WHAT IS WRONG WITH DRAMA?
by Peter MastersFROM SWORD & TROWEL 2000 No
4
Why is proclamation the way of the Bible?: The advantages of direct
words over all the alternatives proposed today
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us
which are saved it is the power of God (1 Corinthians 1.18).
GOD’S CHOSEN and appointed means of communicating the glorious
Gospel is by proclamation, which means - by words. All the evangelising of
the New Testament was by means of words, whether by preaching, personal witness, or
writing. The world of those days was full of dramatic art and cultic symbolism, but the
messengers of Calvary stood aloof from it all, and worked with words.
‘How shall they hear,’ asks the apostle in Romans 10, ‘without a
preacher?’ He does not say - without an actor, or a band of musicians, or a discussion
group. Gospel communication must be in words addressed to the mind. It
requires rational speech, whether uttered in a large building or in a home-gathering.
Proclamational methods - particularly preaching - are under attack
today in evangelical circles. The latest church-growth books nearly all sweep away the
primacy of preaching, and what preaching is left makes slender use of the Word of God as a
divinely provided source and model. The promoters of so-called ‘seeker services’, though
they use a measure of preaching, tend to see it as only a component in an elaborate mix of
methods.
Some writers have provided tables of methods to show the comparative
effectiveness of different approaches, and preaching always appears at or near the bottom.
They claim that when people are tested to find how much they remember from preaching,
discussion, dramatic presentation, role-play, and video presentation, preaching gains the
fewest points for efficiency. It is said to come last in terms of comprehension, retention, and
persuasive force. Such ‘tests’, however, are never scientific, and are carried out in
circumstances where preaching is poorly attempted, and by authors out to prove their case.
Nevertheless, the mud thrown at preaching tends to stick.
The undermining of direct proclamation is all the more dangerous in a time
when God’s servants labour with such small results, due to the prevailing atheism and
materialism. At such a time it is tempting to think that something other than preaching
should be brought in. What is the good, we may think, of preaching week after week when
we are not touching the masses?
We are vulnerable to those who say - ‘You have over-emphasised preaching.
You should do other things. You should join the contemporary worship movement. You
should bring the drums on to the platform during the evangelistic service, introduce drama,
wear jeans, cut the speaking to ten minutes and break up into discussion groups. You should
do anything but proclaim.’
Resistance to the Gospel is so great that human nature begins to wilt, and
traditional methods are imperilled. Well-meaning and wholly committed men have buckled
under the clamour for contemporary methods of outreach, because of the hardness of the
days.
This is a time to fortify our trust in God’s appointed methods. If a method of
spreading the Gospel is not proclamational, it is not what the Lord commands and desires. It
is simply not biblical, and surely, obedience is the greatest and wisest duty of God’s
servants in any age, and especially in an age of mounting apostasy.
Why should it be thought that speech is relatively hopeless and inadequate,
when it has been so powerfully used and proved for twenty centuries of church history?
Why do the advocates of Christian rock and drama have such a jaundiced view of the
spoken word? Is it, perhaps (in many cases), that they cannot preach - and are
not truly equipped and called by God? Or is it that they have pursued an inappropriate style
of preaching? Or is it that they are revealing their true tastes as worldly ‘Christians’? Or do
they lack faith in the power of God’s Word when attended by the Holy Spirit? Do they not
realise that to draw the crowds and teach them with the ‘stuff’ of entertainment coupled
with a lightweight version of repentance will only fill the churches with people who make
shallow and deluded professions - the ‘wood, hay and stubble’ of Paul’s famous warning to
church builders?
Words are everything in evangelism. Take the Word of God. It is
words! It is God speaking to us. The Old Testament certainly uses
symbols, and it has one or two miniature dramatic performances, but the ‘script’ was
written by God, the ‘performances’ extremely short, and they were intended as nothing
more than illustrations to sermons or prophecies. At that, they were deadly serious, never
the comedy-show type of sketch adopted by the ‘seeker-sensitive’ brigade of today,
designed to get people into ‘laughter meltdown’.
Of course we believe in using illustrations in our messages, and visual aids
for the young, but the supreme vehicle of communication is directly-addressed words, for
this is God’s exclusive method of making known His grace.
