|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Liberal, conservative and pentecostal churches
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
There is a great article on the ABC website called Plague on both their houses: The real story of growth and decline in liberal and conservative churches. by Christopher Brittain
Contrary to popular opinion in the seventies that liberal Christianity was causing church decline, Evangelicals seem to be having the same problem.
Pentecostals on the other hand are going great guns because they preach a shallow gospel of health and wealth that focuses on "power" and leads to the embrace of modernity and individualism.
quote:
If this portrait is accurate, then it is significant that the relationship between church membership in these Christian churches and the culture surrounding them is not so different from those which Douthat criticizes in liberal churches, and which Hauerwas criticizes in conservative evangelical churches. In all three situations, the most significant concern is that such expressions of Christianity fail to distinguish their Christian identities from their cultural and economic environment. The problem, it would seem, goes much deeper than the failings of liberal Christianity - or, for that matter, any other particular expression of Christian church.
Some other interesting observations:
- Liberal Christianity generally appeals to disaffected conservatives rather than people with no Christian background.
- One of its biggest problems is transmitting itself to subsequent generations.
- The homosexuality issue is not the cause of church decline as some have previously thought.
quote:
Enormous theological, ecclesiological and missiological energy is being directed towards "winning" the battle over how to interpret same-sex relationships; meanwhile, both liberal and conservative churches are in sharp decline in the Global North. Both sides tend to explain the failures of their opponent as resulting from their problematic attitude towards homosexuality.
It is now clear, however, that such diagnoses are well off the mark. Articulating the "correct" position on homosexuality will not turn the tide of church decline. Should conservatives and liberals begin to admit this reality, perhaps then the ecumenical task of analysing the decline of Christianity in the Global North can finally truly begin.
As a liberal myself I can certainly relate to a number of things the article says and it seems to hit the nail on the head with alot of the pentecostal stuff too.
The link to nationalism in Evangelicals seems to me to be mainly a US phenomena but I suppose one could argue Evangelicals get individualistic and conform via the whole work ethic thing (*shrug* - not really my area).
Just thought it was an interesting article.
Anyone agree/disagree with the points it raises?
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Speaking from a British perspective (and having a degree in Anthropology and Sociology of Religion), I think he's got it right. Particularly I like "it is significant that ... such expressions of Christianity fail to distinguish their Christian identities from their cultural and economic environment". Evangelicalism is just as nuanced by culture as liberalism; it is certainly not (as I once heard someone say) "totally separated from the world".
I also think that individualism lies at the nub of the situation: "Increasingly, Christians (liberal or otherwise) believe that they have the right to decide for themselves what they will or won't believe, and whether they will or won't show up for a worship service. For many, identifying one's identity as "Christian" does not necessarily commit oneself to a particular belief or practice".
However this comment intrigued me: "It is perhaps thus unsurprising that, generally speaking, individuals in less developed countries, particularly those making the transition from rural areas to large urban centers, are most likely to attend neo-Pentecostal churches". It will be interesting to see what happens here, as this seems to shadow what happened to "enthusiastic" religion in Britain at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. As the developing countries mature in their industrial and urban economies, this may change in the next generation.
It strikes me that faith is always worked out in a cultural context, and that it faces a huge problem. If it embraces the "zeitgeist" it may be tremendously attractive for a while but eventually lose any distinctiveness; if it challenges or resists the spirit of the age it risks irrelevance and marginalisation.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
this comment intrigued me: "It is perhaps thus unsurprising that, generally speaking, individuals in less developed countries, particularly those making the transition from rural areas to large urban centers, are most likely to attend neo-Pentecostal churches". It will be interesting to see what happens here, as this seems to shadow what happened to "enthusiastic" religion in Britain at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. As the developing countries mature in their industrial and urban economies, this may change in the next generation.
The authors of God is Back (one of whom is former editor of the Economist Bill Emmott) put this in similar but slightly different terms, identifying the rise of Southern nation pentecostalism with the corresponding rise of modernist cultures, as opposed to the postmodernism that's now firmly entrenched in Europe.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I saw the article by Linda Woodhead.
quote:
"In this light, the recent YouGov survey conducted by Linda Woodhead in the UK is of most interesting. The survey suggested that 50% of British Anglicans seldom attend church, but that they continue to affirm the beliefs of their denomination. In an article for the Church Times, Woodhead argues that such "nominal" Anglicans are actually a sign of the church's strength, and should be viewed as the "most real Anglicans." "
It is rubbish. She's advocating that the CofE shouldn't mind if people don't take part. It's there for those who don't. So rather than exhort the Laodicean to change their ways and take God seriously, it should rejoice in remaining as Laodicean as possible. It should tacitly hope all the enthusiastic and committed Christians go off and join the Baptists, Roman Catholics or whoever.
