Recent articles on this blog have considered the way that the institution we know as Holy Trinity Brompton has come to exercise a dominant position within the Church of England. The importance that it possesses is not only financial and structural; the overall HTB culture appears to be what the typical non-Church member, the person in the street, regards as true of all Christians in Britain. Increasingly Christians have come to be understood by ordinary folk to hold extremely reactionary attitudes on sexual morality issues. Also, their musical preferences seem to an older generation, whether church members or not, to have far more in common to the offerings of a night club. This new music has eclipsed the traditional hymnody that used to bind the whole of British society together in something like a common religious culture. Those of us who are outside the orbit of HTB may sometimes also be made to feel that we have no part to play in the Church’s future. The moderate liberal-catholic perspectives which were in the ascendant in the C/E until 20 or 30 years ago, are now considered in many places to be old-fashioned and of little relevance to a younger generation.
The articles by Hattie Calbus may have alerted some SC readers to the thought that the HTB universe and its power should and can be challenged. Any concentration of so much power operating within a single institution, the C/E, is likely to have the potential for becoming corrupted. The wise words of Lord Acton about power come to mind. All dominant cliques in any sphere of life have this potential. Our minds are currently being drawn to the immense power of the Post Office management over their employees and the way that the voices of the powerless were never heard. Those of us who are uneasy at the extent and nature of the HTB’s power might want to understand better what might be going on in the somewhat secretive universe that it occupies. The tools with which to make sense, psychologically and theologically speaking, of what is going on within that world are not readily available. This powerful attraction of charismatic evangelicalism is frankly puzzling to those of us of a more traditional approach to the Christian faith and to the Church of England in particular.
In recent weeks I have been helped, through reading a book, to go further into this mysterious culture, which can be best summed up in the two words, charismatic evangelicalism. One of the commenters on this blog drew our attention to this newish published account of the culture shared by so many congregations that look to HTB for inspiration and guidance. The book is entitled Immanuel. The book successfully draws together and describes the life and culture of two charismatic congregations. Both, one in Lagos Nigeria and one in Winchester UK, are expressions of the charismatic evangelical tradition which has come to dominate Christian practice right across the world. There are of course enormous differences of style between the two congregations, but each would see itself as drawing from the same theological and spiritual well-springs. The main focus of this fascinating book is to describe how a group of very young members of the Winchester house church found their way to becoming members of the Lagos ministry under the leadership of the powerful founder, TB Joshua. The book helps us to understand the extraordinary cultural and theological adjustments that needed to be made by these charismatic pilgrims. Their efforts to be faithful to the Nigerian expression of this culture involved a great deal of pain, experiences of humiliation and other forms of exploitation that we associate with the cults. The author of Immanuel, Matthew McNaught, had been a fellow member of the Winchester house church and is thus able to present sympathetically the motivations and background of these members of his old Christian group, as they pursued a path which would seek to become part of one of the highest expressions of Christian power available. TB Joshua evidently was a powerful presence, and he possessed a range of gifts that we lump together in the word charismatic. Claims of prophetic gifts, deliverance, second sight and healing were communicated to this group of idealistic young people through the medium of video tapes. The house church movement of the 80 and 90s to which the young people belonged, was constantly preaching the arrival of God’s ‘new thing’. This was the age of the Toronto Blessing and other ‘revivals’ believed to have begun in places like Pensacola and Brownsville. TB Joshua appeared to be yet another example of revival, and Nigeria was presenting a version of God’s new outpouring which demanded, on the part of these fired up young Christians from Winchester, a sacrifice of youth, education and futures. These young people, one only 16, were ready to decamp to the poverty and enormous discomfort of the Christian complex and community known as the Synagogue Church of All Nations (SCOAN) under, as was soon to be revealed, a deeply flawed leader, TB Joshua.
The strength of the book is the way that it gives the reader a sense of how attractive the culture of charismatic evangelicalism is and the way that it connects well to the yearnings and idealism of youth. We are given the substance of conversations where the author recounts the motivations which took this group of young people to Nigeria. The story in fact has no happy ending. This ministry shared with others of this kind a dark side, including sexual and financial exploitation. Some were able to escape while others, who remained faithful to the leader up to his death at the age of 57 in 2021, were told to leave. McNaught, the author, well captures the idealism of youth which is prepared to sacrifice everything in pursuit of an ideal, even if the ideal is based on a lie and the grandiose narcissism of a deeply flawed leader. It is this sympathetic and insightful telling of a saga of church life, both in England and Africa, from the perspective of deeply devout young people that gives the Immanuel its special value.
McNaught’s book allows us to eavesdrop on the thinking and feeling of a highly motivated group of young people who were formed by the charismatic impulses of the 90s. The history of that period is immensely complicated, but the main feature of the time was an atmosphere of restless striving. During this early period, well before the influence of HTB had come to be felt by a large section of the Church of England, there was already a sense of restless agitation among many who thought of themselves as charismatic Christians. Although they had some evidence that God was alive and working his Spirit in their congregations, they still found it necessary to jet off to Toronto or Lagos to meet God there. The story of the 90s charismatic Christian experience may be regarded at one level as a form of religious addiction. Such addiction is never satisfied or complete; it always demands to be fed more.