Why not have drama? What is wrong with it? We have already pointed out
that it is not part of the New Testament blueprint, and it is not difficult to see why.
While drama can be powerfully captivating and influential in the secular
world, it is a woefully inadequate and inappropriate vehicle for the presentation of Gospel
truth, being primarily entertainment, and not a direct and plain challenge to the mind. It
chiefly appeals to the emotions, and seldom for long. It is most closely associated in the
mind of the viewer with fiction, or make-believe, and this ethos colours its
application to Gospel work, hanging as a mist before the eyes of an audience.
If drama presents a case or an argument, it must do so in an artificially
contrived situation. It cannot easily compare and contrast viewpoints or argue the point, and
as soon as it tries to do so it becomes more boring than direct speech ever is.
Overall, it distorts reality. The various characters inevitably obscure any
message, because their own personalities and skills either please or repel watchers. If they
are attracted by them, they are unconsciously disposed to approve of their case or
‘message’, which is merely a subtle form of emotional manipulation, and not a true appeal
to the mind.
Only a minimum of real information can be conveyed by drama, perhaps at
most two or three significant, simple points. It is inefficient, it is inappropriate, it runs the
risk of emotional trickery, it cannot effectively argue the case, and it is not the method
which has been appointed. It certainly fails to address the viewer directly, either to appeal to
him, or to hold him to account before God.
Drama will inevitably empty the message of real moral conviction. Some
people go to the cinema or to the theatre for a good weep, and they are affected in outlook
for minutes, perhaps even for an hour or two, but it is at an emotional level only and usually
has no lasting effect. In the Bible, ‘graphics’ are always subservient to proclamation, and
that is the way we must keep it.
As for the dramatic presentations which include portrayal of Jesus Christ the
eternal Son of God, one would have thought any Bible believer could readily see that this
cannot be done without disfiguring the Lord. How can you worthily portray, other than in
words, the Person, the life, and the heart of the Saviour of the world?
Some may say, ‘But is not a film about Jesus full of words?’ It certainly has
words, but it also has actors, and dramatic impact and spectacle, capturing the attention of
the watcher and arousing human sympathies above spiritual understanding. An actor
displaces the Lord (most probably in breach of the second commandment) and the vital
points of Gospel doctrines are not amplified, explained and applied - this work being the
true representative of sympathetic communication.
SUPERIORITY OF DIRECT PROCLAMATION
Let us review some of the superior qualities of direct proclamation by
contrast with any of the new methods and gimmickry.
1
FIRST, with direct words in preaching or witness, Almighty God is
always in view. He is always there. He is always being referred to. It is clearly
His message, for it is brought from His Word, whereas with non-
proclamational methods of presentation God is somewhat obscured, whether it is discussion
which wanders and stumbles around the debris of human opinion, or whether
entertainment-style songs, or whether drama. Only with direct proclamation is God always
the supreme purpose and objective, and the unmistakable source of the message.
That is the point behind the tradition of having an enormous Bible on the
pulpit lectern. Our forebears had big Bibles out of principle, because all could then see the
source of the message and the authority behind it. The old-time travelling evangelist
achieved the same effect by holding the Bible firmly in his hand, stabbing his finger at it
and saying - ‘The Bible says! . . . The Bible says!’
Whether the proclaimer works from a lectern or pocket Bible, God is clearly
the source, authority and objective.
2
SECONDLY, proclamation like nothing else enables us to convey the
spirit in which God gives this message. It may be expressed with passion, with
sympathy, and with pleading urgency. Drama conveys and evokes feeling, but it is feeling
expressed between the characters, or evoked by the impact of a situation, not the attitude
and heart of God to sinners. Only direct speech on His behalf can convey some sense of
this. Do not let anyone denigrate straightforward preaching or Sunday School teaching,
because it alone brings the heart of God to listeners.
3
THIRDLY, direct proclamation alone engages the free, rational mind. It is
true that preaching can exploit emotional manipulation. The speaker can tell sob-stories,
and let his voice range from shivering tones to explosions of sound, jarring the feelings. But
if excessive histrionic tricks are avoided, direct speech addresses the responsible (though
fallen) thinking faculty, to challenge it and persuade it.
