GLEN S. BROWN was trained at the N.S.W. Bible College, of which he was one of the original students. He has had ministries in N.S.W. and New Zealand, and at present is minister of the Church of Christ, Prahran, Vic.

      If the Church ever doubted that Evangelism should have the primary place in its programme and concern, the present state of human affairs should challenge its doubts with the voice of thunder.

      As far back as 1938 the Bishop of Dornakal, India, told a large gathering of Christian leaders about the conversion of a man who had been "a Hindu seeker after truth." This man had, whilst reading the New Testament, been fascinated by the life of Christ, and profoundly stirred by the accounts of His death. In the Gospels Jesus was everywhere in the foreground. The record was of His life, His work, His deeds, His death and His resurrection. As he read on into the Acts, the man felt that Jesus was in the background, whilst the foreground was occupied by the Church. The Church continued, so to speak, where Jesus in the flesh had left off. "Therefore," said this man, "I must belong to the Church which carried on the Life of Christ."

      Then the Bishop proceeds to ask, "Do the younger and the older churches realise that they exist to carry on what Jesus came to do?" This appears to be a particularly pertinent question. If we were to ask ourselves the question as to what was the real purpose of the coming of the Lord, a multitude of the facets of the ministry of our Lord may suggest themselves to us, but the simplest and the most meaningful explanation of the life of Jesus Christ is found upon His own lips as recorded in Luke 19:10, "The Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost."

      Surely the example of the way in which the early church carried on the work of the Saviour is an indication to us today. "Life," they cried, "we have found it, and having found it we must share it." It was this vital, compelling, personal experience that became the genesis of the evangelistic zeal of the New Testament Church.

      There appears to be some misunderstanding today as to what does and what does not constitute evangelism. Some will say, "Everything we do as a church, is evangelism." This kind of statement will only come from a church that is attempting nothing at all in the realm of evangelism. Some will say, "The very best kind of evangelism is to be found in the witness of a good Christian life.--But no matter how good or how sincere or how beautiful a life may be, in itself it would be insufficient to win a soul to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. It is true that a good life lived as a witness for Jesus Christ, conditions people to hear the gospel, and favourably disposes them towards Christ, but in the work of evangelism there must of necessity be the presentation of the message of redemption.

      There are very many definitions of evangelism to be found. In his book, "Effective Evangelism", George E. Sweazey provides a list of definitions all of which have at least something to commend them. I like particularly the one that he himself gives, "Evangelism is every possible way of reaching outside the church to bring people to faith in Christ, and membership in the Church." Mass evangelism is no longer the power that it was in previous years. Even Billy Graham, than whom there is no greater authority on the subject, says that

he believes that mass evangelism "Is not the most ideal method of proclaiming the Christian Message." Comparatively recently there have been other methods and techniques of evangelism perfected. Visitation Evangelism, Personal evangelism, team evangelism and friendship evangelism are among other methods of evangelism. All of the various methods have at least something specific to commend them. As a general rule, however, I am convinced that there are very few people today who come to know Jesus Christ as Saviour except through the direct friendship of individuals. Some insist that "It has pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe" and that therefore the other methods than pulpit preaching are unacceptable with God. These same folk may be heard to say, "We need today men like H. G. Harwood, Thos. Bagley, Thos. Hagger, Gilbert Chandler, and E. C. Hinrichsen to be evangelists among us, and I pray that God will raise them up for His Glory." This kind of thinking can be the result

      of the failure on the part of these same folk to face the personal responsibility of evangelism. Any effective method of evangelism has its example and its commendation in the New Testament. The kind of evangelism we need for such a time as this will be an active evangelism in which all share the responsibility for the evangelisation of the world.

