Thread: Purgatory: The Failed Welsh Outpouring At Cwmbran Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=001164
Posted by FROSTIE (# 18148) on
:
Have any of you guys got any more news on thew failed "Welsh Outpouring"?
This featured the apostates Richard Taylor and Andrew Parsons with their sham "miracles" and failed healings!
It started in the Spring of 2013 but was dead in the water by the end of the year?
However it led many people astray, as it was inspired by "the god of this world"....and not Yeshua!
[ 20. September 2014, 10:45: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
Welcome FROSTIE.
You might want to read the various Board descriptions with a view to finding out which topics are best suited to which Boards. In Heaven, we largely do Chat and Frivol.
I will consult with my fellow Hosts.
Firenze
Heaven Host
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
Well, that didn't take long.
Topics for serious discussion go to Purgatory. Fasten your seatbelt.
Firenze
HH
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Aye FROSTIE, we thrashed this to death as soon as it surfaced. Nobody was deceived who wasn't already. This confusion is as old as Christianity. Its author a tad older.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
Welcome Frostie! Do take a moment to read our 10 Commandments and board posting guidelines, and free to say hello on the "Welcome Aboard" thread in All Saints.
Now that this thread's in Purgatory, and to refresh everyone's memory, here is our discussion of this when it first became news.
Eutychus
Purgatory Host
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Calling these fellas 'apostates' is a bit strong, Frostie. What grounds do you have for doing so?
I grew up in Cwmbran and know some of the churches that were involved around the edges of this. However, the one where the 'revival' was supposed to be emanating from wasn't around when I lived there.
My own 'take' on it is that it is yet another example of fairly short-lived religious excitement such as tends to happen from time to time within Pentecostalism and on the charismatic scene more generally ... we've had similar things in recent years in Telford and in Dudley and they seemed to follow a similar pattern.
If you can do so without resorting to intemperate language and a rather reductionist or black-and-white approach, I'd be interested to hear what the upshot of the whole thing has been.
I wasn't at all tempted to dash back home to visit the meetings and see what was happening and I've visited the area several times since these things started without even hearing anything about it from people in the area.
Would I be right in thinking that the majority of the crowds allegedly flocking to the meetings were from outside the area? People visiting in search of revival or some kind of spiritual high?
What, if anything, has been the impact on the housing estates in Thornhill, Fairwater and Coedeva? Or in the older parts of the town such as Pontnewydd or Old Cwmbran?
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Laying my cards on the table, I tend to think that a lot of revivalist excitement is all too human. No need to cite the demonic or even the otherworldly.
No need to see it as the work of the 'god of this world' and so on ... it's simply excitable human behaviour in an excitable religious context.
I think people tend to see what they want to see and in the heightened atmosphere of a revivalist context that's what happens.
But I admit, I'm looking at this from some distance and not up close. But I've seen similar things and heard similar rhetoric before, of course.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
As so often, I agree with Gamaliel.
Posted by FROSTIE (# 18148) on
:
Thanks for your comments guys, and good to see the post has been put into the correct place.
Cwmbran has not changed much and all those council estates of Thornhill, Fairwater, Coed eva etc all remain the same and were not touched in the slightest by the failed "Welsh Outpouring", as indeed the whole town itself was not.
Many people were "bussed" in from afar for their events which started with seven nights per week. And the promise from the leaders Richard Taylor and Andrew Parsons was that "if we turn up, God will turn up too"!
Strange then that it dwindled from 7 to 6 to 5 to 3, and now to just one poorly attended weekly evening meeting which is hardly "an outpouring" despite Victory Church still claiming it to be!
The sham of "this revival" started with the false "healing" of local man Paul Haynes who was delivered from his wheelchair, when he never needed it in the first place!
There were also false "healing handkerchiefs" given out, and at least one person died despite receiving promises of healing from the small piece of worthless cloth!
And according to Taylor and Parsons, who received their "vision from the Lord" this outpouring was going to sweep all over Cwmbran, then Wales, then the UK and was also set to become the largest revival the world had ever seen!
False Prophets I believe!
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
False prophecy is innate to being human. Viral. As is reaction to it. Including mine. Any expectation we have that if we pray for the cat or Iraq or that those providing for the vulnerable will realise that that is as spiritual as it gets and that there's nothing more is false. That anyone will understand anything. False prophecy, a false prospectus, false hope.
That we must work with, just like the rest of our aspirational liturgy.
Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on
:
The people who believe in these sorts of things will believe regardless of facts or evidence. The event-based based mentality, the highly-manipulative culture and emotionally-charged environments that foster this kind of thing will only produce more of the same. The whole 'outpouring' and 'revival' mentality is a destructive one, on the whole and like so much of the religious culture of the charismatic/evangelical scene, it sets people up either to believe in lies or to fall—in charismatic culture these events must never be examined. As a culture it cares very little for the casualties of truth and honesty, nor does it care much for the human costs—the primary goal is to promote itself. I can remember at HTB when one of the big Alpha testimonials ('I was a drug addict, now I'm a Christian and life is great') was discovered to have made up most of his story the big effort was to keep it a secret. He was removed from the Alpha circuit, but no apology was ever offered for having deceived so many. Just as with the Cwmbran 'outpouring'—it must never be examined, no matter how fraudulent it was or how devastating the consequences of the con might be. The culture of lies most only be encouraged because in their eyes, the ends justify the means.
Can you tell that I'm still bitter?
K.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Thanks Frostie, that pretty much accords with what I was expecting to hear and, indeed, expecting to happen.
A friend of mine, though, has seen footage of the alleged miracle that sparked off the hoo-ha and he said it 'looked convincing'.
Why was the bloke who was supposed to have been healed sitting in a wheelchair in the first place? Did he need it occasionally?
On the earlier thread, Eutychus in particular - who is a bit of a whizz at ferreting out spurious claims and so on (and to whom I take off my hat) drew attention to the lack of documentary or other evidence.
The leaders at Victory Church apparently seemed reluctant to allow interviews with the recipient of the putative healing and claimed that this was due to a desire to protect his privacy etc etc.
I've certainly been in meetings where miracles are said to have taken place and have even seen one or two apparent ones take place on the street following prayer by earnest charismatics ... only for it to become quickly apparent that no such healing had actually happened.
In most instances, I would suggest that this is the result of heightened expectations and a degree of naivety rather than deliberate attempts to deceive.
I suspect in this instance that having started the leaders simply went with thought they thought they had - adrenalin will take you a fair way round the track before you start to flag and tire.
So then the temptation comes in to maintain momentum by giving oneself an extra boost - hence the over-blown rhetoric about revival extending across Wales and across the globe ...
We've heard all this sort of thing before.
I've been caught up in revivalism myself, so I know how easy it is to switch-off the critical faculties and suspend disbelief ... particularly when there apparent 'results' in evidence to keep the ball rolling for a while.
I always felt that the Cwmbran thing would fizzle out in time.
I don't know what we'd need to make an impression on the hardened housing estates ... decorous worship with the Book of Common Prayer isn't likely to make that much impression so I can understand why people would assume that revivalism might do the trick.
But it rarely does.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Komensky - EMBRACE it. Feed that wolf. THIS is, this IS, what we are called to work with. We are to expose the deceit and embrace it.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Yes, Komensky, these things can leave bitterness in their wake ... and also plenty of disillusioned and damaged individuals.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
The problem is that revivalists are highly selective in the material they read and use. There's a fascinating account by Watchman Nee - widely acclaimed as an influence by many charismatic evangelicals - which describes a period of 'outpouring' in Shanghai in the 1920s and '30s I think.
Nee concluded afterwards that little had been gained and 'much lost'.
Yet warnings and checks and balances found in the records and accounts of earlier revivalists are either air-brushed out or overlooked.
Adrenalin takes over.
Far be it from me to offer advice - as I've plastered my own bitterness across these boards over the year - but it's best not to dwell on these things Komensky.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't reflect and learn from our previous experiences, but I've known far too many ex-revivalist types who simply bemoan their experiences in such fellowships without moving on to something more conducive or constructive.
Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on
:
Look—forget it. All of the 'healing' stuff is a con. If you hear about 'healing rooms', 'healing services' or someone with a 'healing ministry'—run for your life. I had a friend in London, dying of cancer, she had the typical 'prophetic' words from someone at Bethel Nut House in California, spent time and money to fly there and go to a 'healing room'. Of course she died anyway. Her widower's faith is now in tatters—the fault is not God's, but the deceivers and the deceived who continue the whole 'healing' charade. To date there are precisely zero proven 'healings' from Christian 'healers'. Yet, believe it or not, there are poor souls wandering this great planet of our either spreading or believing the lie.
K.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
I disagree G. Dwell. Here. Get it out. Embrace it. Embrace our younger foolish selves. We HAVE to find a way to embrace weakness and ignorance: ALL.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
It's OK K. All is well.
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by FROSTIE:
Thanks for your comments guys, and good to see the post has been put into the correct place.
Cwmbran has not changed much and all those council estates of Thornhill, Fairwater, Coed eva etc all remain the same and were not touched in the slightest by the failed "Welsh Outpouring", as indeed the whole town itself was not.
Frostie -
Just because the enthusiasts for such things like to immanetize the eschaton it doesn't follow that we have to do the same. So the fact that there are bills to pay, jobs to find, and social ills to overcome the following day doesn't rule out the possibility of God working the previous night. This has always been the case - from Acts onwards.
As Gamaliel says above, a fair amount of such things are down to human excitement. Yet, even a genuine shaking doesn't clear out human nature - the church of Jerusalem went back to pushing little old greek women out of the way after they had all experienced an anointing.
In this case of course it appears that it was a large part of it was driven by hype and hopefully there are thoughtful people around to help the disillusioned.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
All of it. Not just a large part. With no room for sacred doubt, true faith.
Posted by Twangist (# 16208) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
It's OK K. All is well.
NO it's not, K's friend has been screwed over - that is not OK.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Twangist, we have to embrace the deceived regardless. That covers everyone. THAT'S what makes it OK.
Posted by Twangist (# 16208) on
:
Martin you are very enigmatic
Posted by Lord Pontivillian (# 14308) on
:
Can I ask how many of the people posting comments on this thread went to Victory Church? How do you know it's all false?
Sadly healing isn't always physical, sometimes death is a form of healing and I fear to many Christians don't seem to see it as such. By all means be sceptical, but don't totally dismiss the outpouring until you have experienced what is going on.
I wouldn't say that the outreach from the "outpouring" is dead, it is just flourishing in different ways in different places.
[ 05. July 2014, 15:31: Message edited by: Lord Pontivillian ]
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Can I ask how many of the people posting comments on this thread went to Victory Church? How do you know it's all false?
Given that God can use anyone and anything, I for one have never claimed it's all false.
However, on the last thread I produced proof that the pastor engaged in regular plagiarism on his blog (a blog, by the way, that a pastor in Horsham quoted, presumably in good faith, as part of his endorsement of the outpouring).
A trustee of Victory Church was informed of the plagiarism, the blog was pulled, but there was no acknowledgement of the fact or reply to my message.
To me that is a serious challenge to the credibility of the enterprise right there. I raised other concerns on last year's thread, too. These concerns are objective, so none of them require attendance at the meetings to be established.
quote:
don't totally dismiss the outpouring until you have experienced what is going on.
As someone who still feels they got some positive things out of the Toronto blessing, I will concede that God can do good things in such environments.
However (and this is a point that supporters of this kind of thing seem to ignore systematically and at their peril), the fact that individuals may be blessed is no excuse whatsoever for not holding the organisers and leaders to account when there is demonstrable proof of a lack of integrity, and every excuse for sounding warnings.
quote:
I wouldn't say that the outreach from the "outpouring" is dead, it is just flourishing in different ways in different places.
Excuse me, but that is pathetic. It's like John Wimber's infamous prophecy that revival would break out in Britain in 1990; when it signally failed to happen, it was explained that he really meant "preparation" for revival. That was the best part of 25 years ago now and I think you are still preparing...
Creative redefinition like this does the charismatic cause more harm than good. As Gamaliel has said in the past, it helps in New Church circles to have a short memory...
In my view, "outpourings" like this are overwhelmingly a distraction and a diversion of time, money and resources from the long-term work of seeking the Kingdom and letting Jesus build his Church.
[ 05. July 2014, 16:42: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I think there were some eye-witness accounts on the archived thread, Lord Pontivillian.
I must admit, I've never visited Victory Church nor have I any particular desire to, despite it being in my home town. I still have relatives that I visit down there. To be honest, if I was visiting the area I'd have better things to do with my time ...
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
I do know people who have been and so does my brother who still lives in South Wales. From what I can gather it's now different to what can be seen at any of these apparent focal-points ... lots of fervent singing and enthusiastic exhortation and people falling over when they're prayed for etc.