At the bottom of her argument is the pernicious notion, that as a state church, it is there to serve the people and give them what they want. If they want a platitudinous faith that keeps God safely at arms length, she thinks that's what the CofE should give them. She appears to be blind to any notion that the CofE is answerable to God - there to call people back to him - rather than the state or 'what people appear to want'.
Christopher Brittain's comment is entirely valid.
quote:
"While this contribution offers a helpful corrective on the tendency to equate a church's vitality or relevance to counting the number of people at a Sunday service, it is rather difficult to agree that non-attendance can be considered an asset for any church. Presumably, those Anglicans who no longer attend services did so at some point in their lives - at least, for a long enough period to acquire a sufficient sense of the tradition with which they continue to associate. With fewer people now attending long enough to develop such an identity, however, there will be a steady decline in even the number of these "nominal" Anglicans. The promising demographic that Woodhead identifies is thus an endangered species."
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
This idea about the rise in evangelicalism being linked to such things as moving from rural to urban, industrial revolutions, etc, has intrigued me.
Could this kind of study be extended to discover what kind of church culture works best, historically, in different kinds of community?
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
This idea about the rise in evangelicalism being linked to such things as moving from rural to urban, industrial revolutions, etc, has intrigued me.
Could this kind of study be extended to discover what kind of church culture works best, historically, in different kinds of community?
Some studies state that the movement from rural to urban living also explains the decline of religious observance in certain contexts, so the issue isn't a simple one.
The studies I've seen claim that class and social status influence the kinds of churches that people attend. This is a major reason why I feel uncomfortable with discussions here that condemn 'emotionalism' in worship, because they seem to pay no regard to the contexts in which many ordinary people live and experience their faith. In fact, one might see a certain elitism in such arguments. Pentecostalism is depicted as a crazy youthful phase best put aside; this may be a relevant comment in some cultural/social contexts, but clearly not in others.
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
This comment intrigued me: "It is perhaps thus unsurprising that, generally speaking, individuals in less developed countries, particularly those making the transition from rural areas to large urban centers, are most likely to attend neo-Pentecostal churches". It will be interesting to see what happens here, as this seems to shadow what happened to "enthusiastic" religion in Britain at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. As the developing countries mature in their industrial and urban economies, this may change in the next generation
Whether the developing world will mirror what's happened in Britain is questionable. The contexts aren't entirely the same, especially since 'the developing world' encompasses a large number of different countries, and Western culture, though influential, is less and less able to impose itself as a unified global norm.
There was a very interesting essay online about whether Africans are as 'incurably religious' as they have been depicted, but it seems to have been removed.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Pentecostals on the other hand are going great guns because they preach a shallow gospel of health and wealth that focuses on "power" and leads to the embrace of modernity and individualism.
I suppose the question is whether that's a fair characterisation of Pentecostalism.
(I understand you're reporting what the article says, not necessarily your own views.)
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Adopts Travis Buckle voice, 'Are you talkin' to me?'
If, SvitlanaV2, you're referring to the threads where I'm questioning or exploring (rather than 'condemning') emotional responses and emotionalism in worship, you'll find that I'm suggesting the issue isn't clear cut.
I may have moved out of my more youthful neo-pentecostal phase, but I suspect what I've done is channel the emotional/affective element into other directions rather than squished them out of existence.
I do think, though, that Pentecostalism and enthusiastic religion in general flourishes best in communities and settings where people are seeking certainty and a sense of belonging - hence the reason why it appeals in urban settings among both working class economic migrants (or people moving to cities from rural areas) or among middle-class students and young professionals.
That's not to dismiss it. Simply to acknowledge what's going on. All of these things happen in a cultural context, as Baptist Trainfan notes.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
...Pentecostals on the other hand are going great guns because they preach a shallow gospel of health and wealth that focuses on "power" and leads to the embrace of modernity and individualism...
I don't think it's fair to say that all Pentecostals preach "health and wealth" - Jimmy Swaggart and co. are passionately against all this "blab it and grab it", although I don't know how it relates to the popularity of his church or TV station.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
...Pentecostals on the other hand are going great guns because they preach a shallow gospel of health and wealth that focuses on "power" and leads to the embrace of modernity and individualism...
I don't think it's fair to say that all Pentecostals preach "health and wealth" - Jimmy Swaggart and co. are passionately against all this "blab it and grab it", although I don't know how it relates to the popularity of his church or TV station.
I can't stand the prosperity gospel and i have been quite impressed with Swaggart's 1950s style evangelicalism and his music and his focus on the cross. He seems like a good guy to me - certainly he has an experience of grace to talk about!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
dv
Shipmate
# 15714
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I saw the article by Linda Woodhead.
It is rubbish.
[...]
She's advocating that the CofE shouldn't mind if people don't take part. It's there for those who don't. So rather than exhort the Laodicean to change their ways and take God seriously, it should rejoice in remaining as Laodicean as possible.
