The History and Impact of Altar Calls When One
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The History and Impact of Altar Calls When one thinks of an evangelical church, especially a modern Baptist, Pentecostal, Assembly of God, Methodist, or other church, the altar call inevitably comes to mind as part of the service structure. In fact, it would be difficult to find a modern evangelical church that does not incorporate an altar call as part of its worship service on a routine basis, nor could we describe one of these churches without including the invitation as part of the description. It is considered an essential part of evangelism and “soul winning.” At the end of the sermon, the pastor makes an invitation, a pleading at times, for those that want to receive Christ, to come down to the front of the church to be prayed with. The individual is then prayed for at the front of the church at the “altar” area or taken to a private counseling room where they meet one-on-one with a prayer partner or counselor and are led in a “sinner’s prayer.” Information about the person is taken, and the person is then encouraged to continue coming to church and ideally is enrolled in a discipleship program to facilitate spiritual growth. This is the typical way the event is structured. Bennett defines the altar call as: A method of evangelism, within which a regular or frequent, planned invitation is given to “unbelievers” to respond to Jesus Christ publicly at the conclusion of a sermon or other gospel presentation, in such ways as: calling out a response, raising a hand, standing, or walking to a designated spot in the evangelistic setting. A response to such an invitation would normally be followed by immediate counseling and later by some form of follow up. It often incorporates an appeal to Christians for such issues 1 as rededication and call to mission. It is not a theology, though it does reflect and support particular theologies.1 While the altar call is probably thought of by most people as a long time tradition, it is a relatively new addition to the church. According to Bennett, the altar call originated from two eighteenth century practices, namely the “mourner’s bench” and the “anxious seat.” They were usually at the front of the evangelistic event, and people were expected to move forward to them and be prayed for. The camp-meetings of the early 1800’s systematized the invitation system, and Charles Finney is credited with establishing and popularizing the invitation and justifying its use. Bennett also notes that D.L. Moody further developed the invitation by using music to supplement his preaching, and training laypeople to act as counselors. The altar call is widely used today around the world in evangelical churches of varied denominations.2 The altar call may be an integral part of the evangelical church, but the practice is nonetheless not without controversy. Many evangelical churches do not have altar calls or invitations, not because they do not believe in salvation, but because mainly they believe that the Holy Spirit will work in a person just as well in any location. Many pastors also believe that the pleading invitation and altar call borders on mental manipulation, and again places more emphasis on man’s abilities to convict than the power of the Holy Spirit. Others see the invitation or altar call as ineffective in really reaching and keeping people for Christ, believing than many or most of those that 1 Bennet, David. The Altar Call: Its Origins and Present Usage. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2000, xvi. 2 Bennet, 36 – 37, 139 – 143. 2 respond just do so because that is what is expected of them and not out of any real desire or conviction to repent. Supporters see Jesus in the Gospels calling people to Himself. Many of the sermons in the scriptures were calls to action, and certainly the altar call can be a call to action. It does put one on the spot and may make sinners uncomfortable with themselves, but that conviction is what makes us move. It provides a way for us to make a decision to get serious with Jesus. There are a couple of ways that it is accomplished in the evangelical church. One is where the individual responds to the invitation, walks down to the front of the church, and is prayed for in public by the pastor or a member of the pastoral staff or prayer team. Another method is where the individual responds to the invitation, is met at the front or off to the side by a member of the prayer team, and is led to a prayer room or counseling room where the counselor and individual can meet and pray in private. Other methods do not include an immediate response, such as filling out an attendance card with the rest of the congregation but annotating that the individual was saved, or maybe making an appointment with the pastor after the service sometime during the week to explain their conversion and to ask any questions. These are delayed-response invitations. There may be variations to these methods, but generally, the invitation takes these basic forms. Of course, another alternative is that the altar call/invitation is deemed to be ineffective for spiritual or other reasons, and is not conducted at all. There are two basic problems regarding the invitation. One is whether or not an altar call is effective as a means through which the Holy Spirit can work to save souls. There are certainly arguments on both sides of this issue, including those that say the 3 invitation is a man-made mechanism through which the pastor psychologically manipulates an individual to come forth to say a prayer, but the individual never really repents nor is their life really changed. The pastoral staff does not allow the Holy Spirit to work though lives but tries to control the Holy Spirit through psychological manipulation of the invitee. The other side says that the invitation forces an individual to make a decision for Christ as the Holy Spirit is working in his life. The pastor and the altar call are tools that the Holy Spirit can use to ensure that the individual has the opportunity and environment needed to receive Christ, and to start themselves on the journey of sanctification. The invitation and subsequent prayer and receiving of Christ is not the only step, but the first step in an intentional soul-winning and discipling process God’s church uses to increase the Kingdom of God. The topic of whether or not the invitation system is effective, and whether or not to even do an altar call, is a controversial topic. But while many other controversial topics in evangelicalism have received a lot of discussion in print, the altar call has not. There are a number of sources on evangelism in general, the history of evangelism and revivals, and many works on those individuals that pioneered the use of the altar call. Two of the best recent sources on the general topic of the invitation system are Bennett and Streett3. Both of these sources discuss some of the history of the invitation system, the pros and cons of the system, some of the abuses of the system, and recommendations regarding the invitation system. However, they each come to a different conclusion. Both of these books make a good starting point to this topic. 3 Streett, R. Alan. The Effective Invitation. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1995, and Bennett, op. cit.. 4 Streett covers a lot of ground in discussing the history and uses of the altar call, but is a more practical help for pastors who want to give altar calls. Streett discusses the abuses and pros and cons, and reviews the Biblical support for the invitation. He concludes that the altar call is Biblical and has a place in the modern worship service. There is a good discussion in the book on types of invitations, such as the raising of hands, coming forward, and other methods. Streett covers these various types of invitations, but specifically includes some detail on their uses, and how a pastor can effectively utilize them to reach people for Christ. Bennett is a more scholarly work, and is based on his ThM dissertation. Bennett reviews in more detail the history of the invitation system, and covers its uses on three countries: The United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Bennett also discusses in detail the uses and abuses of the invitation in each of the three countries, and makes several detailed recommendations in the second half of the book. Bennett is generally against the invitation system, but does accept the argument that it has some, although little, Biblical support and can be used effectively, if the pastor guards against the typical abuses that can manifest themselves. One of the important steps in researching the altar call topic is to look at the historical use of the invitation system, especially from its beginnings in the early 1800’s. Understanding the use of the altar call by such influential ministers such as Charles Finney, D.L. Moody, and Billy Graham provides a basis from which we can make decisions regarding types of altar calls that have been successful, and how measurement of this success has been conducted in the past. 5 There are a couple of classic books on D.L. Moody that provide good background to his preaching and theology. Dorsett4 and Gundry5 are great biographical reading on one of the most influential preachers of this country.