Thanks Mark, for the excellent questions and sorry for my slow reply. Let me give some quick answers and then I’ll come back and elaborate later.

First, some Calvinists are considered poor evangelists because they are. We could both give examples. This is a point I’ll take up later.

Second, Calvinists are often considered poor evangelists by anti-Calvinist evangelists because they have been taught that Calvinism quenches evangelistic zeal, and undermines the motive for missions, and those same anti-Calvinists have simultaneously mis-identified certain man-made approaches to evangelism with the evangel itself and with biblical evangelism, and thus have viewed the use of these man-made methods as the final measure of faithfulness in and zeal for evangelization.

Third, Calvinists are often considered poor evangelists because of historical ignorance. The standard fare of anti-Calvinism (Calvinism kills evangelism and missions) so often served up in the SBC and in wider evangelicalism is, of course, wrong. Dead wrong and demonstrably wrong. The greatest evangelists and missionaries of Protestant era have been Calvinistic or Reformed. That is, they have embraced and preached the doctrines of grace. Whether it is Bunyan or Spurgeon, Carey or Nettelton or Whitfield or Duff or Stott, that you are talking about – the Baptist tradition, the Congregational tradition, the Anglican tradition, the Presbyterian tradition and so on – find the hall of fame evangelists and missionaries and you’ll find folks who live, breathe, teach and preach the doctrines of grace.

Fourth, Calvinists ought to be better evangelists because we (only by God’s mercy) have gotten a clearer hold on the Bible’s teaching on man’s sin, God’s grace, Christ’s cross and free salvation – the very heart of message of evangelism. Those who have been forgiven much, love much, and love to tell the story. And we realize the depth of our own sin, the greatness of God’s grace to us, the cost of Christ’s work and the freeness of God’s grace shown to us – so we love to tell others about it.

Fifth, I well remember your remark to me a number of years ago, that "Calvinists will be the last people sharing the Gospel." I agree with you wholeheartedly and that statement is true at so many levels (again, I want to explore it some more, later). For instance, in the last fifty years in evangelicalism (as its Calvinistic moorings slip) we have seen an erosion of commitment to the exclusivity of Christ and the absolute necessity of the Gospel for salvation. This is the consequence of an encroaching, incipient, Arminianism. It has led many an Arminian to stop sharing the Gospel. The evangelical Calvinist, on the other hand, will be the very last one to cave in to universalism in its various forms, or to accommodate the spirit of the age. The evangelical Calvinist is a supernaturalist and a particularist in ways that the Arminian is not, and thus is less vulnerable to the siren call of the spirit of the age that compromises bold Gospel witness.

Sixth, this being said, the growth of the PCA (and other strong reformed churches like CHBC and CLC and GCC and BBC) is not because we are better evangelists but because we have a better evangel (that is, a more biblical one) and a gracious, sovereign God who is at work changing hearts by his Spirit. The PCA motto has been from the beginning – "true to the Bible, the reformed faith, and obedient to the Great Commission." Not a bad slogan. In the PCA though, we earnestly desire to see more adult professions of faith, and in no way are patting ourselves on the back or resting on our laurels. God gets all the glory. The rest is our fault.

Seventh, reformed types (in the SBC and PCA and elsewhere) are more likely to be able to find their converts than non-reformed types (who might have to put out an APB to locate 75% or more of their decision-makers). So, multiply Shiflett's results for reformed church growth by at least four. The reason for this is that we reformed folk are interested in making disciples (see Matthew 28:19), not simply getting someone to pray a prayer or sign a card or raise a hand or walk an aisle, etc.

Lig, Mark and Al have served us big time with their personal examples and excellent posts on the importance of reading and study for pastors. It should be obvious to all of us by now that consistent, substantive, strategic reading is simply not optional for a pastor. I have yet to meet a pastor who is growing in his knowledge of God and his effectiveness in pastoral ministry, who doesn’t read consistently. Where there is an absence of reading, there is normally the presence of decline and deficiency in one’s soul and ministry.