I thought Linda Woodhead's article was a sound counterargument to the usual self-interested clerical one that says we need to sit around for an hour and a quarter each Sunday morning to be real Christians. Pew fodder is required if the professional reciter is to have an audience for the read through.
Her survey indicated that many self-identified Anglicans actually found God in more meaningful, less passive, pursuits. I can see that wouldn't play well with those who have a vested interest in trying to maintain the status quo (futile though that is).
Posts: 70 | From: Lancs UK | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
this comment intrigued me: "It is perhaps thus unsurprising that, generally speaking, individuals in less developed countries, particularly those making the transition from rural areas to large urban centers, are most likely to attend neo-Pentecostal churches". It will be interesting to see what happens here, as this seems to shadow what happened to "enthusiastic" religion in Britain at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. As the developing countries mature in their industrial and urban economies, this may change in the next generation.
The authors of God is Back (one of whom is former editor of the Economist Bill Emmott) put this in similar but slightly different terms, identifying the rise of Southern nation pentecostalism with the corresponding rise of modernist cultures, as opposed to the postmodernism that's now firmly entrenched in Europe.
A few of you have raised this point.
The article speaks to the point here:
quote:
This emerging scholarly consensus on this movement is not unlike Max Weber's interpretation of the rise of Calvinism, which, with its "Protestant Work Ethic," fueled the Industrial Revolution. Leaving criticisms of Weber's thesis aside, if there is anything to the linkage that scholars are identifying between Pentecostalism and global modernity, then the concerns about the weaknesses of liberal Christianity have come full circle. For, according to Weber's thesis, the prosperity enjoyed by the Protestant industrialists spurred on the rationalism, individualism and secularism that have contributed to the decline of Christianity's cultural influence in the Global North.
This is not to suggest that Africa and Latin America are destined to experience the same secularizing trends as the nations of the Global North; but it does raise the possibility that these developments are gradually producing the same kind of individual subjectivity among Christians, with all of its benefits and limitations.
Simply put, if the Christian churches that are currently experiencing significant growth are at the same time helping to spread modern individualism (as well as increasing social mobility and the undermining of local cultures and traditions), then we have every reason to anticipate that the issues Douthat and Hauerwas criticize in American churches will become increasingly prominent in many churches in other parts of the globe - whether they are "liberal" or "conservative." Like so-called "liberal Christians," Pentecostals are increasingly learning to adapt Christianity to their own beliefs and needs.
In other words, if the Global South goes the economic and cultural way of the Global North, there is no reason to suspect their religion won't either.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I do think, though, that Pentecostalism and enthusiastic religion in general flourishes best in communities and settings where people are seeking certainty and a sense of belonging - hence the reason why it appeals in urban settings among both working class economic migrants (or people moving to cities from rural areas) or among middle-class students and young professionals.
Agreed. I also suspect that it appeals to those individuals who require emotion and a sense of community to substantiate their beliefs: it is about "feeling" as much as (if not more than) "doctrine" which appeals to the post-modern desire for individual existential authenticity.
Dare I say that it also appeals to those who are stressed and want religion to be a refuge from their complicated lives; or to those who have relegated faith from the public to the private sphere and thus see no need to do the agonising over issues such as poverty and justice that are such a hallmark of the liberal churches?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm not sure that the 'stress' thing applies so well, Baptist Trainfan - at least not in quite the way you've framed it here.
I think that part of the appeal of Pentecostalism in my native South Wales was that it offered temporary respite from forge, foundry or mine - or added colour and excitement to drab Valley life.
You could get a buzz without getting pissed and squandering your hard earned wages.
Speaking for myself, in my neo-pentecostal phase, or my 'new church' restorationist phase, it was precisely when I started to get more stressful jobs and responsibility that I felt increasingly estranged from that kind of church experience.
The higher up the greasy pole I got and the more responsibilities I had with family, mortgage and so on, the less I wanted to go somewhere where I'd be expected to dance, clap or bob money into the offering bucket on cue. I'd have much rather escaped to a Trappist retreat.
When we finally left - and joined a more moderate but still charismatic Baptist congregation - I was struck by how involved people were with things other than church - how some were into lobbying for various causes, some were big into bikes and cycling issues, others were more involved in the arts or with green issues and how still others were into the Northumbria Community thing and had a bent towards more contemplative prayer etc ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Not so sure that conflating evangelicalism with conservatism is particularly helpful here. The most successful churches IME (in the Anglican church in England admittedly) were evangelical, conservative-but-compassionate on dead horse issues but certainly more concerned about the environment, people trafficking, poverty etc than said dead horses. All gently charismatic but take a stance of 'not cessationist' more than anything else. Interestingly, I see much more concern for social issues amongst Vineyard/New Wine friends than those who go to cessationist evangelical churches. Class plays a role too, though, with social issues being more important to middle-class Christians in general I find. I find this....frustrating.