The book Immanuel is then a work which is able to further our understanding of the Christian phenomenon known as charismatic evangelicalism. Its real value is the way that it gives an inside feel for the lived reality of the experience without writing it off as mere fantasy or evil. The heightened insights into what makes someone a charismatic – particular a very young adult – allows one to return to our current dilemma in the C/E, namely the dominance of HTB in our national Church. The kinds of question that come from Immanuel are, in many cases, common sense questions. Some of them want help in understanding why there is a potential and propensity for young people to embrace the values and leadership of what I would describe as cult-like churches. TB Joshua is clearly an example of a sociopathic leader who possessed psychic gifts which were able to seduce a group of articulate but impressionable young people. How much does the Church understand this personality type? Will ‘large’ personalities (I can think of several examples) go on being allowed to sweep up the vulnerable among the young to gratify their narcissistic impulses and appetites? The charismatic evangelical world continues to create new big names because there is a appetite for chasing after the new things that God is supposed to be doing. As long as the wider church refuses to engage with questions thrown up by Immanuel, it will suffer. Already the wider population has, as I suggested, come to identify Christianity as being closely identified with extreme moralism and addictive chasing after novelty. It will also learn to miss examples of Christian behaviour connected with tolerance, human flourishing and the practice of love undergirding all human behaviour. Such teaching does not require hyped-up preachers who try to batter down the capacity of listeners to think or reason. It needs teachers and leaders who are at home with the peace and stillness of God and who understand the importance of teaching their flock to find ‘rest’ in God’s peace.
Fascinating reflection! Thanks. I grew up without a huge connection to Church, but did attend during holidays with a grandparent. An Anglican Canon gave my school class wonderful lessons on the three C’s: Creation, Conscience, Christ. From mid-teens to middle thirties, I never went to Church. A sequence of events then led me to explore the faith and to commit to it. For several years I was involved with a charismatic Church. But it became wearisome. I got sick of emotionalism, demands, manipulation, bullying, harassment. There was also an absolute obsession with marriage (Would Our Lord or John the Baptist be allowed into some modern charismatic groups?!?) The savage ill-treatment of people was sickening. It was interesting to be connected to a very enthusiastic Church for a time. But it was also a relief to escape the shallowness and arrogance present. The time and financial costs were high, and I would never want immersed in that stuff again. The three C’s which the old Anglican Canon taught about are the real deal. Give me a simple communion service and human compassion, over all the screaming and arm waving stuff. One of the saddest things, in retrospect, is now seeing the shallowness and superficiality of ‘the growth model’.
‘This new music has eclipsed the traditional hymnody that used to bind the whole of British society together in something like a common religious culture.’
I’m not sure it was ever the case that traditional hymnody bound the whole of British society together in any kind of religious culture – certainly not since the 19th century. People who didn’t attend church and who went to a secular state school may not have known any hymns at all. Plus, hymns well known to nonconformists were (and are) strange to Anglicans; and Roman Catholic hymns were often foreign to both Anglicans and Free Church people. How often have you sung e.g. ‘A debtor to mercy alone’ or ‘Thou dost seek a bride all pure and holy’?
I don’t much like current popular worship music, if those featured on Songs of Praise are anything to go by. They’re not to my taste. However I loved the ‘UK blessing’ of two or three years ago, which went viral. More importantly, I believe everyone should be able to worship in whatever musical style is familiar to them. Martin Luther set hymns to popular drinking songs, asking, ‘Why should the devil have all the good music?’ In the 1970s (which is ancient history now) Larry Norman set Luther’s question to rock music, delighting many of us who were teens at the time.
David Watson believed it was important to have both classic and up-to-date worship music in church, and I agree with him. Sadly, most churches have either one or the other, and don’t cater for all tastes.
Thank you Janet. I too cringe at some of the poor musical construction and cliche-ridden words of some modern worship songs … and I agree with every word you have written here.
A friend, a semi-professional Christian musician, once told me that the problem with a lot of contemporary worship music is that it is written by professionals, and you have to have similarly professional ability to sing it. Not very helpful if, like me, your musical ability, particularly in changing keys and rhythms from and within line to line is about nil!
“I’m not sure it was ever the case that traditional hymnody bound the whole of British society together in any kind of religious culture – certainly not since the 19th century”
Yes, it’s worth remember that the 1851 census revealed that of the 18 million people in England only 5 million attended the Anglican church, with another 5 million attending other churches. That’s an awful lot of non-conformists and non-church goers, who wouldn’t have been bound together by ‘traditional hymnody’.
Developing this theme a little, what is wrong in the Church of England didn’t start and end with the charismatic/evangelical wing, there were reasons for the large numbers of non-conformists, among them a class-bound church hierarchy (bad leadership? In the church of England?).
Furthermore, the charismatic renewal itself was a reaction to a particular set of circumstances which had been fostered in the then established churches, like everything it then became orthodoxy and gave rise to some of the abuses we see these days.
If I said, tongue in cheek, that some of the classic nonconformist tunes also have other words to them? Rightly or wrongly I know a few – usually picked up from relatives in the old Royal Navy, and have to be very careful when the ‘official’ words are used in church! And there’s an old Confederate song, ‘Gruber Peas’ set to the tune of ‘Bringing in the Sheaves.’ Again, it is very tempting indeed to ‘accidentally’ slip into the wong lyrics…….
