quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Now, I'm wondering whether Alpha has been as successful (in numerical terms) because of this or inspite of it. I suspect that the success is largely down to the format - meal, discussion, systematic approach etc etc.

What I'm wondering, though, is how the Holy Spirit weekend contributes to the overall effect - in sociological terms rather than the way participants may interpret it.

---

The basic approach works without the 'Holy Spirit Weekend' - it's just an adaptation of the Iwerne approach.

I would also tend to disagree with the contention that it is necessarily in contrast to the rest of the course. Rather than experiential vs cognitive, I think the better descriptor is 'pragmatic'. The approach is very much 'do you feel this is true to you' and this is as true of the earlier sessions as the weekend.

I would also like to see some figures for what sort of impact it actually makes long term. My observations have been that many of the attendees are churched but were never taught - rather than people who don't have a church background. How well they were subsequently taught is open to question, especially as the first group was usually the one most likely to push for a follow-up Beta group. Against the background figure of continuous church decline, there isn't even a blip where Alpha would be, so I suspect a lot of it's perceived success is displacement.
 

---

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :
 
I've done 'the whole HTB thing', been an Alpha leader, support couple on The Marriage Course (the best thing they've done!), run a Pastorate, and so on. I'm a bit 'over it' now, but there is much to commend about the Alpha Course. Nicky was/is well aware of the issues with Holy Spirit weekend but the feedback is mixed. My problem with the weekend is the Toronto-esque take on what 'receiving the Holy Spirit' means. HTB have gone way too far down the theologically and biblically dubious path of laughter and levitating. I think it can succeed without it or at least without the HTB idea of what is entailed.

There are other issues, but overall the positives outweigh the negatives.

K.
 

---

Posted by Hairy Biker (# 12086) on :
 
I did Alpha with a MOTR CofE in the UK. They replaced the spirit weekend with an away-day with a confessional theme. It worked for me. I was very reluctant to join in on the day. I would have run a mile from speaking in tongues. But even though I didn't participate fully in the event, after I'd slept on in a couple nights I suddenly started to believe. It was a big turning point in my faith. 12 years later, I'm still believing. I think I'd call my experience "a success".
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
That's good to hear, Hairy Biker. Shows it can 'work' without the souped up stuff.

I think Cliffdweller makes a very good point. A 'Holy Spirit weekend' makes sense in a charismatic context, such as HTB. It makes less sense in a MOR or a more sacramental context or a conservative evangelical one.

The whole thing is an attempt to make the charismatic experience normative, of course, and to export it to places where it may not be, or not have been, the norm.

I just wonder whether it deters or puts-off as many people as it attracts. I've heard of Alpha courses where virtually everybody dropped out at that part. 'We were fine until they brought in this speaking in tongues thing, that's not what I signed up for. I wanted to know more about the Christian faith not all this speaking in tongues business ...'

That's what I mean about it acting as a 'filter' - perhaps in some unconscious way. If you filter out all those who aren't susceptible to the tongues thing then you've got a pretty good chance that those who are left on the course are going to be malleable and suggestible enough to go along with all of that.
 

---

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
I can understand why Nicky Gumbel doesn't want people to leave out parts of the Alpha course, though. To me, it suggests that some churches want to buy into the fame of the Alpha brand without fully sharing Alpha values (however those might be defined). It would be more honest to run a less famous course that fits more closely with the values of your church. There are several alternatives, so I understand.

From what I've read, Alpha attracts a high proportion of people who are already fairly regular churchgoers. Otherwise, it appeals to people who are on the fringes of the church and who are in some way already somewhat positive about Christianity. Very few people just turn up with no connection at all to a congregation. Few of them are complete atheists - although I used to post on a messageboard where atheists would regularly start threads about their awkward experiences on Alpha courses! I think they were just looking for a debating club, personally! What struck me as a result of our discussions on those threads was how difficult it must be for course leaders to satisfy the very different needs and/or expectations of the people who do the course.

I can recommend a very interesting book on the history and the impact of Alpha: Stephen Hunt, 'The Alpha Enterprise: Evangelism in the Post-Christian Era' (2004). (The author is an agnostic sociologist who joined several Alpha courses during his research for the book. I don't think he become a Christian as a result, but he met some interesting people, and his book is a respectful, academic, but very readable analysis of the Alpha phenomenon.)
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Sounds interesting, SvitlanaV2.

Alpha's been discussed here a fair bit in the past, before you joined the Boards, so I wasn't aiming to provoke a discussion about Alpha in broader terms, but to focus on one particular aspect of it.

Not that I'm carping at your contribution, I hasten to add!

It seems to me that it's axiomatic that an 'experiential' element - whether in pietistic or charismatic terms as in Alpha - or in a more 'sacramental' or perhaps 'mystic' way as found in some other traditions, or an aesthetic way as in others - is going to help people to 'stick' around .

Whether that is sufficient validity for the claimed experiences, isn't for me to say.

I've gradually come to the conclusion that most of what we call 'spiritual gifts' in the charismatic sense have no intrinsic meaning or validity in and of themselves, other than as 'bonding' or reinforcement mechanisms that make people feel part of a group.

I'm stretching the point a little, but it's a position I'm prepared to defend.

Other traditions have their own equivalent mechanisms.

What's intriguing me about Alpha is the extent to which this aspect is emphasised and whether it really makes a difference to whether people stay the course and come to faith.

Hairy Biker has demonstrated that it is possible to come to faith through Alpha without the particular charismatic dimension. I suspect there are many others who could say the same.

I'm by no means wanting to eliminate any sense of the 'vatic' or the experiential - but I am wondering what difference it really makes other than some kind of sociological glue.

Am I barking up the wrong tree? But not in a Toronto way ...
 

---

Posted by Johnny S (# 12581) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
So, my question is ... could Alpha have been/or become more successful without the added charismatic dimension. Or is it such a vital ingredient that Alpha wouldn't be Alpha without it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Johnny S:
From a theological pov my hackles always rise when I sniff overt and strong pragmatism and I have to say that I have been told countless times that Alpha will not work if I don't do it exactly the approved way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
I can't see the connection. Surely a pragmatic view would be 'this works, but if you find doing something a different way, works, then, fine, do it'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Tangentially, what's wrong with pragmatism by the way? What am I missing?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
Thirdly, I'm unsure what the long-term impact of Alpha might be. I'm interested in getting people to follow Jesus for the whole of their lives, and I'm not convinced the "hit rate" from decision-oriented evangelistic campaigns is any better than less spectacular methods.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:

Alpha is irrelevant to most people because most people do not sit around listening to people waffling and then discuss it over a meal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
For me, the main issues with Alpha are much less about what happens at the weekend and much more to do with the content and the advertising/glossiness. I've no particular beef with Nicky Gumbel, but I don't like being told what to believe by a bunch of ex-barristers.