The hearer is not influenced by extraneous things. He is not hypnotised
under the sway of compelling, rhythmic music, or projected into an emotional trance by
something which moves him at a fleshly level. He listens to plain words, and his mind
(from a human standpoint) is under no coercion. He hears a clear message, passionately
expressed, but without manipulation, and as the Spirit moves, his response will be genuine.
If he rejects this direct message, God will be just in holding him to account.
4
FOURTHLY, proclamation enables the ‘tone’ of communication to be right
in another way. This message is serious. This is a life-or-death matter. This concerns
eternity. Like nothing else, preaching can get the tone right. Direct
proclamation, even though there may be moments of humour, accommodates intrinsic
authority, reverence for God, and seriousness.
We have already noted that drama is associated with entertainment, and
cannot therefore achieve the right tone. With drama the audience is transported into the
realm of unreality from the beginning. With entertainment-style music the hearer is the
‘customer’, and the singers and instrumentalists the artistes, whose job is to please. In the
case of discussion groups, every member is wrongly given the right to determine what is
Truth, for they are gathered to teach one another, and to arrive at the Truth between them.
They are the source of Truth. They are all-important. Where, here,
is the necessary humility to hear the Gospel, and where are the authority and seriousness of
Truth? Only proclamation possesses the capacity to preserve these.
5
FIFTHLY (extending the previ ous point), nothing has
convicting power like direct proclamation. This message is about great matters of the
soul. It concerns God’s righteous judgement, and the possibility of a momentous escape
through His amazing love and astounding forgiveness. It is about great guilt and deep need.
Direct proclamation, blessed by the Spirit, is the exclusive vehicle for the arresting and
convicting of the soul. The keep-it-light methodology of the entertainment and seeker-
service circles seldom ever knows anything like this. In the end, they must turn to
charismatic tricks, such as slayings in the Spirit, induced by crude mass-hypnosis, as a
substitute for the convicting of the heart.
LEARNING FROM BIBLE-TIME HERALDS
Paul says twice that he was ordained a preacher, and this is of great importance.[1] In the Greek he uses the word herald. The characteristics
of a herald in biblical times are of immense significance. A court herald in the ancient
world was not allowed to do anything on his own initiative. He had to keep strictly to his
text.
Heralds were often sent as envoys in war to an enemy capital or camp, but
they were never negotiators. They kept within their brief, taking the message and returning
with the response.
Paul uses the ‘herald’ term because these duties perfectly mirror the very
limited office of a Christian preacher, who is not called to devise new methods of
communication for every age, but to honour and operate those established in the New
Testament.
The term herald also described a town crier who declared whatever message
he was given. He could not change the announcement or the date. Similarly, we are not
given the scope to vary either the message or the method. We are to work within the limits
that are appointed to us, and this is what is being forgotten today. Our energy and initiative
should be deployed in bringing in the people and Sunday School youngsters to hear
proclamation, and not replacing it with entertainment.
Paul says that he did not preach the Gospel - ‘with wisdom of words, lest the
cross of Christ should be made of none effect’. He does not mean that preachers cannot use
arguments, because he used them himself. His own preaching was wisely marshalled,
exposing the folly of dedication to this world, and establishing the necessity of turning to
Jesus Christ for salvation. However, he never blended evangelism with worldly
wisdom, employing Greek philosophy to tickle the ears of the intellectuals in an attempt to
make his message more attractive to them. He never mixed the message with what they
wanted to hear.
It is inconceivable that the apostle, if he were alive today, would say, ‘The
proclamation of the Gospel is not popular and therefore I will mix it, not with Greek
philosophy, but with a rock band performance which will commend itself to the people.
Then I will reduce the message drastically to give room for pieces of drama, because they
do not want to listen to anything serious.’
Whether Greek philosophy or the sound of drums, it is exactly the same -
the mixing of the message of the Word with something preferred by lost society, so that we
can avoid the offence of the cross. This is what Paul, inspired by the Spirit, clearly
condemns.
