I can't post a comment to my own blog at the moment - so this is for Graeme and anyone else interested in the myth of cultural relevance.

Graeme says

“...the methods by which the early Army evangelised were very much reliant on cultural relevance. I believe that ignoring this fact actually devalues the work of those early pioneers.”

The early pioneers had no strategy – they were reactive to the Spirit within them. They acted naturally. Apart from ‘The darkest England’ scheme you will find no record of any of the pioneers either together or individually drawing up a strategy. They did what they did because they were so inspired. Take Railton for example - perhaps our greatest pioneer - an effective evangelist in Africa, Turkey, Germany even Japan and China - he had no plan or strategy (true he was an incredible linguist) but apart from that all he had was his poverty, a heart full of love and the courage to preach.

I always think we tend to forget the purpose of that very first spiritual gift given at Pentecost – it was the ability to communicate with people who had a different language – the gift was cross cultural communication.

Graeme continues “We need people who are prepared to seek ways to put across the very real message that the majority of people in this world are going to Hell. What are the ways of doing this in a culturally relevant way? How can we take the modern day cultural icons and redeem them for use by the Kingdom, in the same way as throughout Christian history those who have gone before did? I am strongly committed to the cause of holiness, but the Lord is leading me to ask the questions about the methods we will use into the future in order to communicate and fulfil the divine charge of Matthew 28:19-20.”

I am glad that you are ‘strongly committed to the cause of holiness’ and that you are asking questions about the methods we will use to communicate in the future – both of these points are very encouraging.

But if you look back at the history of revival the leaders did not deliberately set out to hijack the cultural icons of their day - whether it's Edwards, Wesley, Caughey, Finney, Palmer or Booth they had no plan. The simply followed the leade of the Spirit.

I think that true holiness will answer the questions you are asking – holiness gives us all the Spirit’s gifts and collectively they are our armoury in the area of communication.

I believe we’ll find the answer to these questions on our knees just as our forbears did. I am certain from the content and tone of your posts that this is where you often are!

I hope this response doesn’t sound anti-intellectual – I just think it is so important that we don’t let our own creativity get in the way of what God wants us to do – I have seen this happen in the UK.

Eg. Open air meetings - on a Sunday morning at 10 am in front of a double glazed house their pants - but on a Friday night at 10:30 pm in downtown club land (as the drunks and party goers reel onto the streets) they are brilliant - ask Cory Harrison.


Much love and prayers
A

The myth of cultural relevance…

The myth of cultural relevance…

Picking up on the debate below by Teakles, Olivia, ‘No 3’ et al.

The following quote is taken from an article I wrote called ‘The past is good’, the whole article is available here. (JAC Issue 45) - It lays to rest the distracting myth of culteral releavance -

“Some argue that our earliest converts were familiar with the teachings of the bible and that society generally accepted the bible as true. Proponents of this theory would argue that if a Salvationist in 1880 confronted a sinner for long enough with the gospel the inevitable result would be repentance. This theory is well passed its sell by date and in desperate need of dismissal. Many of the Army’s earliest converts had experienced no contact with any kind of religious education whatsoever, many of them were unable to read or write and were accurately identified by the Army as belonging to an un-churched underclass. The gospel preached and the methods used in reality were no more culturally relevant to the un-churched masses then as might be the case today. The truth is that the gospel has never been culturally relevant – this was true when Judaic monotheistic Christians tried to convert polytheistic Greeks and Romans in the first century and it remains so today.

Our need is not to make the gospel (nor the Army) culturally relevant but to simply recognise the relevance of the gospel full stop.

The world needs Jesus, sinners need Jesus and it is the responsibility (and ought to be the natural desire) of the Salvationist to go after them. Without judgement, without hell, without heaven the Salvation Army is indeed redundant. We were raised up to be a mission engaged in the active redemption of the lost – quite literally plucking souls from the fires of hell. Take away man’s universal need for salvation, take away the urgency of our evangelism and we become like a hospital without patients or worse - Doctors without a cure.

In order to rediscover this essential our soldiers once again need to become ‘saved to save’. Collectively The Salvation Army needs to become a living corporate testimony to both the need for and the efficacy of Salvation. The truth is that not ‘one’ but millions of souls ‘remain without the light of God’ and God still requires an Army to go and fight for them.

O is not the Christ 'midst the crowd of today
Whose questioning cries do not cease?
And will he not show to the hearts that would know
The things that belong to their peace?
But how shall they hear if the preacher forbear
Or lack in compassionate zeal?
Or how shall hearts move with the Master's own love,
Without his anointing and seal?

In George Scott Railton’s book “Heathen England” printed in 1877, the old warrior expounding the value of open-air evangelism is asked “How many are considered necessary to undertake a procession?” – Railton’s response – ‘One!’"

Yours set apart by Christ, for the lost, in the Army.

PS - Olivia thanks for the prayer cover it is needed and appreciated :-)