John Wesley had this concern for a particular pastor he had visited. Wesley observed the distinct absence of growth and fruit as he spent time with this pastor and listened to him preach. So here was the caring, courageous and wise counsel Wesley gave this man:

“What has exceedingly hurt you in time past, nay, and I fear, to this day, is, want of reading. I scarce ever knew a preacher read so little. And perhaps, by neglecting it, have lost the taste for it. Hence your talent in preaching does not increase. It is just the same as it was seven years ago. It is lively, but not deep; there is little variety; there is no compass of thought. “

So, what does Mr. Wesley prescribe as a remedy for this serious condition of soul and ministry?  “Reading only can supply this.”

It sounds like Wesley would be very appreciative of all that Lig, Mark and Al have written, at least on this topic.  He went on to write, “Whether you like it or not, read and pray daily. It is for you life; there is no other way; else you will be a trifler all your days, and a pretty, superficial preacher.”

I am assuming you don’t want to be “a trifler all your days.” And I’m assuming no one reading this blog wants to be “a pretty, superficial preacher.” Sadly, it appears to me that the American evangelical landscape is filled with these kind of pastors and authors. I wish it were not so. And I hope I’m not one of them.  By the grace of God, let it not be said of any one of us that there has been no discernable growth in the past seven years (or even the past year).  May we do whatever we can to avoid being called “a pretty preacher.”

This can be prevented, but only by reading. John Wesley got it right, “there is no other way.” In my laziness, I have often wished there was another way. But there isn’t. 

Now, if you’ve lost the taste for reading, here is the good news: an appetite for reading can be restored. “You may acquire the taste which you have not,” Wesley encouraged, “what is tedious at first, will afterward be pleasant.” But discipline always precedes the restoration of a voracious appetite for reading. And in my experience, a plan for reading and study will make all the difference. Momentary inspiration won’t suffice or sustain.

Who isn’t inspired reading this stuff?! But for inspiration to result in transformation there must be specific application. So, in our next conversation, I will address the importance of a weekly, monthly, and yearly plan for reading and study--so that none of us will ever be called  “a trifler all your days “ or worse yet, “a pretty preacher.”

Gobs of you have been asking for the source of the Packer quote. Thanks for your interest. It can be found in his famous introduction to John Owen's The Death of Death in the Death of Christ. Probably on the first page or two, if you have the Banner of Truth edition of that book. Or, it can be found in that same introduction, serving as chapter 8 (entitled 'Saved by His Precious Blood': Introduction to John Owen's The Death of Death in the Death of Christ) in Packer's book A Quest for Godliness (Crossway, 1990), pages 125-126. The book is called Among God's Giants in the UK, I think.

J.I. Packer is surely right when he says that "one of the most urgent tasks facing evangelical Christendom today" is "the recovery of the gospel." "Why so?," you ask. Here's his answer.

"There is no doubt that evangelicalism today is in a state of perplexity on and unsettlement.  In such matters as the practice of evangelism, the teaching of holiness, the building up of local church life, the pastor’s dealing with souls and the exercise of discipline, there is evidence of widespread dissatisfaction with things as they are and of equally widespread uncertainly as to the road ahead.  This is a complex phenomenon, to which many factors have contributed; but, if we go to the root of the matter, we shall find that these perplexities are all ultimately due to our having lost our grip on the biblical gospel. Without realizing it, we have during the past century bartered that gospel for a substitute product which, though it looks similarly enough in points of detail, is as a whole a decidedly different thing.  Hence our troubles; for the substitute product does not answer the ends for which the authentic gospel has in past days proved itself so mighty.

"We would suggest that the reason lies in its own character and content.  It fails to make men God-centered in their thoughts and God-fearing in their hearts because this is not primarily what it is trying to do.  One way of stating the difference between it and the old gospel is to say that it is too exclusively concerned to be “helpful” to man— to bring peace, comfort, happiness, satisfaction— and too little concerned to glorify God.  The old gospel was “helpful,” too— more so, indeed, that is the new—but (so to speak) incidentally, for its first concern was always to give glory to God.  It was always and essentially a proclamation of divine sovereignty in mercy and judgment, a summons to bow down and worship the mighty Lord on whom man depends for all good, both in nature and in grace.  Its center of reference was unambiguously God.  But in the new gospel the center of reference is man.  This is just to say that the old gospel was religious in a way that the new gospel is not.  Whereas the chief aim of the old was to teach people to worship God, the concern of the new seems limited to making them feel better.  The subject of the old gospel was God and his ways with men; the subject of the new is man and the help God gives him.   There is a world of difference.  The whole perspective and emphasis of gospel preaching has changed.