---

Are there other classes of people who can't possibly have any theological insight worth you disdaining to listen to, or is it just lawyers?
 

---

Posted by the long ranger (# 17109) on :
 
@Leprechaun - well, I think it is interesting that the course was designed and propagated by ex-barristers. If one was to think of a group to design a theological course with an emphasis on content rather than dramatic argument, I'd think theologians might be more appropriate than barristers.
 

---

Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on :
 
I think the HS Weekend is just another part of the "Bait-and-Switch" approach of Alpha in general.

The course is advertised as a forum for questions, but by the third week, it starts to turn into "this is the right answer, how do you feel about that?"

The session on Biblical evidence purports to examine the arguments, but moves straight from "we have some old manuscripts" to "therefore the Bible is 100% accurate!"

The HS Weekend fits into this pattern, usually being described in bland, unremarkable terms and then turning the manipulation up to 11 once people have made an initial commitment by going on it.

I'm not sure that it's deliberately placed to filter people, though - I think it's more to get to the sales pitch before everyone gets bored. Anyone who's still interested after 7 or 8 weeks is probably committed to the course, and will go along, especially as everyone else will be talking about it the week after. If you leave the HS Weekend to the end, it's easier to treat as an optional extra.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
That makes sense, The Great Gumby ...

At the risk of going off on a tangent about 'bait-and-switch' techniques, I despair that they seem pretty endemic across evangelicalism in general - although there are notable exceptions.

I once challenged an evangelist about what I took to be a very manipulative and staged - in the step-by-step sense - approach to an 'altar-call' only to be told that it was the technique Jesus had used with Zacchaeus - 'Zacchaeus, come down from that tree and I'll go round your house for tea this evening ...'

These things are so endemic in some circles as not even to be questioned, challenged or even thought-through properly.

Of course, the Lord can and does work in and through this sort of thing - despite the inherent naffness of it all.

He must have infinite patience alright. I no longer go to our church prayer meetings because I can't bear to hear the crap that people speak when they give God detailed instructions for what they want Him to do. It sounds like Holy Ghost sat-nav sometimes:

'Lord, would you move by your Spirit along Acacia Avenue, left into Primrose Drive, then across to those bungalows and the bottom ...'



I don't know how he puts up with it. Imagine being God, you'd have the Orthodox chanting the same thing at you week by week, the Quakers going all quiet on you and the charismatic evangelicals bossing you about and telling you what to do ...


 

---

Posted by Niteowl2 (# 15841) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

I don't know how he puts up with it. Imagine being God, you'd have the Orthodox chanting the same thing at you week by week, the Quakers going all quiet on you and the charismatic evangelicals bossing you about and telling you what to do ...

---

LOL, quite a fitting description.

 

---

Posted by no_prophet (# 15560) on :
 
Moving tangentially from the OP:

I've been wondering, in this age of science and scepticism, if a whole different approach to 'selling Christianity" is required. Less on the unbelievable - from a conventional perspective - and more on how to live reasonably with self and others. If Christians look like loony hysterics, how can it be expected that people will take it seriously? The miraculous can be added in measure as the person grows into the faith.

Thus, an anti-conversionism (and anti-Paul) stance as the entry to Christianity. Jesus' life and way of living it seems to me to be the most attractive part of Christianity on a conventional level, and his message of charity and love to be the "sale-able" core on initiation.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:

Alpha is irrelevant to most people because most people do not sit around listening to people waffling and then discuss it over a meal.

---

There are many criticisms I'd make of Alpha, but this isn't one I recognise necessarily and frankly seems a little bizarre.

Talking over a meal - if presented correctly - can be a very familiar for many people from all sorts of backgrounds. One might almost say that the experience of hospitality - if done correctly - is the reason why Alpha succeeds outside middle class circles.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
A lot here sums up my reservations.

From here the whole Alpha format looks unredeemably middle-class and establishment. Evidence for this is that in France, the churches running successful Alpha courses are overwhelmingly catholic churches, not protestant/evangelical ones.

Secondly, I'm very chary of having to buy into a whole package, especially one that attempts to package the Holy Spirit.

Thirdly, I'm unsure what the long-term impact of Alpha might be. I'm interested in getting people to follow Jesus for the whole of their lives, and I'm not convinced the "hit rate" from decision-oriented evangelistic campaigns is any better than less spectacular methods.

---

My impression was that almost all successful evangelisation in France is dominated by the Catholic Church, so the fact that French Alpha is a mostly RC phenomenon probably does nothing more than confirm that reality.

****

Re the success rate of Alpha, that book by Stephen Hunt that I mentinoed above has some figures (as does his previous book on the topic). The 'Journal of Contemp. Religion' has an article by the same author, and he makes the following relevant points about Alpha:

It sees itself as distinct from the Billy Graham kind of evangelism, which is now deemed to be culturally inappropriate.

Alpha material urges course leaders not to pressurise people into making a decision. 'The idea is to ease people into the faith in their own time, pace and at their leisure.'

If people drop out of the course they shouldn't be contacted and coerced into rejoining.

Alpha largely attracts participants as a result of personal contacts.

The Holy Spirit weekend is the most controversial part of the course. Apparently its purpose is to get the participants into a more relaxing 'group-bonding' environment, and is designed to coincide with the course's section on the Holy Spirit. 'The concern is, therefore, to create the right psychological environment for the Holy Spirit to operate.'

The 10 week course is highly structured, and although the developers want it to have a certain flexibility on the ground, they are also concerned about a 'loss of integrity in some courses.'

Despite the inherent standardisation of such a course, customisation in local contexts is inevitable. (E.g. churches leaving out the Holy Spirit weekend, or other topics.)

Conservative Protestants and RCs are unhappy about each other's involvement in Alpha, traditionalists criticise its modernist and charismatic approach, and liberals complain about its lack of a social gospel, basic theology and fundamentalist leanings.

