Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

The Pangea Blog

Home

Home
Progressive Christian
PPI – Does the Church Mis-sell Personal Assurance? (Friendly Friday: Al Molineaux)

PPI – Does the Church Mis-sell Personal Assurance? (Friendly Friday: Al Molineaux)

Last updated on: July 6, 2011 at 7:00 pm by Kurt Willems

PPI – Does the Church Mis-sell Personal Assurance? (Friendly Friday: Al Molineaux) 2011-07-06T19:00:59-07:00 Kurt Willems

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Source: Hacking Christianity

A recent ruling by the High Court in Britain condemned UK banks for mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) when offering mortgages for individuals to buy property. The court took the view that customers had agreed to take on the extra cost involved because they believed that they might not be granted the loans if they were to refuse.

There is little evidence that banks overtly told customers that this was the case but the methods employed in the transactions left a clear implication that agreeing to PPI was an essential part of the process.

There are perhaps lessons for the church, and related mission based organisations, to learn from this ruling.

Firstly, people agree to propositions for a variety of reasons and we should not assume that the overt call for a response is fully understood by the hearer.

An alter call might well be seen as having a clear evangelical message by those who attend the church regularly. The visitor, however, might be responding to the suggested answer to a particular felt need on that occasion.

For example; a young girl arrives at church fresh from the break up of a long standing committed relationship. During the sermon the preacher affirms that speaking with God can offer comfort to those in crisis.

The regular attender hears this as a call to ‘become a Christian’ and ‘start attending the church’. The guest, however, hears that their pain can be eased by praying.

The appeal is given and the woman responds. The church counts this as a decision to become a follower of Christ and processes her application for assurance according.

Thus there are two different interpretations of the same event. The church now speaks to her as if she has made a full commitment to become a disciple of Jesus Christ. She is ‘sold’ personal assurance on the back of responding to receiving comfort for her felt need.

Secondly, churches and agencies might offer an individual some much needed help in their moment of crisis. During the delivery of this kindness a church worker explains the gospel and offers to pray with them if they desire to respond.

The person in need senses that to refuse this part of the deal might lead to the help being withdrawn or limited and so agrees to become a ‘follower of Jesus’.

The church worker may not have intended to mis-communicate the message but in their eagerness to see people respond they perhaps ignore the emotional vulnerability of those in need.

If we consider the high court ruling and allow this to reflect on the two examples above we might consider that some parts of the church could be accused of mis-selling.

Here are a few thoughts to help church leaders avoid falling into such a trap.

1. Avoid using the Barnum Effect*

We perhaps need to be careful in our calls for a response to the gospel that we do not offer a proposition so wide that it could include just about everyone whilst making it look as if we are speaking specifically to individuals.

Appeals that start off with some suggested insight into the circumstances of the intended responder but end up being aimed at ‘anyone who is breathing’ undermine the strength of the message.

2. Avoid the commoditisation of individuals.

There is a danger that churches measure such responses as the number of ‘souls saved’ as if this were some key performance indicator. We should never turn people’s story into a mere measurement of our success.

It’s not that measurement is in itself wrong but that we can begin to count the initial act of getting people to respond as the main indicator of success.

Every person’s back story is more important than the ecclesiological statistics of any given church.

3. Understand that behind every person there are many others.

Behind those who responds are others who will develop their own commentary on how the church treats this newcomer.

Families are understandably concerned when their loved ones adopt new patterns of behaviour. The church is rightly judged for how it treats these people.

Much of our teaching, explicitly or otherwise, draws people out of their old life and into a new community. This can cause a division between individuals and their families. One has to question whether this is a goal consistent with the gospel message.

I have often heard evangelical leaders asking the question ‘why is the back door bigger than the front?’ in the context of church growth.

Perhaps to fully answer this we need to understand more about the journey made by those coming into the church.

If, as we have seen, there is the possibility that the church and those who respond to an appeal can view this transaction in a different way, we must make every effort to handle these moments with care.

We don’t want to be accused of mis-selling personal assurance.

———————–

(* The Forer effect (also called the Barnum Effect after P.T. Barnum’s observation that “we’ve got something for everyone”) is the observation that individuals will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people.)

————————–

Thanks to my good web friend, Al Molineaux for this challenging guest piece. Connect with him on Twitter.

Previous Post

June 9, 2011

Getting Into Heaven BEFORE You Die (Dallas Willard)

Next Post

June 14, 2011 An Evangelical Reject Who Refuses to Reject Evangelicals

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category (Series) All Out War-Spiritual Warfare (Series) Church Plant Journal (Series) Dear Reader... (Series) Earthquakes...Signs of the Times? (Series) Entering the... Conversation (Series) Evangelical Culture Myths (Series) Everything is Meaningless [Pete Enns] (Series) Evolving Evangelicalism (Series) Hell Yes. Hell No! Who Cares? (Series) Hidden Worldviews (Series) If Evolution is Right, what about Adam? (Series) in less than 300 words (Series) Jesus and Nationalism (Series) Liberating Women for Ministry? (Series) Life-Changing Books (Series) Markers of Church Plant Movement (Series) Nonviolence 101 (Series) Philemon - Reconciliation (Series) Quote to Ponder (Series) Red Letter Dialogues (Series) Resource of the Week (SERIES) Revelation Sermons (Series) Share Something Sundays (Series) Simplicity in the Burbs: $2 a day (Series) The Binding of God [Open Theism] (Series) The Creed: Anabaptist Reflections (Series) Values for Church Leadership (Series) Video to Ponder Anabaptism Animal Advocacy Books Church Ministry Church Planting Community Culture Eschatology Eucharist Evangelical Reject Evolution Fundamentalism Greek Greg Boyd Guest Contributors Hell Holy Spirit Israel/Palestine Kingdom of God Lent Missional N. T. Wright Nationalism New Creation Nonviolence Open Mic Open Theism Parenting Passover Paul Philemon Podcast Politics Restorative Justice Revelation (the book of) Rob Bell Ron Martoia Sermon Shane Claiborne Social Justice Speaking Engagement Spiritual Warfare Spirituality Temple Theology Tim Geddert Tribulation Uncategorized universalism Video Blog Women in Ministry Worship Music Youth Ministry

Select a Month August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 October 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 December 2016 October 2016 August 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which city is known as the "City of Palms" in the Bible?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Damascus Jerusalem Bethany Jericho

Support this
Column