A searchable, downloadable PDF of the original review appears below. Colleen Kouwenberg is a member of St. Giles Church, Prince George, B.C.
Made for a Purpose: Understanding and Using Spiritual Gifts. Chuck Congram. Committee on Church Growth to Double in the Eighties, The Presbyterian Church in Canada, 50 Wynford Drive, Don Mills. ON M3C 1J7. Includes leader’s guide, participant manual, cassette tape (introduction and assistance).
The St. Giles’ Presbyterian Church ladies’ Bible study group in Prince George. B.C. has studied Made for a Purpose – Understanding and Using Spiritual Gifts by the Rev. Chuck Congram. The group of thirteen has met weekly – with the occasional school break – from October ’83 to May ’84. approximately 30 sessions.
Congram’s material is basically an outline of spiritual gifts – with both an introduction and a concluding questionnaire. The fact that the approach is in outline form only should be made clear to anyone considering using the material. It is a skeleton – and the meat must be put on the bones by the leader. Hence various books on the topic of spiritual gifts must be available as resource material to be used by the leader in preparation for weekly sessions. I made extensive use of Unwrap your spiritual gifts by K.O. Gangel and Discover your gifts by Christian Reformed Home Missions, supplemented by other books and articles on particular gifts, such as John Stott’s Baptism and Fulness. The tape accompanying the material did not, to my disappointment, talk about the gifts themselves, but referred more to the method of conducting the study, and is, I feel, superfluous.
It is difficult to see how this study could be completed in nine sessions, as is recommended. Particularly when dealing with the gifts themselves, we found that in a 1¼-hour session, only one gift could be adequately covered – and this was with members having done previous preparation.
There are also various other comments related to this study. Twenty-five gifts are listed – some of which do not generally seem to be accepted as gifts by other sources, eg. missionary, celibacy. Also, why not group relevant gifts for study so that there need not be overlapping and constant review, eg. wisdom after knowledge, helps with serving, teaching before prophecy, interpretation after tongues, etc.? Why not start with some of the well-known and recognized gifts such as helps or giving or hospitality, rather than with administration? This would help in creating a more understanding atmosphere from the outset. Also, many of the Scripture references are too abbreviated in the passages given, are rather obscurely related to the gift concerned, or, in other cases, more commonly related passages are not included at all. The Christian Reformed material Discover your gifts has excellent Scripture passage selections, as well as an application section for each gift.
The group as a whole had difficulty with the “misunderstandings” section of each gift. Do these refer to the abuse of the gift, or do they refer to the manner in which persons having this gift might be looked upon by non-Christians? Again the Christian Reformed material was more clear in this area. Another suggestion made was that discussion questions on each gift would have been helpful.
Some other problems: in the introductory true/false statements – is a spiritual gift really considered a “possession”? And the question about the Peter Principle seems highly irrelevant. And how helpful is the true/false statement, “As an example, more Christians do not have a gift of mercy than do have it”? Also the introductory sentence completion statement, “When I eat eggs I like them _____” raised more questions than it was worth, as far as relevance to the material is concerned.
The closing sessions regarding each person discovering their own gifts were helpful. However, the idea of each person taking turns sitting in the centre to be “discussed” by the others was rather threatening even for women who felt they knew each other. We had each person describe the results from their own gifts questionnaire, which gifts they identified with when going through the study, and then let others share which gifts they felt this particular individual had. For thirteen people this took three sessions. We did have some problems with the questionnaire. The statements were to be followed by the comment, “This has been experienced in my life ______” and then graded from 3 to 0. Many ladies in our group have been prevented from developing gifts because of husbands who are unbelievers (eg. hospitality, giving) or young children yet at home. They felt the questionnaire should also reflect what they would like to do in the future. Also the questions pertaining to the teaching gift seem to demand a measureable response, i.e. people knowing more, becoming “more obedient disciples of Christ,” and might be more relevant to a teacher at a Bible College or seminary rather than a teacher of children in whom the results might not be visible for many years. Thus although several ladies identified with the teaching gift, not one had it listed in their top three gifts as a result of the questionnaire. These questions should be altered to more adequately reflect the gift.
In conclusion, the ladies involved felt that they had learned a great deal about spiritual gifts – both as a concept and what their own gifts might be. However, I feel as a usable tool the Christian Reformed Discover your gifts would have been easier to implement except for the fact that it excludes the more controversial gifts of healing, tongues, miracles and interpretation.