      In such an evangelism there will be--

1. AN AWARENESS OF A VERITABLE CERTAINTY as to its own faith. To know oneself the personal experience of the saving power of Christ is a prerequisite for the effectively witnessing Christian. Any degree of uncertainty in our own experience makes it well nigh impossible to be convincing, let alone effective in our evangelistic programme. There may be church members who are quite anxious to share the responsibility of the divine commission, together with their brethren in the church, but though they be well prepared and carefully tutored, their efforts will prove to be pathetically abortive unless their own experience of the Christ is real. Normal evangelism is individual. To say the very least, the numerical status of the Church in our time furnishes no conclusive evidence that past methods will ever bring the world to Christ. What hope has the Christian who is diffident and doubtful, of making any impression on the life of an associate, let alone the world so patently in need. Let us beware of the temptation to consider the work of evangelism as shallow or superficial. The story is told that Chas. Dickens once visited a séance and asked the medium to call up his friend Alexander Murray, a man of great scholastic attainment and intelligence. When the supposed spirit came Dickens asked him if he were really Alexander Murray and the spirit replied, "I are." "You are a liar," said Dickens, "because if you were Alexander Murray you would use good grammar." People know very soon the extent of our experience of the one we seek to present. It is quite impossible to touch the area of a man's life if that same area has not been touched in our own. Conviction is born of certainty.

      In 1946 there appeared an article in "The Christian Century" by William G. Mather in which severe and sometimes sarcastic strictures were pronounced upon the shallowness of much that passes for "visitation evangelism". The method itself was not under attack, but the superficiality that too often accompanies it. It was held to be a device mainly for gaining church members, not disciples. It was ridiculed for its too facile way of training

visitors in a too facile technique of "signing up" new members. This is what the author says:

      "When the psychologist and the sociologist and the theologian lay open their inner workings, the older forms of evangelism are seen to have glaring faults. But at least they assumed a genuine change in the person. He was supposed to embrace a faith and to make a decision, a great and far-reaching decision between good and evil, between God and the Devil, between righteousness and sinfulness. By that decision of faith he was saved. He was converted . . . the old man died and the new man was born . . . one noted visitation evangelism expert allows precisely eight minutes for the entire interview supposed to bring conversion. The general impression gained from most of the literature is that joining the church should be made to appear so easy and natural that it is guaranteed not to disturb one's established way of life . . . Now you can join the church and hardly feel it. Your business associates won't notice it, strangers on the street won't notice it, your relatives won't notice it, your wife won't notice it, even God won't notice it. There is no change."

      Let it be remembered that this is not a blow at Visitation Evangelism as such, but rather an indictment of short-cuts often attempted by Christians who have little if any of the necessary certainty as to their own relationship to Jesus Christ. The old evangelism could be equally indicted as so often the securing of the decision, or the immersion of a person was looked upon as the primarily important achievement. There are absolutely no short cuts in real evangelism, and therefore to attempt the work of evangelism without the real certainty of the knowledge of both salvation and Saviour, it is quite useless. On the authority of the Scriptures we say "No man can say that Jesus is Lord, but by the Holy Spirit." We suggest that it is true that except the Spirit is in possession of the Evangelist in all of his activity and witnessing, he must fail. It seems that churches keep hoping that they can hire an evangelist or revivalist, or else they can send their people out to ring door bells and call it evangelistic visiting, or their programme of evangelism. Such attitudes always end in disillusionment. There are some labour saving methods in the new evangelism, but there are no easy methods at all. God still works miracles, but He never does for us what we can do for ourselves. It would be the greatest of all tragedies if we began to get the idea that we can manage under our own power and by means of our own organisational abilities. We are utterly and completely dependent upon God for any and every blessing in His work. Let us never lose sight of that fact, and let us know beyond every shadow of a doubt that God is able and will use those that trust in Him.

      For such an evangelism the Church will need to be

2. ALIVE WITH A VITAL FERVENCY.

      Someone has characterised evangelism as "Intelligence on fire." If seems to me that without the fire of enthusiasm in the church we shall never even begin to make the impression upon the world that is so necessary, if we are to accomplish the purposes of Christ in the salvation of the world. We, strangely enough, seem to be afraid of enthusiasm in the church. We seem to distrust any display of enthusiasm, and almost look askance at its unexpected appearance. We have almost reached the place where, when we hear a man raise his voice in his presentation of

the Gospel message, we are prepared to recognise that he is acting bad taste. To shout from platform or pulpit would indicate the unmistakable fanatic.

