come any closer to achieving that goal than we were in 1976? And so…

The Debate Goes On

This paper has never been ashamed of its excitement about the Christian education issue, or about the progress made towards the establishment of Christian schools controlled by Christian parents. We are well aware of the relative smallness of the Christian school movement but we would like to believe that being small does not necessarily mean being insignificant. A beginning has been made, schools have been established, the issues have been raised and the debate on what Christian education is about has been thrown wide open.

In the circle of the Australian National Union of Christian Schools the Education in Focus Conferences have been a tremendous help. As a venue for discussion and for training in Christian educational thought the conferences have been unique in Australia. It is essential that the Christian School movement finds its own answers to the educational challenge of the day: which are the ultimate aims and the methods of classroom education?

Not every one at the Education in Focus (E.in F.) Conferences came up with the same answers. That was hardly to be expected and it was never the case. Yet, when I look through the pile of studies and papers delivered at the conferences since they started I can only be impressed with the great variety of the work done and with the skill and enthusiasm with which it has been done. Taking into account that nothing much of this nature has been tried in Australia before and that the evangelical community never managed to proceed much beyond a program for Bible-in-school lessons we may forgive the participants in the E.in F. conferences their reliance on work done overseas, particularly in Canada. It is only understandable that much of the Toronto material has been received here with enthusiasm. For one thing nothing much else is available: and for another the Canadian material, based on the philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd, represents the first effort to come up with an all-over Christian educational program.

Even when we are critical of that program (for more reasons than one) we ought to make sure that our criticism is restrained and constructive. If we concentrate on picking holes in the various publications coming from Toronto (which in itself is easy enough) we offer little positive service to the Christian educational community. When I listen to criticism of the integral school curriculum which the Canadians have begun to produce (Joy in Learning) I am tempted to fear that we are driven back into the wilderness where for over a hundred years Christian teachers looked for a Christian philosophy of education and found Bible-in-school lessons.

However, this is not to say that the Canadian program is sacrosanct. It is not; nor is the philosophy on which it is based, the Dooyeweerdian philosophy, sacrosanct. It is good to remember that the Christian school movement is NOT a Dooyeweerdian movement. It never was. Long before there was a Dooyeweerdian philosophy there was a Christian educational program. It could even be argued that the Toronto men have come to the educational scene as Johnnies come lately. It is therefore proper that their material is studied carefully and that critique and corrections are offered freely where these are believed to be needed. The discussion is still wide open. The Toronto Institute does not function as the Holy See for Christian educational thought; nor has Dooyeweerd been canonised.

Not so long ago Dr. Noel Weeks has offered points of criticism regarding the Canadian program as presented at the E. in F. conferences. Some of his questions I find most relevant and to the point, but in other instances I find his critique uncertain and the Canadian propositions more Biblically sound.

Dr. Weeks asks a very pertinent question on the consequences of what the Bible teaches regarding the total depravity of the human nature for Christian thought on education. Good question. He also challenges some of the Canadians on what he sees as their compromise with present day unbelief in educational philosophy (Dewey). Did we reject the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas on account of its attempted synthesis between the gospel and classical thought in order to do some modern day synthesising ourselves? Dr. Weeks further raises the issue of the school as a unique structure of society, and of history as normative for the truth.

On the other hand there are questions that I would like to ask Dr. Weeks: e.g. since we all agree that God’s self-revelation in the Scriptures is normative for the faith and life of God’s people what reason is there to doubt that also His self-revelation in the creation can be trusted by those who read “the book of nature” believingly, i.e. believing the whole self-revelation of God in the creation and in the Scripture? And when we do study God’s creation by faith do we then not discover by faith His wonderful and wise designs and the amazing order in all that He has created? It seems to me that not the Bible but that the solar system tells me in what wonderful ways God keeps the solar system together. For the pulpit it is enough for me to say that He does so by the Word of His power; but in the school and at the university I have to explain what Bible believing research has discovered about the laws of creation by which the Word of God’s power functions in the solar system. And these discoveries then have authority for my Christian thinking as well as for my Christian behaviour within the solar system.

And so the discussion is altogether wide open yet and the debate goes on. But let it be positively directed. We need to furnish the young men and women who pioneer in teaching at the Christian school not only with good material and textbooks, but also with a comprehensive program for Christian education in which the textbooks properly fit. This may seem a mammoth task; and it is. But then we need all the talent we can muster to work together and to find biblical ways for the development of a Christian school curriculum. In T&S we hope to continue taking part in the discussion on these educational matters. One point that we hope to bring up in the next issue is that of the confessional basis of the school. This is the more interesting since the same question has come up in the context of the Association for a Christian University and its confessional basis.

BILL DEENICK

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Looking Back – “Things We Couldn’t Say”

On May 26 we posted a book review, also by Bill Deenick, with the above title. In it he wrote: “Now that I have read it, I want to tell the readers of T&S more about it, because it is a very wonderful book; and it deserves place of honour on the book shelves of those who have come to love and serve the Lord Jesus in the Reformed tradition.” I took Bill’s advice, bought a second hand copy on the internet and finished reading it last week. I concur with everything Bill wrote about this incredible book. Being knee-high to a grasshopper when my family migrated to Australia I have never really felt a connection to the country of my birth – until I read “Things We Couldn’t Say”. My parents never spoke about their experiences during the war but this book has given some insight into what they went through. It explains a lot why they were the way they were.

It also sounds a warning about the anti-Semitism that currently appears to be sweeping through the Western World, including Australia. A warning that history is repeating itself. In the postscript Diet writes: “When the war ended we all said,’This can never happen again.’ But now polls show that 22 percent of the US population does not believe there was a holocaust. The story has to be retold so that history does not repeat itself.” That was written over 25 years ago. Diet Eman and many of those who worked with her were members of the Reformed Church in the Netherlands. It is time that the CRC here in Australia and also in New Zealand make our voices heard in our churches, in the papers and in the halls of power to stop the increasing anti Jewish sentiment from growing into another holocaust.

Leave a comment

Are Our Congregations Really Active?

Rev. Prof. K. Runia. Trowel & Sword, August 1959

Preamble: Take note of the date of this article – 1959! As with so many previous articles re-published in TSR, it is hard to escape the thought that Dr. Runia could just as easily have been writing also for 2025. In doing so he is not necessarily offering solutions for the denomination then, or now, as to what he sees as some of the problems we face, but rather encourages his readers to think about, debate, and formulate a plan of action to overcome our shortcomings and then to put that plan into action to reflect, in his own words, “GODS’ ORIGINAL INTENTION WITH (for) THE CHURCH.” Keep in mind that, with hindsight, it could be said that Prof. Runia wrote these words in what could now be considered probably the most active and productive period of the CRCA.

Are Our Congregations Really Active?

A Slow And Inert Flock?

Undoubtedly every minister and every elder or deacon will agree with me, that the question in the heading of this editorial is one of the most important questions in our Reformed Churches. Are our congregations really active? Or are they a (more or less) willing and docile (?), but also a (more or less!) slow and inert flock, that constantly has to be urged and spurred by the office bearers to go on and display some kind of activity?

Of course such a contrast, as I have indicated here, is always in danger of being an unfair generalisation. In every congregation there is a certain number of members, who are willing indeed to be active, to sacrifice their time and energy for the cause of the Church and its Lord.

But – and that is the question here – are they typical of the total congregation, or are they rather the exceptions which confirm the rule? Personally I fear that the latter is more true than the former.

And therefore it is a truly burning question: Are our congregations really active?

The Days After Pentecost And Today

However, not only in our Reformed Churches this question can be and must be asked, but this same problem is also under discussion in many other Churches, In our days, in which the Church is faced with the situation of being again a ‘ little flock’ (Luke 12:32) in the literal sense of the word, in the midst of a world which is in a process of ever increasing secularisation, all Churches are forced to reflect upon their own attitude.

And then always this question comes up: Why was the newborn Church of the days after Pentecost so flourishing? Why was there that great increase of numbers, or which we time and again read in the book of acts? It is an impressive list of texts: Acts 4:4; 5:13,14; 6:7; 8:6; 9:31,42; 11:21,24;12:24; 14:1,21; 16:5; 17:4,12; 18:10; 19:20.