Does it 'work'?

There is a relatively high brand awareness among the public, but Hunt's research in the UK (470 returned questonnaires) shows that the attempt 'to move away from social networks to direct advertising has largely failed.'

3% of participants arrive as a result of advertising.
70% know of Alpha through their church, indicating that a large number are already churchgoers.
5% of participants are from outside the faith, with little previous knowledge, and on an intense spiritual journey.
14% are Christians using it as a refresher course.
66% (whether committed or on the fringe of the church) want to deepen their faith.
77% were already Christians on starting Alpha.
17% approx. claimed they'd committed themselves to the faith as a result of the course - although a majority of these were already churchgoers.
16% say it didn't change their view of Christianity.
60% say it's had a positive view on their spiritual lives.

One might generalise that 'the net effect of Alpha is to rejuvenate evangelically-minded churches and the spiritual life of their members' rather than creating sizeable numbers of converts. This is also true of earlier evangelistic campaigns.

Alpha appeals to a particular social demographic. Female-male ration is at 2:1. A wide age spread, though the majority are middle aged. The young (0-30 yrs) are not particularly attracted to Alpha, nor the very old.

Black-majority churches seem to be underrepresented.

General orientation is towards the middle classes. 65% are in employment, and the majority of those not working are retired or housewives.

HTB estimates a drop-out rate of 30%.

A small number of converts are being made, although not nearly enough to replace those who have left the churches.

The founders of Alpha would not necessarily be expecting to 'win souls' in the short term, but would claim to be informing people about Christianity and inviting them on a long term journey.

1 in 20 partipants take the course again. There are also follow-on courses to do post-Alpha.

'Alpha's discernable net effect so far would seem to be in extending charismatic Christianity to UK churches, including those previously untouched by the Renewal movement. Charismatic Christianity therefore continues to have the same function that it has had for nearly four decades in spiritually reinvigorating those already in the church, albeit by different means. This has been by far Alpha's greatest achievement.'

(The impact and makeup of Alpha abroad may be different; Eastern Europe has been strong for converts.)

Emphasis mine in all cases. I hope some of these figures and details have been of some interest. May I boldly suggest that the problem of the Holy Spirit weekend almost seems irrelevant if Alpha is read as an agent of charismatic influence and renewal.....
 

---

Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :
 
My wife and I walked out of the Holy Spirit wekend when a local RC taking the course at our church started rolling around the floor in ecstasy. HSW was by far the worst part of Alpha for us. Thankfully Alpha died a natural death at our church with changing of rectors.
 

---

Posted by the long ranger (# 17109) on :
 
Has anyone here done Alpha in an RC context? What happens to the weekend there?
 

---

Posted by churchgeek (# 5557) on :
 
Years ago at my home church, we had a priest who started up Alpha courses. The "Holy Spirit weekend" was run with other churches - I'm not sure how many, because I never attended - some of which I believe were Pentecostal churches (ours was Episcopal).

I attended the Alpha class, to check it out, and then, on the priest's request, I went through it again as some kind of group facilitator (leading at a table during the discussion). I was supposed to go to the HS weekend, but my car broke down. The priest half-joked that it was the work of Satan (unlike many Episcopal priests, she actually believed in a literal Satan). Being a recovering Pentecostal myself, I was certain it was the work of God.

The main problem I had with the idea of the HS weekend (since I never experienced it) was that the course is promoted as something for seekers; however, that weekend ends up turning the course into a program that is meant to systematically convert people on a schedule. As if people should come the first week with no particular commitment, perhaps no more than curiosity, perhaps with all kinds of baggage from previous church or life experience; and then be speaking in tongues on - what was it, week 9 or so?
 

---

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
Does the Holy Spirit weekend really require that people suddenly start speaking in tongues or rolling on the floor? Can't it simply mean that you have a whole weekend to meditate deeply on God, without distractions?

What about using that weekend to explore non-charismatic experiences of the Holy Spirit. What about Celtic spirituality and all the monastic types of experience that some people are into? Surely they involve an awareness of the Holy Spirit?

If you've already 'de-charismatised' your Alpha course because you're not a charismatic church, then I can't see why you can't just de-charismatise your Holy Spirit weekend.
 

---

Posted by Waterchaser (# 11005) on :
 
I am sure Alpha can work without the Holy Spirit Weekend.

I don't think Christianity can work without the Holy Spirit however.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Well yes, Waterchaser, but it's this idea of 'creating the right psychological conditions for the Holy Spirit to work' that bothers me.

SvitlanaV2's statistics are relevant and interesting, as is her observation about the potential for having a Holy Spirit weekend that doesn't necessarily involve the charismatic dimension in the way that charismatics traditionally understand it.

But the fact is, the Alpha franchise doesn't allow for that. Built into the whole thing is an expectation that God will conform to certain expectations by causing people to speak in tongues or roll on the floor or whatever else happens to be de-rigeur in charismatic circles at the time - with tongues as the general, but not compulsory, constant.

So yes, I think SvitlanaV2 is onto something when she suggests that this aspect is part-and-parcel of the intrinsic default-strength of Alpha which has been to spread a particular form of charismatic spirituality more widely.

I will lay my own cards on the table and suggest that all Christians are charismatic to some extent or other - but this doesn't necessarily mean that they should fall over, speak in tongues or whatever else.

The Holy Spirit is clearly at work in settings where the charismatic dimension is apparently absent or downplayed. There wouldn't be ANY form of Christianity anywhere without the work of God the Holy Spirit. The Orthodox, for instance, believe that their Liturgy is pneumatic - infused with the Holy Spirit - whilst most charismatics would be puzzled by that and not discern the working of the Holy Spirit by that means because it doesn't conform to their particular expectations.

The Brethren believe that the Holy Spirit prompts them to speak or pray in their worship. Quakers, to some extent or other, believe the same or similar.

Are we saying that any of them are deficient because they don't approach these things in the prescribed Alpha-style way?
 

---

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Waterchaser:
I am sure Alpha can work without the Holy Spirit Weekend.

I don't think Christianity can work without the Holy Spirit however.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
My wife is quite musical and understands how easy this is to achieve. People simply harmonise around a single note or phrase and the effect builds and before you know it you have the semblance of 'singing in tongues'.