I've seen all of that before. Many, many times.
The only difference I can see this time is that there have been claims of healing and claims that it was going to be start of something huge. Again, we've heard all of that before.
From what I can gather, none of the healing claims have been substantiated.
Every now and then you do get a charismatic or Pentecostal church then seems to step up into over-drive all of a sudden and then starts to trumpet that it's in revival. The same thing happened in Telford and in Dudley in recent years and in both cases things fizzled out fairly quickly. You can't keep up that kind of frenetic spiritual momentum for very long.
A friend who visited Dudley who is a card-carrying charismatic and into things like that, came away thinking that it was all froth and hype.
Move along, there's nothing to see.
That said, and I think this was acknowledged on the earlier thread on this topic, Victory Church does have an effective - but sometimes controversial - outreach to drug addicts and so on. I've heard people who aren't otherwise impressed by the place acknowledge that.
I don't believe for a moment that it'll all be bad and all baloney - but as Frostie has noted, if there are false prophecies flying around then these things need to recognised and called into question.
False prophecy is false prophecy. You can't bury it under the carpet and say, 'Ah well, for all the criticisms it's revival really ...'
Do I think this is/was a revival in the UK rather than the US sense of the term - where 'revival' can be a term used for regular evangelistic meetings?
No, I emphatically don't.
Do I need to go to Victory Church to see for myself? I would if I thought there really was something to see. But again, I don't believe there is.
All we're seeing - or have seen - was another outburst of religious 'enthusiasm' that has given a particular church it's 15 minutes of fame yet appears to have had little impact on the community.
That's why I was asking Frostie about the impact on the housing estates up that Valley. Because if it was having an impact there, I might sit up and take notice.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Excuse me, but that is pathetic. It's like John Wimber's infamous prophecy that revival would break out in Britain in 1990; when it signally failed to happen, it was explained that he really meant "preparation" for revival. That was the best part of 25 years ago now and I think you are still preparing...
Correction, it was Paul Cain who prophesied that and John Wimber who endorsed it. See the article from that time here which has a lot to say to the events being discussed on this thread. Who remembers the Kansas City Prophets now?
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I meant 'no difference' of course, rather than 'now difference'.
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
At any rate, you know as well as I do, Lord Pontivillian that what is being claimed in instances like this isn't along the lines of, 'Oh, well, he/she died, what a merciful release ... that counts as healing ...'
No, far from it. What's being claimed are spectacular supernatural healings. And there's precious little evidence for them.
If they were that apparent then surely we'd expect the whole town to be shaken by such occurrences?
But no, that's not what we are seeing at all.
When we read about miraculous healings and so on in the NT then people appear to sit up and take notice.
Other than people from other charismatic churches travelling down in coaches to extended revivalist meetings, I don't see much evidence of any of these claims.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
Thanks for that link, Eutychus. Interesting to read, speaking as a member of a Vineyard church...
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Awesome Eutychus. Gamaliel too. But you know this cannot change Lord Pontevillian. Only confirm him in his thinking ESPECIALLY if your defense convinces him against his will. Nothing will bring him closer but inclusion, acknowledgement, endorsement.
Posted by Emma Louise (# 3571) on
:
Oh gosh I remember that phase well. ( I used to work for a Vineyard church in a past life)
1995ish I remember a "waves of the spirit" huge conference in Bournemouth with the at-the-time-leaving-vineyard Toronto folks.
Then 1997 I started with one of the more famous Vineyards at teh time. Oh gosh. we had "prayer for revival" meetings regularly. We'd had all the prophesy about revival/ Paul Cain/ John Wimber bits and then Gerald Coates was the funniest - "revival in MAy" and then when it didn't happen... oh "must be next may".
Oh I have so many stories from that time. I may be rather cynical these days. THere were many, seriously intelligent students (oxbridge) that thought they might not have to focus that hard on studies as revival would come before the end of the course and everyone would be needed....
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Awesome Eutychus. Gamaliel too. But you know this cannot change Lord Pontevillian. Only confirm him in his thinking ESPECIALLY if your defense convinces him against his will. Nothing will bring him closer but inclusion, acknowledgement, endorsement.
Martin, I hope you will excuse me if I gently suggest you back off a little. I think I know Lord P. a little better than you do, and I politely suggest that you do not make the sort of remarks you have made at his expense until you know him a lot better.
Lord P's remarks were framed around the profound absence, from this thread, of up-to-date, eye-witness, evidence. Most of what is being said here is inference and supposition.
I think we might, all of us, benefit from keeping our powder dry.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Darllenwr:
Lord P's remarks were framed around the profound absence, from this thread, of up-to-date, eye-witness, evidence. Most of what is being said here is inference and supposition.
Why is the issue of plagiarism out of date? It hasn't been acknowledged, simply covered up.
And as far as I can see, the independent evidence for what I understand to be the "foundational miracle" of this outpouring is singularly lacking.
The pattern of the "outpouring" resembles Toronto, Pensacola, Lakeland and so on in many respects; is it wise to choose to ignore the lessons learned from those episodes?
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
?
Posted by Lord Pontivillian (# 14308) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Awesome Eutychus. Gamaliel too. But you know this cannot change Lord Pontevillian. Only confirm him in his thinking ESPECIALLY if your defense convinces him against his will. Nothing will bring him closer but inclusion, acknowledgement, endorsement.
Oh dear. I have issues with Cwmbran, but I also see the good that has come from it. Good has come from these places regardless of the people involved and the lies/deceit they have woven. The plagiarism does not mean God was not at work in Cwmbran but that "his" people have failed in many ways.
My opinions have changed over the years, as several shipmates can attest and I don't mean my parents. My views as a Christian are constantly being reformed, but I have seen to much too struggle to believe that God isn't active today.
[ 05. July 2014, 21:55: Message edited by: Lord Pontivillian ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I don't think anyone here is saying that God is 'inactive', Lord Pontivillian.
Eutychus is highly critical of unsubstantiated claims but on his own admission still feels that he benefited greatly from the 'Toronto Blessing' 20 years ago now.
Other than Frostie, perhaps, who sounds like something of a cessationist to me, and who certainly uses intemperate terms - in my view - such as 'apostate' and Komensky who is very disillusioned, I don't think any of the other posters are saying that nothing good can come out of this.
I can't speak for the others, but I've been round the block a fair few times and nothing I've heard from Cwmbran has convinced me that we're dealing with anything more than the kind of 'enthusiasm' that surfaces in Pentecostal settings periodically.
I don't think we have to cite extremes like Lakeland and Todd Bentley (Bent Toddley as Daronmedway memorably called him) to see this as the most likely explanation in this case.
I've already mentioned Telford and Dudley. There was also Pensacola earlier. And people who were involved with the revival hype of the mid to late '90s have already shared their experiences of that.
I was heading away from revivalism by then but I well remember Gerald Coates's thing about 'revival in May' and so on.
I really don't know what more to say. The whole thing is the triumph of hope over experience.
Saying that the 'outpouring' (if that's what it was) hasn't fizzled out but is appearing elsewhere (where?) is bit like those name-it-and-claim-it prosperity-gospellers who used to go around saying, 'Well, he's been healed but the symptoms are persisting ...'
To apply a Yorkshire phrase (I lived there for nearly 30 years), 'Was he heck as like.'
You can't be healed and the symptoms persist. You are either healed or you aren't.
You can't have a revival that mightn't be apparent as one. It's either a revival or it isn't. If it WAS a revival I'd expect to hear more about it whenever I went home. I grew up in Cwmbran for goodness sake and still have relatives there. None of them have even mentioned it.
If there was a revival going on then surely it'd be the talk of the town?
But it isn't.
Other than a very good - and very balanced - article in the Big Issue, the only places I've heard this thing mentioned is in charismatic circles or here on the Ship. No-one else has said a dicky-bird about it.
If that's not grounds for being somewhat sceptical about it, I don't know what is.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Oh dear. I have issues with Cwmbran, but I also see the good that has come from it. Good has come from these places regardless of the people involved and the lies/deceit they have woven. The plagiarism does not mean God was not at work in Cwmbran but that "his" people have failed in many ways.
I don't disagree with any of this.
What I do disagree with is the notion that because God in his sovereignty can bring good out of bad stuff, the bad stuff and those responsible for it should be ignored.
Those responsible for this type of phenomenon frequently go on to become minor Christian celebrities. As such they become opinion-formers and influencers. Once they have achieved a certain level of notoriety, even respected Christian leaders who have endorsed them may refuse to speak out against wrongdoing because "it would be a bad witness", "we mustn't discourage people", etc. (or simply because it would reflect badly on them).
Simply put, wolves get a free pass to tyrannise the sheep. The fact that some sheep manage to grab a few bites of grass in between the tyranny does not address this problem.
I keep insisting on the plagiarism issue because:
- unlike testimonies of healing, the evidence was pretty much incontrovertible and plain for all to see
- it's an immediate, serious and widely recognised challenge to an individual's integrity
- the church responded to it by burying it, not addressing it. Unless and until such a serious issue is properly addressed, I think any further claims by that source are suspect.
Earlier I mentioned the Pensacola revival. The local paper did a series of award-winning articles on the revival.
The paper's coverage is fair enough to make Lord Pontivillian's point about Cwmbran for Pensacola:
quote:
Many have had an emotionally and spiritually stimulating experience there.Many have been baptized. Many have made a commitment to change their ways and live closer to God.
But the rest is worth noting too: quote:
...the first service, plus the accounts from members who were there, reveal otherwise and indicate the revival was well-planned and orchestrated to become a large and long-running enterprise.
I see little difference here, especially given the developments on Victory Church's website since a year ago.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Ah, the magic word: enterpri$e
As ever Eutychus, superb, this is the voice of the spirit of a sound mind.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Sadly healing isn't always physical, sometimes death is a form of healing and I fear to many Christians don't seem to see it as such.
That's because it isn't a form of healing. It is a failure of healing. Death may be a relief, but it is not healing.
To heal someone is to make them well and to avoid their death. If someone told me that my child had been "healed" after dying of cancer, I would be tempted to "heal" them of their stupidity by the laying of of my hands around their throat.
God has given us fantastic ways to really heal ill people in the form of modern medicine, diagnostics and hospitals. Any other form of healing is at best misguided and in all other cases a sham set up to leech money out of vulnerable individuals.
It is people like that who give Christianity a bad name and I for one would welcome back throwing them to the lions to really allow them to test out their faith!
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
Considering the number of times I ever agree with anything deano says, ever: LP, please consider you must be very, very mistaken.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by deano:
God has given us fantastic ways to really heal ill people in the form of modern medicine, diagnostics and hospitals. Any other form of healing is at best misguided and in all other cases a sham set up to leech money out of vulnerable individuals.
It is people like that who give Christianity a bad name.
But if modern medicine were so utterly wonderful there wouldn't be any 'vulnerable individuals', would there? They'd just go to the doctor and everything would be hunky-dory.
In the Western world there are some individuals who refuse any kind of medical help because they're only interested in miracles. I suspect that such people are in the minority. Most of those who turn to faith healers are probably also well-known to their doctors. For some of them, faith healing will be the last resort, not the first. After all, there are faith healers whose PR relies on the sorrowful testimony of doctors who've 'done all they can' as part of the narrative of miracle-making. Doctors are required at the very least to pronounce a diagnosis.
I do think that most churches need a much better theology of suffering, illness and death. I presume that previous generations of evangelicals as well as mainstream Christians dealt with this better, because incurable illness and early death were a bigger part of their daily lives that they are today. Death is an affront to everyone's modern, Western, 'advanced' sensibilities, whether Christian or not.
Posted by Lord Pontivillian (# 14308) on
:
Can you explain the case of the man who ruptured his tendon, went to the same doctor who diagnosed him,after prayer, and found out his tendon wasn't ruptured any more? I have known the person involved for coming up to 20 years. I trust him.
What would you have said on the day of Pentecost? Would you be looking for wine?
I know that some of you have suffered from Pentecostalism/Charismaticism but please don`t take the view that it`s all fake. I was very dismissive of high church services until I went to one.
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Can you explain the case of the man who ruptured his tendon, went to the same doctor who diagnosed him,after prayer, and found out his tendon wasn't ruptured any more? I have known the person involved for coming up to 20 years. I trust him.
What I can explain is that tendon repair is utterly routine on the NHS. I know personally of examples of sewing on of fingers that have been removed in traumatic accidents, which involved several tendon repairs all at the same time. These have copious medical records to go with them.
Forgive my lack of faith, but I don't find a single case of tendon repair compelling evidence of an extraordinary outpouring of the Holy Spirit. My response to the person concerned would be "That's nice. Saved you a bit of time" - a response that would be, I suggest, far more sensible than calling a revival.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Lord Pontivillian (sorry for the 'ee' for an 'eye' last time, almost lex talionis of me).