Like you, I agree with David Watson – take the best of both old and new, which is, after all, in keeping with Christ’s own advice. Thankfully my church are keen on Stuart Townsend, whose material is often profound and beautiful. Some modern stuff is fine – and some is chronic. Just the same, really, as its always been. Thankfully, the shockers from each generation end in the graveyard of duff hymns known as the vestry cupboard……
Worship is a very personal issue – a reflection of our own individual personalities, and how we relate to our Father. Different styles suit different personalities – and if we’re truly listening to the spirit, a service should get a reasonable balance. Be interesting to see, and hear what awaits us in Heaven – and it might be nothing at all like anything we know down here……
Do you know, I’d never realised that ‘Eating Goober Peas’ (peanuts) is the same tune as ‘Bringing in the Sheaves’? But then, I’d never heard of the harvest hymn when I was living in the USA, and I’ve never sung ‘Goober Peas’ since coming to the UK.
Some classic Anglican hymns have other words to them, too. If they didn’t start out as drinking songs or the like, irreverent souls like myself have written alternative words since.
Or, inventive organists have decided to try a familiar tune, such as setting ‘What a Friend We Have in Jesus’ to ‘The Carnival is Over’. I have to say that didn’t work f or me, the associations were too strong.
Isn’t it true, though, that Luther set some of his hymns to well-known secular tunes? And many “Wild Goose” (John Bell) hymns are set to Scottish folk tunes – which my Scottish wife finds problematic as she has the original words ringing round her mind as they are sung (she also dislikes the way that church musicians can “tidy them up” and reduce the folk element of the music).
Yes, Luther often put Christian words to drinking songs, saying, ‘Why should the devil have all the good music?’
And many a hymn has been set to a classical tune, such as ‘We Rest on Thee’ to ‘Finlandia’.
I agree with your wife about church musicians ‘tidying up’ folk tunes. I have a particular dislike of choral settings for American spirituals. It completely spoils them.
I always believed it was General Booth who said the Devil shouldn’t have all the good music. Whoever said it, though – bang on the mark!
Interesting. I just looked it up on Phrase Finder, and found the following:
‘The first recorded use of the term in print is found in The Monthly Review, December 1773 included this:
They [sc. the Moravians and Methodists] have adopted the music of some of our finest songs, &c. such as, He comes! The Hero comes, &c. And they have given good reasons for so doing: for, as Whitefield said, ‘Why should the devil have all the best tunes?’
The Whitefield referred to there was the preacher George Whitefield (1714 – 1770). Despite the opinion of the Monthly Review author, the line is now usually attributed to the evangelical Methodist preacher Rowland Hill (1744–1833).’
“He says ‘The Yanks are coming, boys,
but what d’you think he sees?
The Gee – or -gi – yah militia – eatin Goober peas.”
One church I know had an organist with an American wife; he could be guaranteed to include ‘Bringing in the Sheaves’ every harvest festival here in Birmingham. ( UK – not Alabama!)
Copyright laws make it a lot harder these days, alas. Me, I like hymns which borrow folk tunes – usually I can stand a better chance of ‘singing’ (or whatever passes for it in my mouth) them than modern rock-inspired tunes, but that’s another story. (Most of my favourite songs are sad ones too. Like you, they have personal associations.)
Hello Stephen. It’s good to read your blogs. I have just stepped down from Holy Rood House and developing the healing ministry from ‘Hilda House’ in Northumberland. Let’s keep in touch. Elizabeth
Good to hear from you Elizabeth. Hope we can keep in touch!
Charismatic evangelicals, or charisgelicals for brevity, are looking for something. Not looking for something to them would be a sign of spiritual poverty, or at least a dullness of approach or a lack of faith. “Ask, seek, knock” is their response to a sacrificial Saviour.
A friend of mine left his charisgelical church and migrated his family to a more conservative congregation. He reported it was good, adding that he dozed through the sermon whilst enjoying an hour’s free childcare for his children. Understandable after a long week in the office, for him to catch up on his sleep.
Charisgelicals generally want action, certainly experiences. There’s a belief that we can quench the Spirit, so it makes sense to pilgrimage to far off places where things appear to be happening.
Young people will challenge the styles of worship older people like. They don’t necessarily feel particularly invested in a mouldy old hymn book. That youthful challenge isn’t ubiquitous of course, but I remember in my medical training that it was considered normal, and perhaps abnormal not to. “Worship wars” are well documented elsewhere, but musical tastes vary.
Music is nothing, if not powerful. I attended ABBA Voyage last week and found the experience mesmerising. It’s not my chosen genre per se, although I fitted into the age demographic rather well. But as a musician, I tend to avoid music now because of the adverse influences it was part of in the charisgelical world.
People want to be moved. Affected. Being rigid and unaffected can be a sign of deep repression. I grew up with this, and can vouch that it isn’t very healthy mentally, either.
The risk of a desire for more is a suppression of the “sanity” button when it comes to the evaluation of leaders. Yet another Report has landed this week on a charisgelical leader, Gerald Coates, of “Pioneer Trust”, formerly “Pioneer People” doing very dodgy things. How could he get away with it for so long, with so little challenge? Because people want to believe the magic, the individually tailored prophetic words spoken into their lives. These “words” appear divine, and often readily resonate with the individual, such that they would seem spiritually a dullard if they didn’t surrender more of their lives to the cause. That these phenomena can be replicated quite easily by a reasonably good psychotherapist in a completely secular setting, is less well appreciated in charisgelical circles.