These are just my observations though, I'm not suggesting anything about actual patterns!
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
In other words, if the Global South goes the economic and cultural way of the Global North, there is no reason to suspect their religion won't either.
On the other hand:
* Weberian theories were developed in and for a specifically Western context. To apply them to every other context without reservations is a culturally uninformed act that hints at notions of cultural superiority.
* Pentecostalism was born outside Europe, and its greatest successes have been outside Europe. So while secularisation may occur globally, it can't treat global Pentecostalism as a European adversary and expect to have an easy time of it.
* Some see conservative forms of religion as the creation of secularisation, in which case, more secularisation will only create more religion!
* By 2050 Europe will have just 7% of the world's population. Non-hispanic whites will be in the minority in the USA by 2055. There are British cities which are already or almost majority non-white spaces, and there is increasing segregation. In these contexts, 'white', secular responses to religion may seem to be increasingly irrelevant to other people.
* The upcoming struggle for global resources is unlikely to create a world where everyone benefits equally from the fruits of industry and technological developments. There are going to be winners and losers, just as there have been since the beginning of time.
Eric Kaufmann, a professor of politics, predicts that the future will belong to the (most) religious, mainly for demographic reasons. I notice that he'll be at Greenbelt this year. He'd be very interesting to listen to.
http://www.sneps.net/
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
They are ALL doomed modernist and anti-modernist movements. As fruitless as the false dichotomy exposed by Kierkegaard in the pursuit of the aesthetic OR the ethical.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
If, SvitlanaV2, you're referring to the threads where I'm questioning or exploring (rather than 'condemning') emotional responses and emotionalism in worship, you'll find that I'm suggesting the issue isn't clear cut.
I may have moved out of my more youthful neo-pentecostal phase, but I suspect what I've done is channel the emotional/affective element into other directions rather than squished them out of existence.
I do think, though, that Pentecostalism and enthusiastic religion in general flourishes best in communities and settings where people are seeking certainty and a sense of belonging - hence the reason why it appeals in urban settings among both working class economic migrants (or people moving to cities from rural areas) or among middle-class students and young professionals.
That's not to dismiss it. Simply to acknowledge what's going on.
There will always be people who seek certainty and a sense of belonging. If the liberal churches are unable or unwilling to take these people seriously then nomatter how inclusive such churches think they are, or how much more sophisticated their theology, these people will always go elsewhere. Indeed, a rapidly changing world like ours might make it inevitable that 'Pentecostalism and enthustiastic religion'
will have more to offer than the alternatives, for those who are seeking something Christian.
Your experience suggests that (traditional)Anglicanism is something that one has to grow into, after trying the alternatives. Maybe this is where the future of the CofE lies, rather than in running after 'the yoof'.
BTW, did you pass through Pentecostalism as a member of a Pentecostal family, or were you an individual on a personal quest? Of course, we all journey alone in one sense, and in another sense all Christians are brothers and sisters in the faith, but the experience of my extended maternal family, who were all Pentecostal together, and the experience of an individual who follows without family support, are likely to be different in several ways.
I'm not sure what the catalyst was in my grandparents' case, but it wasn't migration, as they were still living in a rural area.
[ 09. May 2013, 22:26: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
They are ALL doomed modernist and anti-modernist movements. As fruitless as the false dichotomy exposed by Kierkegaard in the pursuit of the aesthetic OR the ethical.
The anti-modernists are just modernists in drag. The antithesis to the thesis, two sides to the same coin. So of course they will sink together.
So what comes next? (and don't say postmodernism, which is just strawberry flavoured modernism)
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I passed through Pentecostalism in its 'neo' form - I was too middle-class to be a proper Pentecostal ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) - although I did hang out with working-class Penties at times.
'A charismatic is a Pentecostal who has gone middle-class'.
Actually, Andrew Walker the sociologist, the son of a Pentecostal pastor, said that and he was right.
The 'new churches' did have a lot of working class people but they also attracted more middle-class former 'renewalist' types.
No, my family background wasn't Pentecostal. My mum's family were sort of folk-Anglican and my Dad's were nominally Baptist. His father was an atheist and freethinker, as many were in the Valleys, partly as a reaction to the Welsh Revival of 1904/05.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Demas, agreed that anti-modernism is the other side of the modernist coin. What comes next IS postmodernism FIRST. That's where I've been catching up to. Thanks to Brian McLaren. Read the whole article after my one liner soundbite and it's superb. Plague on ALL houses that suckle on Caesar's breast while bitching about him.
All we need is love.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
...I can't stand the prosperity gospel and i have been quite impressed with Swaggart's 1950s style evangelicalism and his music and his focus on the cross. He seems like a good guy to me - certainly he has an experience of grace to talk about!