This is going to be incredibly difficult for us. More for me than for you. I have to find a way of embracing you without reservation despite your otherness. I can do it with all others it feels like except Christian others. Which is most Christians! Most Christians are other to me, are more other to me than most non-Christians. So you're in good company.
So, we are other to each other with regard to healing, revival, the working of the Holy Spirit in those regards. We will never convince each other otherwise. Is there any way ahead for us together? Because I value your company. Regardless and because of your otherness. Is there a metawalk in which we can walk together despite our otherness?
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
I'm not suggesting for a moment that there are any sex abuse issues going on here, but the similarity in systemic failure with what seems to have happened in Britain in the 1970s and 80s has suddenly struck me.
In the scandal over the "lost" Whitehall child abuse dossier, Norman Tebbit has said: quote:
people had an "almost unconscious" tendency to protect "the system".
I think that is also largely the case with the charismatic-evangelical "system" when allegations of things not being as they are claimed surface. Sometimes it goes by other terms: "not touching the Lord's anointed"; "believing the best"; "trusting our team".
It wasn't until ten years after I moved back into secular work that I came across the phrase - from two independent, non-Christian sources - that "confidence does not exclude control". It's a shame that assertion is beyond the pale in many Christian circles.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Lord Pontevillian, I don't think you are dealing here with people who are reluctant to attend charismatic or Pentecostal services and are dismissing them without having experienced them.
For the most part, those posting on this thread have been involved - either as observers or participants - for some considerable time. I was part of a pretty full-on charismatic evangelical fellowship for 18 years and part of a mildly charismatic Baptist church for six years. I've lived here about 7 or 8 years now and our local parish church is evangelical/charismatic.
So it's not as if I haven't seen it, done it, got the T-shirt.
The case of your friend's ruptured tendon could be a genuine healing or it could have been a misdiagnosis in the first place. I've no way of telling what it was. I'm simply glad that he doesn't have a problem with it any more.
I'm seconding what Doc Tor says about Deano's post.
I can count the number of times I've agreed with Deano on the fingers of ... on the finger of one hand.
Now I'm heading towards a fistful of agreement with him.
I'm not a cessationist and I don't doubt that genuine stuff does happen on the charismatic scene. Generally, I would posit, in a fairly quiet and dramatic way without any great deal of fanfare.
Heck, I won't name names but even today I heard a testimony from a well known evangelical 'name' concerning an experience he had within 8 weeks of what the doctors said would be his death. I have no doubt that the experience was genuine and it did involve something that sounded quite 'other' and supernatural if you like - but it also involved the hospital and the doctors.
I'm not dismissing claims of healing out of hand. But at the same time I'm not rushing to revivalist meetings looking for them because I've learned through long exposure to these things that the rhetoric exceeds the reality.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Sorry, that should be 'quiet and undramatic' ...
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Gamaliel! You old backslider! I'm not a cessationist either, God can do what He wants. WHAT genuine stuff? Cheshire genuine? I watched Behind The Candelabra last night. Fascinating. Liberace had kidney failure and a vision of a nun in white and his kidneys recovered that night. He died obscenely of AIDS later.
And we conclude what?
For me it's ALL distraction. All instead of building the kingdom. Successful revival would be the biggest failure of all.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Can you explain the case of the man who ruptured his tendon, went to the same doctor who diagnosed him,after prayer, and found out his tendon wasn't ruptured any more? I have known the person involved for coming up to 20 years. I trust him.
What would you have said on the day of Pentecost? Would you be looking for wine?
I know that some of you have suffered from Pentecostalism/Charismaticism but please don`t take the view that it`s all fake. I was very dismissive of high church services until I went to one.
Yes, I would say the "doctor" should be reported to the GMC for missing such a basic diagnosis in the first place. Or did he go to A&E and they did an x-ray? In which case they should be reported. Because a ruptured tendon is quite specific in its symptoms. either your friend is lying, or the so-called doctor is, or you are.
God doesn't do that kind of nonsense; I will heal you but not you!
There is always a scientific reason for people dying. It may be unpalatable to people who demand control in their lives and can't cope when things get beyond them intellectually, but nevertheless, it is science that has the answers. But God gave us the "seen and unseen", which includes science.
[ 06. July 2014, 19:51: Message edited by: deano ]
Posted by Lord Pontivillian (# 14308) on
:
Lying brings no glory to God. Why do it? I am against claiming miracles falsely as anyone.
[ 06. July 2014, 19:56: Message edited by: Lord Pontivillian ]
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
These revival type things seem to have been crying wolf for centuries. Hence my heavy scepticism, every time I hear of a new one, and total lack of surprise when it goes phut.
I believe in the possibility of miracles, I don't think they arrive on cue at revival meetings. I also cleave to occam's razor, find me a well documented case of healing that is not better explained by spontaneous remission within the bounds of normal medical experience - then you would hold my attention with a healing claim.
What makes me really angry, is the people I work with who have serious mental health problems who have been very damaged by this kind of psuedo-religious practice.
At least the victory church lot aren't soliciting for money, or claiming to be sprinkled with gold dust I suppose.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Lying brings no glory to God. Why do it? I am against claiming miracles falsely as anyone.
Excellent, now we've ruled you out, so was it the doctor, the radiologist or your friend who was doing God a disservice over the case of the mended tendon?
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by deano:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Lying brings no glory to God. Why do it? I am against claiming miracles falsely as anyone.
Excellent, now we've ruled you out, so was it the doctor, the radiologist or your friend who was doing God a disservice over the case of the mended tendon?
You've simply begged the question here - in your worldview there is no scope for miraculous healing, so someone has to be either lying or deceived. Whereas it's clear that Lord Pontivillian does accept the possibility of miraculous healing.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by deano:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Lying brings no glory to God. Why do it? I am against claiming miracles falsely as anyone.
Excellent, now we've ruled you out, so was it the doctor, the radiologist or your friend who was doing God a disservice over the case of the mended tendon?
You've simply begged the question here - in your worldview there is no scope for miraculous healing, so someone has to be either lying or deceived. Whereas it's clear that Lord Pontivillian does accept the possibility of miraculous healing.
Then he's either a foolish naif or a dissingenous charlatan.
The only miracles that have ever occurred in the last two thousand years were the ones Christ himself performed between his baptism in the Jordan, and his ascension into Heaven. Any others are fake and you're either taken in by them or part of them.
Any other worldview is again taken care of by modern medicine... psychiatry.
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by deano:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Lying brings no glory to God. Why do it? I am against claiming miracles falsely as anyone.
Excellent, now we've ruled you out, so was it the doctor, the radiologist or your friend who was doing God a disservice over the case of the mended tendon?
While I sympathise with your tenacity, is it actually important whether it was a misdiagnosis, a natural healing or a miraculous healing?
It's just a tendon. I could point to my local specialist hospital where they probably do a dozen repairs a day. We don't line up outside the consultant's office singing hymns and praising God (though they deserve the kudos). We certainly shouldn't be beating a path to such a paltry 'healing' ministry.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
And if there were an incontrovertible miracle (I LOVE the one in The Second Coming with Ecclestone at the Man City ground: all materialists instantly believe) then what?
Posted by St. Gwladys (# 14504) on
:
Thanks, South Coast Kevin - the topic seems to have got away from whether the events at Cwmbran were real or no to whether miracles happen. Personally, I would say that God is the same, yesterday, today and forever - and He still works miracles, sometimes very dramatically - like the old friend of mine who had a car accident which left him practically unable to walk - after prayer he ran up and down a flight of stairs and around the church building, and he is still able to walk 30years on. As he had been in hospital for a significant period before hand, I assume there are medical records.
Not everyone in Christ's time was healed, I haven't yet been healed of my MS, but I stil believe in a God who does heal.
Going back to the various "revivals" - the proof will always be in the results - there will be some people who get carried along with the hype, and some who have a real experience - that has always been the case - again, I have seen it for myself - we were involved in a very lively church which had a very active youth group. The church split, some held on to their faith, others didn't and were casualties, possibly because their "faith", their foundation, wss actually the peer pressure of being in that particular group - a second hand faith, if you like.
But, and it is a big but, there are a lot of people from that group who still have a deep faith and experienced changed lives.
Yes, you have to check out the claims, but you can't "throw the baby out with the bathwater" either.
(And incidentally, I also know the gentleman with the injured tendon - he was prayed for at the end of a fairly ordinary Anglican service - not a hyped up Revival service - and had an immediate improvement in his walking - his physiotherapist (NHS) couldn't believe the amount of improvement in such a short time.)
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
It reminds me mildly of the Lance Armstrong debacle, probably cos I have tour on the brain.
(The revival phenomenal, not your friend.)
[ 06. July 2014, 21:08: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by deano:
The only miracles that have ever occurred in the last two thousand years were the ones Christ himself performed between his baptism in the Jordan, and his ascension into Heaven. Any others are fake and you're either taken in by them or part of them.
Any other worldview is again taken care of by modern medicine... psychiatry.
Ah - so the book of Acts is non-canonic?
Bless ... ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
I do think a lot of healing stories discount how both chronic pain and conversion disorders work.
Pain is massively cognitively mediated. Plus placebo effect is a real thing, it causes the body to produce not just painkilling chemicals, but also kicks up anti-inflammatory response.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Were you there St. Gwladys? If your friend could publish his records and there was anything inexplicable we could praise God for more than His provision. And then what?
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
Anyway, aren't so-called miracles late nags, or has this particular equine had a miraculous healing as well?
It certainly feels a short step (even with a dodgy tendon) from healing miracles to other pedigree chum areas that choose to ignore science in favour of "oh say can you seeeeee...." Or whatever the song of the ignorant is in the valleys these days.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Darllenwr:
quote:
Originally posted by deano:
The only miracles that have ever occurred in the last two thousand years were the ones Christ himself performed between his baptism in the Jordan, and his ascension into Heaven. Any others are fake and you're either taken in by them or part of them.
Any other worldview is again taken care of by modern medicine... psychiatry.
Ah - so the book of Acts is non-canonic?
Bless ...
Okay, fair point. The RCC and the Eastern Orthodox may well have some claims over miracles leading to sainthood. But I'm willing to bet that most folks looking for divine intervention over toothache, bad posture or tendonitis have no interest in anything approaching Papal approval for such acts, and I speak as a CofE member, not a Catholic or Orthodox apologist.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Gwladys:
(And incidentally, I also know the gentleman with the injured tendon - he was prayed for at the end of a fairly ordinary Anglican service - not a hyped up Revival service - and had an immediate improvement in his walking - his physiotherapist (NHS) couldn't believe the amount of improvement in such a short time.)
This is very important, IMO. I think the hype and sensationalism that seems to accompany much so-called revivalism is a dangerous and often profoundly ungodly thing. The Holy Spirit does not need hyping up.
Yes, I know some people have a strong aesthetic sense and benefit from an environment in which there is a lot of sensory input. But I think we have to be very careful - ISTM that it's so easy for this drive to create worshipful spaces (be it through the use of music, visuals, fragrances etc.) to become a manipulative thing, inadvertantly seeking to mimic the effect of God's work in our spirits.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Divide and conquer eh Darllenwr?
Yeah, ay, deano, Peter and Paul didn't do no apostolic miracles then and the disciples didn't when Jesus sent them on tour?
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
I think well-heeled, well-educated Western Christians should probably leave miracles to one side and seek for God to manifest himself in some other way. Asking for medical miracles when you've already got the NHS doesn't seem quite right somehow.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Divide and conquer eh Darllenwr?
Yeah, ay, deano, Peter and Paul didn't do no apostolic miracles then and the disciples didn't when Jesus sent them on tour?
Like I said, I have conceded that point, but somebody wanting their rheumatism fixed up is not St Peter in the upper room, and anyone who says they can fix someone's rheumatism through divine intervention is doing it for the money and is a liar, a cheat and a thief, and not St Paul driving out some spirits in Malta.
I want to see way more proof of divine favour than a simple claim. I want MRI scans and I want to see the person claiming to do the healing being bitten by a few serpents of my choosing, starting with a couple of king cobras, then being all hunky-dorey in a short time afterwards.
In fact, lets make "physician heal thyself" the gold standard for faith-healers. Before you can claim to be able to heal someone though the laying on of hands, you have to have a piano dropped on your head first, then fix yourself up.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think well-heeled, well-educated Western Christians should probably leave miracles to one side and seek for God to manifest himself in some other way. Asking for medical miracles when you've already got the NHS doesn't seem quite right somehow.
And we have a winner.