Feeling good is a compelling experience, potentially addictive if the right conditions are in place. Unscrupulous leaders, not just charisgelical ones are skilled at manipulating their charges in this respect. We all have our addictions, particularly those reinforced by society as socially acceptable, such as workaholism, but nevertheless destructive of relationships, lives and families.
I can identify with so many of the different comments on this thread, about problems with ‘charismatic Christians’ from personal experience, making it unneccessary to duplicate them. Much of it rings true, and yet, and yet….
Speaking personally, I long ago gave up on the ‘travelling circus’ which the organised movement had degenerated into – but not the relationship which I had with the Spirit herself. That’s the important difference – a relationship with a divine companion, and through them the other two members of the Trinity, rather than a codified system of doctrines. The one lives, the other is purely intellectual.
If I said that that relationship has totally transformed my adult life; from an immature, emotionally disturbed and socially inadequate 18 year old to a reasonably secure and useful 71 year old it would only be the truth – and that phrase is, unfortunately yet another Christian cliche.
I would also have to say that the Spirit is still at work on me – there is no such thing as instant transformation for most people; thankfully God is very patient as I can be very obtuse and slow to respond. There have been some pretty difficult times along the way, times when I could have thrown it all up and walked out were it not for one simple thing St Peter understood – where else can we go, when our leader has the words of eternal life? And, he promised, ultimately his Spirit will lead us into all truth.
Sadly the organised movement has never been any good at accepting valid criticism – even from its friends – and never has there been a group more badly in need of it. It seems to attract larger than life characters who abuse the power and trust which people place in them – and all too often majors on experiences in themselves, rather than on being open to God. Too many people I knew ran unquestioningly after John Wimber, desperate for his promised signs and wonders – and, like everything else based on experience for its own sake, it is going to pall, and so its adherents go hunting more and bigger thrills.
I keep coming back to the ‘still, small voice’, the authentic charisma – and the more I distanced myself from the ‘movement’, the more important that relationship became. That’s my testimony – I can’t express it any more clearly, or specifically than that.
Amen to that!
Thank you!
Something has definitely happened recently – I’ve never been able to speak or write like this before. ‘Someone’ is up to something within me – I need to follow and find where it leads.
Casting my mind back to a “prophecy workshop” many years ago, I had been impressed by the multitude of “words” many of us had for each delegate, as we gathered round, reflected, prayed, and then shared our prophetic impressions.
These days I’m sick to the back teeth of fakery. Of course I’ve been involved in it myself in the past, though hand-on-heart unwittingly. After receiving doses of psychotherapy, some of it very apt indeed, almost uncanny at times, and then many years of studying the inner depths of the human mind, and also their interactions with the others around, it’s pretty clear how much these “words” are human, not divine. That said, I believe it’s a thing for great thanksgiving, the breadth of human capability for insight and mutual understanding. It’s fortunate too, since unlike other species we don’t come out fully formed and need a sensitive Other to hear us without our being able to communicate verbally.
It may of course be God, but isn’t usually in my opinion. We can’t be sure one way or the other.
Jeremiah 14.14: ‘Then the Lord said to me, “The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds.’
Alongside the power to discern is the power to deceive. The greatest deception starts with ourselves, and is the hardest to be extricated from. Nothing usually happens without a major upset.
But now, following many years of successive disaster disclosures, one dodgy senior church leader after another, it’s all too clear just how much fakery there’s been. Brain, Ball, Smyth, Fletcher, Zacharias, Pilavachi, Coates: they just keep on coming. All of them manipulating others for personal gain, of one sort or another.
Before they are tacked down even more securely, there’s a great deal more work to be done pulling the rugs out from beneath their pedestals. Perhaps, in a sense, this is a prophetic word? It’s certainly a cause I for one feel at peace with.
Sadly, Steve, your comments are all too true. I have my own experiences of ‘prophetic messages’; its very easy to make a generalised comment, such as ‘there is someone in this room whose robes are stained with worry’ (unbelief, doubt, etc) and shoot the breeze, knowing that there’s going to be at least one person who will accept it.
It tends to feed on the expectant nievity of the typical charismatic audience, and their belief that because something happens in a church, it must automatically be caused by the Spirit of God – and those of us who are more cautious are seen as not being open to the Lord. Once the hype machine is in full flow, and the emotions are being whipped up, it becomes harder and harder to step back – and none of us want to be seen as out of step with God.
Too often such movements become trapped by an uncosncious love of experiences for their own sakes – a kind of Christian hedonism – which needs more and more sensations, signs and wonders to keep the followers satisfied. And, like any other human appetite, the experience stales, needing new, more dramatic ones.
The big problem is the worship of personalities. People like Gerald Coates, Todd Bentley and others have larger than life personalities; they have a dynamic style, a confidence and (dare I say it?) a dominant personality which aims to shake the comfortable and complacent . Its hard to confront such people, or go against their particular stream.
They’re going to attract youngsters (and the not so young) who are frustrated by what they see as the dull respectability of a socially conformist church, and want to express their enthusiasm for what’s important to them.
After all, how many church youth movements – YWAM, Campus Crusade, 24/7 etc are built around exactly that legitimate youthful desire? Channel it correctly, and its an immense force for good. But be very careful of the superstar showman leader, very often self appointed by the strength of their personality.
And don’t put leaders on pedestals – until they’re safely dead and buried. Then they’re beyond the reach of the temptation to, however unconsciously, abuse their position. Above all, think for yourself as an individual, don’t just follow the herd.