Ah, I'm glad someone else gets it - I'm sure we must be both talking about the same experience of Grace which originated almost 25 years ago, which others can't seem to get over.
Anyway, excuse the tangent, but I know if I was a Pentecostal who lived in Baton Rouge, Louisiana that's where I'd go - and not just for the very best of Nashville gospel/country music either.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I was surprised Swaggart made a come-back, to be honest.
But hey ... stranger things have happened.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I was surprised Swaggart made a come-back, to be honest.
But hey ... stranger things have happened.
Yes - lesser men would have just given up.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Pentecostals on the other hand are going great guns because they preach a shallow gospel of health and wealth that focuses on "power" and leads to the embrace of modernity and individualism.
I am sure that one of the factors in the growth of the Pentecostal church is the various self improvement elements associated with the movement (not all of them as objectionable as the health&wealth gospel).
I disagree that it's the only one - though yes, it will probably have the same issues with transmitting faith across the generations experienced by other movements.
Research elsewhere has shown that whilst fundamentalism is a turn off, in general churches that grow are those that are distinctively counter-cultural in some way. I'm sure part of the decline in conservative evangelicalism in America (by which they usually mean the American south) is in part because evangelicalism has become seen as part of the establishment - and thereby of the culture.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I was surprised Swaggart made a come-back, to be honest.
But hey ... stranger things have happened.
Yes - lesser men would have just given up.
I remember watching the 'I have sinned' tearful confession on a video clip once. The fact that his public sin, his public confession and subsequent ministry are all genuine is a testimomny to the grace of God - what a testimony.
Think of King David.
Think of Peter
Think of others who have had testimonies to the grace of God after a spectacular fall.
The fact that this man preaches Christ crucified and not the prosperity message reveals that his ministry has integrity.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
You do know that three years later he was caught with another lady of negotiable affection don't you?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm still very uncomfortable with Swaggart. I can see why Mark Betts and Mudfrog appear to warm to him, though.
Perhaps it says something about them, for all their ecclesial differences ...
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
More seriously, as they both like 'ole-time religion' (Mark's rather more 'ole-time' than Mudfrog's by about a millenium and a half) then I can see the appeal.
Whether Swaggart has a terrific ministry and testimony isn't really for me to judge.
I can't say I'll be watching his broadcasts anytime soon though.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I was surprised Swaggart made a come-back, to be honest.
But hey ... stranger things have happened.
Yes - lesser men would have just given up.
I remember watching the 'I have sinned' tearful confession on a video clip once. The fact that his public sin, his public confession and subsequent ministry are all genuine is a testimomny to the grace of God - what a testimony.
Think of King David.
Think of Peter
Think of others who have had testimonies to the grace of God after a spectacular fall.
Anyone who has testified can claim the same. The club isn't exclusive to big names from scripture. The Fall was spectacular and applies to every one of us. Quite how Jimmy Swaggart's fall give him any additional leverage is a mystery to me.
quote:
The fact that this man preaches Christ crucified and not the prosperity message reveals that his ministry has integrity.
There are many ways in which one can preach the Gospel that have nothing to do with the prosperity message and everything to do with Christ crucified. Swaggart ain't special, but he did perform a fine, tearful breast-beating confession on television.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
What reveals that Swaggart's ministry has integrity, in Mudfrog's terms, is that it accords with how Mudfrog sees the Gospel. It's a purely subjective response on his part.
I'd suggest that if we're looking for a 1950s style evangelist with integrity then Billy Graham, rather than Swaggart, is the paradigm example.
Not that I think that 1950s style evangelism is where it's at, necessarily, but of all its practitioners, Graham strikes me as the most on-the-level.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What reveals that Swaggart's ministry has integrity, in Mudfrog's terms, is that it accords with how Mudfrog sees the Gospel. It's a purely subjective response on his part.
I'd suggest that if we're looking for a 1950s style evangelist with integrity then Billy Graham, rather than Swaggart, is the paradigm example.
Not that I think that 1950s style evangelism is where it's at, necessarily, but of all its practitioners, Graham strikes me as the most on-the-level.
They are both cut from the same cloth, yes, except that Jimmy Swaggart has a more Pentecostal background. It could be (though I'm not saying it is) that Billy Graham strikes one as being more on-the-level, simply because he was cleverer and didn't get caught with his pants down (so-to-speak).
I could be completely wrong about Billy Graham of course, but all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Jimmy Swaggart's line now seems to be that if you don't give up on God, He won't give up on you. That's encouraging, if you should find that you've strayed a long way off the straight and narrow and you're now trying to find your way back.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You do know that three years later he was caught with another lady of negotiable affection don't you?
Yes, and did you know that all that happened more than 20 years ago?
