City to City Blog

Revival: Ways and Means

10 Jan 2011 by Tim Keller

How do seasons of revival come? One set of answers comes from Charles Finney, who turned revivals into a "science." Finney insisted that any group could have a revival any time or place, as long as they applied the right methods in the right way. Finney's distortions, I think, led to much of the weakness in modern evangelicalism today, as has been well argued by Michael Horton over the years. Especially under Finney's influence, revivalism undermined the more traditional way of doing Christian formation. That traditional way of Christian growth was gradual – whole family catechetical instruction – and church-centric. Revivalism under Finney, however, shifted the emphasis to seasons of crisis. Preaching became less oriented to long-term teaching and more directed to stirring up the affections of the heart toward decision. Not surprisingly, these emphases demoted the importance of the church in general and of careful, sound doctrine and put all the weight on an individual's personal, subjective experience. And this is one of the reasons (though not the only reason) that we have the highly individualistic, consumerist evangelicalism of today.

There has been a withering critique of revivalism going on now for twenty years within evangelical circles. Most of it is fair, but it often goes beyond the criticism of the technique-driven revivalism of Finney to insist that even Edwards and the Puritans were badly mistaken about how people should embrace and grow in Christ. In this limited space I can't respond to that here other than to say I think that goes way too far. However, this critique trend explains why there is so much less enthusiasm for revival than when I was a young minister. It also explains why someone like D.M. Lloyd-Jones was so loathe to say that there was anything that we can do to bring about revivals (other than pray.) He knew that Finney-esque revivalism led to many spiritual pathologies.

Nevertheless, I think we can carefully talk about some factors that, when present, often become associated with revival by God's blessing. My favorite book on this (highly recommended by Lloyd-Jones) is William B. Sprague's Lectures on Revivals of Religion (1832). Sprague studied under both Timothy Dwight, Edwards' grandson, at Yale and also Archibald Alexander at Princeton. The Princetonians – the Alexanders, Samuel Miller, and Charles Hodge – did a good job of combining the basics of revivalism with a healthy emphasis on doctrine and the importance of the church. Sprague's lectures include a chapter on "General Means" for promoting revivals, and his chapters on counseling seekers and new converts are particularly helpful.

The primary means-of-revival that everyone agrees upon is extraordinary prayer. That's the clearest of all and so I won't spend time on it. The second means is a recovery of the grace-gospel. One of the main vehicles sparking the first awakening in Northampton, Massachusetts was Edwards' two sermons on Romans 4:5, "Justification by Faith Alone," in November, 1734. For both John Wesley and George Whitefield, the main leaders of the British Great Awakening, it was an understanding of salvation by grace rather than moral effort that touched off personal renewal and made them agents of revival. Lloyd-Jones taught that the gospel of justification could be lost at two levels. A church might simply become heterodox and lose the very belief in justification by faith alone. But just as deadly, it might keep the doctrine "on the shelf" as it were and not preach it publicly in such a way that connects to people's hearts and lives.

The third factor I would mention is renewed individuals. Sprague points out how certain church leaders can be characterized by the infectious marks of spiritual revival – a joyful, affectionate seriousness, and "unction" – a sense of God's presence. In addition, often several visible, dramatic life-turnarounds ("surprising conversions") may cause others to do deep self-examination and create a sense of spiritual longing and expectation in the community. The personal revivals going on in these individuals spread informally to others through conversation and relationship. More and more people begin to look at themselves and seek God.

A fourth factor I will call the use of the gospel on the heart in counseling. Sprague and John Newton in his letters do a good job of showing how the gospel must be used on both seekers, new believers, and non-growing Christians. The gospel must cut away both the moralism and the licentiousness that destroys real spiritual life and power. There must be venues and meetings and settings in which this is done, both one-on-one and in groups. See William Williams, The Experience Meeting, a leaders' manual for revival-promoting small group meetings in Wales during the first great awakening.

Finally I would add a fifth factor. Sprague rightly points out that revivals occur mainly through the ordinary, "instituted means of grace" – preaching, pastoring, worship, prayer. It is a mistake to identify some specific programmatic method (e.g. Billy Graham-like mass evangelism) too closely with revivals. Lloyd-Jones points to some sad cases where people who came through the Welsh revival of 1904-05 became wedded to particular ways of holding meetings and hymn-singing as the way God brings revival. Nevertheless, Sprague grants that sometimes God will temporarily use some new method to propagate the gospel and spark revival. For example, under Wesley and Whitefield, outdoor preaching was a new, galvanizing method. Mid-day public prayer meetings were important to the Fulton Street revival in downtown NYC in 1857-58. I'm ready to say that creativity might be one of the marks of revival, because so often some new way of communicating the gospel has been part of the mix that God used to bring a mighty revival.