Of course there is first of all the Holy Spirit Himself, who in His superior force breaks through all the obstacles of Judaism with its legalism and of Paganism with its lawlessness. But – the spirit did his work then, as well as now, through the medium of the BELIEVERS: Why that amazing result in those first days and also in the subsequent centuries? Why again in the days of the Reformation? Why still today in some mission fields?

WHY?

All over the world the Church struggles with this Question. In an article in the “REFORMED AND PRESBYTERIAN WORLD” (Vol. XXV, No.4, of Dec. 1958) I read some very helpful and instructive thoughts about this problem, and I would like to pass some of them on to our readers. The author, Dr. Richard SHAULL, an American minister, does not go into the practical side of the matter, but rather concentrates on the underlying principles. I hope these principles may be of such an impact upon us, that we too start to think about the problem and then try to find out some practical measures, which can be applied in our special situation, in order to reach the desired goal: the combined activity of all our members.

Is The Setup Of Our Church Life Right?

In his article ,entitled “The Service of The Church”, Dr. Shaull points to the fact that the Church is called to be a COMMUNITY OF SERVICE AND MISSION IN THE WORLD. And of course we all agree! But the author immediately adds: When it comes to pursuing this to its logical consequence we are still mere children. The whole set-up of our Church life seems to be defective in this regard. The actual situation is this: “By means of a programme primarily under the responsibility of the pastor, the faithful come together to hear the preaching of the word and receive the sacraments, to be instructed and nurtured in Christian faith and life”. In other words, the members of the congregation are entirely AT THE RECEIVING END. They are mainly the object of ministerial and pastoral care, rather than subjects who abound in personal activities.

How insufficient and unsatisfactory this set-up is, becomes evident especially in the mission fields. In many places in the mission fields, there are small congregations which, as they come into existence, are dynamic missionary communities, but which lose much of their vitality and outreach as they take on the established pattern. New converts come to the Church as militants but, after a few years on the receiving end of a religious programme, they lose much of their original enthusiasm or become so involved in the programme of the ecclesiastical institution that they have little possibility of service in the Church’s mission to the world”.

Of course this does not mean that we have to throw away the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments, the nature and the fellowship, as we have them now. On the contrary. They are indispensable. But – they have to function in the great context of the all-important task of service and mission in the world.

In this connection we could certainly learn a great deal from the sects. Some of them, such as the Pentecostals have discovered again what it means for the local Church to be a dynamic missionary community. We could also point to the activity of the Communists. Nobody can be a real, good Communist, without being at the same time a fervent propagandist of the doctrine of his party. The author himself says: “On several occasions I have been shocked when I have taken militant Communists to activities of our Church and they have told me quite frankly that they could see little correspondence between what I had said to them about the mission of the Church, and what they saw in the programme and activities within its walls”.

WHAT WOULD A COMMUNIST SAY OF OUR REFORMED CHURCHES IN THIS REGARD?

Can We Leave It To The Minister?

Further there is the place of the MINISTER in our Churches. We are not Roman Catholics who say that their spiritual leaders belong to a higher order or class. Yet we, too, are in constant danger of Clericalism (DOMINOCRATIE).

We tend to think of the ministry of the Church as the work of the pastor and make him the centre of the congregation. The layman tends to have a passive role, to be thought of as the person who assists the pastor in the work of the Church.

But is that the right relation between the two? WHO has to do the work of the Church in the world? For the Church exists only, or at least: mainly, to fulfil her service IN THE WORLD. WHO has to do this? Can the minister do it alone? Or should it be so that the real witnesses are the laymen in the factories, shops, offices, etc? Is not the main task of the minister to nurture the members of the congregation in order that they may obtain the spiritual strength to perform their missionary task in the world?

VERY OFTEN WE ARE QUITE SATISFIED(?) WHEN WE HAVE A NICE CONGREGATION, WHICH AS TO ITS ORGANISATION RUNS SMOOTHLY, HAS A SOUND FINANCIAL BASIS, A NICE CHURCH BUILDING AND A POPULAR MINISTER. But – DID JESUS GVIE HIS LIFE TO CALL FORTH SUCH ORGANISATIONS?

What is our highest aim in and with the Reformed Churches? A NICE congregation, with a NICE minister and a NICE building and NICE organisations, etc.? Or do we realise that we are Church of Christ IN ORDER TO REACH OUT TO THE WORLD?

But should then the set-up of our Churches not have to become quite different? Should then not every member have to become a missionary? Should then our congregation not be a real failure, if it is NOT such an active community, directed at the world outside the Church? Should then not each one of us have to be ashamed, if we come before God’s Holy countenance on Sunday and we have NOT witnessed of Him since the service last Sunday?

Come, O Creator Spirit!

What then to do?

It is easier to ask this question than to answer it . Dr. Saull mentions a few points, which I pass on without any comment. They may be useful as a starting point for further reflection.

FIRST he points to the fact that the New Testament speaks of a much greater variety and richness of ministerial callings than our Church permits at present. (See I Corinthians 12:4-30). How can we make room in the Church for more  of this  richness ? Or in other words: HOW IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO MAINTAIN ORDER IN THE CHURCH AND STILL REMAIN OPEN TO THE HOLY SPIRIT?

SECONDLY, the ministry of the Church is called to prepare all the members of the Body for the service of Christ. Too often the MINISTER DOES NOT THINK IN THOSE TERMS. How is it possible for him to develop a new conception of his role in the Church and become in reality what he is called to be? What changes doos this demand in the way he uses his time, in the work that he does in the organisation of the programme and life of the local Church?

THIRDLY, what changes are demanded in our programme for the training of THE MINISTRY? If the minister is called to prepare and stimulate the development of a community of servants, called to suffer with Jesus Christ in the world, how then should he be trained? What aspects of his training have to receive the main emphasis?

Back To The New Testament!

It is obvious that a wide field of reflection and research is opened up here. It is also obvious that this new line of thought, and eventually of practice, will not be easy. This will ask a complete rethinking of the life and function of the church, followed perhaps by a complete re-organisation.

But I am sure that we cannot and may not avoid these problems. This is not a matter of introducing novelties, but we are faced here with the centre nerve of the Church’s existence.

It is true, we are prompted to it. by the changing situation in our modern world. But is it not equally true that precisely in this way we are PROMPTED BACK TO THE NEW TESTAMENT SITUATION, even more: TO GODS’ ORIGINAL INTENTION WITH THE CHURCH.

K. Runia

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Don’t forget to “Like” the article. It helps to spread the word to a wider audience.

Leave a comment

Jesus Christ Lord of Life and Cadets

Prof. G. van Groningen. Trowel & Sword. November 1967

Preamble: VAN GRONINGEN – remember that name; especially the younger members (under 50) who may not have heard it before and do not know the significant part that both George and Harriet played in the development and growth of the Reformed Churches in Australia and New Zealand, the Reformed Theological College; and their passion for children’s and youth programs. They were unashamedly Calvinistic in their outlook and this defined their theology and their Christian worldview. It makes one wonder – where are the Van Groningen’s of today?

Jesus Christ Lord of Life and Cadets

As Calvinists we hold with conviction and fervour to the blessed truth that Jesus Christ is Lord of life. He is the Master, the King, the absolute Sovereign over all of life. Jesus Christ , through whom the world and all it contains was created is also the redeemer of the Cosmos. Jesus suffered, died and bore the anguish of hell because the cosmos – man’s home as well as man himself, lay under the curse of God upon sin and evil . Paying the debt of sin and guilt, Jesus Christ ransomed man and his home . Our Lord Jesus is a cosmic Redeemer. And as a cosmic Redeemer He is also a cosmic Lord.

This great and glorious truth is one of the main reasons and motives for my intense interest in the Calvinist Cadet Corps, its program and above all its members – counsellors as well as boys. This truth stimulates me to continue as an active worker in the Cadet Corps .

In case you wonder what another main reason is – I’ll be happy to tell you….  It is: six young Van Groningens! Yes, we have six sons whom our Covenant God has entrusted to us . My wife and I do our utmost in our home to train these sons in the way of our Covenant Redeemer and Lord. Our sons attend the Christian schools. They miss Catechism and worship services only when attendance is made impossible by unusual circumstances. Yet there was a real lacunae , a specific vacuum in the lives of our sons. It was in the cultural and social realm. And praise and thanks be to God, the Cadet movement is God’s answer to that problem.