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
All we need is love.
Well yes, but you can't use this to escape Evensong's trichotemy if it is just an excuse not to answer difficult questions.
Was Mary a virgin? Was the tomb empty? What happens after we die? I'm not going to talk about that question because, you see, love is all we need.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Mark - of course all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God - Billy Graham, thee, me - all of us.
I'm not saying that Swaggart's past misdemeanours preclude him from the ministry, but I do think we can all be guilty of double-standards. I well remember Penties and 'house-church' people bending over backwards to defend Swaggart back in the day yet if a vicar, a priest or a bishop in any of the mainstream churches ever stepped out of line you'd never hear the end of it.
Personally, I'm not in the least bit interested whether Swaggart's preaching, ranching or serving behind the counter at McDonalds. His brand of '50s style revivalism does very little for me. I'm not in the least bit interested.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Could you define '50s style revivalism' please.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Good question.
Short answer:
A mid-20th century development of earlier 19th century revivalist emphases involving a pietistic response to the Gospel - often characterised by a public profession of faith in response to an altar-call or other 'means' of eliciting a public response. It can often be centred on and associated with particular figures and pulpiteers. It tends to be associated with a homely and demotic style, a somewhat literal approach to the Creation stories and so on and sometimes a pre-millenialist eschatological schema - but the mileage varies.
There, that wasn't short ... ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
I'd have to go away and think some more in order to give a pithy response.
For my money, the approach has certain strengths and weaknesses and, as always in any sphere, the main strengths can also be weaknesses.
So - strengths:
- Emphasis on personal, individual response.
- Activism.
- Plain and homely style of delivery.
- Broad and engaging appeal.
Weaknesses:
- Can be individualistic.
- Can be simplistic.
- Can be rabble-rousing, demotic and rhetorical in an unhelpful way.
- Can be shallow.
Will that do for now?
There's a place for it, certainly. I've got a soft spot for certain independent conservative evangelical and Free Methodist churches I knew 'up north' which had this kind of 'feel' and were very 1950s-ish. I've even preached in some of them - not that I've done much preaching in my time.
They're quite sweet - he said patronisingly ....
Seriously, there are good folks in those outfits and they mean well and do a good job. But there's more to it.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Could you define '50s style revivalism' please.
I had no difficulty guessing what Gamaliel meant even before his excellent explanation.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Absolutely Demas as none of those questions is relevant to that. In fact they detract from it, more being less.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
On the "health and wealth" heresy, it is tripe to suggest that it is held by all or even most penties.
I am one of those "not cessationist, not penty" types, but I have mixed a fair bit with penties over the years, and can say that many of them regard the whole "health and wealth" thing as bullshit.
On the appeal of Pentecostalism to Christians in the developing world, someone once said that "middle class Western Christians made a preferential option for the poor, and the poor made a preferential option for Pentecostalism".
Liberation Theology offered a version of power to the poor too, but who in their right mind would want to find solace from their miserable existence in listening to lectures on neo-Marxian economics, when they could be forgetting their troubles by singing and dancing to worship music?
On conservative churches surviving or thriving while liberal mainstream churches are moribund, I am old enough to just remember when evangelicals were the patronised minority, and defended themselves by saying they were small and unpopular because they remained faithful to Christ by preaching unpalatable truths such as sin, judgement and salvation.
Today, some liberals have claimed that their churches are shrinking because they have remained faithful to Christ by preaching unpalatable truths such as sexism, racism and the decline of the environment.
Whatever one might think about those two lines of defence, the general point remains that growth and decline are irrelevant as evidence of faithfulness to the truth.
In this case at least, size does not matter.
[ 11. May 2013, 12:27: Message edited by: Kaplan Corday ]
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Good question.
Short answer:
A mid-20th century development of earlier 19th century revivalist emphases involving a pietistic response to the Gospel - often characterised by a public profession of faith in response to an altar-call or other 'means' of eliciting a public response. It can often be centred on and associated with particular figures and pulpiteers. It tends to be associated with a homely and demotic style, a somewhat literal approach to the Creation stories and so on and sometimes a pre-millenialist eschatological schema - but the mileage varies.
There, that wasn't short ...
I'd have to go away and think some more in order to give a pithy response.
For my money, the approach has certain strengths and weaknesses and, as always in any sphere, the main strengths can also be weaknesses.
So - strengths:
- Emphasis on personal, individual response.
- Activism.
- Plain and homely style of delivery.
- Broad and engaging appeal.
Weaknesses:
- Can be individualistic.
- Can be simplistic.
- Can be rabble-rousing, demotic and rhetorical in an unhelpful way.
- Can be shallow.
Will that do for now?
There's a place for it, certainly. I've got a soft spot for certain independent conservative evangelical and Free Methodist churches I knew 'up north' which had this kind of 'feel' and were very 1950s-ish. I've even preached in some of them - not that I've done much preaching in my time.