When we proclaim the cross of Christ we have much to do. We must present
the need for the cross, the holiness of God, the Fall of man, the Person of Christ, and what
really happened on that cross. We must also expose the emptiness and futility of life
without God, the benefits of salvation, the exclusive saving merits of the cross, and the
tragedy of a lost eternity. But only words can adequately explain these matters to rational
minds, informing them of the details and challenging attitudes in a way that the Holy Spirit
can use. Only words can inform, persuade and remonstrate in a convicting, challenging and
appealing way. Only words are supported by scriptural promises of instrumentality. This
high work cannot possibly be done by musical entertainment, or by drama (the medium of
fiction).
We appeal to preachers and church leaders not to yield to the new
experiments in communication. Remember that the people who started these trends are
people who present a weaker notion of both conversion and the Christian life, in order to
retain a considerable degree of worldliness.
These ‘evangelists’ only seek a moderately sanitised lifestyle. What they
promote is a new syncretism - God and mammon; Christ and the
world - and they have proved that it is extremely popular. These are the people who have
invented the plethora of new, non-proclamational gimmicks and methods.
Do not imagine this is merely a generational thing. Today’s trends mark a
deliberate departure from the Christianity which calls people from sin and worldliness to a
radical, Holy-Spirit-wrought conversion. Genuine Christian workers must not fall into a
system engineered by doubtful workers.
We first encountered these alternatives to proclamation (on a serious scale)
at the end of the 1960s when Campus Crusade launched their original ‘Four Spiritual
Laws’. Certainly, there were Campus workers who were godly people and whose
evangelistic efforts rose much higher than their official script, but the script they were
supposed to follow fell woefully short of the message of the Gospel.
Big-band musical entertainment jostled with show-biz testimonies and ultra-
short messages pointing to a tragically undersized Gospel challenge. Readers may
remember the general line: ‘God has a wonderful plan for your life.’ God is full of smiles
and readiness to bless, but, said the script (in effect), there is just one little problem in the
way. Before you can be blessed, you need to get this little matter of repentance out of the
way. Happily, this can be done in a short sentence, then you can go on to the next, nicer
step.
We are, of course, parodying the Campus formula, but it certainly minimised
matters, falling short of any real conviction. This is precisely what is going on with most of
those who now promote drama and entertainment as an alternative to the direct challenge of
proclamation. They do not want the convicting character and power of the authentic
message.
For all we have said about the superiority of direct proclamation, the power
is not inherent, but is the work of the Spirit. The fact that we preach does not guarantee
blessing, and the apostle expresses this bluntly: ‘For the preaching of the cross is to them
that perish foolishness.’ Countless people will react with scorn. They will understand, but
think it is ridiculous and foolish to put these propositions before them.
They will say to themselves, ‘I do not accept that I am a condemned sinner. And
if I turn to this Saviour, I shall forfeit my right to rule my own life and do what I want. I will
have to conform to new standards, and many things that I am committed to and enjoy will
have to go. It is ridiculous to ask me to do this.’
Sweetening the pill by watering down the Gospel and disguising it with
entertainment will not make it more acceptable, only less understandable. People will hear a
modified, weakened Gospel, and their response will not be authentic.
The apostle warns that proclamation works only because God makes it work in
the hearts of His people.
When people say to us, ‘You people are just traditionalists, stuck firmly in the
past, and you want everything to be done in a 19th-century manner,’ they have got us
wrong. We want to use direct proclamation because it is what God tells us exclusively to
do. Whether it is Sunday School teaching, personal witness, preaching in the pulpit, or
printed tracts and books, the scriptural way is to present the Gospel in rational words, to
rational minds, supported by earnest prayer.
Many evangelicals today see that the public wants rock groups, informality,
conviviality, drama and other entertainments, and whereas the apostle Paul had no intention
of obliging the carnal wishes of either Greek or Jew, today’s modernisers go overboard to
give outsiders exactly what they think will please them.
Let us focus all our energies on forms of direct proclamation, and activities
which bring people under that influence. These are the only two legitimate aspects of
evangelism - proclamation, and efforts that support it.
Footnote [1]1 Timothy 2.7 and 2 Timothy 1.11.
|