---

Complete tangent; but I've noticed that people tend to harmonise around the tonic and the major third, and have often wondered whether an Arabic christian gathering would harmonise around the minor third instead
 

---

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 

quote:

---

Komensky: Just as Gam mentioned above, a serious error in the charismatic scene is the 'summoning' of the Holy Spirit to 'appear'. (...)

Of course I believe the Holy Spirit works in our lives and works miracles—but he doesn't need our instructions or 'the right atmosphere' or a certain recipe for it all to 'work'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:
Complete tangent; but I've noticed that people tend to harmonise around the tonic and the major third, and have often wondered whether an Arabic christian gathering would harmonise around the minor third instead

---

Not that I've noticed. But Indian Christians certainly sing in a minor key.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
And the Holy Spirit also isn't an 'it' Le Roc, but a 'he' ...

God is always personal.
 

---

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 

quote:

---

Gamaliel: And the Holy Spirit also isn't an 'it' Le Roc, but a 'he' ...

God is always personal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
And the Holy Spirit also isn't an 'it' Le Roc, but a 'he' ...

God is always personal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

Komensky: Just as Gam mentioned above, a serious error in the charismatic scene is the 'summoning' of the Holy Spirit to 'appear'. (...)

Of course I believe the Holy Spirit works in our lives and works miracles—but he doesn't need our instructions or 'the right atmosphere' or a certain recipe for it all to 'work'.

---

And it also isn't some kind of a butler whom we can 'summon'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
And the Holy Spirit also isn't an 'it' Le Roc, but a 'he' ...

God is always personal.

---

But not exclusively male. Which is why English pronouns for God are always problematic. "He" is no more correct than "it".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
@Enoch, yes, absolutely. I don't have an issue with the charismatic emphasis on the immanence of God. That's implicit in the more sacramental traditions, of course, most notably in eucharistic theology - but isn't always expressed or appreciated in that way.

@Matt, yes, I agree, there can be a certain amount of 'psychology' going on in the quiet reflective approach as well as in the loud and the exuberant. We are not disembodied beings so an element of that is always going to be present however we do things.

I don't have a beef with loud and exuberant per se ... just so long as we realise what we are doing and that this is just as much a 'construct' as anything else.

When Jon Ronson did his rather sarcastic documentary on Alpha, I was struck by how Charlie Cleverley (not so cleverly) arranged the salient point of the Holy Spirit weekend at the one they filmed.

They went off to a stately-home somewhere and then, at the pertinent point, tried to induce tongues-speaking by hushing the atmosphere, getting someone to lead some worship and then continue strumming the guitar at which point people were expecting to join in either singing or speaking in tongues. My wife is quite musical and understands how easy this is to achieve. People simply harmonise around a single note or phrase and the effect builds and before you know it you have the semblance of 'singing in tongues'.

Anyway, just as they were getting going, some 4-wheel drive vehicles started reversing and revving and setting out for some off-road activity booked by some of the other guests. The charismatic worship leader was put off in his stride and they postponed the session and reconvened it for a later time when they were less likely to be interrupted.

How they couldn't see how this lent itself to suggestibility and manipulation is beyond me. Several of the delegates laughed the whole thing off and others walked out because of it.

It the work of God the Holy Spirit can be thwarted by a couple of reversing and revving off-roaders then surely it makes you wonder about the depth and reality of the putative experience these people are expecting ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
And the Holy Spirit also isn't an 'it' Le Roc, but a 'he' ...

God is always personal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

@SvitlanaV2 - lots of people sing 'Spirit of the Living God, fall afresh on me' whether non-charismatics or charismatics. The difference, I suspect, lies in the expectation of what people think is going to happen as a result of singing or praying that.

And, of course, in the more sacramental traditions we have the 'epiclesis' where the Holy Spirit is invoked over the sanctified elements so that they are 'changed' into the Body and Blood of Christ. One could accuse that practice of being programmatic too, of course.

I don't have an issue with singing 'Spirit of the Living God ...' nor the use of prayers and invocations such as the 'epiclesis'. What I do have an issue with is the hyped up 'Come Holy Spirit' and 'More Lord, more ...' stuff that one so often hears in certain charismatic circles, particularly where it is allied with a level of suggestibility.

Compare that with what you've described in your Methodist setting or what goes on in your average RC, Anglo-Catholic or Orthodox parish week-by-week as the eucharist is celebrated and you'll see that we aren't comparing like with like.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Also, since the Father and the Son are obviously 'he', if you were to decide to use 'she' for the Holy Spirit, it would imply some sort of sexual relationship taking place within the godhead. So I'd say, always use 'he' for the Holy Spirit.

---

quote:

---

SvitlanaV2: British Methodists, who are not usually thought of as charismatic in the neo-Pentecostal sense, like to sing a meditative chorus of which the first line is, 'Spirit of the living God, fall afresh on me'. You comment suggests that this summoning of the Holy Spirit is theologically inappropriate.

---

quote:

---

Gamaliel: I was winding Le Roc up to some extent.

---

A duel. Tomorrow at noon. Swords.
 

---

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :
 
Funnily enough, I'm in the early stages of planning a research project on the role of repetition (focussing on music) in creating a suggestible and more easily receptive audience. My initial reading on the subject is that this is more or less taken for granted in hypnotherapy and advertising.

Thinking of the Holy Sprit prayers, antiphons, sequences, etc., until very recently (20+ years?) these were not repetitive and hypnosis-inducing mantras.

Compare the 13th-century plaintchant (the actual chant is certainly much older) with this. Not only is the text of the latter highly repetitive, the music—although with the untapped power of polyphony at its disposal—is also extremely repetitive and has almost no larger structural points of rest or change and a primitive harmonic language. It doesn't move from one place to another, it simply goes on and on and on. For all the musical shortcomings of Taize, it sounds like Beethoven when compared with this monstrosity, which consists of so little musical material that it's hardly worth discussing and so repetitive and mind-numbing that the lead singer (sorry, I mean 'worship leader') could have got the audience to say and do almost anything by the end. Anyone who has seen Derren Brown's brilliant TV programmes or has seen an entertainer—hypnotist in action, has seen a similar process.

K.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
You'll have to join the queue, Le Roc ... I think Mudfrog, Jamat and others might be there before you, swords drawn or pistols in hand ...