Dear Lig,  great post!  I love that excerpt of Packer, but that leaves me with a question.  So why are Calvinists considered such poor evangelists?  Do the statistics of the PCA's growth that I have read suggest that Reformed types are better evangelists?  In the Southern Baptist Convention, we're always having to defend the idea that we can believe that Romans 9 has to do with individual salvation, and that Romans 10 still weighs on our hearts and minds and calls us to obedience.  But in a more Reformed denomination like the PCA, do you actually think that Calvinists are better evangelists?

I think of the kind of denominational statistics we see, like in Dave Shiflett's book Exodus (that Al was interviewed in) from last year.  Shiflett cites the following statistics of church membership from the last 10 years:

14.8% decline in the United Church of Christ

11.6% decline in the PCUSA

6.7% decline in the United Methodist Church

5.7% decline in the American Baptist Churches

5.3% decline in the Episcopal Church

5% growth in the Southern Baptist Convention

18.5% growth in the Assemblies of God

21.8% growth in the Christian and Missionary Alliance

40.2% growth in the Church of God

42.4% growth in the PCA

57.2% growth in the Evangelical Free Churches

In light of your post on not losing a grip on the gospel, would you suggest that Calvinists are better evangelists?  Is that what these statistics suggest?  To what do you attribute the PCA's much more rapid growth?

"Members of our church are expected to abide by the lifestyle guidelines of our membership covenant.  Those who engage in immoral activities are subject to church discipline."

--Rick Warren, Purpose-Driven Church (page 217).

I should also note that Saddleback so separates baptism and church membership that they will baptize someone they know to be in unrepentant sin, though they will not admit such a person to membership. 
See http://www.saddlebackfamily.com/membership/group_finder/faqs_smallgroup.asp?id=7509#q_03.

Thanks for the kind comment about the posts on reading, Mark. And thanks for your questions. Sadly, the answer is that sometimes Presbyterians are lax in our attitudes towards church membership, though when we are it is a betrayal of our historic understanding of biblical polity rather than a consistent working out of it.

I often tell my interns that you and I are aiming for the same thing in terms of a healthy local chuch. We want to see a regenerate, baptized adult membership - all of whom can be accurately characterized as Christian disciples. Now, of course, the differences come in how we view the status of the children of believers in the local church, but our goals for cultivating adult discipleship are the same.

As for Donatism, no, of course not. Baptists are simply asking that people be baptized and have a credible profession before they come to the Lord's Table. That is the Christian position. The debate is not over that being an unreasonably stringent requirement, but what constitutes baptism. But, you know this better than me!

Lig, thank you for your thoughtful posts on reading.  You are an example here to us, as you are in so many other ways. 

Now, a question: because you guys "baptize" babies, does that mean that you have lax attitudes toward church membership, "lax" in the sense of not trying to have a regenerate church membership, as Baptist churches (at least officially) do?  Is it "Donatistic" to only allow credibly professing believers to come to the Lord's Table?

Inquisitively yours,

Mark.

I was talking to a friend recently who mentioned that someone "loved the gospel."  We were talking about a church with a pastor in which the Gospel is not consistently preached and the authority of Scripture not upheld.  The current pastor won't mind anyone thinking whatever they want religiously so long as they don't think other people need to agree with them.  I told my friend that when he wanted to get the others who loved the Gospel to agree together that they would make sure (as best they could) that there was a person who was truly preaching the Gospel, then they could be a true church.  No Gospel, No Church.  Gospel, but with no covenant, structure, way to assure Biblical teaching, then No [stable] Church. 

As I talked with another friend tonight, counselling him about living as a Christian, I told him that what he needed was to be a member of a local church, to have his discipleship congregationally-shaped.

Seal the Tupperware!  Practice church membership!  Keep the Gospel witness fresh!

“I want to get back to the discipline of the church—
discipline for the minister as for the members—
and to recapture the glorious conception of the Christian life,
that men may feel that there is no honour which can be conferred upon them so great as their church membership,
and that ministers may feel that there is nothing in life to be compared with the preaching of this glorious and incomparable gospel.”
That was D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones in a sermon around 1929 (cited in Iain Murray, Lloyd-Jones, volume 1, page 228).

