H  O  M  E          
Theological, Doctrinal, and Spiritual Musing - and whatever other else is on my mind when I notice that I haven't posted in a while.
  • - Endorsed
  • - Indifferent
  • - Contested
I Affirm This
The Nashville Statement
Daniel of Doulogos Name:Daniel
Home: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
About Me: I used to believe that evolution was reasonable, that homosexuality was genetic, and that people became Christians because they couldn't deal with the 'reality' that this life was all there was. I used to believe, that if there was a heaven - I could get there by being good - and I used to think I was more or less a good person. I was wrong on all counts. One day I finally had my eyes opened and I saw that I was not going to go to heaven, but that I was certainly going to suffer the wrath of God for all my sin. I saw myself as a treasonous rebel at heart - I hated God for creating me just to send me to Hell - and I was wretched beyond my own comprehension. Into this spiritual vacuum Jesus Christ came and he opened my understanding - delivering me from God's wrath into God's grace. I was "saved" as an adult, and now my life is hid in Christ. I am by no means sinless, but by God's grace I am a repenting believer - a born again Christian.
My complete profile...
The Buzz

Daniel's posts are almost always pastoral and God centered. I appreciate and am challenged by them frequently. He has a great sense of humor as well.
- Marc Heinrich

His posts are either funny or challenging. He is very friendly and nice.
- Rose Cole

[He has] good posts, both the serious like this one, and the humorous like yesterday. [He is] the reason that I have restrained myself from making Canadian jokes in my posts.
- C-Train

This post contains nothing that is of any use to me. What were you thinking? Anyway, it's probably the best I've read all day.
- David Kjos

Daniel, nicely done and much more original than Frank the Turk.
- Jonathan Moorhead

There are some people who are smart, deep, or funny. There are not very many people that are all 3. Daniel is one of those people. His opinion, insight and humor have kept me coming back to his blog since I first visited earlier this year.
- Carla Rolfe
Email Me
Sunday, September 25, 2005
Sutera Update!

UPDATE 2008.

From time to time I get hits on this post from people looking for information about the Sutera Twins. This post was written three years ago when they came to Winnipeg for revival meetings.

Some context: In the early 1970s our former Pastor (Bill Mcleod) was pastoring at a church in Saskatoon, that invited the Sutera Twins to come and hold meetings. A genuine revival broke out - literally thousands were coming to Christ "for real" - repentence -real repentance- was happening everywhere, and each night the meetings were bigger and larger until eventually the church was no longer big enough, then the church they moved the meetings to was no longer big enough - eventually they were meeting in a convention centre. During this time there was a genuine outpouring of God's Spirit, and our old pastor looks back to those twelve weeks or so as the highlight of his life and ministry.

Notwithstanding, a lot of preperatory work took place beforehand. Prayer - begging God to bring revival for years, preceded those meetings, so that they were a culmination of an on-going deep intercessory work that began long before the Sutera Twins showed up.

After our 2005 "revival meetings" in which the Suteras ministered to us, our old pastor commented that it was nothing like the revival meetings of '72 in Saskatoon. There was a spiritual rawness in those early meetings, and none of this emphasis on selling books, no typed out and binder bound "agendas" given out before hand, and less stress on "giving." He was, in my opinion, ashamed and disappointed at having supported them, for in his opinion they were not ministering as they had when revival broke out.

Yet I say this, when they were here, their message was accurate - even polished. They hit sin hard, as we ought, and there was some lasting reconciliation that came about from a message that Lou preached at a local church on the side, though that church has since collapsed. The meetings produced no lasting affect in our church, but again, we had been hearing revival messages from our own pastor for years, so there wasn't much "new" that they could add - except for all the book and tape pushing.

All in all, I think if people haven't heard a good series of messages on sin, or the pastor is scared to preach about sin, these guys can do that well, but if they are continuing in the vein they were when they came to Winnipeg, you will have to take each ministry along side the built in sales pitch for the various spiritual "help" books which they not only endorse, but bring along and tell you to buy if you want to have a revival.

I got..., and this is just one man's opinion, and that seasoned by time and therefore (I hope) even handed, but I say, I got the impression that they were unwittingly reducing revival into a formula, and that they had planned and organized the Holy Spirit right out of His ministry. If I have the opportunity to see the Sutera's again, I will probably pass. Not that I do not desire personal and corporate revival, I do - but rather that I don't think these men carry around revival in their pocket, and their particular ministry, at least for us at that time, was far too convoluted by the pressure to support the ministry financially. There was a palpable and consisten pressure to support their ministry financially that didn't sit right with me then, and remains the one thing I remember most about their time here.

Other than a couple of instances of temporal reconciliation - there has been no lasting imprint of their ministry. I wish them grace in their ministry, and hope that our experience was an isolated one. They are engaging speakers, and fine musicians, and if you have the opportunity to hear them for the first time, you ought to take it. I mention these things just to flesh out my post for those who continue to scour the internet looking for info on the Suteras.

When we invited them to speak in Winnipeg, they sent us a package back about all the stuff we would have to do in order to have them come - a list so detailed it even told us what we ought to feed them for each meal while they were there, and how far away they should be from the church etc. A grand binder full of program, program, program - scheduling etc. An administrative gift gone wild.

Either way, that's my update. Take it for what it is worth, I hope it helps.

Yesterday (Saturday) we had an all day session (9:00 a.m. until 5:10 p.m.).

All I can say is wow.

Ralph and Lou have a unique iterant ministry that over the course of fifty years has brought them into many churches that are on the verge of schism. Compiled into one prolonged teaching, we went over the main reasons why people inside the church tend to argue, fuss, and eventually divide. It was extremely good stuff to hear.

While 50+ years of experience dealing with this sort of stuff is nigh impossible to trim down into a one day lesson - it is even more difficult to trim it down into one post as I run out the door to tonight's meeting. It is enough to say that there is wisdom in that proverb about the house that is neglected. In this case, the neglect is people neglecting to invest themselves prayerfully in others and in the church, in essense, they neglect God's glory.

I will certainly write more on this as I am able, and as the magnitude of it begins to settle into my understanding.
posted by Daniel @ 5:03 PM  
  • At 11:28 PM, September 25, 2005, Blogger Bryan said…

    It is too bad I had to work on Saturday, I would have liked to be at that session since I have a great interest in it.

    I am curious if you are still of the opinion that our church should have split when it did after hearing the Sutera Twins speak.

  • At 10:14 AM, September 26, 2005, Blogger Daniel said…

    Scripture says that we are not to be united in fellowship with someone who refuses to be corrected spiritually. What you characterize as a 'split' was a biblical separation from errant and unrepentant leadership.

    Had the error been in the pew only we would not have left, but would only have segregated ourselves from those in error, and worked to correct them through the leadership of the church. But since the error was in the leadership - this option was not open.

    Both pastors (PB and DH) attempted for a full year to resolve the situation bibilcally - but the leadership refused to be corrected, and in so doing marked themselves as people whom we ought to come away from.

    So in light of what we are learning, my opinion about what we have done is still solid. If anything I am sorry for how we handled it - I would have done the same thing today as I did then, but I would have handled it with much more grace.

Post a Comment
<< Home
Previous Posts
Atom Feed
Atom Feed
Creative Commons License
Text posted on this site
is licensed under a
Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5