Amen!
“Christian Hedonism” is a valuable phrase to coin. Some people, outside the movement may wonder what is even pleasurable about such things, but it is quite possible to experience a certain euphoria in group settings which can be addictive. There are chemical changes in the brain such as an increase in dopamine and endorphins, which are associated with these feelings but not limited to religious experiences.
Another phrase I’ve used and permit me to repeat here, is “horoscope Christianity”. I’m on a slightly different tack with this, but it’s the (mis)use of almost haphazard daily phenomena, such as bible verses encountered and even random portents in the news or on tv, extrapolating these for exact personal prophecy AS IF we are certain they come specifically from God for us for this moment. Like users of horoscopes find personal specifics from the broadest generalisations.
The most infamous apocryphal example was the man who dipped his finger randomly in the bible and found the verse: ‘Judas went and hanged himself.’ The man tried again, this time finding: ‘Go and do thou likewise.’ Still searching for personal meaning he then found the verse: ‘Do whatever you must do quickly.’
If we could ground ourselves in reality, we might be better equipped to distinguish between the wheat and the chaff of Christian experience.
Hello, Steve. Being serious, I think you must be a doctor or psychologist, from the knowledge which you display. Thanks for the comment – one obvious parallel which comes to mind is the football crowd, or other big event like a pop concert where the fans get really worked up.
If you’re familiar with Brother Cadfael, you’ll recognise ‘horoscope Christianity’ as the practice of ‘testing the sortes’ (The Holy Thief) which, rather like other, crueller ‘trials by ordeal’ was once well accepted. We like to think we have moved on since then…… save that we haven’t, and revert to the original mental ‘type’ if given the chance.
Sadly, as I’ve also said before, an awful lot of something very similar to medieval superstition resurfaced in some parts of the charismatic movement. Things which, to a trained psychologist were clearly down to emotional or mental issues, were seized on as proof of either demonic activity or, conversely, the Holy Spirit according to the nature of the incident.
The problem is that if you are encouraged to anticipate a particular ‘experience’ before hand you are likely to set your critical faculties aside. Always unwise, particularly if the speeches, atmosphere etc further encourage you to do just that. I prefer to keep my feet on the floor – even if it does make me the skeleton at the feast. The problem is that it is very, very hard to convince those who are determined not to see otherwise.
Yet, oddly, yes, I do personally know of occasions when the prophetic message or healing act have been very genuine indeed. This is why I can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Janet Fife will understand it if I say that, invariably, those incidents have NOT been high tension, excited or hyped up ‘slayings in the spirit’, but quiet, low key, very ordinary examples of the ‘still, small voice of calm’ breaking in to a situation.
In reality the’ signs and wonders’ are very few and far between and Jesus himself seems none too favourable to those who excitedly demanded them before believing. The problem is us – I recall friends who insisted we ‘must have signs and wonders’ to make people believe, ignoring the fact that both Elijah and Jesus provided plenty, without a great deal of lasting effect. Basically, as the experiences pale, we seek newer, better ones, desperate for a psychic ‘fix’ that keeps us hopped up, or alternatively compels attention and, supposedly, belief.
God’s spirit does not dominate, nor impose, compel, manipulate or pressurise. She’s the very opposite of us – at least in my experience. Those are very human actions. We need to remember that, and be aware of willingly letting ourselves be deceived.
Yes, that all make sense. I remember as a student 50 years ago, attending a charismatic meeting for the first time. There was a lot of emotional and noisy stuff going on that I really didn’t like … yet I couldn’t escape the feeling that was something genuine embedded within it.
Those of us who’ve been around for a while will know that quite a lot of 1970s “renewal” in the mainstream denomination was actually quite quiet and contemplative., if intense It was the Pentecostals (still a bit beyond the pale) who were the noisy ones! Something changed, I think, in around the mid-1980s – perhaps other can add to this or correct me.
Hullo, Andrew.
I’m finding the sharing on these threads very helpful; going back over old foundations and seeing them in a new, deeper perspective. You’re right about things changing in the mid 80s; that was when, rightly or wrongly, Fountain Trust wound itself up and gave the public face of the movement to the Restorationist groups – Arnold Wallace, Terry Virgo, Bryn Jones and Gerald Coates. At that point it ceased to be about encountering the Holy Spirit in a liberal, tolerant way but creating / imposing a ‘new’ social structure based on a fundamentalist reading of the N T epistles with a very dominant pyramid authority structure.
In a nutshell I felt the initial (Fountain Trust) experience was about engaging with the world around us, and liberating the talents God gives us; Restorationism was about withdrawing from the world – going backwards into a much more restrictive sub culture.
Unfortunately things also grew much more centred on what I would see as the wrong kind of ‘experience’ – the running after thrills, fixes and ‘signs and wonders’ – a lot of people became psychic junkies, rushing off to Pensacola, Toronto or wherever the latest ‘blessing’ was . For crying out loud, America has never had a monopoly on the Holy Spirit! We can meet God here, GB -side, so there was no need for it. (In part that’s what I mean by Christian voyeurism, but there’s more to it than that.)
There were so-called ‘signs and wonders’, and prophesies. Most of them were never fulfilled in the time spans claimed – thus giving the movement a bad reputation. Often said in the heat of the moment, they were never subjected to critical appraisal, as per the NT – just unthinkingly accepted, until such time as they were conveniently forgotten.