On a serious note, I agree with the thrust of your posts and the points you've made here, I was just pulling your leg ...

On another serious note, @SvitlanaV2, yes, I know it's obvious that you weren't comparing like with like in terms of the apparent 'effects' ... and yes, you've raised a deeper issue in terms of the underlying theology as opposed to the external 'symptoms'.

Well, for all my reservations about aspects of charismatic spirituality (the term 'theology' is rather too exalted for what most of them get up to .. ), I do think it's not an unreasonable assumption from the scriptures to expect - at times - some kind of tangible 'effect' ...

It depends on how you interpret particular passages, of course, but charismatics would cite instances such as Acts 4:31 to indicate that physical effects may sometimes accompany the activity of the Holy Spirit:

'And when they had prayed, the place where they were assembled was shaken: and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the word of God with boldness.'

Charismatics (and other more conservative Christians) would claim that it was the Holy Spirit who shook the place where the disciples were assembled - that there was some kind of physical tremor as a result of the powerful presence of God the Holy Spirit.

However, this still begs the question as to why one's friendly neighbourhood charismatic church building doesn't rattle to its foundations on any particular Sunday ...

You'll occasionally hear accounts of buildings shaking - there's a famous incident from the Hebridean revival of the 1950s for instance (which was hardly charismatic but very conservatively evangelical) - but in some of the more sober accounts this is described in terms of a natural earth-tremor rather than some supernatural event.

Who knows?

Anyway, on the point you've raised about the difference between charismatic evangelicals invoking the Holy Spirit and an RC priest doing the same at Mass - that's an interesting one. I'm not sure there's actually that substantive a difference on one level. To some extent, I would suggest that charismatics have 'sacralised' other aspects of their worship services rather than the eucharist. Nature abhors a vacuum, so in the absence of any physical object to act as a vehicle for sacramentalisation (to use or coin an ugly word), they've turned to things like the 'worship time' or (increasingly) the so-called 'ministry time' and sacralised that instead.

It's a similar motivation, but directed in a different direction, or so it seems to me.

As for your other point where you can't have a Holy Spirit weekend where everyone is utterly dignified, sits around drinking tea and nibbling buns ... well, quite ...

But the thing is, that's NOT how charismatics see the Holy Spirit working. They look for evidence, for the 'this is that' and it can be self-fulfilling or suggestible. 'I've felt a funny feeling in my arm, it must be the Holy Spirit ...'

On the nature abhorring a vacuum thing, then I think this also answers your next question about well-educated theologians and clergy not coming up with an inspiring alternative to the Alpha version of a 'Holy Spirit weekend' ...

The fact is that the well-educated theologians and clergy HAVEN'T done so. They're not activists, by and large, unlike the charismatic evangelicals and the likes of Nicky Gumbel. He'd probably have become a top barrister or a CEO of a large organisation in secular life. Charismatic leaders are often movers-and-shakers and entrepreneurs. It attracts those sort of people. I'm not saying that's wrong, simply making an observation.

So because the quieter, more reflective, academic types haven't come up with any popular or widely-known alternatives (although retreat-houses and the like have been enjoying a boom) the floor has been left for those who make the most noise.

Which is fine, as long as it doesn't drown out the other quieter voices.

That's my take any way.
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
It's blinding obvious that we're not comparing like with like! But what exactly is the theological difference between a charismatic calling on the Holy Spirit and a Roman Catholic calling on the Holy Spirit? Is it simply that charismatics are less dignified with their peculiar noises and gestures, or are there more profound objections?

---

I would say that it has to do with a greater sense of objectivity as opposed to subjectivity. By that I mean that, in the sacramental traditions' liturgies, apart from the choice of which Eucharistic Prayer to use, the same words are said week in week out and are prescribed to be thus used. They are not dependent on the personality or mood of the speaker or the recipients of those words. It doesn't matter what sort of building they are said in, what tone of voice is used, how far away the speaker of the words is from the hearers, whether the service so far has been stiff upper lip or happy-clappy etc etc. Contrast that with your average charismatic setting where the 'mood' is all-important, as is the disposition of the hearers, the tone of voice of the speaker, the nuance of the worship, personalities involved etc etc.Much more scope for artificially 'upping the anti'.
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
True. Although I remember that in Billy Graham's meetings there were complaints that the singing of "Just as I am" during the appeal was manipulative, so they stopped singing and simply had a pause - at which point some (presumably other) people said that was manipulative too!

Of course one has to set this within the wider context of the entire evangelistic meeting/rally, its cultural assumptions and emotional subtexts. And those issues are relevant to any act of communal worship although different people may "read" them in a different way. Some folk will be intensely moved by 8 am Said Matins with 3 people in a tiny ancient rural church, others will simply cite it as evidence that the church is "dead".

But, certainly, Pentecostals/Charismatics are more aware of "mood" - and may do more to foster it - than folk in other traditions. Although the late great Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones railed against using lighting to create different moods during a service, and he came from a Reformed tradition!

On a slightly different point: is the "experience God during the weekend away" of the HS Weekend really very much different to the "Make a decision for Christ at the Youth Camp" scenario which many of us experienced, and which had a profound effect on me? Indeed, following Pete Ward's timeline in "Growing Up Evangelical", one could make a case for a direct generic link from the "Bash Camps" of the 1930s, via Crusaders or Pathfinders Bible class camps, to HS weekends - I don't think that is being too fanciful.

In both cases you are removing people from their normal environment, and subjecting them to a particularly intense and suggestive aspect of Christian spirituality. Were it not for the fact that folk were attending willingly, both could almost be regarded as forms of spiritual abuse. Certainly the leaders need to be careful of making any "hints" which could be regarded as undue pressure - this would be easy to do, however inadvertently.

[ 24. May 2012, 09:35: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
 

---

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :
 
I don't think that many would deny that any sort of 'mood' is unimportant, but too many of the environmental aspects are aimed at the base emotional experience. The problem (and I think Gam is on the right track about the title 'Holy Spirit Weekend'—it comes with a pretty clear set of expectations, articulated or not) is that the title itself projects a certain outcome that is read in a certain way by certain people. 'Worship service' is another—what people who use the phrase 'worship service' mean is a hand-waiving sing-along of repetitive, light-pop ditties. Just like 'Holy Spirit Weekend' it determines God's presence at a certain place and time. "If we get the recipe right, God (or usually Jesus, they say) will 'turn up'". The fact of Christ's presence in the Eucharist must be too boring for the TV-culture churches, so they resort to 'devices' to make it all happen to their satisfaction.