Criticism and/or varying opinions have been voiced concerning the Cadet movement. One father expressed the opinion that the Cadets (and Calvinettes) were really worth nothing to him. Said he in effect: if the home does its part, Catechism, Sunday school and church services were attended faithfully and if the young folk attended youth club then the Cadets were like an unnecessary coke drunk with a lunch.

Now it is very evident to me that this father is not well informed at all as to what the Cadet program is or for whom it is intended . Taking the last point now , if a young person is to attend youth club after his/her 16th birthday, why should this person not attend a youth club before that time? The Cadet movement is for boys 10- 15 years old.

The father’s problem is much bigger however. It is really this: he considers the Cadet movement a type of Boy Scout movement which has its outdoor and recreation emphasis. This “recreation” is employed to attract boys to Bible study . This father has the opinion that sports, craft , camping are to be compared to a bottle of coke which a man drinks to help him swallow down his dry bread (Bible study). This opinion is to be compared to some people’s idea of the Christian school – reading, writing, arithmetic, plus a few prayers and a half hour of Bible study per day. Just as many people have a very wrong conception of Christian education – subjects plus – so there are those who are equally confused and wrong about youth work – Cadets and Calvinettes specifically.

So, whether a man calls himself “Pete from yesterday” or “Tom of today” or “Tony for tomorrow”, whether he is “John the Layman” or “Jack the preacher” or “Bill the teacher” makes little difference when he expresses an opinion about youth-work that is not correct. The all important thing is this: what is true? What are the true answers to the questions: What is the real nature of the Cadet (and Calvinette) movement? What is its intent? What needs in the lives of Covenant (and non covenantal) children does it fill?

It is to be granted immediately that: 

(1) The home life and training of any child  is very, very important . Nothing can take its place. Parents have a most solemn, important and thrilling opportunity and duty with regard to their children. At home the children must be taught to know the Lord through His Word and Spirit, to pray, to know life in its various dimensions, to enjoy real Christ centred Spirit dominated fellowship. Indeed, the home is so basic. But, as the church and school are vitally necessary, so I insist that youth-work, which I consider as part of the wider church program, is also equally necessary. 

(2) No movement is perfect. I’ve yet to enter the perfect home and meet the ideal covenant parents. I have yet to meet the perfect preacher, the flawless teacher. I have yet to meet the top notch counsellor or youth worker in Australasia . But lack of attaining the perfect goal or acquiring the ideal leader – teacher – preacher parent is of course no reason to discard a youth movement – school, church or home .

There is another criticism that has been voiced in various quarters about the Cadet movement. It is closely related to what is discussed above, but it is a much deeper criticism. It goes right to the core of the matter. Let me try to quote one of the men who voiced this criticism: “The cadet movement is not concerned with the Lordship of Christ. Jesus Christ is not recognised properly as the absolute Sovereign of all of life. The Cadets are not taught to see Christ as the Sovereign Lord to whom they must surrender their lives, whom they must serve in every sphere of life. Cadets  are not taught this because Christ is not given His proper place as Lord of nature, Lord of life, Lord of culture, Lord of nations. Rather the Cadet movement is at heart a personality cult. It is devoted to making good boys, hale hearty well met fellows. The cadet movement tries to put on an external coating, a veneer that covers up or polishes down the bad, rough and unsightly elements of human nature and life. In short, the Cadet movement is so concerned with boys it forgets about Jesus Christ the absolute Sovereign Lord of the boys.” And continued this voice, “I have come to this evaluation about the Cadet movement by reading the materials that have been published by the organisers and leaders of the movement.”

Well, this is really a serious criticism! If it is true then there are only two imaginable alternatives before us: (1) eradicate the whole system from our Church and Christian environment, or (2) reform and transform the entire movement so that no signs of its former character remains.

Frankly, I am not ready to do either one because I don’t believe the evaluation is true at all!! I do not deny that there is room for improvement, that in some instances the nature, intent and methods could have been stated more meaningfully. I do not deny that some Cadet  club organisers and leaders may not have Jesus Christ as Lord as fully in mind as they should. (Do all parents, teachers and preachers?) And I also admit that the Cadet movement does not emphasise the Lordship of Christ primarily in terms of Christian organisations in industry, labor, professions and sports . I do insist however, that Jesus Christ is ever held before the Cadets as the Sovereign Lord. Lord of the Cosmos, Lord of individual people, Lord of culture, Lord of all!

The Lordship of Christ the Redeemer is one of the very basic principles of the Cadet movement. No, we don’ t minimise the centrality of the Word of God, the importance of Justification by faith, the Sovereign grace of God in man’s salvation , the necessity of a Spirit filled and directed life, the unique character of the church, the inclusive nature of God’s Kingdom. In fact, because these basic Reformed Biblical principles are the very building blocks which form the foundation of the Cadet movement, therefore the Lordship of Christ is also included. One cannot have some of these principles and omit the others, even if some are stressed more than others.

ln due time I hope to write more about the Sovereign Lordship of Christ and its meaning for boys , for their lives, for their education, training and fellowship. I  conclude this introductory article by urging all parents (yes parents first), all preachers, all teachers and all youth leaders and counsellors to continually teach that the gracious Saviour of a boy is also the absolute Master of that boy; that as salvation effects the totality of a boy’s life, so does the Lordship of Jesus Christ effect every aspect of his life.

The theme song of the Cadets is a real boys’ song. “Living for Jesus – in All that I do”!  Why live for Jesus? Because Jesus is their only Saviour, Teacher and Master!!

G. VAN GRONINGEN

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Don’t forget to “Like” the article. It helps to spread the word to a wider audience.

Leave a comment

Let’s Keep Our Sunday Evening Worship

Paul H. Alexander. Trowel & Sword. Sept.1999

Preamble: Following on from last week’s article – “Why Do We Need To Go To Church Twice? – we take a further look at the current trend towards one service per Sunday for most churches. Is this an adequate response in showing gratitude through worship to God for what He has done for us? We wonder what Calvin would have made of this apparent stupor considering he was known to favour daily worship services. This week’s article, from the same edition of T&S in Sept. 1999, continues on the theme of the importance of having (at least) two services on Sundays. It was written by Rev. Paul H. Alexander and first appeared in New Horizons, a Periodical of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

Let’s Keep Our Sunday Evening Worship

One of the small pleasures of my early childhood was playing with other children outside the church after Sunday evening worship. For a half-hour or more, the adults seemed to forget their parental responsibilities and we ran wild and free in the soft summer air of a Kansas evening. While our parents pursued more mature interests, we captured lightning bugs, played tag, or chased girls with toads we had caught. It was one of the high points of the week. Life without Sunday evening worship would have been a drag! Fewer and fewer children would think so today. Sunday evening worship is not a part of their lives because an increasing number of churches are not including it in their schedules. Sunday evening worship seems to be on the endangered species list, and there is a lot more at stake than a child’s game of tag. Sunday evening worship can meet important needs in the lives of God’s people.

True, Sunday evening worship is nowhere specifically prescribed by Scripture – but then, neither is Sunday morning worship. Both services are established at the discretion and on the authority of the elders of the church, on the basis of such texts as Hebrews 10:25-26 and 13:17. The historic fact is that the practice of worshipping twice on Sunday is a firmly established tradition in evangelical and Reformed churches. What has changed that would warrant a departure from the wisdom of our godly forefathers, who established and maintained this practice for so many centuries?

Below are four reasons which, I hope, may persuade us to keep this tradition alive, or revive it, as the case may require.
The Importance Of Frequent Public Preaching
The need for the frequent preaching and teaching of God’s Word is the primary reason for maintaining both morning and evening worship services. The apostle Paul urges Timothy: ‘Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage – with great patience and careful instruction’ (2 Tim. 4:2). In this concluding and climactic challenge of his apostolic ministry, Paul is following the example of Moses and all the prophets of the Old Testament, as well as that of our Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles. These great servants of God were pre-eminently preachers and teachers of God’s Word. Preaching was the key tool they used to advance the kingdom, and they were at it incessantly.

Since the Reformation of the sixteenth century, Reformed churches have led the way in emphasising the necessity for the frequent public preaching of God’s Word. John Calvin exemplified this principle in his own practice of preaching nearly every day of the week, as well as on Sunday. First in Britain and then in the American colonies, our Puritan forefathers followed Calvin’s example by preaching twice nearly every Sunday and often at a weeknight service called ‘the lecture.’ This pattern has characterised Reformed churches (and other evangelicals as well) until very recent times.