Put simply, personally speaking, the movement lost its way. God doesn’t – thank God. The alternative to a living experience of the Holy Spirit however is either dry intellectual understandings of one sort or another, or discouragement and loss of faith. None of which, personally, are very helpful. Thankfully we have a Trinity of love and care who don’t give up on us.
God bless.
I recall reading a semi-academic book assessing the Toronto Blessing. Its author suggested that, by the early 1990s and post-Wimber, the Charismatic Movement was getting a bit “tired” and looking for “something” to revive it, which is why Toronto attracted such attention. I was a Baptist minister in west London at the time and we sent two “spies” to HTB to see what was going on; they weren’t impressed. Some of my colleagues were very surprised that I wasn’t buying into the “Blessing” but held it at arm’s length.
Later in the 90s we attended again a church which formerly had largely been conservative evangelical, but the vicar had done the same thing, and taken a sneaky look at HTB. He was moved by what he encountered, as far as I can understand, but held back from full frontal engagement in the “blessing”. In genetic terms by way of analogy, this might be described as “incomplete penetration”.
The result was a rising level of HtB types in the church and a stalwart residue of more traditional types. We ended up with several different services catering to the varying tastes. As a musician the band had to wait out the trad service where drums in particular were forbidden, to set up for the charismatic service later.
In DNA terms, the church had too much, rather like the triple chromosomes in certain disorders like Downs. We had many dysfunctions and weakened areas. There were takeover attempts, splits etc. It wasn’t healthy.
Been there, done that, refused to buy the T shirt! Its very sad, how something which began with the hope and promise of renewed unity so quickly resulted in chaos, power struggles and hurt. As always, God begins with something creative and beautiful, then we muck it up!
Thank you very much for sharing your insights – its been very encouraging, and makes me feel a lot happier, surer about my experiences and the general path of my own life. God bless
We’ve been travelling parallel roads here, Andrew and Steven; I had very similar experiences to both of you at around the same time. A constant, uncritical hunting for new experiences to keep the ‘experience’ going ultimately led to disillusionment for a fair few people, and a growing wariness to buy into anything ‘new’. Better to keep our feet very firmly attached to the floor!
I did experience ‘the laughter’ more than once at New Wine, and regularly a tingling sensation during worship, which at the time I assumed was the Holy Spirit somehow blessing me. It may have been. I now suspect it was an autonomic sensory meridian response, which can easily be googled and occurs in other settings not typically associated with the Holy Spirit, such as Heavy Metal concerts, or so my son tells me!
I’m grateful for good sensations but less gullible than I was hopefully.
I think the charismatic movement has brought a great deal to the church. The genuine creativity and beauty of many charismatic songs and practices, etc. has brought about genuine transformation of many churches and many people’s lives. To my mind, the problem is that charismatic practice has not exclusively, but very often, tended to take place in churches where there is a fairly conservative evangelical theology, and I think these are uneasy bedfellows. The free-flowing and spontaneous nature of charismatic practice does not cohere well with rigid evangelical theology, especially in matters of sexuality. I think it’s the combination of these two things gives fertile soil for unhealthy personality traits to be further distorted and magnified, and the kinds of problems that this blog focuses on to arise.
Wise sentiments. Thanks!
-“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me…….”-has all too often been taken as a mantle for a normal human leader to wear. That inevitably brings deep trouble!
Selectivity around which sins to publicly pursue brings shame. Sexuality issues are to the fore, but do some senior Anglican leaders have hidden rental property portfolios or stuffed bank accounts?
And what about UK abortion? Bump off 10,000,000 plus human lives and the Church is pretty silent. So why pursue endless debate on LGBTQ+ people?
A GAFCON Bishop in Ireland did not fix any independent inquiry when a gay man was allegedly evicted from an organist post at Drumcliffe in Sligo.
What message did the 2019 reports on the organist eviction send out to un-churched or de-churched people?
Yes, I can remember back to the Fountain Trust days of the early 1070s when the Charismatic Renewal movement, although evangelical at its heart, embraced a rather wider theology and ecclesiology, notably Roman Catholic. And, although it had its leaders, it was in general more informal and free-flowing. Possibly things changed when folk from the Restorationist movement and, later, John’s Wimber’s “Third Wave” people, came on – the former being very authoritarian and the latter having a strong influence in and through HTB.
Yes, the 1960s-70s renewal movement was good at bringing together people of all theological stripes. In the USA one of the early leaders was Fr Dennis Bennett, a high church Episcopalian. In the UK, David Watson and Michael Harper were invited to minister to Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Baptists. I think Harper later became Eastern Orthodox.
In the 1990s, my Roman Catholic neighbour was a charismatic and introduced me to Catholic charismatic circles in greater Manchester. Some lovely music came out of that movement, including Marilla Ness and Sr Breige O’Hare from Ireland. Sr. Breige produced a record of songs based on the meditations of mystics such as Julian of Norwich. I have it on cassette but have no means to play it now, and haven’t been able to find a CD.
Len Oakes in his book “Prophetic Charisma” (1997) provides a valuable analysis on the subject, following his own research.
P58: ‘Given the motive to become a prophet, how does one do so? What talents are needed?
In interviews with followers, the most frequently reported gift possessed by their leaders was an acute insight into other people. Some of the examples given seemed to verge on the paranormal telepathy and omniscience being the most frequent—and were like the tales told of Jesus at the well’.