I was there with Nicky and Sandy while they offered advice on how to get people to speak or sing in tongues. They weren't trying to manipulate people, per se, they really believed in what they were doing, but I think failed to realise that the environment (the repetitive music and prayers, the lights, the social conditioning) was the real reason behind people going 'la, la, bip, bip, goonga, goonga—hey I'm speaking in tongues! It really works".


K.
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
I agree. Some years ago I went to a service at an HTB-linked church in London. Everything was done well, decently and in order. And yet the worship leader (one of the musicians) was actually very controlling and manipulative, to the extent that I felt decidedly uncomfortable.

But I'm sure she was an honest and good person who didn't have any idea of how she was operating - it was just part of the "normal liturgy" of "how we do things here" (as it can be in classic Pentecostal churches, too). I don't know if her Vicar, who preached but did not lead, recognised what was going on: he was certainly an intelligent person with a lot of "savvy" on such issues. But I never asked him.

[ 24. May 2012, 10:24: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
 

---

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :
 
I can't help coming back to what I said before. Maybe it's just semantics, but I think there is a difference between inviting the Holy Spirit and summoning Him (there, I got it right!). I'm not a native speaker of English, but to me the verb 'to summon' contains an element of power, of control, and I think it's silly to think that we can control the HS.

Anyway, I believe that the HS is with us always (didn't Jesus promise something to that effect?), so to me it would be more to the point to say that we open ourselves to Him.

In the Lutheran church in Brazil we have a song titled "Come, Holy Spirit, come" (Vem, Espírito Santo, vem) that I rather like. Actually, it was written by a friend of mine. I understand this song more in the sense of "We open ourselves to You" than "Get Yourself in here, right now!"

As for repetitive music to get in the mood, I'm not against that in principle. I rather like Taizé, for instance. But it has to be done in an honest way. I have no problem with "Singing these songs will help to relax our minds and open ourselves", but I'd find "If we sing this, the Holy Spirit will come" a bit dodgy
 

---

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
I would say that most of the churches I've seen run Alpha - and these have mainly been moderate evangelical CoE churches - have not really done the Holy Spirit weekend in the way that HTB envisage. I think this is a good thing except for being a bit disingenuous. Perhaps it would be better for these churches to say "an Alpha-style course" rather than "Alpha".
 

---

Posted by Komensky (# 8675) on :
 
Quick follow-up to LeRoc's last point: And if he doesn't 'appear' (people don't babble, fall over, or chicken feathers don't fall from the air-con ducts) you didn't 'do it right' or your 'faith' isn't strong enough or 'you have a sin blocking the power'. I've heard all of these 100 times.

K.
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
We finite humans seem to think we should define the working of the Infinite God ... What a cheek that is!
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Sure, I agree with all of that - what Komensky, Le Roc and Baptist Trainfan have written.

And yes, I don't think it's too fanciful to draw a line of descent from the 'Bash Camps' to Alpha and the HS Weekend, Baptist Trainfan. Only the other day I was discussing this aspect with a friend from a public school background who came to faith in a very 'rah' public school weekend-away type context. He certainly sees a connection between that and the way that Sandy Millar and Nicky Gumbel subsequently operated at HTB.

None of these things happen in a vacuum and they all have an historic/sociological context.

That doesn't in any way invalidate them, of course.

There's an interesting article by an historian of revivalism which describes the different ways that a mid-19th century 'revival' worked itself out on the ground in north-east Scotland. In Aberdeen and other urban centres it was more meeting-centred, big rallies in large halls with big-name speakers and so on. In the fishing villages it was quite intense with long periods at sea fuelling introspection and 'conviction of sin' etc.

In the inland, rural areas it was much 'quieter' and followed a more seasonal pattern with attendance at meetings and so on determined by the agricultural cycle.

I find this a very convincing approach. Although some I've come across have railed against it as they felt it went against the 'sovereignty of God.'

Christianity is incarnational, so it should come as no surprise that the way things work out are culturally conditioned to a great extent.

I think the problems start when we lose sight of that. The mood-creation at places like HTB etc are conducted in all sincerity but the problem is that many participants begin to equate particular moods and feelings with proof-positive that the Holy Spirit is moving in a particular way.

As for Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones - well, of course he railed against the use of lighting and so on ... people from a Reformed background are often very suspicious of the aesthetic and the 'soulish' - I remember a particular 'dry' Reformed preacher back home in South Wales railing against cathedral worship and so on for that very reason ...

Not all Reformed types are like that, but there can be something of a kill-joy element in there ...

Chill out guys, tat can be fun ...
 

---

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

And yes, I don't think it's too fanciful to draw a line of descent from the 'Bash Camps' to Alpha and the HS Weekend, Baptist Trainfan. Only the other day I was discussing this aspect with a friend from a public school background who came to faith in a very 'rah' public school weekend-away type context. He certainly sees a connection between that and the way that Sandy Millar and Nicky Gumbel subsequently operated at HTB.

---

quote:

---

Komensky: or chicken feathers don't fall from the air-con ducts

---

quote:

---

..but I think failed to realise that the environment (the repetitive music and prayers, the lights, the social conditioning) was the real reason behind people going 'la, la, bip, bip, goonga, goonga—hey I'm speaking in tongues! It really works".

---

Creating the right conditions can get people believing anything i.e. "Speaking in tongues is a GIFT!:

'Get It From Trying' " ( )

i.e. roll your tongue in such manner, repeat after me, let go of yourself of any inhibitions, don't hesitate raising your hands...blah blah..

Educated middle class Wimberites from Britain flocked over to the Toronto Airport Fellowship, to 'receive' and 'bring back' the 'blessing' (i.e. involving going away on a plane to Toronto - to attend a weekend of brain-washing.

Holy Spirit Weekend Away is a world away from the traditional at grass roots level Protestant belief of HEART washing:

Here Evil Ariseth, Repent Thereof ("Woe is me, for I am a man of unclean heart" - Isaiah)

the Holy Spirit - far from bothering anyone to get on a train, coach or expensive plane journey to seek him at some hotel, spa, far flung pilgrimage or mega convention centre - comes instead to visit in one's own home or place of worship, a field, closet, place of work, sports arena - the possibilities appear limitless - to cleanse and to renew a new spirit within, throwing into the bargain a spirit of discernment.