The preaching of God’s Word, therefore, in both morning and evening worship services on the Lord’s Day, has been regarded as an important application of this frequent preaching’ principle, crucial to the life of the church. Granted, this principle might be fulfilled at other times than Sunday evening, but experience has shown this to be the time that best suits most Christians. This practice has been regarded as axiomatic for Bible- believing churches and went almost unchallenged for nearly four centuries.

Not so today! ‘Church growth’ experts are advising us that the evening service (and frequent preaching in general) is excess baggage, inhibiting evangelism and getting in the way of ‘small group’ ministries now deemed more important than preaching. We are being advised that ‘the culture has changed,’ that evening worship no longer meets the ‘felt needs’ of our contemporaries, and that we need a great variety of programs to meet the needs of every age and interest in our world. If we do not change with the culture, it seems, we will be consigned to the trash heap of irrelevance, or, what may be even worse, to smallness, a fate worse than death to the ‘church growth’ mind.

We should be asking if this is really the time to reduce our own efforts at preaching – the means God has ordained and blessed for communicating his Word. Our times have been called ‘the information age’ because of the rapid growth of data in every field of knowledge. The mass media are propagandising us intensively with amoral as well as immoral messages that are quite obviously impacting our church people as well as the world. Add to this the vast bulk of distracting trivia that the media peddle as important, and we have a seriously confused populace. To reduce our preaching either in quality or in quantity at this point in history appears to be a concession to the worst side of modernity. It is a dangerous experiment. The tried and true method of frequent preaching is being cast to one side for the sake of an unproven methodology, right when there is the most crying need for the preaching of God’s Word.

Writing in 1971, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones spoke clearly to this issue when he said, “The most urgent need in the Christian church today is true preaching; and as it is the greatest and most urgent need in the church, it is obviously the greatest need of the world also.” A bit later in the same book, he said, “What is it that always heralds the dawn of Reformation or of a Revival? It is renewed preaching. Not only a new interest in preaching but a new kind of preaching. A revival of true preaching has always heralded these great movements in the history of the church.’ (Preaching and Preachers, 1971, pp. 9, 24-25). This is the kind of guidance we need today.
Greater Breadth In Our Preaching Teaching Ministry
Sunday evening worship provides an appropriate opportunity for pastors to present a broader scope of teaching and preaching than is possible in the Sunday morning worship service. The Sunday morning worship service has long been regarded as the time for a quite formal sermonic style. Given the majesty and holiness of God, and the awesome significance of the gospel, this is most appropriate. God deserves worship characterised by deep reverence and high dignity, and the gospel is the most weighty issue before mankind.

Without departing from due reverence, it is also appropriate to employ a somewhat more informal style in the preaching and teaching of God’s Word on such occasions as the evening service. Here the pastor may adopt a more conversational approach, such as our Saviour employed on occasion in teaching his disciples. An evening service may have somewhat the atmosphere of an adult Sunday school class, using a variety of teaching aids such as an overhead projector and even questions and answers from the congregation. This also has roots in puritan practice. Our colonial fathers often used the lecture method as their Sunday afternoon or evening style of preaching. This meant that they would address topics of timely and practical interest that might not seem appropriate to the Sunday morning worship.

Whether or not a more informal or more topical style is used on Sunday evening, the point should be obvious that we need a greater breadth of biblical and theological instruction than can be given within the confines of the Sunday morning sermon. Our Christian colleges and seminaries are reporting that an increasing percentage of young people applying for training lack the basic Bible knowledge that used to characterise applicants. Failure to maintain Sunday evening worship and preaching will only add to the growing ignorance of the Bible and our confessional standards prevalent among too many of our people. To feed God’s flock anything like an adequate diet of preaching and teaching, Sunday evening worship seems to be an absolute necessity. This is one of the things it takes to produce the kind of strong, well-rounded disciples needed to advance the kingdom.
Keeping The Lord’s Day Holy
Morning and evening worship on Sunday is a valuable means of preserving the biblical observance of the Lord’s Day. Like the morning and evening sacrifice which Israel offered to God, morning and evening worship marks the whole day as holy, setting brackets around it to remind us of its special purpose in God’s plan. While we may differ on the details of Sabbath observance, some being more strict, others more lenient, surely we all agree that God requires us to keep this day holy.

This is my shortest point, but not the least important. The fourth commandment is of equal importance with the other nine. To treat it with contempt or indifference is to treat the whole of God’s law and God himself with contempt and indifference (James 2:10). Those who may not accept the full teaching of the Westminster standards at this point, are, nevertheless, under a compelling biblical mandate to discover and practice what Scripture teaches on the keeping of the Lord’s Day. To decry every other kind of moral decay without recognising Sabbath desecration as a great evil is to betray our whole cause.

We must keep the Lord’s Day holy. God requires it and we need it. We were created with a need for the Sabbath, and Jesus reminds us of this need (Mark 2:27).

Against a culture that seems bent on despising the Lord’s Day and all else that is holy, we need all the help we can get to hold our ground. The history of both ancient Israel (Ezek.20) and the modern church provides sufficient evidence to convince us that to lose the Sabbath will eventually mean to lose all biblical distinctive and to lose our faith itself. The practice of morning and evening worship is conducive to preserving the sacred meaning of the day and, thus, the sacredness of all of life.

The ordained elders of Christ’s church have been calling his people to worship twice on the Lord’s Day for many centuries. If we will continue to hear that call, he will continue to bless us. This point leads naturally into the next. The preaching of the Word and the keeping of the Sabbath are keys to Christian culture, a whole way of life that blossoms and spreads through the faithful use of these means.
Maintaining And Propagating Our Christian Culture
There is a quality of spiritual life that develops and thrives around the worship of God twice on the Lord’s Day. Something about being in church with God’s people twice every Sunday has a wonderfully positive effect, producing not only Christian individuals but a whole Christian culture, a community lifestyle distinguished by its caring, Christlike quality, and a missionary zeal that reaches out to the whole world.

Such church is modelled for us in Acts 2:42-47. Here is a beautiful example of a ‘normal’ Christian church community. Frequent preaching and teaching of God’s Word is obviously the very heart of this early church and it was wonderfully productive of that first Christian culture, setting the pattern for healthy, self-propagating church life from that day to this. Churches that develop along these lines can expect God’s blessing for generations to come.

Os Guiness sees the opposite in the modern ‘church growth’ movement – the movement that, more than any other influence, has contributed to the abandonment of Sunday evening worship. Guiness warns that such churches may have ‘no grand-children’ because ‘the tools of modernity are successful in one generation but cannot be sustained to the third generation’ (No God but God, 1992. P.157). We should stay with the established pattern. It has proven itself.

Evangelical and Reformed churches of recent history have come in for their share of just criticism. We have been far from perfect. At the same time, we should be reminded that it is those churches, with their twice every Sunday’ pattern of preaching and teaching, that have produced the many positive benefits of the Reformed and evangelical movement. These twice every Sunday’ churches were all we had until about twenty years ago. This older model may not have grown as fast as the new streamlined ‘once on Sunday’ types, but they produced nearly all of our present pastors and denominational leaders, just about every Christian college and seminary professor you or I ever met, and the entire modern missionary movement. This is no small achievement. Experience also supports this point, please forgive me for being just a little autobiographical at this point, but thirty-seven years in one pastorate has given me a somewhat unusual perspective. I have been able to watch people in my congregation grow up, get married, raise children, and finish careers – in short, live out large parts of their lives – during that lengthy tenure. My generalisations about my parishioners may seem too narrow a database to satisfy all the demands of contemporary scholarship, and am sure that I am lacking in total objectivity. At the same time, I am confident of one conclusion: Those who regularly participate in morning and evening worship over a period of years are the most stable and productive Christians. They are, furthermore, the most joyful and effective.

Our present membership is three hundred. Over the years, more than a thousand have come and gone, largely because of the nature of employment in Huntsville. Among those who have come to church twice on Sunday, there is a remarkable record of family stability and spiritual productivity. Of course there have been exceptions, but from these families has flowed a constant stream of children who have grown to maturity honouring the Lord, marrying in Christ, and following the Lord in their vocations. This is what it’s all about.