      It may well be that some of the extremes to which men have gone in the discharge of their responsibility to evangelise, have caused many to have feelings of regret or even revulsion. There have been many things done in the name of evangelism that have not always been admirable, but surely that is no reason why we should proceed to the other extreme in the process of our reversion. We plead for no foolish zeal that is not according to knowledge. We place no premium upon ill-directed energy, noise and merely flaunting banners. Far, from it. What we have at heart and for which we plead is a firm faith, passionate devotion to the loving Christ that shall render its service consistently, yet steadily, so that, even when it is called into question, cannot be shouted down, or laughed out of court, because of its sheer worth.

      Emerson has well said. "Every great and commanding movement in the annals of the world is a triumph of enthusiasm." Surely we must not only be enthusiastic in our service and devotion to Jesus Christ and His Church, but we must also be willing to let that enthusiasm be witnessed. The strength of conviction, and the passion that conviction engenders, must have opportunity of expression. When our devotion and response to the commission of Christ becomes an importunity of concern we will of necessity and by a compulsion that will not be denied, find some means of communication. Fervency need not necessarily be undisciplined emotionalism, but that which too often appears to be almost indifference is quite impossible for the fervent in spirit.

      The destructive and demonic movements of our time have fire in them. Nazism had fire in it. Fascism had fire in it. Atheistic communism has fire in it. Many of the devotees of communism are convinced, military and aggressive. Only the very early days of Christianity, the apostolic era and a period of a few short years that followed it, produced such enthusiasm and devotion to a cause as are being produced among the communists in this day and time. They are utterly convinced that communism is the answer to all the world's problems, that they have been delegated to propagate its teachings and to promote its principles to the ends of the earth. To this cause--sacred to them--and you need not shudder at the use of the word "sacred" in this connection, because it is sacred to them--they are devoting thought, time, talent, liberty, life itself, everything that they are and have. They are zealous bigots, dangerous opponents. They are narrow, concentrated; much worse--consecrated to the god of communism. They are cunning and deliberate; objective in their attitudes and purposes, but in it all there is an unflagging indefatigable drive which is tremendous. The church cannot hope to stand before that which within the compass of a generation has captured the imagination and the allegiance of more than a third of the world, unless it has more than a matching passion possessing it.

      It is said that a professed infidel once said to D. O. Philip of Scotland, "Why, Sir, did I believe as you profess to, and did I act as you act, I should be ashamed. You profess to believe that the world is lost and that you have a remedy that can save it. Why do you not go out and plead with your perishing fellow men with all the earnestness such a situation demands? If your creed were mine I could not rest until I had warned of their condition and entreated them to

embrace the remedy you profess to be available to them." It may have been that this was prompted only by his own hostility and as an excuse for his own infidelity, but this does not alter the fact that by our own unconcern and apparent indifference we serve but to fan the fires of the godless movements of our age.

      It may well be true that the man who evinces the enthusiasm and concern that as a Christian he ought to show, could be spoken of as "a miserable enthusiast," but

      The Christian Church must learn, and learn very rapidly, the fact that only passion can cast out passion. Yet speaking generally it is still true, and threatens to remain so, that communists out-kindle Christians. To us all the observance that "the Master deserves a more flaming allegiance than Marx" is axiomatic. Yet what do we about it. To actually arise and shake ourselves from our lethargy seems beyond the powers of determination of almost the entire Church.

      Let us fairly face the situation and see if the smug self-satisfaction which has been our curse until now will not give way to a new, and mighty era in the history of the Church in which Jesus Christ will be given His rightful place in this nation and all nations.

      The kind of evangelism we need will be,

3. ACTIVATED BY A VISION OF PERSONAL PARTICIPATION.

      One of the dangers of the "Old Evangelism" was its sporadic nature. Whereas, continuity of participation, and constancy of expectation were the norm of the New Testament witness, our evangelistic endeavours have almost completely become matters of "special seasons" and infrequent endeavours. Whether in the realm of missions or Visitation Evangelism or both it is true that the statement of Armin Gesswin is altogether too true for comfort when he says: "Our specials have tended to become spasms and our supers, superficial."