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
Engages cynic hat:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Gwladys:
- like the old friend of mine who had a car accident which left him practically unable to walk
So (a) he had a non-degenerative condition that his body would be trying to fix and (b) "practically unable" means he could both stand and walk, though with difficulty.
quote:
- after prayer he ran up and down a flight of stairs and around the church building,
Perhaps prayer gave him the confidence to overcome twinges of pain, and the fear of falling and go for it. That in itself is a blessing, why do we need it to be more than that ?
How much pain you feel is strongly effected by expectation. In hospital when they hook a patients to a morphine driver they can press for a dose, it has been experimentally demonstrated that although not every button press delivers morphine (or they might overdose) they experience pain relief from the button press even when morphine is not delivered.
quote:
he is still able to walk 30years on.
That is great and I am I am happy for him, I would think walking regularly would allow his legs, joints, tendons etc to gain strength, flexibility and range of motion.
quote:
As he had been in hospital for a significant period before hand, I assume there are medical records.
But you haven't seen them - so you do not have definite information about his condition at the time.
Also, you are describing events thirty years ago. There is strong research evidence about what happens with human memory over time - one of the best known trackbacks is Richard Wiseman's research into eye witness accounts of the Indian rope trick - essentially unusual events get elaborated over time in accordance with the recallers expectations.
None of which is about deliberate deceit, or a lack of God's grace. Your friend really got better, and prayer helped him do that, I just doubt the mechanism was supernatural and that the run was as dramatic as you remember. And my doubts are based not on my view of your integrity, but on how people's minds usually work. Essentially I think my version is likelier than yours.
I could be wrong.
[ 06. July 2014, 21:34: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I think the adrenalin and placebo effect thing accounts for a lot of this. I've been in meetings where I've seen people cajoled out of wheelchairs and encouraged to push them round and round the meeting hall while everybody whoops and hollers and praises the Lord.
By the end of these same meetings these same people are back in their wheelchairs.
What we'd been seeing was simply an adrenalin rush, peer-pressure and a lamentable lack of fellow-feeling and even basic humanity on the part of the organisers.
I've seen terrible, terrible things like that.
I've told this story before, but my brother once drove a group of young people to a 'healing meeting' at a small conservative evangelical - and not particularly charismatic - church in Gloucestershire. One of the girls in the party had a pronounced squint or cast in her eye.
During the service the evangelist (and I won't name him but he is well-known) said that he'd had a word-of-knowledge about there being a girl in the gathering with a cast in her eye and that God wanted to heal it.
So his friend went forward for prayer. There was no hype or jiggery-pokery and all was calm and without pressure. And to everyone's amazement, as the evangelist prayed the girl's eye began to flicker and visibly 'moved' into a more regular or rightful position. Much rejoicing, both in the gathering and in the car on the way home.
The next day, the girl got up and looked in the mirror. Lo and behold, the cast had returned. She still had her squint.
What's going on here? Does God mess people about like that?
No, I don't believe he does.
What I think happened was that there was a nervous muscle reaction which gave the appearance that something was happening. A physiotherapist has explained to me how these things work - muscle spasms and so on.
Although it wasn't a hyped-up meeting there was still a sense of tension and heightened expectation.
If I remember rightly, there was a first hand - or perhaps second-hand - account from someone who had visited the meetings in Cwmbran. An lady with some kind of pain - rheumatic or similar - had felt instant relief in the meeting itself but the pain returned as soon as she'd left the building.
I'm left wondering why a lot of these claims are orthopaedic or muscular in nature. I suspect it's because such conditions can give a semblance of immediate response.
Unlike Deano, I do believe that it is possible for people to be healed and for their conditions to improve in response to prayer. I can't prove that, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to suppose that such a thing is possible if we do believe in an interventionist God.
However, other than one or two instances where I remain open to the possibility that prayer and the supernatural - or supranatural - were involved, I have to be honest and acknowledge that in my 30+ years as a Christian I have seen very, very little evidence of any of these so-called healings lasting very long.
If Gwladys has an example that has, then that's great. But at the same time I can give loads of examples from my own experience where the opposite has been the case - inclusing, sadly, people with MS where healings have been claimed when the condition had simply gone into remission.
My Christian physio friend (who doesn't dismiss the possibility of divine healing either) can cite plenty of examples of spontaneous remissions and even quite spectacular recoveries from musculo-skeletal disorders where prayer, faith or any belief in God weren't involved at all.
She believes that this is the nature of these conditions. That's what happens with them.
Which is why, I believe, the vast majority of apparent healing stories concern people with muscular or orthopaedic problems - or damaged tendons and the like.
We don't hear anywhere near as many about deafness, blindness, broken bones, conditions like Aids and so on.
Heck, in the charismatic church I belonged to for 18 years we had a bloke who was our 'poster-boy' testimony ... a former miner who suffered with emphysema.
He was up and about, out of his wheelchair, not on oxygen etc ... and he lived a good while before the emphysema finally killed him.
He hadn't been healed at all, but he acted as if he was. It was a mind over matter thing and impressive though that was to a certain extent, it certainly wasn't the miracle many of us took it be.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by deano:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think well-heeled, well-educated Western Christians should probably leave miracles to one side and seek for God to manifest himself in some other way. Asking for medical miracles when you've already got the NHS doesn't seem quite right somehow.
And we have a winner.
I'm glad you're happy!
I'm not anti-miracles, though. I just don't think that the quality of faith in our particular Christian culture is likely to generate spiritual blessings of that type. And faith healing as a form of evangelism (which I presume was the idea in Cwmbran) doesn't seem to be suitable for our culture in general. In other cultures,though, I think faith healing makes more sense.
(We should remember, though, that the NHS doesn't bring satisfaction and peace of mind to everyone.)
Posted by Steve Langton (# 17601) on
:
Keeping out of the miracles issue, back a bit more to this kind of 'revivalism' in general;
I don't have the reference to hand, but I once read an account of Wesley's reaction to finding people in his audience doing the 'holy-roller/slain-in-the-Lord/Toronto-blessing kind of thing. At first it seems he was quite impressed; but in the end he realised that it was a reaction he seemed able to produce himself, by how he preached and exhorted, and stop it happening by different style preaching.
In addition he felt that the people doing the 'holy rolling' didn't seem to be noticeably better Christians in shall-we-say more important kinds of holiness than those who didn't respond so dramatically, and indeed the holy rollers often showed pride and other spiritual problems. He therefore consciously stopped the kind of preaching which produced such results....
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
With respect to healing miracles, I think it is significant that there are still, as far as I know, NO documented cases of healings. Lots and lots of claims but nothing that has ever stood up to investigation. I'm not asking for much - just one case where someone has a clear ailment, with supporting medical evidence, and then, after prayer, clear independent medical evidence that the ailment has completely gone. The blind seeing, the deaf hearing or the lame walking would be fantastic. But I would accept a case where a documented tumor disappears immediately and for good.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Gwladys:
Going back to the various "revivals" - the proof will always be in the results
The really important question is proof of what?
The argument about whether anything spiritually authentic, miracles or otherwise, happened at Cwmbran is an entirely separate question to that of the integrity and honesty of the leadership and the soundness (in ethical rather than theological terms) of the framework in which it takes place.
As I've said before, God is fortunately big enough to bestow grace in the most corrupt environments. The fact that he does in no way validates the credentials or modus operandi of those responsible for those environments.
I have heard the defence "but look at the fruit" too many times in situations which can be proven to be deceitful. It's a bait and switch in which sovereign work of God in some individuals' lives is used in an attempt to endorse the integrity of completely separate individuals (usually the leaders or organisers).
In fact I seem to remember Jesus referring to those who performed miracles, prophesied and cast out demons in his name, that he never knew.
[ 07. July 2014, 05:47: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I'm reading what many regard as the definitive biography of Wesley at the moment, Steve Langton (although I'm sure that there are other biographies which others would regard in a similar way ...) -
And what that author concludes on the holy-rollering thing is similar to what you've written here - only with the caveat that Wesley never dismissed these things entirely.
It is significant, perhaps, that these 'manifestations' apparently only happened in Whitefield's meetings when Wesley was present - as he was on some occasions despite their theological disagreements and differences.
On those occasions it's not clear whether Wesley always preached, but it would appear that the mere fact of his presence was sufficient to induce this kind of behaviour - perhaps among the more susceptible.
This leads me to believe that we are talking about 'learned behaviour' and psychosomatic responses to a certain extent.
Nigel Wright, former President of the Baptist Union, noticed a similar thing during the Toronto-Blessing. He found that he could induce these kind of experiences very easily and so he pulled back from doing so after a while.
My own experience echoes this. For a while during the Toronto thing I found that when I prayed for people or laid hands on or near them, they would fall over or else jerk backwards as if hit by an electric charge.
I felt very proud of myself. Look at me, I had the 'anointing' at last ...
But I quickly realised how easy it was to create conditions where this sort of thing could happen - there was a kind of Toronto-liturgy which built up a sense of expectation. Also, once it had happened to people once or twice it was easy to repeat the performance with a small number of cues - some of them quite subtle and barely discernible to the uninitiated.
So, like Wright, I too stepped back from it all. I was concerned that I might fall into spiritual pride and hubris.
I don't say that to suggest that I'm any more wise or saintly than anyone else - far from it. But in this instance I recognised the dangers. I could see that these things were largely psychologically induced.
What would I do if Toronto-style holy rolling were to kick-off all over again?
Well, this time round I would steer well clear. It's not where it's at.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
I don't have the reference to hand, but I once read an account of Wesley's reaction to finding people in his audience doing the 'holy-roller/slain-in-the-Lord/Toronto-blessing kind of thing. At first it seems he was quite impressed; but in the end he realised that it was a reaction he seemed able to produce himself, by how he preached and exhorted, and stop it happening by different style preaching.
In addition he felt that the people doing the 'holy rolling' didn't seem to be noticeably better Christians in shall-we-say more important kinds of holiness than those who didn't respond so dramatically, and indeed the holy rollers often showed pride and other spiritual problems. He therefore consciously stopped the kind of preaching which produced such results....
Thanks for this, Steve! My respect for John Wesley and admiration for what he did has just increased a bit (it was already pretty high, I should add). I'm about to buy a book all about remarkable Christian movements and one chapter is about early Methodism. I shall read with interest!
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Your best bet for a biography of Wesley, SCK is Henry D Rack's 'Reasonable Enthusiast'. Although it might help if you've read his Journals and other biographies before you come to this one.
I'm part way through it and I have to say it strikes me as the most balanced account I've come across and it puts the whole thing into a very clear historical, social and theological context.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I would add that it doesn't portray Wesley as a 'plaster saint' either. The guy had his faults, as we all do.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Your best bet for a biography of Wesley, SCK is Henry D Rack's 'Reasonable Enthusiast'. Although it might help if you've read his Journals and other biographies before you come to this one.
I'm part way through it and I have to say it strikes me as the most balanced account I've come across and it puts the whole thing into a very clear historical, social and theological context.
Cheers for this, Mr G. For now, I'll see how I get on with the book I've just ordered as I simply must focus my reading on this bloomin' dissertation I'm writing. But I am keen to explore the roots of Methodism further when time permits, so I might well come back to your recommendations.
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
Lying brings no glory to God. Why do it? I am against claiming miracles falsely as anyone.
One suspects that God isn't the one to whom they're trying to bring glory.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Gamaliel, it's as reasonable as any other theoretical possibility of God overruling SOME of the laws of physics because He's capable of doing so despite the fact that none of us has ever encountered that or knows anybody who has.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Sure, which is why I don't seek out revivalist meetings and such like these days, Martin.
But neither am I claiming that it is impossible for these things to happen.
It's a tricky one. The liberals get out of the dilemmas by having a non-interventionist God in the first place. God isn't capricious, they say, why would he chose to heal one person and not another? Surely it's far better to have no concept of answered prayers for healing at all ...
I can see what they're getting at but can't see how this is true to the thrust and tenor of the NT.
So I'm something of a cleft stick. I've not seen anything that could count and pass all scientific muster as a 'miracle' - yet I remain open to the possibility that such things can and do happen.
Coming back to the Cwmbran thing though. It's pretty obvious that what we are dealing with is the standard forms of Pentecostal revivalism and enthusiasm that have temporarily 'boiled over' from their home environment - in this case Victory Church, Cwmbran - and attracted wider attention.
It's not the first time this has happened - nor will it be the last. Is it worth going to check out and investigate? No, I don't believe it is.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
I think the thrust and tenor, the arc, the trajectory are beyond mere physical miracles in to the relational, the social.
Until we behave as if we were God's arms He can't come.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
The reason why this issue raises such passion, of course, is that to mislead someone about what they can expect God to do for them is a unique kind of wickedness. (Not a unique degree, but a unique kind.)
