Royce

Yes. But there is a difference in wanting someone to admit they are wrong and wanitng someone to be healed.

I think coming clean is the first step to healing, isn't it?

Royce

One last thought….. Only when you have leaders (elders, preachers, etc.) who are transparent and openly admit their struggles are you likely to have those in the pews comfortable sharing openly when they are in trouble. Thank God we have elders (both of our preachers are elders too) who are in every way just like us. They are different in that they have much greater responsibility and carry a heavy load.

Royce

You mention confession. In my view, if the transgression is public, many people in the congregation are aware of it, then a public confession would be in order. However, if the guy had cheated on his IRS forms a talk with his wife or a close friend who is also a brother would make more sense in my view.

One of the problems I see in churches like ours where it is so open and grace oriented is that some people tend to think their forgiveness is only possible if they confess to the congregaiton.

God has forgiven sin based on the worth and work of Jesus. As we confess to God (see our sin the way he sees it, or say about it what he says) he cleanses us from unrighteousness.Confession to others invokes their love, their prayers, and their holding accountable the one who confesses. They don't hold out forgiveness.Only God owns that right.

Royce

I remember reading that Billy Graham's critics had said that the music was in some way causing the great hosts of folks to come forward in his crusades. Deeply troubled by that thought he instructed that at the next nights meeting there would be only silence after his appeal. Graham ended his trademark plea with, "If you came on a bus they'll wait for you" and pressed his hands together under his chin, closed his eyes, and prayed for God to prick the hearts of the people. All that broke the silence was the shuffle of hundreds of feet as hundreds came to declare they wanted to follow Christ.

Royce

The invitation song is a late nineteenth century innovation. James A. Harding opposed it as too emotional, for example.

Calvinists, whether Presbyterian or Congregational, divided over the use of exhortations and their emotion in the 18th century–"New Sides/New Lights" vs. "Old Sides/Old Lights." Stone, as a Presbyterian, would have fallen in the "New Light" category.

Some conservative Reformed thinkiers, like MIchael Horton (as an example), still oppose the invitation as an Arminian/revivalist ploy.

Thanks for the reflections, Jay.