A typical weekend away involves a degree of coercion for 'receiving' the mandatory 'gift' of TONGUES:

Technique Of Negotiating Gob Unto Echolalic Speech.

To the uneducated simple minded fisherfolks of the first century even they'd have smelt that something's fishy here.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I can recommend a very interesting book on the history and the impact of Alpha: Stephen Hunt, 'The Alpha Enterprise: Evangelism in the Post-Christian Era' (2004). (The author is an agnostic sociologist who joined several Alpha courses during his research for the book. I don't think he become a Christian as a result, but he met some interesting people, and his book is a respectful, academic, but very readable analysis of the Alpha phenomenon.)

---

quote:

---

..but I think failed to realise that the environment (the repetitive music and prayers, the lights, the social conditioning) was the real reason behind people going 'la, la, bip, bip, goonga, goonga—hey I'm speaking in tongues! It really works".

---

Creating the right conditions can get people believing anything i.e. "Speaking in tongues is a GIFT!:

'Get It From Trying' " ( )

i.e. roll your tongue in such manner, repeat after me, let go of yourself of any inhibitions, don't hesitate raising your hands...blah blah..

Educated middle class Wimberites from Britain flocked over to the Toronto Airport Fellowship, to 'receive' and 'bring back' the 'blessing' (i.e. involving going away on a plane to Toronto - to attend a weekend of brain-washing.

Holy Spirit Away Weekend is a world away from the traditional at grass roots level Protestant belief of HEART washing:

Here Evil Ariseth, Repent Thereof ("Woe is me, for I am a man of unclean heart" - Isaiah)

the Holy Spirit - far from bothering anyone to get on a train, coach or expensive plane journey to seek him at some hotel, spa, far flung pilgrimage or mega convention centre - comes instead to visit in one's own home or place of worship, a field, closet, place of work, sports arena - the possibilities appear limitless - to cleanse and to renew a new spirit within, throwing into the bargain a spirit of discernment.

A typical weekend away involves a degree of coercion for 'receiving' the mandatory 'gift' of TONGUES:

Technique Of Negotiating Gob Unto Echolalic Speech.

To the uneducated simple minded fisherfolks of the first century even they'd have smelt that something's fishy here.
 

---

Posted by Pasco (# 388) on :
 
Sorry for posting twice, it appeared at first not to have passed through first time.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Ho ho Pasco.

Clever acronyms, but a bit too propositionally Prot' for me ...



I don't have a big issue with the idea of pilgrimage per se ... but I do have a big issue with people spending loads of money to fly to Toronto or wherever else. At least they used to walk or ride on ponies and so on in medieval times and we got some good literature out of it - The Canterbury Tales for instance ...
 

---

Posted by Edward Green (# 46) on :
 
Does Cursillo work without, er, the Cursillo weekend? Or Anglo-Catholicism without Pilgrimage?

I cannot see how it can be argued that the gifts of the Spirit only operate amongst those who have experienced Charismatic renewal. My experience is that the Spirit can blow as s/he wills through the most traditional of PCC's or the most reflective of early morning BCP Holy Communions.

However an emotive, intentional, even ecstatic response to God is less common, but also more easily manipulated. Come to Walsingham, come to an Alpha weekend, come to Greenbelt even, and it is there in some shape or form. And yes there is expectation, excitement and all the other factors that are a part. We walk a fine line.

Do such encounters bring people to faith? I am not sure they do, but they do confirm people in a particular path. And that worries me. Is everything that flows from Medjugorje of God just because some people have powerful encounters with God at Medjugorje? So it is the same with popular Charismatic Christianity and the Alpha course.

I happen to believe that a broadly Catholic faith is the faith of the Apostles and the Early Church, and those who do not are actually missing something essential to the fullness of faith & salvation, despite them benefiting from the grace of God that flows from the offering made at the altars of the apostolic church. I happen to also believe that we should be free to be emotive, intentional, even ecstatic in our response to God.

But I refuse to argue the former from the latter. With Christ on the altar and in our stomachs speaking in tongues or visions of Christ (both of which I experience) seem pretty insignificant.
 

---

Posted by Vaticanchic (# 13869) on :
 
Can ACs not do Alpha? I would like to do an Alpha weekend but, like S Augustine, prefer to wait a good 40 years or so.
 

---

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:


[T]he issue for me is having a distinct 'Holy Spirit weekend'. The very idea of it sounds programmatic to me.

---

quote:

---

As for your other point where you can't have a Holy Spirit weekend where everyone is utterly dignified, sits around drinking tea and nibbling buns ... well, quite ...

But the thing is, that's NOT how charismatics see the Holy Spirit working. They look for evidence, for the 'this is that' and it can be self-fulfilling or suggestible. 'I've felt a funny feeling in my arm, it must be the Holy Spirit ...'

---

quote:

---

On the nature abhorring a vacuum thing, then I think this also answers your next question about well-educated theologians and clergy not coming up with an inspiring alternative to the Alpha version of a 'Holy Spirit weekend' ...

The fact is that the well-educated theologians and clergy HAVEN'T done so. They're not activists, by and large, unlike the charismatic evangelicals and the likes of Nicky Gumbel. He'd probably have become a top barrister or a CEO of a large organisation in secular life. Charismatic leaders are often movers-and-shakers and entrepreneurs. It attracts those sort of people. I'm not saying that's wrong, simply making an observation.

So because the quieter, more reflective, academic types haven't come up with any popular or widely-known alternatives (although retreat-houses and the like have been enjoying a boom) the floor has been left for those who make the most noise.

Which is fine, as long as it doesn't drown out the other quieter voices.

---

quote:

---

Komensky: LeRoc, it's another 'signs and wonders' hoax .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I wonder if certain kinds of participants are more willing or receptive than others. We know that a certain demographic is overrepresented on Alpha courses, and it would seem that the course frequently fails to reach the groups that Rev. Gumbel and others initially envisaged.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I'm sure this is true of Alpha in general. For instance, the socialisation that is achieved through meals together is indicative of a middle-class dinner-partying social milieu. And I suspect that cultural "feel" would remain even if one changed it to pork scratchings and pints in the back room of the "Dog and Duck".