People who are sick are usually desperate to get better - and the sicker they are, the more desperate they get. And people who expect their illness to be terminal will often go to the most extraordinary and (to an uninvolved third party) apparently irrational lengths just to make it to that birthday, that wedding, that graduation....
In these circumstances, to murmur to someone, "I know a God who can fix that for you" puts you in a position of incredible influence with that person. You gain tremendous power, and they become very vulnerable. From that moment on, the temptation to abuse that power is enormous - the more so if you can justify it to yourself by saying it'll "bring others to God", or whatever.
The disappointment, when it comes, and it nearly always does, is crushing - not only to the sick person but to their friends, their family, even their whole community. I can't possibly believe in a God who would want us to behave in that way towards people just on the off-chance of gaining another disciple or two.
Far harder than saying "I know a God who can fix that" is saying, "I'll walk with you every step of the way." Far harder, but in my opinion far more Christ-like.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
By a country mile.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I'm about to buy a book all about remarkable Christian movements and one chapter is about early Methodism. I shall read with interest!
Hi
Which book is that? I would probably be interested in reading it as well.
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Your best bet for a biography of Wesley, SCK is Henry D Rack's 'Reasonable Enthusiast'.
Thanks for this recommendation. I might check it out.
(My pile of books to read is beginning to get out of hand again.... )
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Aren't all Christian movements 'remarkable' in some way or other?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
I'm always amazed/thankful that anyone comes to Church in this secular and post-Christian society (I speak of the urban UK).
All this hype about healings and stuff (whether substantiated, or ISTM more often, unsubstantiated) looks to be just froth - none of it appears to have any relevance to the un-churched, hungry, deprived, poorly-educated, low-income, low life-expectancy, young single-parent families which form the majority of the population of the parish in which I work!
Am I missing something here? (And don't tell me the Holy Spirit doesn't work in such places, cos She does - only very quietly.....).
Ian J.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Divide and conquer eh Darllenwr?
Dunno about that - but if you are going to claim that there were no miracles after Jesus' ascension, then you have to accept that Luke told a few porky ones. If that is the case, how can you be sure that he told the truth about Jesus' miracles? And if you concede that Luke may have been economical with the truth where Jesus was concerned, you have to say the same about the other synoptic Gospel writers, since they reported the same miracles. And if you do that, why bother reading the New Testament at all, given that it is obviously a tissue of lies from beginning to end?
Alternatively, if you accept that Luke wasn't playing games in his reportage, then it is difficult to see how miracles ceased with Jesus' ascension. I can understand how one might then draw a line with the death of the last of the Apostles, but as the Early Church Fathers also cite the miraculous, even that might be tricky.
Probably safer to keep an open mind on such issues and concede that, "I'll believe it when I see it." Or, if you prefer, don't dismiss it just because you, personally, haven't seen it.
My problem with the cessationist perspective is that it requires that somebody maintain a careful record to show that there have been no miracles, of any sort, since the chosen year. Since none of us lives for that sort of time, this is a bit of a problem.
As a scientist, I am required to acknowledge the data, even when I don't like it. It seems to me that the Cessationist, inevitably, has to reject data that doesn't fit his world-view.
YMMV
Posted by Steve Langton (# 17601) on
:
by Gamaliel;
quote:
And what that author concludes on the holy-rollering thing is similar to what you've written here - only with the caveat that Wesley never dismissed these things entirely.
I wouldn't entirely dismiss them myself; I believe they can be a genuine and spontaneous reaction of a person confronted by his sinfulness before God - the problem is when there's a temptation to repeat them and 'make them happen'. I think Wesley rightly made an effort to avoid that pitfall without writing off the experience altogether.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
I wouldn't dream of making any sort of claim Darllenwr. I repeat as a fact I have never seen a suspension of the laws of physics and in 30 years of fellowship with thousands and thousands of believers in congregations, home groups, in festivals, I don't know anybody who has. Including you.
It's a distraction. From the responsibilities of Christian maturity. Even if every claim were true, so what? Revival would happen? If only we'd believe more? Revival of what?
I'm grateful that the miracles DON'T happen. It would be far, far worse if they did.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Your best bet for a biography of Wesley, SCK is Henry D Rack's 'Reasonable Enthusiast'. Although it might help if you've read his Journals and other biographies before you come to this one.
I'm part way through it and I have to say it strikes me as the most balanced account I've come across and it puts the whole thing into a very clear historical, social and theological context.
This particular biography is on my list, so I'm glad you can recommend it. Did you enjoy reading the journals? I have a project in mind that requires that I read them, but the thought is a bit overwhelming.
Wesley should probably have more detractors nowadays than he does. Those who fear or otherwise disapprove of the irrationality of Pentecostalism should bemoan the Wesleyan influence on that massive and still growing movement. And the liberalism of modern Methodism is not entirely disconnected from his teachings either, so I understand. Fortunately for Wesley's memory, though, it's his boundless energy and utter devotion to spreading the gospel that charms all-comers!
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I'm about to buy a book all about remarkable Christian movements and one chapter is about early Methodism. I shall read with interest!
Which book is that? I would probably be interested in reading it as well.
It's called Movements that Change the World. Not a neutral, non-partisan source, I suspect; but I'm buying it as material for my dissertation, which is about whether institutional church (i.e. clergy, lines of authority, structure, buildings etc.) is an inherent barrier to whole-hearted, whole-life commitment to Christ.
I find it interesting how (apparently) all the Christian movements that have had a genuine, long-lasting impact on a nation, culture or empire have been informal and grassroots in nature...
[ 07. July 2014, 22:37: Message edited by: South Coast Kevin ]
Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on
:
The Wesley sub-thread is more interesting, methinks.
The 'miracle' con is one of the major factors that drove me from the church—certainly from the evangelical wing of it. There is ample evidence of the resulting cognitive dissonance right here in this thread. People become very worked up when faced with the clear-as-day fact that the miracles that they are told are happening, are not actually happening. Worse, they even see what they believe to be miracles—in cultural terms (for evangelical Christianity is a sub-culture of its own) they have no choice. We're already at a point in Cwmbran story where—just like every similar such story before it—it's clear it was a con. Worse, the 'event' obsession of evangelicals made the con even worse ('everyone needs to know about us!')—there is always a 'show'. The plagiarism issue was serious, not minor.
The deceitful, selfish and narcissistic aspects of the charismatic evangelical movement knows no bounds. So long as you accept everything, it feels fine. However, in truth, the whole culture is like a soap bubble; it appears beautiful and miraculous to behold, but upon closer inspection with even the slightest of touches, one is left only with slightly damp nothingness.
K.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
@South Coast Kevin - on the 'informal and grass-roots thing' - I'm not entirely sure that's true. The way that Christianity spread in the so-called Dark Ages wasn't 'informal and grass-roots' in that the missionary monks tended to start in the courts of the kings and chiefs.
How could they have done otherwise in those sort of societies?
Of course, there was then a more grass-roots aspect once Christianity had gained a foot-hold.
But I take the point you are making.
But revivals don't happen in a vacuum and one of the valuable aspects of the 'Rational Enthusiast' biography of Wesley is that it shows the background and the extent of religious observance and practice before the great 18th century 'Awakening'. Most Methodist converts were religious observers of one form or other prior to their conversion.
@SvitlanaV2. I've read Wesley's Journals and fascinating they are too.
I think his enduring appeal does derive from the factors you've indicated but also the combination of 'rationalism' and 'enthusiasm' that Henry Rack cites.
He's also capable of appealing to people from all kinds of traditions and backgrounds - Catholics and Orthodox admire him (and his hymn-writer brother) as well as Protestants - both liberals and evangelicals.
He's a bit like C S Lewis in that respect, only much more of an activist.
I'm sure Charles was the more likeable of the Wesley brothers but it's impossible not to be moved reading Wesley's Journals, even though you have to take him with a rather large pinch of salt at times ...
Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on
:
The 'conversion experience' (or 'experiences') is very easy to replicate.
This Derren Brown one is a personal favourite. Derren says the same kinds of things that all the 'event-based' evangelicals said in my HTB days. They prime their audience ('you're not going to get hurt', 'I'm going to catch you', to plant in their mind not only that something will happen, but that something specific will happen. When that something specific happens, it appears miraculous). Also note that a big part of Derren's show (across many topics) relies on testimonials—he needs to show to the audience that what he does 'works'—that's part of how he convinces people to do whatever it is he tells them or suggests to them.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
@Komensky - to offset against that - and yes, I believe that the shiny sub-culture is fragile and ephemeral - there are however, many, many gritty, determined and quite rugged individuals within the charismatic evangelical scene.
I take my hat off to the raw determination of many of those I know, even though I may these days part company with them over their expectations and elements of their theology.
These people are in it for the long haul and yes, some of them do have blind-spots and some of them do carry unhealthy layers of cognitive-dissonance around with them.
My old charismatic evangelical fellowship up north is now down to around 70 people - having reached - temporarily and in a mushroom sense - around 300 or 400 people at its peak back in the early 1980s.
Yet they are still banging on about revival and so on.
Is this a tragic distraction?
Yes, in some ways I think it is. But as individuals there's some real grit and gravitas there with some of them. They've stuck at it through thick and thin.
I'm glad I'm not there with them, but I wouldn't want to take anything away from them in terms of the reality of their faith - however misguided or misplaced it may ultimately prove to be.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Sure, I'm with you on the Derren Brown thing, Komensky. That's why I said it's relatively easy to induce revivalist phenomena.
Heck, I've done it myself.
I probably still could. Given the right atmosphere and circumstances I'm sure I could have loads of people laid out on the floor and others shaking and laughing and so on.
You simply need to know the cues and to deploy them properly.
Or else ... as was more the case with me ... step into a situation like that which was already up and running and then people's susceptibility and sense of expectation would do the rest ...
All that said, there conversions that don't take place in a meeting context and plenty of charismatic evangelicals who quietly get on with things.
The problem is that the whole thing has become a 'scene'.
I do have a lot of sympathy with South Coast Kevin's call for a more simple, direct and grass-roots approach as that takes the 'scene' aspect out of it and pares things back.
However, I think such an approach would simply defer the 'scene' aspects until later on in the process or development.
Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on
:
Gam, my gripe is less so about individuals, but about the cultish aspects of the culture. Sure, some of them are doing utterly fantastic work on a global scale that is changing and improving our world; but that is not a get-out-of-jail card for the other crap. By the way, that is the refrain about things like Cwmbran: 'aw shucks, ya know humans are fallible and, gosh, we get things all mucked up, but the Lord is still able to work his special magic through it all'. If someone wants to stop the spread of the destructive and deceptive aspects of that culture the answer is very easy—stop participating in it and stop promoting it. Instead it is accepted as 'we don't always get things right', when in fact 'getting it wrong' is an essential part of their ministry—if it wasn't an essential part of it, they wouldn't do it.
K.
Posted by Stejjie (# 13941) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Far harder than saying "I know a God who can fix that" is saying, "I'll walk with you every step of the way." Far harder, but in my opinion far more Christ-like.
(Emphasis added)
I don't necessarily disagree with your post - in fact I think you're right about what you say of the dangers of power that saying "I know a God who can fix that" brings to the person who says it and the person to whom it's said.
But could you clarify the bit I've italicised in your quote? Because it strikes me from the NT records that when Jesus encountered the sick etc., he did heal them - he did "fix" them and then moved on. So what do you mean when you say it's more Christ-like to walk with them every step of the way, instead (genuine question)?
[ 08. July 2014, 09:11: Message edited by: Stejjie ]
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
Komensky I very much agree with you here, but with time and experience I've come to a realisation that not everybody is wired to see the big picture. It's a question of personality.
Not everyone thinks about long-term impact or structural or organisational issues, or has the critical distance to consider leaving a church environment, and not everybody has the constitution to be a whistleblower. Those people who do speak out often do so vituperatively and with recourse to poorly substantiated arguments.
I think it was you upthread who mentioned bitterness. Plenty of us have excellent reasons to be bitter, and I don't believe that's a sin in and of itself, but we do need to be self-aware in this respect and try and achieve some detachment in order to speak out constructively.
So I think there needs to be a measure of compassion, sympathy and even recognition for the rank and file and, as I always say on these occasisons, to rejoice à la Paul in the gospel being preached whatever the circumstances.
At the same time I think there's a definite need to go after perpetrators in influential leadership positions and, in true Purgatory style, to attack the issues and not the people.
More courage on the part of the Christian media would be great, and I think the Ship has a role to play here.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
But revivals don't happen in a vacuum and one of the valuable aspects of the 'Rational Enthusiast' biography of Wesley is that it shows the background and the extent of religious observance and practice before the great 18th century 'Awakening'. Most Methodist converts were religious observers of one form or other prior to their conversion.