Another interesting fact is that in all those years there have been only three divorces among those who have been regular in our morning and evening worship. I have been reluctant in the past to tell such a statistic in public for fear the Devil would attack more of our marriages just to embarrass us. Confident that we can trust the Lord to protect our people, I tell it now in order to give praise to the Lord and to the means of grace he has given us to make us strong in him. Participation in Sunday morning and evening worship is a proven means of helping God’s people to be ‘strong in the Lord and in his mighty power’ (Eph. 6:10). It certainly is not the only thing we need, but it is an important source of strength and blessing to those who have used it.
Courage Friends!
I have written this to encourage church members, officers, and pastors wondering about the present shift away from evening worship. I believe that we are seeing a major paradigm shift away from a tried, tested, and proven means of practicing our faith. Advocates for this change have not provided adequate reasons for us to follow them. Such changes in the past have proven disastrous. We have every reason to keep the course we have been following and to persuade those who might be wavering to return to this established pattern.

J.C. Ryle, a great evangelical leader of the last century, described a leader of the first Great Awakening in terms that should encourage us all in this direction. Ryle said, ‘The good old apostolical plan of incessant preaching, both publicly and from house to house, was nearly the only machine that he could use. He was forced to be preeminently a man of one thing, and a soldier with one weapon, a perpetual preacher of God’s word. Whether in the long run the minister of the last century did not do more good with his one weapon than many do in modem times (late nineteenth century) with an immense train of parochial machinery, is a question which admits of much doubt. My own private opinion is, that we have too much lost sight of the apostolical simplicity in our ministerial work. We want more men of ‘one thing and ‘one book,’ men who make everything secondary to preaching the Word. It is hard to have many irons in the fire at once, and keep them all hot. It is quite possible to make an idol of parochial machinery, and for the sake of it to slight the pulpit.’ (Christian Leaders of the 18th Century. pp.269-70).
Let’s Keep Our Sunday Evening Worship!
We should reaffirm this practice and continue it. Last Sunday night, as I walked out of church, there were the children out on the lawn catching lightning bugs, playing tag, and chasing girls with toads. I am praying it will still be that way until the Lord comes back. I am praying that all of you will join me in working to that end.
Paul H. Alexander.

This article first appeared in New Horizons
Periodical of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church
Used with permission

Leave a comment

Why Do We Need To Go To Church Twice?

Rev. Allan Quak. Trowel & Sword. September 1999

Preamble: Our world is changing; our world has changed. The same is true of the Church – our Church. A mere 25 years ago Rev. Allan Quack wrote passionately about the need for believers to attend church twice on Sundays. Today, in most churches, this is no longer even possible as the second service in many cases has passed into history; gone the way of the dodo. There could be a number of reasons for this: Perhaps attendance dropping so low Sessions deemed it no longer viable to conduct second services; perhaps ministers struggling with the task of preparing two sermons each week let alone one; or perhaps some churches simply got out of the habit following the Covid lockdowns. This article by Allan Quack may be the stimulus we need to reverse the trend of fewer services in our churches. If not, and the trend continues it may not be too long before some, or many churches close their doors for good.

Why Do We Need To Go To Church Twice?

It’s a question many children ask their parents and when we consider most churches have a high percentage of people who do not come to the evening service, it seems to be a question many parents are asking themselves.

Many reasons have been given to Session members for not coming to the second service, yet a common thread which seems to tie the reasons together is busyness. Our weeks are too busy to catch up with relatives which means Sunday is the only day we have. Work commitments make family life impossible during the week making Sunday the only day where we are not too busy to spend time together. The morning service wasn’t really that great so we use the rest of the day to be busy doing something else that feels more productive and exciting.

Perhaps here lies the problem. In this world of busyness our motto for life has become, “Don’t just stand there… do something”. We must produce, we must be active, we have to see results – and we have a tendency to apply these same criteria to worship. If worship falls short of the standard once on the Sunday what incentive do we have for coming twice?

The burden of this article is to encourage us to approach Sunday with a different motto. We need to move from being “don’t just stand there but do something” type people, to “don’t just do something but stand there” type people.

Let me propose a principle.

When you don’t know how to stop you’re headed for disaster. It’s a principle which applies to many areas of life but especially in your spiritual life. All of us need a spiritual time out. We know it. God knows it even more for, “God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it He rested from all the work of creating that He had done” (Gen.2:3).

God also knows we have a tendency to side-step the opportunities He gives to have rest, that is why, in the fourth commandment, we read, “Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the LORD your God has commanded you” (Dt.5:12). Stopping and standing in the presence of God is good and necessary. Even Jesus modelled this principle. In Luke 4:16 we read, “On the Sabbath Day Jesus went into the synagogue, as was His custom…!” Maybe these words don’t seem so significant just yet but let’s think about the implications of them for a moment. As Jesus makes His way to the synagogue, try and picture His circumstances. It’s still fairly early in His ministry. In Luke 3:21-22 we read of Jesus’ baptism, which begins His formal ministry. Jesus knows He has been set apart by God to preach, teach, heal and restore. Jesus knows He has about three and a half years to make His way around the people of Israel with the message of the kingdom. Jesus knows that Satan is going to do his best to hinder the progress of the Gospel. Basically, as Jesus walks towards the synagogue, He has a full and busy agenda. If anyone had reason to justify not coming to the synagogue it was Jesus. He could easily have thought, “I’m too busy for this, there are more important things to do”.

But He doesn’t, instead He goes to the synagogue even though He knows He is going to be rejected. Now in this context we could say Jesus went to the synagogue because He was going to preach and, on this occasion, that is true. However the words “as was His custom” do not apply to the reading and preaching, they apply to the action of going to the synagogue – and all synagogues had morning and evening services (cf. Ps.92, especially the title and the first three verses). Jesus wouldn’t miss worship. In fact Jesus had this attitude right through His ministry.

Make the effort some time to read the latter portions of all the Gospels, especially the portions which deal with the last week before Jesus went to the cross. As you are reading see if you can find out what Jesus was doing on the Sabbath before He died. It may seem hard to believe but, in all four Gospels, you will not find one reference to Jesus doing anything on the Sabbath before He died. Admittedly it is an argument from silence but it does give weight to the consistency of Jesus’ attitude to worship. With the busiest week of His life ahead of Him it seems that Jesus had a very quiet Sabbath Day. In six days the salvation of God’s people would be placed on His shoulders as He bears the curse of the cross, yet it seems Jesus thought worship was more important than work. If Jesus took the time during the busiest week of His life to stop and just stand in God’s presence should we be tempted to think we can do any less?

Life is busy and has many demands. Work, sport, family, leisure, study, personal time, gardening, maintenance, church activities, special occasions – all these and much more are putting up their hand to claim a piece of our time.

And then comes Sunday.

During corporate worship we have a chance to sing praises, to be assured of our salvation, to hear God’s Word faithfully being preached and to communicate with our God. We are given the opportunity to encourage members who we haven’t seen for a while, and make a note to visit those who are not present. We fellowship as those who have one Lord, one hope, one faith. We stop and stand in God’s presence.

Corporate worship is able to give us so much yet, too often, we see Sunday as a catch-up day, or a convenient day to visit relatives and give the children quality time, or a great day to keep going with unfinished tasks. In other words we can have a tendency to see Sunday as a day to keep busy rather than a special opportunity to stop and worship and be spiritually refreshed. If this is an attitude you have developed remember there is no beatitude that says, “Blessed are the busy”. But there is a text in Hebrews 10:25 which says: “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another – and all the more as you see the day approaching.”

And that is exactly what Jesus was doing. By the time you have gotten to this point I would hope that you are becoming convinced of the importance of worship both in the morning and in the evening. But, if you need further encouragement let your focus come back to Jesus whose custom it was to go to the synagogue.

Just picture Jesus sitting in the synagogue looking around at the people who are there. What kind of people are they? When we look at other parts of Scripture we see that the synagogue worshippers were quite a mixed crowd. Jesus mentions some of them later in His ministry. In Matt.23:6 Jesus speaks about teachers of the law who love the place of honour at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogue. In Matt.6:2 Jesus calls us to be righteous without making a big fuss as the hypocrites do in the synagogues.

