We are to preach the Word, and if we do it properly, there will be
a call to a decision that comes in the message, and then we leave it to
the Spirit to act upon people
Early in the 1970s Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones was the speaker at a ministers'
conference in the USA and at a question session was asked the following
question:
Q During recent years, especially in England, among evangelicals of
the
Reformed faith, there has been a rising criticism of the invitation system
as used by Billy Graham and others. Does Scripture justify the use of
such
public invitations or not?
A. Well, it is difficult to answer this in a brief compass without being
misunderstood. Let me answer it like this: The history of this invitation
system is one with which you people ought to be more familiar than anyone
else, because it began in America. It began in the 1820s; the real
originator of it was Charles G. Finney. It led to a great controversy.
Asahel Nettleton, a great Calvinist and successful evangelist, never issued
an "altar call" nor asked people to come to the "anxious
seat." These new
methods in the 182Os and were condemned for many reasons by all who took
the Reformed position.
One reason is that there is no evidence that this was done in New Testament
times, because then they trusted to the power of the Spirit. Peter
preaching on the Day of Pentecost under the power of the Spirit, for
instance, had no need to call people forward in decision because, as you
remember, the people were so moved and affected by the power of the Word
and Spirit that they actually interrupted the preacher, crying out, "Men
and brethren, what shall we do?" That has been the traditional Reformed
attitude towards this particular matter. The moment you begin to introduce
this other element, you are bringing a psychological element. The
invitation should be in the message. We believe the Spirit applies the
message, so we trust in the power of the Spirit. I personally agree with
what has been said in the question. I have never called people forward
at
the end for this reason; there is a grave danger of people coming forward
before they are ready to come forward. We do believe in the work of the
Spirit, that He convicts and converts, and He will do His work. There
is a
danger in bringing people to a "birth," as it were, before they
are ready
for it.
The Puritans in particular were afraid of what they would call "a
temporary
faith" or "a false profession." There was a great Puritan,
Thomas Shepard,
who published a famous series of sermons on The Ten Virgins. The great
point of that book was to deal with this problem of a false profession.
The
foolish virgins thought they were all right. This is a very great danger.
I can sum it up by putting it like this: I feel that this pressure which
is
put upon people to come forward in decision ultimately is due to a lack
of
faith in the work and operation of the Holy Spirit. We are to preach the
Word, and if we do it properly, there will be a call to a decision that
comes in the message, and then we leave it to the Spirit to act upon
people. And of course He does. Some may come immediately at the close
of
the service to see the minister. I think there should always be an
indication that the minister will be glad to see anybody who wants to
put
questions to him or wants further help. But that is a very different thing
from putting pressure upon people to come forward. I feel it is wrong
to
put pressure directly on the will. The order in Scripture seems to be
this
- the truth is presented to the mind, which moves the heart, and that
in
turn moves the will.
