April, 1936
T H E K I N G ' S B U S I N E S S
124
Mass and Visitation EVANGELISM Combined
By HENRY E. FURKE Chicago, Illinois
D uring the last few years, we have heard a great deal said about the merits o f visita tion evangelism over against those of mass evan gelism. The declarations, “ The day o f mass evangelism is past” or, “ The day o f revivals is over,” are being sounded out by visitation evan gelists and ministerial associations in all parts of America today. Invariably, those, who hold this view rest their ássertions upon a fourfold basis, saying: 1. In view of modern church work and methods, it seems no longer necessary to con duct revival meetings: 2.
churches today are rejecting mass evangelism and are substituting a program o f visitation evangelism. It appears as though these churches have found it increasingly difficult to secure the necessary church additions under the old order, and that the tendency has been to throw down the bars and to use any program, just so the masses might be brought into the membership of the church, often without any consideration of the individual’s spiritual experience. As a Christian and an evangelist, I do not object to the general idea o f visitation evangelism,
Henry E. Burke
for it is Scripturally sound. But I feel that there are many serious objections to the average program of visitation evangelism as we find it in operation today. D isadvantages of M ere V isitation In explaining my grounds for objection, may I sug gest the following propositions: li. The average visitation campaign is unscriptural. ' Visitation evangelists usually make the contention that they have- the only Scriptural method. I admit that there are some wdrfibrs who employ a Scripturally sound method, and we recognize that Christ used this method in reaching certain people. But He never used it to the exclusion of His preaching ministry. The tendency in visitation evan gelism is to minimize the value of teaching the great truths o f Christianity through the channel o f the preached Word. A fter the church was formed at Pentecost, the divine order was a combination of mass and personal evangelism, but even the personal workers of that day taught the people concerning the great facts o f salvation, centering in the death and resurrection oCTesus Christ (cf. Acts 8 :30-38). They never resorted to a system o f arguments devoid of Scriptural truth, purporting to makexhurch members. In many visitation programs, the basis o f appeal is shal low and falls far short o f the demands o f Scripture. The appeal usually centers around the thought o f following Christ, rather t-han of accepting Him as the only Saviour from sin. Christ should not be followed merely as an Ex ample; He must be received first as a Saviour (John 1: 11-13). As a rule, in a campaign of calling, no emphasis is placed upon the need of accepting Christ on the basis of God’s own Word. Too rarely is the average visitor able
The harmful effects qf organized hiasS evangelism
offset the good, that might be done.
: ;J - -
3. It seems no longer possible to have- anu.old-tiqjp; re vival meeting [as though God were no longer on the giv ing hand]. \ 1 4. A new method, which is claimed fó be Scriptural,,, has supplanted the old order. This new method is an organ-; ized program o f visitation evangelism. No S ubstitute for O ld -T ime R evival S ervices I would answer these contentions by saying I believe it is just as possible to have an old-time revival today, with as definite results, as when Peter preached on the day of Pentecost, or when Paul gave that memorable address on Mars Hill— that is, it is possible if God’s people are willing to pay the price. I am not defending sensationalism, vul garism, stereotypeism, or that which is Scripturally objec tionable in modem mass evangelism. W e should always remember, however, that the good has had its counterfeit, and this difficulty has existed especially with regard to God-given evangelism. God has ordained “ by the foolish ness o f preaching to save them that believe” (1 Cor. 1 :21) ; and He has described evangelists as a gift to the church (Eph. 4 :11 ). No church that continually ignores this God-given plan can prosper'in a deeply spiritual way. I have taken a poll in many churches, in different parts of our land, to see just how many o f the members were saved in an old-time revival meeting, and the facts are that upward of eighty per cent o f those attending church and having a definite interest in the program o f the church were saved in a revival service. In spite o f this fact, many A n ' address delivered at the Conference on Evangelism, Bible Institute o f Los Angeles, January 30,1936.
Made with FlippingBook HTML5