Oh sure, and this, I'd say, is why it worked for Wesley to go around preaching from town to town and field to field. He was reawakening a faith that was already there, just lying dormant. As the level of background knowledge and experience of Christianity drops, so I think does the effectiveness of the 'travelling preacher' approach.
This is a tangent, so I'll stop there. But once I've got into the book I mentioned upthread, I may well start a new discussion about society-changing Christian movements. (I should be able to keep it from being 'homework' as my dissertation is focused on one particular person's claim and argument, rather than the general question about movements.)
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
My old charismatic evangelical fellowship up north is now down to around 70 people - having reached - temporarily and in a mushroom sense - around 300 or 400 people at its peak back in the early 1980s.
Yet they are still banging on about revival and so on.
Is this a tragic distraction?
Yes, in some ways I think it is. But as individuals there's some real grit and gravitas there with some of them. They've stuck at it through thick and thin.
What do you think their talk of 'revival' is a distraction from? How is it preventing them from doing more important Christian work, as you would see it?
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I think it can be a distraction insofar as it locks people into an endless round of meetings - at least until the heat cools down ...
It also fosters a kind of helter-skelter, roller-coaster kind of faith where people look for the next 'high' instead of giving themselves faithfully to the unexciting tasks.
This isn't purely an evangelical charismatic thing. Tolstoy wrote disapprovingly about people in 19th century Russia who were constantly on pilgrimage going from one monastery to the next seeking particular 'highs' from this or that 'staretz'or this or that icon or relic or whatever it happened to be.
There are equivalent distractions in all Christian traditions.
I would also make a distinction between the kind of Wesleyan style revivals of the 18th century and contemporary revivalism. There are echoes and similarities but by and large we are dealing with different phenomena I think.
As Steve Langton has said, the prostrations, swoonings and fallings and so on that accompanied revivalist preaching in the 18th century - and there were some earlier examples from the 17th century too - were generally in response to preaching about hell and so on. As Henry Rack writes in his biography of Wesley, it didn't take much to 'quicken' or 'awaken' consciences on that score back then as everyone lived with a background idea of hell and damnation and heaven and eternal bliss and so on.
So, you could see these as 'conviction of sin' in the traditional sense.
I'm not sure that applies nowadays - which doesn't in and of itself invalidate the experiences that people have - but there does seem to be more of a 'bless me' element to it.
My own experience of revivalism is that whilst people do come to faith and some progress is made - for the most part all it does is lead to more and more revivalist activity in order to keep the momentum going. And eventually people tire of it and things go back to normal.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Stejjie - Adeodatus will answer for themself and I look forward to it, but if I may:
It's more Christlike in the sense of WWJD if He were in our shoes. JUST human. No miracles.
What would He have done before He was 30?
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Well, if some of the non-canonical Gospels are to be believed he would have made birds out of clay, struck down his teachers and made his play-mates' lives a misery ...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think it can be a distraction insofar as it locks people into an endless round of meetings - at least until the heat cools down ...
[...]
My own experience of revivalism is that whilst people do come to faith and some progress is made - for the most part all it does is lead to more and more revivalist activity in order to keep the momentum going. And eventually people tire of it and things go back to normal.
I suppose some people just really like going to church! At least it's something to do, and you have to remember that not everyone has exciting and important secular activities to be involved in otherwise.
It's also worth saying the obvious: that 'revival' is only possible if there's something to be revived from and into. Of course things have to die down and get back to normal! How else will the next revival be able to take place in ---- years' time??
The idea of highs and lows in communal church life is distasteful to some, but it relieves the boredom, and creates periodical interest. Maybe it's simply psychologically necessary for some religious groups to go through these cycles, just as it's psychologically necessary for some Christians to move on from these groups and into churches that prefer to keep on a more even keel. And there's movement both ways. I believe that a good proportion of former Methodists have moved into more revivalist churches, especially in the developing world.
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I suppose some people just really like going to church! At least it's something to do, and you have to remember that not everyone has exciting and important secular activities to be involved in otherwise.
Sure, except this implies that it is merely about entertainment or some kind of psychological comfort. Which is exactly what it's secular detractors claim - and which is exactly what its proponents deny it is.
Posted by deano (# 12063) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I suppose some people just really like going to church! At least it's something to do, and you have to remember that not everyone has exciting and important secular activities to be involved in otherwise.
Sure, except this implies that it is merely about entertainment or some kind of psychological comfort. Which is exactly what it's secular detractors claim - and which is exactly what its proponents deny it is.
Not all of its detractors are secular! Some of us despise it because it is an embarrassment to Christianity.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
chris stiles
I accept what you're saying. But it's not necessary to be a 'secular detractor' to see that certain forms of religion appeal to certain kinds of people, and that non-believers are more likely among some categories than others.
Every religious community is different, obviously, but I'm aware that some Pentecostal pastors and theologians are concerned about the difficulties in attracting men/youngsters/white people etc. to church, and whose responses to those difficulties aren't just spiritual (e.g. more prayer), but also involve making sociological and psychological assessments of the situation.
Maybe this a kind of evaluation runs the risk of minimising the work of the Holy Spirit. OTOH, attempting to separate the life of the church completely from the scholarship and understanding of the world can also lead to secularisation, because churchgoers could begin to see their church experience as completely separate from and irrelevant to what they do and experience the rest of the week (assuming they have more to do than just attend church meetings)....
[ 08. July 2014, 17:41: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
Actually, I remember reading a comment by one black pastor (from the New Testament Church of God, I think) who noted that although the 'revival' meetings churches like his used to hold initially had a strong evangelistic element, they'd become more geared towards strengthening the faith of people who were already church members. He didn't seem to think they were still suitable vehicles for pursuing the church's goals.
I also found it interesting to read elsewhere that revival meetings in indigenous English and Welsh Nonconformity gradually became less spontaneous over time, more formal, held indoors rather than outdoors, and eventually involved the hiring of professionals to conduct the campaigns. Although there were gains to be made, it seems as though the returns produced by these events declined over time. Can I assume that the 'Cwmbran outpouring' was an example of this process of formalisation?
Posted by Green Mario (# 18090) on
:
Martin - wasn't Jesus in our shoes?
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Can I assume that the 'Cwmbran outpouring' was an example of this process of formalisation?
Perhaps a bit, but I think that as time goes by the temptation to copy what is perceived as a tried and tested model increases.
It's easier to research previous revivals than ever before (there are indeed entire blogs devoted solely to Welsh revivals) and to think, unconsciously or otherwise, "it's about time another one came along", as though they were earthquakes or buses or something.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Aye Green Mario, even more so before He was 30. And we follow in THOSE footsteps.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think it can be a distraction insofar as it locks people into an endless round of meetings - at least until the heat cools down ...
[...]
My own experience of revivalism is that whilst people do come to faith and some progress is made - for the most part all it does is lead to more and more revivalist activity in order to keep the momentum going. And eventually people tire of it and things go back to normal.
I suppose some people just really like going to church! At least it's something to do, and you have to remember that not everyone has exciting and important secular activities to be involved in otherwise.
I knew a woman who used to seek out exciting religious activity. The problem with this is that there is much more to being a Christian than having exciting experiences. It was my impression that her religious life suffered because of her approach.
Moo
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I knew a woman who used to seek out exciting religious activity. The problem with this is that there is much more to being a Christian than having exciting experiences. It was my impression that her religious life suffered because of her approach.
Sadly, I have met too many people with such a mindset. I knew one woman who openly admitted that once the Sunday evening service was over, and she had had her weekly "fix" of being slain in the Spirit, the rest of the week was just a boring wait for the next Sunday.
For some people, it really is an addiction.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Addiction to one's own hyperventilation and endorphin rush, altered states, primal mob psychology: being witlessly involved in theatre more than in communion and probably even less involved with actually Following In The Footsteps than the average pew warmer. Which if I am anything to go by ...
There is probably a positive benefit to all this distraction as there is to all legalism taken to heart: it keeps one on the straight and narrow in poverty.
But I wouldn't be surprised and in fact I'm intuitively sure that charismania reinforces ennui and anomie. All addictions come with a downer, withdrawal.
Those who lead in this are vampires.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I think we have to be careful not to be overly critical of those who rely on some kind of 'rush' or release from some form of worship/church activity - but at the same time we have to be realistic and acknowledge that this is what it is ...
For instance, I remember seeing a documentary series about black-led churches which traced the history from the slave plantations in Jamaica and the USA through to the rise of African indigenous churches in London.
It suggested that if you were working in the sugar plantations or as a maid in one of the estate houses being bossed around all day then the exuberance of the Sunday morning service was inevitably going to provide a welcome release.
The same would be true, I suggest, if you were a coal miner in the South Wales Valleys.
All that said, contemporary middle-class Christians zoning out on endorphins doesn't strike me as a particularly good use of their time.
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
chris stiles
I accept what you're saying. But it's not necessary to be a 'secular detractor' to see that certain forms of religion appeal to certain kinds of people, and that non-believers are more likely among some categories than others.
Absolutely, and this is what people have been saying in other threads, whenever people - including you - posit the charismatic movement as something that 'renews' evangelicalism
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I knew a woman who used to seek out exciting religious activity. The problem with this is that there is much more to being a Christian than having exciting experiences. It was my impression that her religious life suffered because of her approach.
Sadly, I have met too many people with such a mindset. I knew one woman who openly admitted that once the Sunday evening service was over, and she had had her weekly "fix" of being slain in the Spirit, the rest of the week was just a boring wait for the next Sunday.
For some people, it really is an addiction.
Maybe the rest of their lives really is boring, unsatisfying or arduous in some way? There must be many people like that in the world, and it's unsurprising that this kind of religion inspires them more than the dignified, restrained variety.
Formal religious routines don't necessarily fill the need for spiritual experience. I think this is one reason why a lot of people don't bother with church at all; even revivalistic religion is now fairly tame when compared to the secular opportunities for 'losing oneself'....
Perhaps we need to devise a kind of dignified, quiet Protestant Christianity where it's acceptable to look for or indulge in overwhelming spiritual experiences at certain intervals, once every few years, for example, before returning to the normal church routine. This would give some people something to look forward to, but detractors wouldn't be obliged to participate.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Balancing as usual Gamaliel.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
chris stiles
I accept what you're saying. But it's not necessary to be a 'secular detractor' to see that certain forms of religion appeal to certain kinds of people, and that non-believers are more likely among some categories than others.
Absolutely, and this is what people have been saying in other threads, whenever people - including you - posit the charismatic movement as something that 'renews' evangelicalism
Charismaticism presumably renews those who participate in it! It may renew people from more respectable churches whose true inclination lies in a more charismatic direction. It may offer evangelistic renewal if it borrows aspects from the surrounding culture where it takes place.
But as I implied in my last post, I agree that MOTR Christianity, for example, needs to devise its own special ways of reaching out to people who for whatever cultural/social/etc. reason don't find charismaticism appealing.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[/qb]
Maybe the rest of their lives really is boring, unsatisfying or arduous in some way? There must be many people like that in the world, and it's unsurprising that this kind of religion inspires them more than the dignified, restrained variety.
Formal religious routines don't necessarily fill the need for spiritual experience. I think this is one reason why a lot of people don't bother with church at all; even revivalistic religion is now fairly tame when compared to the secular opportunities for 'losing oneself'....
Perhaps we need to devise a kind of dignified, quiet Protestant Christianity where it's acceptable to look for or indulge in overwhelming spiritual experiences at certain intervals, once every few years, for example, before returning to the normal church routine. This would give some people something to look forward to, but detractors wouldn't be obliged to participate. [/QB][/QUOTE]
This presupposes that we can 'devise' these things according to plan and build them into our collective church lives rather as we might build in special 'treats' and outings into our family lives if we live in families or our single lives if we are single.
I'm not sure it works as neatly as that.
But I take the point you are making.
People are looking for 'authentic' spiritual experience but that comes in various packages and flavours. How we would legislate for that in a dignified Protestant context, I don't know.
Would we have a 'menu' of options?
'Right folks, it's coming up to that time of year where we have a bit of a spiritual blast ... here is a list of the options for this year. You can choose from the following:
- Charismatic Bible Week where you will be 'slain in the Spirit'.
- A week at a monastery where you will enjoy the stillness and quietness and experience a sense of the numinous in he liturgy.
- A week at an Alternative Worship convention ... remember to take your pebbles ...'
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
- A week at an Alternative Worship convention ... remember to take your pebbles ...'
Amusing, and yet .. this is essentially 'technique' (in the Ellulian) sense being applied to worship isn't it.