They're quite sweet - he said patronisingly ....
Seriously, there are good folks in those outfits and they mean well and do a good job. But there's more to it.
Well, your wikipedia-style first paragraph has the aroma of Salvationism in it but I wonder if it takes one or two modern examples and applies them to the entire evangelical culture over the last 150 years in America. In the States there are what they call camp meetings and indeed, this title is applied to some of Jimmy Swaggart's crusades.
The altar call is Methodist in origin or even Scottish Presbyterian - and is certainly part of Salvationist heritage, tradition and methodology.
I'm not sure if a public profession of faith is as undesirable as I infer from your post - especially when the baptist church has this in its baptisms and the liturgical churches are quite good at getting the faithful to confess their personal faith in Christ every time they kneel for the sacrament.
I don't like the rather patronising term 'pulpiteers' instead of preachers - what is being said here? - please expand on it. It sounds quite dismissive of men and women who are sincerely preaching the Gospel.
Homely and demotic style? If that is as opposed to academic lecturing and pious sanctimony then give me homely every time! If demotic means using terms familiar to the common listener then you are going to have to grant that in his use of parables and stories, Jesus himself was demotic in style.
Literal approach to creationism? Always? If so, that's a conservative position but doesn't form the basis and foundation to gospel preaching - indeed, I've never heard Swaggart refer to YEC but I've heard him speak about the saving power of Jesus and the Cross. That's an important message don't you think?
The preachers are not always big names - 50s style revivalism was/is often small town missions on campgrounds.
Eschatology may well have been premillennial - so what? As a matter of fact, TSAS was always, up to one point, postmillennial through and through - even with our revivalism and altar calls.
quote:
Weaknesses:
- Can be individualistic.
- Can be simplistic.
- Can be rabble-rousing, demotic and rhetorical in an unhelpful way.
- Can be shallow.
1. The Gospel needs an individual response. Incorporation literally 'into the Body' can only start after an individual experience of grace.
2. The preaching of salvation to the sinner doesn't need theological lecturing. Deeper Bible study and learning comes later.
3. rabble-rousing - you mean when he congregation shout Amen? Why is fervour expressed vocally a negative?
4. Shallow? Hmmm yes, a a long sermon in evangelicalism is always shallow, while a 3 minute homily during a Mass is going to provide the deepest spiritual nourishment and theological reflection.
Some of the criticism sounds rather like a sniffy 1950s Anglican on his way to Evensong turning his refined nose up at the rousing singing of the Methodists in the chapel belting out a good old wesley hymn.
Give me what you've described over dead (and dead boring) formality any day.
Jesus wants a hot church or a cold church (at least he can heat it up if necessary) A lukewarm moderate church that leaves the soul unmoved is rubbish. I don't think God would even be allowed in. If he was he wouldn't be allowed to do or say anything.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
The anti-modernists are just modernists in drag. The antithesis to the thesis, two sides to the same coin. So of course they will sink together.
So what comes next? (and don't say postmodernism, which is just strawberry flavoured modernism)
What do you think?
(I'm still stuck in strawberry flavoured modernism - or modernism without the anxiety)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Homely and demotic style? If that is as opposed to academic lecturing and pious sanctimony then give me homely every time!
Give me what you've described over dead (and dead boring) formality any day.
Why do you assume that the extremes are the only two options?
It's also possible to be simple without being simplistic.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Homely and demotic style? If that is as opposed to academic lecturing and pious sanctimony then give me homely every time!
Give me what you've described over dead (and dead boring) formality any day.
Why do you assume that the extremes are the only two options?
It's also possible to be simple without being simplistic.
I take the point - the problem is that on the ship sometimes one has to over state the argument to get it heard! Whenever evangelicals are described you'd think every ministert was Ian paisley and every congregation handled snakes!
To hear some describe Catholicism, you'd think the Latin-only-speaking Pope had horns.
I hope my preaching is never simplistic - though sometimes even being simple draws down some kind of Gnostic ire as if sermons should be worded in such a way so that only the enlightened may understand them.
...and there does seem to be a lot of Gnosticism here.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
You asked me to define it and I outlined what I feel to be some of its defining features. Some positive, some negative. I said it was a 'short' response and therefore it wasn't intended as a definitive statement about every aspect of '50s style evangelicalism.
I also said that I had a lot of time and affection for people who have adopted this form of spirituality.
If you want to infer some kind of value-judgement in every phrase I wrote then you are almost as touchy as EE appears to be.
I'm not knocking Salvationism and I'm not knocking you. If the cap fits though ...
A demotic style isn't a bad thing, necessarily nor did I suggest it was. I've said plenty of times on these boards that when it comes to preaching, in my experience, the Baptists do it best and there's nary a robe nor scrap of linen in sight.