Comments
10 Jan 2011

by canonglenn

Don't believe that Charles G. Finney is the great evil that many Reformed teachers believe. In my estimation, Finney was much needed corrective to the hyper-Calvinism of the early 19th century. We forget that the error of hyper-Calvinism was dominate in Reformed circles in the early 1800's (see *Spurgeon vs. Hyper- Calvinism* by Iain Murray [Banner] , *Southern Baptist Ghosts* by Timothy George [First Things]). However, this article by Pastor Keller is a good overall evaluation of how the Holy Spirit works in revival. Revival is a sovereign work of the Holy Spirit and the result of faithfully applying of the "means of grace": prayer, preaching, sacraments, repentance, and worship. Like many aspects of the Christian life there is a passive/active, His part/our part aspect to revival.

10 Jan 2011

by G12650

The fact remains the Charles Finney denied the substitutionary atonement of Christ for our sins. See Finney's own systematic theology. He says, "...there can be no justification in a legal or forensic sense, but upon the ground of universal, perfect, and uninterrupted obedience to law..." pp 320-2 So Paul provides the response to that in Galations 1:8 To Pastor Keller's point, I would ask: Do you think creativity might become the new "means" of modern revivalism, particularly when it obscures the clear communication of the gospel in the coolness of the trendy creativity? My heart longs for more clear preaching of the gospel of justification by faith alone in Christ alone. When that has happened in my life, EVERYTHING changed!

11 Jan 2011

by canonglenn

Dear G12650: By no means, do I agree with every aspect of Finney's theology. However, a hyper-Calvinsim that preaches only to who they judge to be elect and denies the need for a human response to the evangel is a denial of the gospel. Finney sought to shake a complacent church into action. Scholars can debate the effectiveness of his tactics, but no one can deny that the 19th century church needed to be more graciously aggressive in the evangelization of the lost.

16 Jan 2011

by CarlT

I thank Tim Keller for this article. Too many times we look to duplicate the revivals of the past, without looking on the why we do the things we do to get them. I'm glad to see that revival and doctrine go well together.What I heard much in my lifetime about revivals were growth in number, miracles and a watered down gospel.

22 Jan 2011

by patrickmcintyre

The short answer to how deal with the heresy of decisional regeneration is in the proper use of the Inquiry Room. Please read page 275 of the 1832 Lectures on Revivals and you'll see that Nettleton was the primary evangelist to promote the counseling of the anxious. The Inquiry Room is emblematic of and experientially the solution to improper views of evangelical salvation. God bless you.

08 Feb 2011

by johndoz

I'm reminded of a favorite Francis Schaeffer quote that might pertain: “The church in our generation needs reformation, revival, and constructive revolution...At times men think of the two words reformation and revival as standing in contrast to one another; but this is a mistake. Both words are related to the word restore. Reformation refers to a restoration of pure doctrine; revival refers to a restoration in the Christian’s personal life. Reformation speaks to a return to the teachings of Scripture; revival speaks of a personal life brought into its proper relationship to the Holy Spirit. The great moments of church history have come when these two restorations have simultaneously come into action so that the church has returned to a pure doctrine and the lives of Christians in the church have known the power of the Holy Spirit. There cannot be true revival unless there has been reformation; and reformation is not complete without revival. Such a combination of reformation and revival should be revolutionary in our day, revolutionary in our individual lives as Christians. May we be those who know the reality of both reformation and revival, so that this poor, dark world may have an exhibition of a portion of the church returned to both pure doctrine and the Spirit-filled life." (Francis A. Schaeffer, "Death in the City")

08 Feb 2011

by Rupzip

I like the third factor about "renewed" individuals in the process. We can have all the form and function and no life ... nothing happens. When God moves,, there is nothing like it anywhere. David, http://www.RedLetterBelievers.com

08 Feb 2011

by Mark Tucker

Let us not forget a key aspect that must be at the heart of revival: Loving people. Think of the work that Jesus did as went through out Galilee. He LOVED them with action. He had compassion and showed (Matt 9.). Jesus washed his disciples feet and said go and do likewise. Stark's book, Rise of Christianity also shows sociologically how Christianity's early fast growth was due in large part to how Christians were interacting with their culture. They were reponding to needs in love in radical ways. This was at the core of what Schaeffer taught as well (No Little People). Of course, I don't mean to downplay solid preaching, and def. not prayer. But if we can't get folks in our church doors, what good is good preaching, and we can't get them in our doors if they aren't welcomed. People don't care how much you know, until they know how much you care. You want to see real revival? LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR.

26 Feb 2011

by amyvanderpoest

As I was reading through these posts a phrase from the Song of Songs kept coming back to me, it's repeated three times through the book, "Do not arouse or awaken love until is so desires." I've often wondered if these words meant that God doesn't pour out His Spirit on us in full until we have a strong desire for Him in our lives and begin to seek Him with all of our hearts.