I heard an anecdote about someone who is big in the tech world recently, commenting that they started to experiment with prayer, but yet they found that they didn't seem to get any immediate benefit from it. This led the speaker into reflecting that perhaps this person was applying the idea of efficiency to prayer (after all, maybe if you could pray efficiency you could get the same benefit in 5 minutes that traditionally people got after 3 hours .. and so on).
This kind of thing is most typified by the lifehacking movement - which attempts to improve productivity/efficiency/output measured in different senses by treating everything - the human body included - as a kind of machine.
.. and yet, this is where the kind of individualised choice driven evangelicalism logically leads to, isn't it? We might all laugh at the joke - but essentially we end up making the same calculation at a much cruder level.
[ 09. July 2014, 13:52: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Yes, I think there is something in that, Chris. It becomes so reductionist that eventually it disappears into a hole ... usually up its own backside.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
Well, if sensation-hunting religion could be exchanged en masse for reasonable Methodism and MOTR Anglicanism, that would no doubt calm many anxieties. But it's not happening quite like that, all jokes aside.
IMO, if you have nothing better to offer people in exchange for what they have, there's not much point in going on and on about how unwise and unreasonable they're being. I mostly make do with MOTR churches, but I can't see them being any sort of replacement for charismatic forms of religion. Maybe economic improvements around the world will reduce the demand for Pentecostalism and leave the remaining Christians craving quiet reflection and gentle 5-10 minute sermons. I don't think so, but if God grants me a long life maybe I'll live to see it.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I'm not postulating that we seek to replace Pentecostalism or revivalism with MOTR alternatives as such - simply that there has to be somewhere for these people to go when the bottom falls out of the whole thing.
Many casualties of revivalism end up nowhere. It's burn-out.
My brother-in-law grew up in a large Pentecostal family. Now, he's the only one of his siblings - there were six of them in all and one is sadly no longer with us - who is still involved in church in any meaningful way.
I'm not saying that MOTR religion would be any more effective in Cwmbran and the South Wales Valleys than revivalism is. But from what we've heard so far I'm not sure that revivalism is being as effective down there as its supporters would like to think.
We've already heard that it hasn't made any noticeable impression on the council estates that sprawl up the Eastern Valley.
The existing traditional churches aren't doing particularly well down there either.
If I knew what the answer was, I would give it. I'm simply observing that classic revivalism isn't having a great deal of impact either.
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
IMO, if you have nothing better to offer people in exchange for what they have, there's not much point in going on and on about how unwise and unreasonable they're being.
Firstly, it wasn't a joke. It was a serious point.
Secondly, a lot of my critique comes from having grown up in a community like this and seen the resulting spiritual and emotional casualties emerge over long periods of time. Which is why it is difficult the laissez faire attitude that at least some need - be it psychological or whatever - is being met.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
I don't deny the points made above, but sadly, leaving the church is frequently what happens these days, whether it's due to burn-out, or boredom, or whatever. (And be aware that Methodists can crash out too, since able-bodied volunteers are often in very short supply there and hence overworked.)
We seem to have a yearning for revivalistic religion to be better than it is, to compensate for the serious deficiencies elsewhere in Western Christianity but not produce any challenges of its own. Maybe that's too much to ask.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I'm not sure 'we' have a yearning for revivalistic religion to be better than it is, it's more a case that the revivalists put it forward as the ultimate panacea to all ills - hence the resulting casualties when disillusionment sets in.
I well appreciate that the CofE, Methodists and URC etc have lost plenty of people over the last few decades through boredom, apathy and so on ... but roller-coaster religion can also tip people out too.
It can give a semblance of something happening that masks the fact that very little is actually going on at all.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
"Highs" are a trap that I fell into as well. It is a natural consequence of the fact that our cultures tell us that life is about being cool, better and exciting, it's about working-hard and achieving things. It's about not just being a good singer, but about being the Top Talent. A book I've reading the moment by Arnold Retzer points out that Bowie's maxim that "we can be heroes, just for one day" heightens expectations, when in fact that we have capitalistic societies means that not everyone can be that special person. These capitalistic societies don't value weakness and boredom, and promises occasional highs as pay-back for the shite we have to swallow.
Others escape their boredom (for short periods of time) through alcohol, drugs or consumerism. Like with prayer, these are not bad things in themselves, but when they become the focus...
I myself have witnessed the charistmatic/evangelical abuse of vulnerable people, people promising those highs, promises often made out of desires to help.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
...fact that we have capitalistic societies means that not everyone can be that special person. These capitalistic societies don't value weakness and boredom...
Are there any societies where everyone can be that special person, and which value weakness and boredome?
Moo
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
Are you disagreeing that capitalistic societies don't value weakness and boredom?
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
...fact that we have capitalistic societies means that not everyone can be that special person. These capitalistic societies don't value weakness and boredom...
Are there any societies where everyone can be that special person, and which value weakness and boredome?
Moo
Possibly, in some ways and at some times, the Church?
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm not sure 'we' have a yearning for revivalistic religion to be better than it is, it's more a case that the revivalists put it forward as the ultimate panacea to all ills - hence the resulting casualties when disillusionment sets in.
I well appreciate that the CofE, Methodists and URC etc have lost plenty of people over the last few decades through boredom, apathy and so on ... but roller-coaster religion can also tip people out too.
It can give a semblance of something happening that masks the fact that very little is actually going on at all.
If your old congregation have declined from 300 to 70 people they can't reasonably be claiming to have the panacea for all ills! But I imagine they might have felt that way in the early days.
I don't know about Wales, but according to Peter Brierley the number of indigenous, self-proclaimed charismatic evangelical churches in England has decreased. If this is because these churches want to disassociate themselves from the Toronto Blessing, as he claims, then triumphalism must be fading.
Churches of all kinds have experienced declining numbers, as you say. But the decline is less in (various types of) evangelical churches. Of those churches that are growing, the great majority will be some sort of evangelical. The question is whether the most effervescent of these churches could lose the 'roller-coaster' part of their heritage without reducing any small growth or speeding up their rate of decline.
Maybe a stronger religious monopoly would reduce the problem of 'vulnerable people' being drawn into unsuitable independent churches, but I suggest that it wouldn't help everyone else.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Mmm ... this isn't easy, especially when you think of the numbers of "semi-itinerant" Christians who only settle in a church for a short time before moving on to the next place where they think that God is acting (or should that be "moving"?)
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Believe you me, SvitlanaV2 we certainly did believe that in the early days - and then some!
Some people were still banging on about reaching the city for Christ and having to lay on extra meetings to accommodate the crowds even after several grievous and painful splits and then a more gradual decline in numbers.
I think the reasons for the decrease in the number of indigenous charismatic churches isn't entirely down to reactions against the Toronto Blessing.
I think there was an element of that. Once you'd fallen over, rolled on the ground, laughed uncontrollably or even barked like a dog - there wasn't really anywhere else you could take it. You still had to get up in the morning and go to work, you still had to go to the toilet, you still had to wash your socks.
The triumphalism has faded, but it's not entirely gone away. Since Toronto we've had the Bethel thing and that's still big in some quarters.
All charismatic activity becomes routinised over time. I suspect that with increased global communications and the pace of life these days, the period between the peaks and the troughs has telescoped. What would take a good while to fizzle out in the old days fizzles out a lot more quickly now.
Sociologists say that a 'church' or denomination (in the sociological sense) tends to have a shelf-life of several hundred years. The Methodists have been around for 270 years or so. They may see out their 300th or even 350th anniversary.
Some of the newer groups won't last anywhere near as long.
I don't know why you post as if I am calling for a greater religious monopoly simply because I attend an Anglican church.
I'm not suggesting that a religious monopoly of any kind would be any better or any healthier. There are problems associated with all these things and all ways round.
All churches have problems. The historic Churches simply have a different set of problems to the Pentecostal churches and the new churches and vice-versa.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Are you disagreeing that capitalistic societies don't value weakness and boredom?
I don't think they do so more than any other kind of economic system.
Moo
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
A point that would be relevant if we were looking at Toronto blessing-style events in such societies. In such an eventuality, where there was, for example, no missionising from capitalistic countries, it would be interesting to see why that would be the case.
Being speculatory, perhaps there's some Buddhist monastery somewhere in a remote mountain where some get addicted to such highs. There it would be prudent to look at the reasons for that, and whether it was also a form of escapism.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I don't know why you post as if I am calling for a greater religious monopoly simply because I attend an Anglican church.
I'm not suggesting that a religious monopoly of any kind would be any better or any healthier. There are problems associated with all these things and all ways round.
All churches have problems. The historic Churches simply have a different set of problems to the Pentecostal churches and the new churches and vice-versa.
I'm just trying to uncover the tiniest smidgen of a solution in the problems that you rehearse so abundantly! But you clearly don't find talk of solutions helpful.
It occurs to me that the church-sect sociological theories must lead to certain degree of fatalism. Revivalism is inevitable, as are liberalism and church decline, rigidity as well as tolerance, etc. In which case, what's the point of being censorious about any of it? Disappointed holy-rollers, like the poor, will always be with us. There's nothing new under the sun, and after we've endured a few short decades of life it'll be someone else's problem anyway....
BTW, do any of your revivalist friends ever consider Christ's return? Does the Church need to be revived before he comes back, or isn't that a priority? Some Christians fully expect things to get worse rather than better as a prelude to the Second Coming. Perhaps revivalists tend not to be among their number.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
In the circles I used to run with, personal renewal would lead to a restored Church, which would bring in a revival. According to some "prophets" and "apostles", a worldwide revival was an essential precursor of the Second Coming. This, of course, raised the stakes immeasurably. "We're building a restored church, full of renewed believers, so that revival can come and Jesus can return. So if YOU aren't personally renewed and "moving in the Spirit", you're blocking the return of Jesus." Guilt trips a plenty...
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Absolutely, Oscar the Grouch, that was pretty much the narrative we were running with so it's no surprise it ended in disillusionment.
@SvitlanaV2. There is the tiniest smidgeon of hope and a 'solution' - if that's the right term - in all of this. Read Ronald Knox's book 'Enthusiasm'. It's dated now but he recounts the various 'enthusiastic' and revivalist movements within both Protestantism (Quakers, Methodists, Irvingites etc) and Catholicism (Jansenists).
He ends with a condundrum. These things are eccentric and sometimes even harmful. But we need 'enthusiasm'.
Meanwhile, I fight shy of hard-cut solutions because I lived for so long in an environment where we thought we had it all taped.
Real life is a lot more messy than that.
I'll admit that I'll sometimes sound censorious about these things but these are internet boards - we can sound off on them and this is the 'Magazine of Christian Unrest' not the 'Magazine of Celebrating Revivalism.'
In real life, I get on pretty well with revivalists. I've just finished proof-reading a PhD thesis by a friend who is in a leadership/teaching position in a restorationist church.
I like your sunnyside-up, let's find some good in all of this approach. It's not that I don't find talk of solutions helpful, it's just that I don't always find your stabs at offering solutions helpful - particularly when I've aleady tried them ...
Yes, the poor will always be with us, but we often forget the rest of that verse as it appears in Mark 14:7 '... and you can help them anytime you want.'
Disillusioned revivalists will always be with us. We can help them too.
Sure, it doesn't always help to rain all over their parade, but it can help to offer a sense of perspective. And that's all I'm trying to do.
Meanwhile, and I don't mean this to sound dismissive, but the very fact that you were asking questions about eschatology and revivalism demonstrates that you don't really have that much experience of it. The early Pentecostals believed in the imminent return of Christ and many saw the 'return' of spiritual gifts like healing, tongues and prophecy as a sign of that.
Revivalism and eschatology tend to be closely linked, although the emphasis does vary according to the underlining theology of whichever group it happens to be.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
A point that would be relevant if we were looking at Toronto blessing-style events in such societies. In such an eventuality, where there was, for example, no missionising from capitalistic countries, it would be interesting to see why that would be the case.
Being speculatory, perhaps there's some Buddhist monastery somewhere in a remote mountain where some get addicted to such highs. There it would be prudent to look at the reasons for that, and whether it was also a form of escapism.
Not in remote places really; I have seen this in Hertfordshire and London! In some branches of Buddhism, there is great wariness of such highs, and quite fierce teachings to bring them down. It is sometimes called 'Satan's cave', in other words, a kind of enjoyable place to hide away. There is also the 'stink of holiness', to which many newcomers are susceptible.
Many stories about it of course - for example, the monk who got so enlightened, that the birds come to sing to him in his hut (some lovely illustrations of this). His teacher remonstrates with him fiercely, and advises several more years meditation, after which the birds have gone. Now what?
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'll admit that I'll sometimes sound censorious about these things but these are internet boards - we can sound off on them and this is the 'Magazine of Christian Unrest' not the 'Magazine of Celebrating Revivalism.'