If I was asked to outline my thoughts on 1970s style Anglicanism say or 2000s style Roman Catholicism or 1000 AD style Orthodoxy ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif) , I'd make a similar list with a similar list of pros and cons. In fact, I might well do that one day just so you don't feel so got at.
We were talking about Swaggart and the particular tradition that he represents and I listed what I took to be its plus points and its weak-points.
On the whole, despite some emotive language in places ('pulpiteering' rather than 'preaching') I think I've been pretty fair and even-handed.
Also, I made it clear that I was making generalisations in some places - 'the mileage varies' I said, in relation to YEC and pre-millenialism. This had nothing to do with the Salvation Army and its stance on these issues. I'd recognise the Sally Army as sharing some - but not all - of these features and would add that, if anything, the Salvation Army was broader in scope and also had a fantastic track-record on social issues and practical humanitarian work that some more pietistic movements lack.
So don't get all sulky.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sorry to double-post but while I'm on, Mudfrog, you might be interested to hear that:
- I sometimes visit my local Methodist church and I love Wesleyan hymns.
- I've heard some ultra-short sermons in more sacramental settings that have been naff. I've heard others that have been masterpieces of concision and said more than some preachers could say in 40 minutes.
- I've heard wonderfully engaging sermons in many evangelical settings.
- As well as a penchant for Wesleyan hymns I have a soft-spot for some of the more revivalist or Moody & Sankey style hymns - but some do make me cringe. I particularly like 'At the cross, the cross ...' and 'Years I spent in vanity and pride ...'
- I think there can be a certain amount of 'sacramental' snobbery towards the more 'enthusiastic' types of church - but equally it can work in the opposite direction in a kind of 'inverted snobbery' way in which people think that something is 'dead' or moribund simply because it doesn't conform to what THEY think of as signs of life or vitality.
- Boring is as boring does. Some more liturgical services can be boring. Some Pentecostal, Wesleyan or probably even - shock, horror - Salvationist services can be boring.
I find Swaggart pretty boring. I've heard it all before. The only difference is that he has some kind of exotic past.
And Kaplan's right, most Penties rightly reject the health-wealth malarkey - at least, most of the 'traditional' Penties do. So there's not even anything distinctive in his approach to that.
In fact, I'm having difficulty thinking of what the guy does have to offer apart from a certain amount of gall, admitted stickability and resilience and presumably a fair amount of funding in order to continue broadcasting.
Ok, so he preaches 'the cross' in the way that you'd approve, but there are plenty of others who do that - as well as others who do a good job in whatever they do without necessarily having the same approach to 'the cross' that you have from your particular tradition.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
I don't think it's fair to say that all Pentecostals preach "health and wealth"
Fair? Its nothing but ignorant prejudice. Some do. Most don't. A few are militantly against it.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
This is supposed to be the Magazine of Christian Unrest, not the Magazine of Everything is Smashing and Right and Lovely.
But if I've been a bit harsh in my assessment of 1950's style evangelicalism, I'm happy to balance it out by saying that there are strengths and weaknesses in all traditions and what you gain on the roundabouts you lose on the swings. That's the way it is.
So, for my money, and for what it's worth, here in the UK ...
The Baptists have the best preachers, the Methodists the best hymns, the Salvation Army among the best social and relief programmes (and there's more to them than that too), the charismatics the closest sense of fellowship (but it can get claustrophobic), the Orthodox the best beards and hats and by far the best Easters, the RCs the best 'lectio divina', the Quakers the best silences, the URCs the best of several different worlds (at their best), the Anglicans the best cathedrals and if there's anyone I've left out, let me know and I'll extend them a hug too ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
...if there's anyone I've left out, let me know and I'll extend them a hug too ...
On behalf of my church flavour, I feel left out! What has the Vineyard movement got the best of?
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Apologies. The Vineyard movement has the best of a laid-back form of charismaticism and a non-confrontational and somewhat democratic style that makes up for a degree of iffiness in praxis.
Couldn't think of a short way of summarising that.
Perhaps this will do:
The Vineyard movement is the best exponent of California charismaticism in the UK.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Gamaliel
quote:
I find Swaggart pretty boring. I've heard it all before. The only difference is that he has some kind of exotic past.
Out of interest, which Pentecostal/charismatic denominations in the UK take an interest in Swaggart? I didn't realise he had much of a following over here. Do British Pentecostals and charismatics all have cable/satellite TV, so they can catch all the famous American televangelists?
A few years ago there seemed to be a wave of big American names (well, the ones I'd heard of anyway) coming to my city for paid appearances. But I haven't heard of anything recently. I read that most of them find the UK very frustrating, so perhaps they've given up.
With the growth of Pentecostalism in the developing world, its biggest stars may soon be coming from countries other than the USA.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