There is also the question about whether Alpha - or even church in gerneral! - attracts specific personality types. As you say, more work needs to be done.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
That cuts both ways: the Pentecostal Church, in common with a lot of Penty gaffes, which I used to go to 20 years ago was mainly working- and under-class in its demography, essentially reflecting the area in which it was situated. The services were much more unstructured and allowed for spontaneous audience participation including some from those being cared for in the community (who were attracted to the place precisely for that reason); ultimately that was one of the contributing factors to my leaving eventually. When I was able to sit back and 'drill down' through that reason for leaving, I realised it was less about theological objections but more that my middle-class prejudices just didn't fit into that setting. It didn't 'work' for me, but it did for the guys from the housing estate who went there. Horses for courses and all that...

Plus what Edward said. I really don't see much of a difference between charismatics jumping onto a plane to Toronto Airport in the mid-1990s and Catholics jumping onto a plane to Medjugorje ten years earlier: they're both pilgrimages with the participants having an expectation that they will receive something of God at their destination that they possibly wouldn't get at home. Whether that expectation is right or not is another matter, and perhaps a subject for another thread, but the phenomenon is far from unique to the charismatic tradition...

---

Matt thank you for that. Both those paras seem to me to be saying things that are important.
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
You're welcome

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
@MattBlack - it'd be interesting to find out how long people had been in those churches.

---

quote:

---

I am not denying that there are working class churches nor that sometimes people are brought in from the edges of a working class congregation.

My point is that the majority of churches are modelled on middle-class norms. Even those who are not have a very distinct culture which is not particularly accessible by people from the main working class culture.

Of course, sometimes working class people come into churches. In my experience, they have to work extremely hard to try to conform to the culture, which they initially find totally alien.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
@MattBlack - it'd be interesting to find out how long people had been in those churches. I am not denying that there are working class churches nor that sometimes people are brought in from the edges of a working class congregation.

My point is that the majority of churches are modelled on middle-class norms. Even those who are not have a very distinct culture which is not particularly accessible by people from the main working class culture.

Of course, sometimes working class people come into churches. In my experience, they have to work extremely hard to try to conform to the culture, which they initially find totally alien.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
(snip)
Plus what Edward said. I really don't see much of a difference between charismatics jumping onto a plane to Toronto Airport in the mid-1990s and Catholics jumping onto a plane to Medjugorje ten years earlier: they're both pilgrimages with the participants having an expectation that they will receive something of God at their destination that they possibly wouldn't get at home. Whether that expectation is right or not is another matter, and perhaps a subject for another thread, but the phenomenon is far from unique to the charismatic tradition...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:

I think the Salvation Army is the archetypical expression of this - with congregations which were once dominated by very working class people becoming over time dominated by much more middle class and/or respectable norms. And many Methodists are a couple of generations further down the track - of course many were originally very charismatic and very working class, which is hard to imagine looking at the churches today.

---

quote:

---

[T]he whole purpose of the expression of church was to appeal to people who were not comfortable with older traditions and forms.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I can recommend a very interesting book on the history and the impact of Alpha: Stephen Hunt, 'The Alpha Enterprise: Evangelism in the Post-Christian Era' (2004). (The author is an agnostic sociologist who joined several Alpha courses during his research for the book. I don't think he become a Christian as a result, but he met some interesting people, and his book is a respectful, academic, but very readable analysis of the Alpha phenomenon.)

---

I have done some work with him. yes, he is not a Christian but a lot of his research is around the field of religion.

I have his book 'Anyone for Alpha?' I don't know whether it is the same book with a different title.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Komensky:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
(snip)
Plus what Edward said. I really don't see much of a difference between charismatics jumping onto a plane to Toronto Airport in the mid-1990s and Catholics jumping onto a plane to Medjugorje ten years earlier: they're both pilgrimages with the participants having an expectation that they will receive something of God at their destination that they possibly wouldn't get at home. Whether that expectation is right or not is another matter, and perhaps a subject for another thread, but the phenomenon is far from unique to the charismatic tradition...

---

One (perhaps subtle?) difference is the RC do not recognise all 'healings' at Lourdes to be miracles. They must be medically verified and the sort of disorders that wouldn't be somehow healed by have a walk, healing over time, or with water.

Just a thought.

K.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
[QUOTE]
And one problem with Alpha is that it has failed to appreciate that the very culture we have developed in church and which so many outside now find impossibly exclusive is just being replicated in this course (and others like it). Hence it will almost inevitably attract people who have some affinity with the church culture or the middle class chattering culture on which it is modelled.

It doesn't need to be like this. It could just be a conversation over a few pints in a pub or some other model that people are more comfortable with.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
The premise is that most evangelism programs are "bait and switch"-- you have one sort of outreach that's designed to appeal to a particular interest/group/culture-- whether that's coffee house or pub or loud rock concert or whatever-- but then when the bait is taken you drag them into a church culture that's very, very different.

The idea w/ Alpha is to be very transparent about who/what you are. To meet in church cuz that's where church meets. To eat and talk around tables because that's what churches do. To have worship cuz that's what churches do. The idea is that you're not just looking for "saying the sinner's prayer" but for meaningful inclusion in a Christian community.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
[QUOTE]
But, as others have noted, the typical (middle class) western church style doesn't suit everyone, and maybe Alpha will never have much impact on those people. That's okay, though, as long as we don't think of Alpha as the way of doing outreach or typical middle-class church as the way of doing church meetings.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
[A]s others have noted, the typical (middle class) western church style doesn't suit everyone, and maybe Alpha will never have much impact on those people. That's okay, though, as long as we don't think of Alpha as the way of doing outreach or typical middle-class church as the way of doing church meetings.

---

quote:

---

I recently attended an event that was part of a relatively new initiative at the Institute of Directors (IOD), in which Director General Simon Walker interviewed a guest speaker as a learning opportunity for the IOD's members. The guest on this occasion was Ken Costa, former Chairman of Lazard International, former Vice-Chairman of UBS bank, and a committed Christian. Costa, Chairman of Alpha International, an organisation that provides an introduction to the Christian faith to 2 million people in the UK and 12 million worldwide, was invited to speak on 'ethical capitalism', and how banks can find business guidelines in the Bible.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0