Very true. But it could be the 'Magazine Celebrating Quiet, Respectable Churches that Won't Let You Get Carried Away'! I'd love to hear that they have a few - any - answers!
quote:
Yes, the poor will always be with us, but we often forget the rest of that verse as it appears in Mark 14:7 '... and you can help them anytime you want.'
Disillusioned revivalists will always be with us. We can help them too.
Yes - send them to the Methodists or the liberal catholic CofE. The more, the merrier! But I admit, after posting my reference to the poor I realised that it would probably be criticised.
quote:
Meanwhile, and I don't mean this to sound dismissive, but the very fact that you were asking questions about eschatology and revivalism demonstrates that you don't really have that much experience of it. The early Pentecostals believed in the imminent return of Christ and many saw the 'return' of spiritual gifts like healing, tongues and prophecy as a sign of that.
Guilty as charged. Interestingly, I've never heard any of my Pentecostal relatives refer to End Times, or anything of that sort. It's the Seventh Day Adventist ones who seem a bit more interested. My elderly Methodist friend talks a lot about Judgment Day.
quote:
In real life, I get on pretty well with revivalists. I've just finished proof-reading a PhD thesis by a friend who is in a leadership/teaching position in a restorationist church.
He's not too disillusioned, I hope? He's lucky to have you, though - I had to make do without that assistance.
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think we have to be careful not to be overly critical of those who rely on some kind of 'rush' or release from some form of worship/church activity - but at the same time we have to be realistic and acknowledge that this is what it is ...
For instance, I remember seeing a documentary series about black-led churches which traced the history from the slave plantations in Jamaica and the USA through to the rise of African indigenous churches in London.
It suggested that if you were working in the sugar plantations or as a maid in one of the estate houses being bossed around all day then the exuberance of the Sunday morning service was inevitably going to provide a welcome release.
The same would be true, I suggest, if you were a coal miner in the South Wales Valleys.
All that said, contemporary middle-class Christians zoning out on endorphins doesn't strike me as a particularly good use of their time.
IME it's the white middle-class charismatic congregations that get silly and caught up in nonsense. Like you said, it's not a particularly good use of their time, particularly for people who have the time/resources/energy to do so much more.
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
IME it's the white middle-class charismatic congregations that get silly and caught up in nonsense. Like you said, it's not a particularly good use of their time, particularly for people who have the time/resources/energy to do so much more.
I have sufficient connections with various ethnic/majority-minority churches of a charismatic and pentecostal churches to say that silliness and getting caught up with nonsense isn't a sole preserve of the white middle class - and they aren't even unusually susceptible to it.
So IME what you say doesn't ring true on a macro level.
[ 12. July 2014, 19:28: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE]IME it's the white middle-class charismatic congregations that get silly and caught up in nonsense. Like you said, it's not a particularly good use of their time, particularly for people who have the time/resources/energy to do so much more.
It's not helpful to generalise in that way - because it simply isn't true.
It does happen in white congregations but its far from unknown in BME ones too. KICC in London is pretty wacky and there are a lot of BME churches who are into the whole deliverance thing around a package of prosperity theology. KICC ISTM runs very close to that line.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
The impoverished get caught up with circuses and that includes the white middle class in a 'subtle', white middle class way. My former congo is typical of that. Buying in to God bringing Angolan Muslims back from the dead, changing people's leg lengths on the streets of Leicester, proclaiming everything eversomuch in 24/7 prayer marathons. Singing a lot. I call that impoverished. Poor. Very poor. When the actual needs of the real poor barely have a little finger lifted to alleviate their burdens.
We are the new Sodomites.
Posted by Lord Pontivillian (# 14308) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
The impoverished get caught up with circuses and that includes the white middle class in a 'subtle', white middle class way. My former congo is typical of that. Buying in to God bringing Angolan Muslims back from the dead, changing people's leg lengths on the streets of Leicester, proclaiming everything eversomuch in 24/7 prayer marathons. Singing a lot. I call that impoverished. Poor. Very poor. When the actual needs of the real poor barely have a little finger lifted to alleviate their burdens.
We are the new Sodomites.
I would suggest that some research is done. The church where I used to attend before moving to Horsham, has seen the type of miracles you mock. It is running a Debt Centre, that is greatly needed and looking at setting up a food bank.
The church needs always to look at the physical needs of people, as you rightly say, but it also needs to bring people into the presence of god, to tender to their spiritual needs.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
I mock no miracles that occur. There are none. Especially the miracle of us being Christ. The kingdom. If nonsense miracles occurred, like leg length actually miraculously changing when all around are dying, grieving, lonely, poor, lost, unfriended, unloved, unvisited, untended expect in ever such spiritual matters, that would be MUCH worse. But God does not mock the afflicted. Debt advice is a common toe in the water. And looking to do something is too. In another two thousand years maybe.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
That's getting pretty judgemental, Martin! You seem to be implying that people who believe in the miraculous (healing and stuff) are bound to be doing less of the social, physical meeting of people's needs than those who don't believe in miraculous healing etc. Do you have some evidence for this implied claim, or have I misinterpreted you?
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
To be fair to Victory Church, they are involved in various ministries to people with drug-dependency and alcohol-related problems.
I seem to remember AberVicar, who ministers in the next Valley over, commending them for this and he's by no means a raving charismatic. If I remember rightly he cited some nuns in Bristol regularly referring people to their programme.
That said, I've also heard it's quite a controversial programme.
Whatever the case, I do think it's going too far to suggest that outfits which are into the signs-and-wonders and revivalist stuff necessarily neglect the social and practical aspects.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
No Kevin. We're all equally bad.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Gamaliel, Kevin: it's opportunity cost, while we're engaged in vain nonsense we're not doing good.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Gamaliel, Kevin: it's opportunity cost, while we're engaged in vain nonsense we're not doing good.
Well, that's true. Arguing on a messageboard is not the most productive activity...
Oh, you meant that praying for people to be healed or set free from oppression by the demonic is vain nonsense!
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
It is when it's not accompanied by other, less spectacular and less overtly 'spiritual' means of engagement.
How many people in the UK have been healed through the prayers of well-meaning Christians over the last 30 or 40 years?
How many people have been healed by doctors, the NHS etc over the same period?
Do the math as the Americans would say.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Hoist with me own petard! Well done Kevin. As I said, we're ALL useless.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
How many people in the UK have been healed through the prayers of well-meaning Christians over the last 30 or 40 years?
How many people have been healed by doctors, the NHS etc over the same period?
How many people who advocate the former also denigrate the latter? Very few, I think - you do the math.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Ha ha. They may not denigrate the latter, but they certainly can't demonstrate anywhere near the same level of results.
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Ha ha. They may not denigrate the latter, but they certainly can't demonstrate anywhere near the same level of results.
Indeed so. As you like to say, it's 'both... and' rather than 'either... or'.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
No, it's God's provision. And He provides millions of times as much through the NHS. Although zero times a million is still zero. There is comfort and placebo in both admittedly, but the NHS actually facilitates miracles of healing every minute of the day, including psychological. Saying zero and a million or ten are comparable in any way is ... interesting to the point of pathological. And yes I've been healed by God in ways the NHS can't touch.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Sure, South Coast Kevin, I think it is both/and rather than either/or ... but these days I'd think twice before going near any attempts to pray for healing - other than fairly general prayers - or overt attempts to deal with the apparently 'demonic'.
I'm sorry, but there is it is.
Been there, done that.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Gamaliel. How much of both? How both? In Alzheimer's, diabetes, cancer, paranoid schizophrenia, alcoholism, name it?
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Or is it, like freewill and determinism in your book, 100% both
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Well, that's the Chalcedonian approach and I'm sticking to it.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Wot, we extrapolate from Jesus full humanity and full divinity to full determinism and full freewill for ourselves and that God miraculously intervenes miraculously all the time while waiting for us to be His arms and voice and ears and actually live as if we were the Kingdom?!
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
No, that's not what I'm saying.
I was thinking in more general terms.
I think a kind of Chalcedonian both/and model can help us negotiate all manner of issues as well as Christology.
On the freewill/determinism thing and whether we can legitimately expect the miraculous and so on ... on the first I don't get het up about it. On the second, I can't see why not in principle ... but in practice I think the rhetoric overtakes the reality.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
You should be in politics. But I like you.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
You should be in politics. But I like you.
Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Ha ha. They may not denigrate the latter, but they certainly can't demonstrate anywhere near the same level of results.
Indeed so. As you like to say, it's 'both... and' rather than 'either... or'.
Look, if people were being healed by prayer there would be evidence of it and there is none. If the so-called 'healers' could really heal, we'd know about it—and they'd be in hospitals and battlefields. If people had the gift of prophecy they would prophecy and those specific things would come to pass with every prophecy—it doesn't happen. For people with that 'gift' who regularly get it wrong, it's no big deal to their supporters. If someone had the gift of tongues, either to speak 'an angelic language' it would be a language, real or 'angelic'. It doesn't happen. The lies simply must be retold—for them, there is no alternative. It's also curious that the very recent emergence (extremely recent in terms of church history) of these practices as cultural phenomenon doesn't seem to raise an eyebrow with them either.
So much of Christian culture could be more accurately described as a 'religious market'. The language are marketing devices are very similar: emphasis on 'choice' (which in both cases is heavily influenced by controlling and manipulative psychological factors) and then the poor sods are offered what one scholar calls 'salvation goods'. Rational choice plays a very small roll in the Christian marketplace. Just as in the capitalist marketplace, the placation of the group is vital to the success of the system. Those on the inside would never dare inspect the facade because the circular system of beliefs insists that to do so reveals a lack of faith. Lack of faith is an obstacle to salvation—presto!
My namesake made a wonderful allegory of this situation back in 1631:
quote:
Looking at the building of the castle [of wisdom] itself, I saw its gleaming white walls, which they told me were of alabaster. But examining them more carefully and touching them with my hands, I saw that they were made of nothing but paper, the cracks revealing the occasional patch of tow. From this I judged that the walls were partly hollow and filled with stuffing. I was amazed at this deception and laughed aloud.
The Cwmbran story is just one of tens of thousand in the evangelical marketplace. No matter how many diet pills are proven to be frauds, there are always more desperate customers ready to believe the next batch of impossible promises. If you're sick of it—stop participating in it. Stop allowing your church and clergy from conning the congregation.
K.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Komensky
That's an interesting analogy with capitalism, which I must think about more. Capitalism is not solely fraudulent, of course, as then people would stop buying, but it has an element of fraud in it, so as to maximize profits, I suppose. See for example, built in obsolescence.
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Capitalism is not solely fraudulent, of course, as then people would stop buying, but it has an element of fraud in it, so as to maximize profits, I suppose. See for example, built in obsolescence.
I think fraud is a loaded term and may impede the discussion a little.
Fraud aside, there is a clear interest for a perception of obsolescence to be pushed by the makers and marketeers of new products.
When evangelicalism went down the revivalist route it necessarily tapped into the same dynamic.
Book deals and conferences - especially when you have a somewhat captive audience in terms of your own movement - can make quite a lot of money for certain individuals.
The rise of the mega church, with the accompanied rise of the mega church pastor who doesn't actually do any pastoring (there are staff to do visitations, and much of the pastoral work is outsourced onto home groups) excaberates this issue. You basically end up with the heads of these churches not having a whole lot to do within their own churches - so obviously they are going to concentrate on their wider 'ministry'. Not all the people in this position necessarily have something to day beyond recycled business speak with a few motivational verses to make things scriptural.
At the more local end of things the values of entertainment and spirituality make uneasy bedfellows as brilliantly parodied by a number of authors/film makers. [I'd recommend PG Wodehouse's "The Aunt and the Sluggard" and the films "Leap of Faith" and "The Apostle"]
[ 15. July 2014, 10:21: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on
:
Thanks for the recommendations. I'll return the favour with an interesting article (though much less entertaining than Wodehouse) Jörg Stolz, 'Salvation Goods and Religious Markets: Integrating Rational Choice and Weberian Perspectives' Social Compass, 2006.
K.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Funny thing is G, you seem to be saying no to what I said when you mean yes. But that's just my rampant ego blinding and stupefying me further I'm sure. You ARE extrapolating from the Chalcedonian paradox to make other both/and paradoxes from either/or. The key one being freewill and determinism which you embrace elsewhere and the relevant other here being the material non-intervention of God and the miraculous. Or are you divining between bone and marrow and I'm too thick to see it as usual?
K is as ever all too beguilingly on the money, which I find troubling as I DO wish to be inclusive (oh wretched man that I am) of those who have to believe, like the majority of Christians, truths for them that can never be mine.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Gamaliel is 'work in progress', Martin. Looking for consistency isn't where it's at.
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on
:
Cuh. Fuh. Huh. indeed
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0