As we bring this consideration of the importance and conduct of pastoral reading and study to a close, I want to ask you a question. Do you pray as you study? Do you pause to praise God for a glorious truth about himself that you learn along the way in your reading? Do you stop frequently to confess your sin and beg pardon as you are convicted by the truth of God’s word even as you read of some saint possessed of a virtue that you have not cultivated, or read a biblical warning against a sin that is a sin of your heart and life too? Do you seek forgiveness for those revealed sins even as you read? Do you intercede for others in relation to the truths you are learning. Prayer and reading and studying go together, belong together!

You may be reading secular history and realize that God’s providence used a common grace exercised in an unspiritual man to be a turning point in the story of nations - this might move you simultaneously to doxology to God in the manner of Romans 11:33, or to lament in prayer that you have not so cultivated that same character quality, though a child of God, or to thank God that in some measure by his grace you have seen some growth in that trait in your own life, or intercede for God to raise up Christians with such mettle.

Do you know what William Carey was reading when God placed a burden on his heart for taking the Gospel to the ends of the earth? The final volume of an account of the adventures of the great English explorer, Captain Cook. Reading of far-off places and strange peoples didn’t lead Carey into a fantasy dream-world of being an adventurer. Instead it led that son of a cobbler to think how those peoples needed Christ, how they needed the Gospel, and burdened him to take it to them. Dear friends, we ought to read with such a spiritual eye.

You might be reading a book by a leading theologian with much helpful in it, but with subtle and dangerous errors, traps laid for shepherds and sheep alike, and this might set you a-praying for your own soul ("Lord God, guard my heart from pride, keep my soul from error, grant me discernment, I hold something in my hand now that could set me off your path, protect me and others, O Savior, keep other shepherds from stumbling, protect your sheep from false teaching, grant repentance to this errant writer").

You might be reading a "soul-fatting" book, but all along thinking of its application to others, especially your flock and your culture, and suddenly you are arrested by the Holy Spirit as to its piercing truth for you. Turn that into prayer. "Lord God, here I am to learn my sin, here I am to learn of your grace and call to me, here I am to learn how you would have me live. O take the log out of my eye, dear Lord, before like a surgeon I attempt to extract slivers from the eyes of others." Or "My heavenly Father, this is a grace I need to know. It is not just something I need to tell my people. I myself need it desperately, because I need you desperately. Grant it in your rich mercy."

True Gospel study ought to be turned into prayer. When we study something that causes us to realize the greatness of God and his saving work, it ought to move us to adoration, thanksgiving and praise. We should not resist the impulse of prayer, in our study or any other time (as Lloyd-Jones said, the urge to pray is one impulse we ought never to resist!), but we should also already have a habit and mindset to read prayerfully. When we read something that convicts us, we ought to be impelled to confession of sin in prayer. When we read something that reminds us of the plight of others, we ought to be moved to intercession. When we read something soul-killing or potentially harmful to the spiritual well-being of ourselves or others, we ought to beg God to squelch the poison, to spare unwary sheep, to rebuke the false shepherd, to protect faithful pastors and to spare our own souls from the contagion of falsehood.

All our study ought to be turned into prayer, and made to serve the interests of sanctification—ours and that of others. This just reminds us again of the importance of an experiential knowledge of God to our theological learning. Without a true, saving, covenantal knowledge of God, study is bound to go wrong on us. This alone urges upon us the importance of prayer and the Holy Spirit in our study. In prayer we show our utter dependence on God for the attainment of true knowledge. And only by the teacher, the Holy Spirit, do we get true knowledge and the true knowledge of God. Both of these realities must permeate our whole approach to study. This is one reason for the profound statement of Proverbs 1:7 "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge."

May God raise up a host of Gospel "mighty men" in our day, committed to the authority of Scripture, firmly persuaded of all its great doctrines, masterful in their grasp of gospel truth and on fire to proclaim it, characterized by warm-hearted godliness and steady holiness, prayerful and careful in pastoral duties, and diligent to keep studying to show themselves approved, that the Church would be built up, her walls enlarged, Christ exalted and God glorified.