He then goes on to demonstrate narcissistic roots in the leader. Leaders and a certain seeker mentality in the follower form a strong and reciprocal relationship. Both need each other. Vulnerability is too simple and broad a notion adequately to describe the qualities of the particular type of mentality looking for a leader like this, but I include myself and many others I know in the cohort. It isn’t simply a lack of skepticism about apparently paranormal or miraculous seeming phenomena. The set up includes Bowlby’s work on attachment, and the deep seated need for a parent, often a father figure. The ministrations of, for example Mike Pilavachi, and now it appears Gerald Coates, play symbiotically into this need. Being narcissistic, they limit their giving largely for their own benefit. Their predations are a sad and ugly byproduct too.
I seem to have accidentally disconnected myself from the ‘notify new comments’ function this morning. Hey ho.
Thanks, Steve, for confirming another experience / idea of mine, namely that things which happen in a charismatic meeting should not always automatically be ascribed to the work of the Holy Spirit. Yes, the Spirit does need human cooperation in order to manifest her gifts, agreed – but to what extent do our faculties enter into what happens?
Paul, remember, said that the prophet’s own spirit had a degree of control over what was uttered in a meeting, implying that, as always, its a partnership between mortal and immortal. His teaching on the need for interpretation of public tongues by another worshipper carries the same sort of idea.
We very clearly are following similar thought paths, albeit at different levels. I’ve known people who, with the best of intentions, have said ‘prophetic’ things which they’ve subsequently realised came from their own ideas – the difficulty is realising that at the time. Which, of course, is why anything of that sort should be weighed and tested by others present – not always the easiest thing to do in a big meeting, with a prominent leader making the comments concerned.
Incidentally, the late David Pawson didn’t approve of levity or laughter in services – he reckoned that the only times laughter was mentioned in the Bible it was always in a derisory context. Well, that was his opinion, but I have a strong suspicion that the Trinity would not agree with him!
I’ve just read “Immanuel” having had my interest piqued by the blog. There are a number of key issues arising, but I must say I was shocked by the flagrant deceit TB Joshua used in faking miracles. Perhaps I shouldn’t be shocked. Obviously he had many character flaws, but the dishonesty was conscious. He knew rationally exactly what he was doing.
There is a lesson here in developing our warning system against other potential frauds leading churches. One of the signs was separated groups of employees or volunteers preparing the fraud, with another chosen group being kept from knowing what was going on.
The book is well worth reading
‘Dan Winfield had reminded me, during our visit to Bristol, of the courtesy drop. This is when, after failing to be slain in the spirit despite being prayed for at length, you politely fall to the ground anyway. It was a manoeuvre I knew well.’ (p43)
‘ “I wasn’t moved at all”said Kate. “I remember actively
falling down.” “Yeah, me too,” said Dan. He sighed. “If you’re going to do a courtesy drop to some random middle-class English person in Southampton, you’ll definitely do one for TB Joshua.”’ P89.
Why would these sincere young people join in with the fakery like this, I was reflecting on this morning? In the Synagogue Church of All Nations, there was mass sleep deprivation, another key facilitator of cultic culture. The Prophet would have everyone in the community woken up to hear his divine utterances usually in the small hours of the morning, but they were also expected to get on with their tasks by awakening early each day with no recovery time.
Anyone who has experienced prolonged sleep deprivation will know how this affects your personality, your judgment and your will. Your mental and physical health too.
Combine this with the repercussions of displeasing Joshua, including a noted temper and a system of punishment and exclusion from the inner crew, and you can see how the delegates were more easily manipulated.
Are HTB etc attracting younger members to the church by producing a new fun way of worshipping God and trying to show that God can work in new ways, I wonder. Unfortunately it can give leaders too much power because they are the centre of attention in the services not God.
Thank you for your heartfelt comments John and Steve. Maybe all you leaders and priests had to try to keep the excitement going in the 90’s and this was difficult .
I remember singing Graham Kendrick’s We’ll walk the land with hearts on fire and believing something special was about to happen. And of course it didn’t .The tingling and elation faded out after that – in church – anyway. I tried HTB but it wasn’t for me. I loved the music though but soon missed the beautiful words of the traditional hymns.
I suppose what I am trying to say is don’t put down all the experiences of the 90’s. The Holy Spirit was moving us on as far as I was concerned. But not to HTB!
,
Hullo again Margaret.
Thanks for your appreciation and encouragement. Just for the record, I’m neither a leader (in any form) nor an ordained priest – and have no wish to be. But we are all ‘kings and priests unto God’, so hopefully by sharing past experiences and thoughts I’m encouraging others. This thread in particular has been a help for me – reassuring me that I’m not perhaps in quite the minority that it has seemed in times past, for a start! And it is a genuine help to be able to talk with people of a similar outlook.
Can I ask something? A lot of the same – sex marriage debate seems to revolve around a theological ‘pleasure principle’ – there was a book of that title, wasn’t there? Now how does that fit in with the evangelical concept of our ‘dying to ourselves’ which, for people of my background is one of the foundational principles of our faith? As I understand it the two are virtually oxymorons which cannot be used in the same sentence – like ‘McDonalds’ and ‘restaurant’.
Thanks everyone for a fascinating discussion. One of our congregations was a soul-survivor-esque youth church. I used to sneak into this for a vocal warm up prior to being on band duty later, for the older adults. I enjoyed it.
