Published by I think it is interesting that when someone takes the banner of Christ and holds it high today in an “unusual” sense they come under fire. Over my nearly 60 years I have seen this in many settings.
In the 40-50’s the Pentecostals held meetings in tents, fire halls, warehouses and homes and won many to the Lord. I was there, I know first hand. In those days you didn’t have to be good to go to a Pentecostal Church. Anyone could come. People with problems came. They met Jesus. Lives were changed. And I saw the results. Let’s call it good fruit. The traditional church preached against them because they didn’t follow their guidelines. After all, a pastor had to wear a suit with a backwards collar and the Pentecostals didn’t. I know of at least one preacher of that time who wore his best bib overalls to church, that was all he had. What’s more, how could a fire hall be consecrated and used as a church? They played bingo there on Thursday night. Many of these groups met where they could find a place. Some of them were “put out of the temple” so to speak by the organized religious leaders. Others were from the highways and byways. They weren’t churched but they had been with Jesus. It is interesting that this was said of the early church that the leaders took note that they have been with Jesus.
The Charismatics of the 60’s were attacked by the traditional churches for the same reason those churches attacked the Pentecostals ten years before. After all, many of them left the traditional churches to find a closer walk with God. Worse, many of the Pentecostals decried the Charismatics because they didn’t join them or do it their way. It was “older brother syndrome” gone to seed. But by then many of the Pentecostal groups had grown up, gotten sophisticated and exclusive. You had to be good to go there to church. You had to follow all the rules of the denomination or non-denomination. Some of their pastors even wore their collars backward! Many of these rules were man-made. Many of the Charismatics came from churches that allowed social drinking, an anathema in the Pentecostal groups. They knew a person couldn’t be a Christian if they drank even a drop of alcohol. Even taking cough syrup with alcoholic content or using rubbing alcohol made you suspect. It was Carry Nation syndrome gone to seed. Although I have strong aversion to drinking I don’t consider it the unpardonable sin and if done in moderation and in a way to not harm others it isn’t a sin at all. I don’t drink because I might cause some to stumble if I did. But this little thing created a big rift. Rather than showing the high road of love Pentecostals showed a low road of ostracism. The traditional churches for the most part gave the Charismatics the left foot of fellowship and the Pentecostals didn’t put out a welcome mat for them.
While this was going on there was another group that was forming that was referred to as the Evangelicals. They left the traditional churches for about the same reason, and they were treated about the same as the Charismatics. I am not as familiar with these so I will mention the briefly only to recognize the groups I will talk about were not alone.
The Pentecostals and Organized Charismatics attacked the Word and Faith people in the late 70’s and 80’s, long before the “name it and claim it” cult surfaced. After all, these upstarts were teaching a message to get back to God’s word and that flew in the face of accepting the Denomination specified doctrine they had developed. The word and faith movement for me was nothing more than a getting back to the solid bible teaching the Pentecostals followed in the late 40’s and early 50’s but strayed from as they got sophisticated and ‘improved’ on the gospel. I can remember an article in the official magazine of one large Charismatic denomination about April 1980 that was strongly against the faith groups. An aside here, groups that concentrate on the written word without the spirit become legalistic. Those who concentrate on the spirit without the written word get flakey. There is balance and the faith and word movements held pretty well for about 15 years and then started to take a nasty left turn.
All of these attacked the Prophetic in the late 80’s and early 90’s. The main reason for this was they weren’t doing it their way. After all, the older brother has the right to dictate policy.
We need to get over the “they aren’t doing it our way.” That was the thrust of the Religious leaders of 30AD. They condemned John the Baptist because he didn’t do it their way. They crucified Jesus (by proxy) because he didn’t do it their way. They persecuted the early church because they weren’t doing it their way. And the Jewish portion of the early church including Peter persecuted the Gentile Christians because they were not keeping the law – until Paul brought order and segregated the Gentile Church from the Jewish Church.
I personally don’t like the flashy. But the one we see as being too flashy may have an anointing to bring people to Jesus through that flashiness. Don’t get concerned if you think you can’t minister that way, take heart, I have good news. You are probably not called to emulate them! It is doubtful God will expect you to do that if it is not a part of your makeup. And if He does expect it, get over it, He will enable you to do it and with flair and finesse. And when he leads there is fruit. Even if we are not called this way we may be called to work with them. At the very minimum we need to support them as ministers of the word of God. This does not mean that we need to support them if they go extra-biblical and into error but we need to support them in prayer and with our words and even, if God directs, finances.
None of you will know how hard that last paragraph is on me. I have been one who has shunned the flashy. And some of that has been valid because I say it as people being focused on the flashy rather than on Christ. But some of the flashy is the attraction that brings men and women to a place they can meet Him. A man I have had problems with in this is Ivan Tait. If you get a chance to see him minister, TAKE IT. Drive an hour one way if you have to. He effectively ministers Christ. But he loses me after a while because his teaching is a little too filled with stories. I find myself saying, “Cut to the chase.” His ministry is not to someone mature in the faith but to someone who needs to come to Jesus or someone who needs a jump start. In this he is good, he is effective. My preference isn’t important. I rarely miss a service when he is with us because I almost always come away with something worthwhile. But I will admit, I have to work to stay with him.
In the 50’s Oral Roberts preached to 12-16,000 people a night in a tent. Thousands came to Christ. The packet that they gave to people who came forward for salvation strongly encouraged people to find a local church and make it their church-home. The emphasis was to find a church and go. Oral knew that the lone wolf, the one just saved and with no support would fail. It was done to protect the new plants. Churches that didn’t participate and even some who spoke out against his ministry got new members through this. They rejected the flashy but were able to follow behind the man who was flashy and help with the harvest. Thank God they helped with the harvest but it would have been far better if they had just taken a more supportive tack. Some of the harvest may have gotten lost because they sat on the sidelines. That is sad.
This was brought home to me when I mentioned a local evangelist (James Waltz – BTW, worth hearing also) to a friend. “He’s a wild man” was the response – and in a sense I would have to agree. But Holy Spirit gave me something and I shared it with him. “I guess they said that about John the Baptist and the Apostle Paul too.” He stood there dumbfounded for a while and then offered, “I guess you could say that.” I am not sure he connected the two situations but I hope he does. Let me say this. I have seen James and minister and have seen fruit of that ministry. I don’t think I need to see more.
Let’s get past the criticism and get with the task that is before us. That is what Jesus said before He left. “Preach the gospel.”
Copyright Ralph Brandt 2003, 2007 Not to be used without permission.