      Because we are all under the compulsion of discharging a. responsibility to our Lord in the realm of evangelism, we cannot begin to think that we do so by even the most enthusiastic participation in some programme that provides for a mere spasmodic effort at the presentation of Christ.

      Our friend Jesse Bader is fond of reminding us that "The Church always stands within one generation of extinction." Although it is true that the Church will ever stand and the promise of our Lord makes it certain that the Church is to experience eventual and unparalleled victory, let us be very sure that it is human instrumentality that God uses to assure the continuation of the Church. Were it not true that men and women are willing to be used in the work and the pattern of God's design, the Church would die within a generation. In this realm then, we all have a personal part to play. We are literally quite unable to delegate this responsibility. Its nature makes it incapable of relegating it to the care and concern of another. Professional preachers cannot acceptably discharge the responsibility of any Christian no matter how sincerely we display our goodwill to them. Our work is clear. It remains the individual Christian's task to witness constantly for Jesus Christ.

      This does not mean that the only acceptable plan of evangelism is method that involves the activity of individuals independently. Our fellowship in this realm, as in so many others in the Church, is precious

beyond words. But as surely we are permitted as a Church to plan and prepare and present Christ together, let us never lose sight of the fact that this is a means of fulfilling our obligation God, and not a way of side-stepping a most important issue. Someone may be inclined to think that one or two can hardly make any very important contribution to the overall programme, but thinking like that has been precisely the cause of our failure to present worthily the cause of Christ. The Church is an association of individuals. The Church's programme is a programme designed for the participation of individuals. The Church's responsibility is the responsibility of individuals. If individuals do not participate in the work and witness of the Church, then the Church has no witness and its work is a mockery.

      Individuals are important. They can do much. How much this world owes to certain individuals. When we think of the impact made on human lives by some individuals we are amazed. What some have accomplished is literally staggering.

      One person wholly given to his task is able to do a great deal. As Dr. Sangster says, "Who among his neighbours at Down--in rural Kent, and only sixteen miles from London Bridge--knew that Charles Darwin would shake the world? Even to his own gardener he seemed half mad at times, watching worms for forty years, and ready, it was said, to give credence to any foolish idea that was put to him. Indeed, it was his simple eagerness for truth which gave currency to the story--apocryphal, I think--of someone who told the gentle recluse that the sound of music affected the growth of plants, and he is said have employed a man for months to play a trombone to a row of beans!

      So unworldly! So foolish! And yet his work was so world-transforming, too!

      Who of those who saw the bearded figure of Karl Marx day after day in the library of the British Museum could have guessed that he would stamp his thought upon an age; that tens of thousands still unborn, would make a holy Bible of his writings and barely stop this side of idolatry in their awesome reverence of their "master"?

      As Dr. Sangster admits, these men were not very usual men, neither does their life affect the realm of evangelism directly, but it does indicate what can be done by one person. These men in their work undertook their various labours alone. We have one with us who says, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the age." We are not engaged in some task that hardly matters, we are not serving a cause that cannot know victory, we are instruments of Almighty God. He is working out his plan, He is condescending in allowing us to be participants, but He never uses a conscript. God has used some mighty men in his service in the past, He has changed the history of nations and the very course of history itself on many occasions. He is still on His throne.

      I was looking through some various books in a book shop recently, and though I do not remember the name of the book, I remember having seen on the flap of a dust jacket, the account of a young negro man who, admiring greatly the work of the founder of the Salvation Army, bowed before a statue of the great General Booth, and with a light of faith and purpose in his eye looked upwards and prayed, "Lord, do it again!" May we too bow before our God and cry, "Lord, do it again!" Though it may not be in the same way, or by the same methods that God has used in the past that the answer will come, of one thing I

am absolutely certain--when God answers our prayer it will be through and by men, or women, individuals who will humbly do their utmost to present Christ to others both in life and word and deed.