A focus on “youth” often features in Charismatic circles, especially “young leaders” and we shouldn’t ignore the increasing hordes of people younger than us now. However I do believe there’s a deliberate attempt to circle in on the sense of “NOW” young people have, playing on their inexperience. Also less cynical perhaps, they buy into what’s been proffered frequently with altruistic abandon, in a way older folk with mortgages and other heavy burdens might not. This provides momentum for a Peter Pan leader, which otherwise would have been less likely with older participants at the outset.
Once the youth gets it, everyone else follows suit. We’d all like to have what they’re having. But on the other hand, we’re happy to delegate youth work to others, and turn a blind eye to what may be happening there.
I recall working for a firm where the off-the-record policy was not to appoint new Partners over the age of 30. This wasn’t simply because they thought increasing senility would occur thereafter, but because they knew younger more naive “leaders” would be easier to control. I suspect similar things have been occurring across Christendom.
Hi John. Can you expand on what you mean by saying that the same-sex marriage debate seems to revolve around a theological pleasure principle?
The principle of ‘dying to self’ is an important strand of Christianity, catholic as well as evangelical. However, it can be destructive when over emphasised or misapplied – and especially when forced on others. As theologian Margaret Guenther wrote, we first have to have a sense of self before we can die to it. That sense of self can be very strong in people used to various kinds of privilege, but weak in people not so ‘blessed’: including women, abuse survivors, ethnic minorities who are discriminated against, and LGBTI people. The task of these people is first to discover who they truly are, and the depth of God’s love for that person whoever and whatever their identity. Susannah Clark has just written movingly about this in ViaMedia. When we know God’s love for our genuine self, that love can then flow out to others. And in that process we often deny ourselves while focussing on the needs of others.
I’ve read Susannah Clark’s piece – one of the bravest and most honest pieces I think I’ve ever read, and a great help to my understanding. I’ve shared it with friends.
Will get back to you when I’ve had chance to marshal my thoughts – am getting over a dose of polymyalgia, which does not enhance the leetle grey cells…..
That sounds nasty. Hope you are soon feeling much better.
Hullo Janet, and thanks for your patience in waiting. The last few days have been extremely hectic, very Miranda Hart like. However…..
On several occasions, while reading comments on Thinking Anglicans, as I said I’ve seen references to following ‘the pleasure principle’, without it being very well explained – the writers, who seem to be using it in a positive way, assume their readers understand what’s being talked about.
(Fatal educational mistake – never assume the student knows anything unless you have personally told it to them!)
A minister friend used to sum this up with the phrase ‘if it feels good, do it’ which he didn’t really approve of – to people of his era it was used to justify all manner of misbehaviour, as though other moral principles were being set aside. So you can see why I’m puzzled.
It seems to be used to justify acceptance of same-sex relationships, although it can also apply to straight ones. (And some folks get rather annoyed about Christian straights having sex before marriage.) Its the whole ideal of self denial, self control and discipline again; lives being controlled by dogma.
The concept of ‘self’ and ‘self love’ themselves aren’t easy to grasp. “God first, others next, self last’ was the old mantra – the other one was ‘others may; you cannot’. The idea of ‘loving (accepting?) yourself started coming in in the mid 70s, though, as Michael Harper said (‘The Love Affair’) loving ourselves was the one thing Jesus never told us to do – he knew we’d do it, and usually to extremes, anyway. Sadly, as Helen King points out in a new post, there have been some strange ways of ‘loving people as ourselves’ in the churches – a lot of it, as my wife acknowleges are more in the way of self-hatred, with a coat of sanctified varnish.
Can’t really say any more than that – my own self image has never been that good, or confident. I can empathise with Susannah in a number of ways, as a ‘straight’ who found many contradictory views and pressures which made it very difficult to accept my own sexuality.
Hope this helps. (Thankfully, we caught the polymyalgia in time, and got it on the run before it reached the half past screaming stage. I feel a lot better now.
Thanks for the clarification. And so glad the polymyalgia has improved.
This is roughly what led to the ‘Northern Crock’ banking disaster of about twenty years ago – they say fools never learn!
My own bad experience with a ‘charismatic house church’ ran along very similar lines. Trouble is, in a free country /society such as ours, risks like that have to be accepted as part of the deal. After all, who does ‘police’ the independent house churches – and with any more success than the CofE safeguarding system?
The weeds, tares and chaff will always be there to taint the good seed, I’m afraid. That is part of life. “Caveat empore” needs to be our watchword. But don’t throw the good out along with the dirty water.
And thank you, Steve, for a very rewarding and encouraging discussion. God bless
Interesting John. Yes I suppose there must be an element of pleasure in church or no one would be encouraged in and stay. Remember the beautiful stamps given to children who attended Sunday school? But I have learnt in ripe old age that joy comes from within how ever much we search for happiness and pleasure. That is where the spirit comes in perhaps through healing services or through music, quiet candlelit prayer meetings… As we grow in faith then we might be strong enough to die to ourselves and die again.
Will get back to you when I’ve had chance to muster my thoughts – I’ve had a dose of polymyalgia, which doesn’t help. Funnily enough, you echo me own words to the young speaker who brought the phrase up – it is not a once and for all experience – we die daily in one way or another. “Each dawn I Die”, as Jimmy Cagney called the film.