And the leader of the synagogue would not be a man well known for his eloquent teaching and charismatic personality – all of those people went to Jerusalem. It’s hardly a situation which sparks the spiritual imagination is it? Such circumstances could have allowed Jesus to have a negative attitude to worship. Wouldn’t Jesus be justified in thinking: “Why am I bothering to come? I’m tired of seeing leaders who are not thinking of the needs of the people but only about themselves. I’m tired of people who are nothing more than religious. They are just going through the motions but being far from God. And the man who stands up the front…? Well, I know much more than He does. He never teaches anything new. He’s not really that inspiring.” Jesus may have been justified to have these thoughts, but He never did – He continued to make it His custom to worship.

Perhaps we are not so keen on worship because of the type of people who gather there – people who turn us off. Perhaps we know of people who wear a “butter-wouldn’t-melt-in-my-mouth” expression to church but who are hard employees or employers during the week. Maybe we feel people only take interest in us on Sunday because we happen to see them – but we never hear from them during the week. There have been times when we have stood on the edge of a circle but not gone further because we don’t fit into the clique.

At this point it is tempting to think, “Well, if that the sort of people we meet at church we might as well stay home”. However, at this point, we are given positive encouragement by the example of Jesus. Jesus could have concluded that He was better off staying home, but Jesus never did because the primary purpose of worship is not to meet one another (although this is a great benefit of corporate worship). Instead the primary purpose of worship is to come and meet God. Who is the God we come to worship? He never leaves us sitting on the edge of the crowd with His back to us. He is delighted that we have come to worship and He is disappointed when we are missing. God is the One who is saying to us during worship and through worship, “You don’t have to do anything except stand in My presence – let Me refresh you as you stop”

Are you convinced now that coming to worship twice should be a priority? Perhaps you’re still hesitating because you’re not happy with the style of service at your church. You have heard about the powerful singing at the Church of Christ and you find that missing in your own church. On a couple of occasions you have been to one of the weekly youth services at the local Presbyterian church and you wish your home church be more like that. You sometimes visit the church in town because they only sing the traditional hymns rather than the modern tunes, which are used at your church. Much could be said about this – a discussion on styles of worship is usually an emotive, passionate and personal subject. I just want to say that, if you look long and hard enough, someone will always be doing something different. If we focus on what is not happening at church, or how we would like it to be, we will always be disappointed. That principle applies when change isn’t quick enough – the principle also applies when the traditions of yesteryear are gone.

Let’s put our attention back on Jesus. He too must have had times when coming to the synagogue was a real disappointment. In the synagogue God was to be worshipped and the Word of God was to be explained. Of all people Jesus had experienced the fullness of worship. Jesus had seen the times when the 24 elders would gather around the throne of His Father and bow down to give the purest worship possible. Jesus had witnessed angels, hundreds, thousands, millions all harmoniously giving praise to God. How insignificant the worship of the synagogue must have seemed. People distracted. People not singing. People worshipping with their mouths but not their hearts. And how the leading of the service and reverence for the Word must have seemed to be a poor imitation of seeing the Father face to face. Knowing all His attributes. Knowing intimately His plan of salvation. Knowing the place of every person in that plan.

But despite the potential disappointment Jesus went to the synagogue as was His custom. He wasn’t there because the worship was overly inspiring and because the leader of the synagogue was a charismatic man. He worshipped because God promises to be with Jesus when Jesus sets aside this day to just stop and stand in God’s presence.

This promise of God is not just for Jesus, it is for all of us. God, who created us, knows how important it is for us to stop and stand in His presence. God provides for His people that they may be refreshed. Even when the Israelites were crossing the desert God made sure His people were given extra food on Friday so that they could be properly prepared for the Sabbath (cf. Ex.16:21-30). The Israelites knew the importance of stopping and standing in God’s presence. Jesus, who is divine, continues to model the need to stop from a busy schedule, and stand in awe of God. Can we, who have been privileged to know the fullness of salvation, justify doing anything less?

‘On the Sabbath Day Jesus went into the synagogue, as was His custom’. There are only two others things Jesus did out of custom: It was His custom to teach the crowds. Telling them about the kingdom of God and the blessing of renewal which God wants to give to His people (cf. Mk.10:1). And it was His custom to find solitary places to pray. Telling His Father all that was on His heart and asking His Father to walk with Him in His ministry (cf. Lk.22:39).

Teaching. Praying. Going to the synagogue. Only these three things were a custom for Jesus. They were given priority. He relished these times.

As we see Jesus sitting in the synagogue we are struck with an amazing truth. Of all people, Jesus has the most valid reasons not to take the opportunity to worship. He has the divine power to keep going. He has seen worship in its fullness. He is the greatest teacher there ever was. He is busy beyond our understanding. Jesus has every reason to be somewhere else, but He goes to the synagogue because He wants to be there. Worship was His custom. He would organise His week to be there, He even took time out from saving people from eternal wrath to be in corporate worship.

Why did Jesus have this attitude? It’s because it was an opportunity – a God-given opportunity – to stop. A time, not to do things, but to just stand in the presence of God and be refreshed. A time to have that rest which God built into creation right from the beginning. A time to listen to God rather than being too busy to shut God off. No excuses are offered. Jesus sees this as a non-negotiable response of faith. If that was the case for Jesus how much more should it be the case for us?

Allan Quak

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

What Marriage Does Not Give

John Haartsen. Trowel & Sword, Jan/Feb 1985

Preamble: “I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.” (Romans 7:15). This verse came to mind as I read through this article from John Haartsen on marriage breakdowns, particularly between Christian men and women. As in all of life’s experiences there is an enormous gap between knowing and doing. As John points out the simple statement that “Christ is the answer”, while true, is not the antidote for failed marriages, as a statistical analysis of broken marriages in Christian homes shows. It does however give a starting point of where to look for answers.

What Marriage Does Not Give

“Don’t expect from marriage that which you can only get from God.”

I heard this statement when John Smith was speaking at the Mt. Evelyn Reformed Church outreach mission. It reminded me of another statement from a leading secular marriage counsellor: “One of the main reasons for marriage breakdown is that people look for, and expect their marriage to fulfil their needs. When their needs are thus not met the marriage fails.” Now for the christian the answer for help and healing with the struggles, strains and breakdowns of the marriage relationship is, at first glance, obvious: Christ is the answer. I don’t think there is ever a truer word spoken. Yes, Christ is the answer to all our problems, also our relationship problems.

Yet, something is not quite clear. Why are there so many marriage hassles and breakdowns among christians? There are the obvious cases where the marriage is shattered, with the hurt and damage to all involved. Then there are the couples who are struggling and hurting, only known to close friends and maybe some relatives.

How surprised we would be if we could lift the cover and peep behind the facade of respectable christian marriages. Would we not discover a whole range of hurts, disappointments, conflicts and even indifference? Husbands and wives, who are to be as one, yet living miles apart emotionally and spiritually. Is the problem one of just plain disobedience, lack of faith or lack of understanding?

Probably we would find elements of all three and it would vary from case to case. Yet, I believe that lack of understanding is a major contributor. Lack of understanding God’s word, ourselves, our partner, and marriage itself. One wonders also if we as christians have failed to understand the extreme and destructive pressures which western society is bringing to bear on the marriage relationship.

The world around us shouts: “Find fulfilment for your needs, focus on yourself!” That’s nothing new; mankind has always focused on its own needs and unfortunately christians too, have been smitten with that same curse. So what’s different now? Well, I believe that the focus is now on a different area of our needs. It has progressed from attention on the physical needs, to our emotional needs.

Maybe we can have a quick look at what man’s basic needs are. Abraham Maslow’s classical needs hierarchy suggests that we have five basic needs and that the lowest one must be met before a person seeks to meet the next one. They are:

1.  Physical, e.g. food, water, shelter.

2.  Physical security, reasonable confidence that our physical needs will be supplied for in the foreseeable future.

3.  Love and security, to be wanted and appreciated.

4.  Purpose, to feel significant and worthwhile.

5.  Self-actualisation, to develop into a full, creative, self-expressing, giving person.

The christian knows from God’s word that Christ meets all these needs but the question is: do we really believe that? Let us spend a few moments looking at some well known Scripture verses to confirm the basis for our faith that Christ does indeed supply all our needs.

God has met our physical needs:

“But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things (food, clothing, shelter, etc.) will be given to you as well.” (Matt. 6:33).

God cares for tomorrow’s physical needs:

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow.” (Matt. 6:34); “Do not be anxious about anything; but in everything… present your requests to God… my God will meet all your needs according to His glorious riches in Christ Jesus.” (Phil. 4:6, 19).

God has met our need for love and security:

“Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? … I am convinced that … nothing will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 8:35, 39). “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners (at our worst; as only He can see us), Christ died for us. (Rom. 5:8).

God has met our need for significance and purpose:

“For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.” (Phil. 1:21); “For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” (Eph. 2:10)

Now it depends on the degree of our faith in these promises that frees us from a self-centred concern with our own needs, enabling us to move on to the higher need of self-actualising, the giving of ourselves without demanding returns, i.e. to focus on the needs of others. This need is so beautifully expressed in the mother-child relationship. In this need also we are not left to our own. Christ says clearly that our highest goal is to serve Him; we do that, by the giving of ourselves. This is my commandment, that you love one another. In Christ’s power we can do so; He gives us that power as a possession. All that remains for us is to reach out and possess that possession. But how does all this relate to the marriage and the breakdown of this relationship?

Let us have a look at the ladder of needs and see where we are at. The first one (food and shelter, etc. for today) is in our situation no problem, and we can also go to sleep knowing that our physical future looks reasonably secure. All these provisions are from God, but often taken for granted. Now we come to our problem areas, that of being appreciated, being secure emotionally and feeling significant. It is in these areas that many turn to their marriage to find fulfilment, instead of turning to Christ. It must be said, of course, that God did decree marriage for the partners to sustain and enrich each other and that includes supplying for each other’s emotional needs. The problem arises when marriage becomes a unit on its own, or even worse, two units on their own. Allow me to explain what mean.

The world teaches (sometimes subtly, sometimes boldly) that a marriage is two units, a man and a woman who form a union so as to derive personal benefits from their mutual involvement, or to say it simply, seeking to have one’s own needs met. Also, in many christian marriages this attitude is often present especially in the areas of security, appreciation and significance. Now everyone, including christians, must feel and be secure, must feel and be appreciated and must feel and be significant, if they are to be able to give of themselves. Here again, the degree of being able to give depends on the degree of these needs being met. But don’t look to receive from your marriage that which only God can give you.

An every day example.

The wife needs to feel secure and significant (though she is often unaware of that need). She looks for it in praise and affection from her husband. He should make her feel special. He has to understand her and appreciate her just as she is. She has her own fixed ideas as to how he should treat her and how he should be: like herself, affectionate, subjective, emotional, expressive, etc. But this particular husband can’t meet these demands. He is not affectionate, unemotional, objective, rational, and so down-right practical (you can turn these roles around, if you like). The husband too has his need for security and significance, and he tries to find it in the responses of his wife. She doesn’t understand the things he finds so difficult to share with her, she takes no interest in him as a person, she over-rules his decisions, etc. And so frustration sets in with resentment and confrontation.

Both or one of them feel more insignificant and insecure, their self-esteem deteriorates, they start attacking and destroying each other, themselves and their marriage, leading to bitterness and sometimes escape. Surely the couple in our example had every intention of having a sound christian marriage. Their intentions were good but their approach failed. For people, all have shortcomings and nobody steps into marriage as a blank page. We all have a past with an inherited and formed character affected by events remembered and forgotten.

No woman can ever completely fulfil a man, only Christ can. No man can ever completely fulfil a woman, only Christ can.

Our need for security demands that we are unconditionally loved, accepted and cared for, now and forever. No human can give such a security, but the christian knows that Christ can and does. He knows that Christ has seen him at his worst and still loves him to the point of giving His life so that he is perfect and secure with Him. That kind of love we can never lose. We are completely acceptable to Him, regardless of our behaviour. We are not under pressure to earn or keep His love. Our acceptability to God depends only on Christ’s acceptability to God. As christians we know that Christ loves us, really loves us just as we are; no conditions! He loves us so personally that He knows us by name and nothing can separate us from His love, nothing at all.

As these facts become a reality in our thinking we discover that Christ gives us that security and significance we crave for. He also gives us the ability to increase and improve in the purpose He has for us, to love, affirm and to give, starting with our partner. Instead of using our marriage to find that which only God can give us, we can start using our marriage to fulfil its true purpose, and that is to enrich, encourage, comfort, praise, guide, strengthen and delight the spouse God has given us. Wonderful things happen in a marriage when the focus is drawn away from ourselves and directed towards pleasing our spouse; when the negative destructive approach is replaced with a positive one.

It’s only when we give that we truly receive.

Yes, this is also true if only one of the couple implements this surrendering and giving. There is also the marriage which is a unit on its own, two people concentrating on each other’s needs, striving to become as one. This is a truly biblical concept and surely this is the way God intended it to be, as we can clearly see in Gen. 2, etc. It’s a rewarding marriage, yet nevertheless incomplete, because of the fall of man into sin. Before the fall into sin it was natural for man to serve God. But now we need a reference point outside of ourselves, namely Christ. We must direct our focus on serving Him, especially in and with our marriage.

So the christian marriage is like a triangle, two people directed towards a common goal and purpose, that of serving Christ and thus growing towards each other. Marriage is not primarily instituted by God to make two people happy but its prime purpose is to serve Christ within the concepts of our marriage. Only a marriage relationship which strives for that purpose, will have contented and secure people. So then, let us not expect from marriage that which only God can give us.

John Haartsen

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

Why Do The Churches In The West Decline?

Trowel & Sword. Dr. K. Runia. April 1971

Preamble: The decline of the Christian Church in the West has been the subject of many articles in Trowel and Sword as well as other Christian magazines and books over the years, both before and after this particular article by Dr. Runia. Despite his optimism that this decline, particularly in Reformed churches could be arrested by the preaching of “the Full Gospel”, today, 50+ years later, this decline has largely continued, to some extent at least driven on by the secularisation of the West resulting in blatantly anti-Christian policies, the effects of the Covid 19 pandemic, as well as the Islamisation of many countries due to an “open border” policy by their governments; factors which could not have been foreseen by Dr. Runia.

Why Do The Churches In The West Decline?

While in the non-Western world the churches are growing, in some cases even at a rapid rate, most churches in the West show a falling membership. Let us first have a quick look at the growth of some churches in the non-Western world. I quote the following figures from an article in The Spectator, the official magazine of the Methodist Church in Victoria. “The Timor Evangelical Christian Church, autonomous since 1947, has grown from that date from a membership of 223,000 to more than 650,000. The Western Indonesia Protestant Church between 1953 and 1967 grew from 150,000 to 350,000 and the Minahasa Evangelical Christian Church from 335,000 to 500,000. Total membership of churches within the Indonesian Council of Churches has grown over this period from 2,550,000 to 4,600,000. Membership of various Methodist Churches in Africa has also expanded. From 1964 to 1969 the Church in Kenya grew from nearly 12,000 to over 17,000, in Ghana from 66,347 to 82,419 and in the Ivory Coast from 14,004 to 17,038.” One scholar predicts for Africa a church membership growth from the 97 million of 1970, to 146 million by 1980, 220 million by 1990, and 351 million by 2000.

In the Western world, however, the picture is quite different. The writer in The Spectator gives a rather gloomy picture of his own church. There are 16,000 fewer Sunday School students between 1966 and 1969. There is an obvious decline in church attendance. The church membership figures are 2000 down. Some people in his church say “that by the year 2000 ‘there will be only a husk or a shell’, ‘the church will have ceased to be’. His own final conclusion is: “For sure, the Australian picture doesn’t read too well”.

Situation in Britain.

This bleak prognosis is confirmed by reports from other Western countries. Last year the English author Kenneth Slack published the second edition of his book “The British Churches Today” (first published in 1961). In the preface to the new edition he tells us that he had to revise his book thoroughly. “‘Passage after passage of the book written in 1960 has seemed strangely optimistic and had to be excised. To write in 1969 is to be led to wonder whether at the end of another decade the whole institution of the Church will not have changed its shape so drastically as to demand not a further revision but a totally different book trying to account for what has happened. It is still possible to write of the British Churches today in the light of history: shortly the operation may assume more the character of archaeology burrowing beneath a collapsed edifice”.

On the next page he writes: “The habit of worship has declined sharply. The curious phenomenon whereby England and Wales had many areas where evening was regarded as the normal time for worship can no longer be observed. Since this was the time when many on the fringe of Christian commitment would venture into a service, this decline is significant as a reduction in opportunities of mission”.

The figures in the British Free Churches can fairly easily be assessed. Mr. Slack gives the following long term figures. The Baptists in England fell from 434,741 in 1906 to 285,000 in 1967. The Methodists at the union of Methodist bodies in 1932 numbered 838,019. In 1968 there were 651,139. Congregationalists in 1909 were 456,631 and in 1969 they were 180,000. Taking into account that since 1909 the population of England increased by 50%, the figures are very serious indeed. It is harder to assess the situation in the Church of England since this is a typical ‘national church’. But the author believes that the situation is rather desperate, as some of the following figures prove. In the ten years to 1966 the ratio of baptisms to population dropped by 15.1%. In the metropolitan area this figure was more than doubled. More significantly, the national ratio of confirmations (=professions of faith) has fallen by 32.2% in six years. Ordinations show a drop of 24.8% in the five years to 1968. In the same period the figure of those recommended for training for ordination has fallen by the staggering drop of 58.9%.

But why has the process of decline been accelerating at such a speed in the last ten years? Mr. Slack points to “the shaking of the theological foundations”, of which Honest to God was the public sign. In this book Bishop Robinson declared “that the old clothes with which the faith had been clad for centuries had dropped off in shreds and tatters. What everyone had been suspecting, but scarcely daring to confess, now became something to come clean about”. But not only the theological and ecclesiastical foundations were shaken, but the moral foundations as well. “The old proclaimed certainties began to crumble”. The 1966 report on ‘Sex and Morality’, prepared by a working party of the British Council of Churches showed that the ‘new morality’ “had invaded the minds of responsible groups appointed by official church bodies”.

What is the general reaction to this process? According to Mr. Slack there are mainly three attitudes among ministers and theologians. Some (especially conservative evangelicals, but also others) openly speak of apostasy. Others like Dr. M. Ramsey, the Archbishop of Canterbury, are increasingly accepting the new ferment. Others again greet all the ferment with joy. Among the great body church members there are mainly two reactions. Some greet the new developments with “a sense of of relief and liberation”. For many others there is “a sense of bewilderment”.

Importance for us.

So far we have simply followed the description of the situation by Mr. Slack. I believe that this description is important for us too, for in many ways the churches here in Australia and New Zealand go through the same process. It may not be as obvious as in Britain, but the same things are going on here. As we have already seen from the article in The Spectator the Methodist Church is suffering from these problems, and the same is true of all the other major churches.

Why?

The most important point, however, is not the mere description of the decline, but the question: Why is this happening? Undoubtedly this is a very complex problem and we should not oversimplify it. There are many factors, especially of a sociological nature. I am thinking of the increasing industrialisation and urbanisation, the greater mobility of the people, etc. There are also psychological and cultural factors. There is the fact of the increasing secularisation, with as one of its results that people have become much more honest about their church affiliation. They are no longer afraid to admit that they do not belong to any church at all.

Yet, from the point of view of the church itself, the main factor, I believe, is the fact that in many cases the church has lost its message. Mr. Slack mentions the book Honest to God. This book was and still is symptomatic of the kind of preaching that is being heard in many churches. Or take the theology of Dr. Hick which we discussed in the previous article. If this is the kind of message with which the church feeds its own members and confronts the world, is it any wonder that the interest of the people is sharply declining? Why should one go to church any longer? And of course, theology never stands on its own. Morality is based on it and it therefore follows suit. We see that in Honest to God, where Dr. Robinson advocated his brand of ‘situation ethics’, that is, an ethics of love without law. How much a changed theology influences ethics also appears from Dr. Hick’s article. At the end of the first article he writes: “Efficient contraception separates in principle sexual intercourse from the begetting of children and thus is said to remove a major reason for regarding pre- and extra- marital intercourse as morally bad”. 

Our own churches.

If our own churches will have a future, then there is only one possibility: We must preach the full Gospel! Less will not do. We have a message for the world of today only when we believe and preach the same Gospel that was proclaimed by the apostles. Naturally, we must bring it in a language that is not archaic but understandable to 20th century man. But it must be the same Gospel. And if this Gospel is alive in our own hearts and lives, I am sure that our churches will not decline but grow. It is interesting to see that evangelical congregations in England are generally holding their ground and even growing, in spite of the general decline, and it is the same all over the world. This is also the secret of the growth of the church in the non-Western countries. On the mission field the old and yet ever new Gospel is preached and the Lord blesses it. A church with this Gospel also has a word for the world. The world of today does not need new theories or philosophies, a la Hick or a la Robinson, but it needs the saving and redeeming power of the gospel of Christ. This is the only power that can transform persons and nations. Yes, it can transform even the structures which form the inner fabric of our society. This has happened in the past, when, for example, the institution of slavery was gradually broken down. It can still do the same. And the church can make a real contribution to the life of the nation and of the world at large, when it preaches this full Gospel of Jesus Christ as the Saviour AND Lord of the world.

K. RUNIA

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

Evangelism In Reverse – Turning Men From Christ

Prof. T.L. Wilkinson. Trowel & Sword. April 1965

Preamble: How better to follow an article by Mrs. Olive Wilkinson, than with an article by her husband, Prof. Tom Wilkinson; a man of extremely dry humour and matching wit. In his inimitable way, “Prof Wilkie” tackles the issue of evangelism in a way that only he could dream up. While coming at the issue from the opposite direction of most, there is nevertheless more than an element of truth in his words. The attitudes expressed in his article are more common than we care to admit. There is more than an element of clique-ness in our churches, like the bible study leader who restricts membership to his study group, because he doesn’t want just anyone attending. Prof Wilkinson cites a number of examples.

Evangelism In Reverse – Turning Men From Christ

The following brethren are doing their best to make sure that we don’t spoil the Church by bringing others into it. After all, didn’t Jesus say “Go and drive men out into the highways and by-ways and hedges, and compel them to stay out”? (Very Much Revised Version).

Their view of Church membership is aptly summed up by the poet (?):

'We are God's chosen few, - All others will be damned,
There is no place for you, - We can't have Heaven crammed."

Our beloved (by himself) brother Bull-dozer is a fair sample. Bull-dozers are, of course, highly unsociable things. They don’t see the sense in stopping at the “Give Way” signs, but just charge on regardless. Anything lying in their path simply has no rights, but must get out of the way or be pushed over by sheer force. Big Brother Bull-dozer doesn’t believe in those old ideas of a gracious and kindly approach. Words like “Tact” “Gentleness” and “Courtesy” belong, in his opinion, to the pre-Bull-dozer era. Just watch this Big Brother in action. When he read his Bible he was in a hurry and didn’t see that word “not” in the chapter, but thought it said “Love is.. .Rude” Now he goes right ahead to put that into practice. He doesn’t worry about your feelings. If you have a sore toe, be sure he will jump on it. When he talks with you his words hit you like a boxer hitting a punching-ball. After all he isn’t trying to help you, but only to hit and hurt.

Another member of this brotherhood, is Mr. I-Know-It-All. He was born with a very large mouth and dexterous tongue, but unfortunately he was born without ears. (Some unkind people say “without brains also”). Being without ears is a real blessing to brother I-Know-It-All. It simply means that he never has to listen to anything that the other chap says, and that he never has to acknowledge that the other person could be right. So that simplifies things remarkably. It means that he himself is always right, and just can’t be wrong.

The Earless One isn’t hindered by any of those weak Christian ideas of trying to encourage other people to express themselves, or of trying to build them up with helpful words. No, his main aim is show you how good he can argue, and how much he knows . So he has made a close study of Wheelan the Wrecker at work on those old buildings; and now he applies those principles of demolition to people who differ from him. Like Nietzsche, the Earless One thinks that humility is a sign of weakness, and that the Super Man (Mr. I-Know-It-All) is the one who can make his Ego blaze like a Neon sign for all to see and admire. His favourite book? Dale Carnegie on “How to lose friends and make enemies”, His favourite text? Well that’s a bit more difficult. Perhaps this one: “He that humbles himself shall be humbled and he that exalts himself shall be exalted”, Maybe it is that text with all those “I” “Me” and”My’s” in it – look it up for yourself. You know this chap? Perhaps you have a photo of Him? No? Try looking hard in the mirror – any family likeness? 

T. L. WILKINSON

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment