by Martyn Percy
Part 2 of Martyn’s assessment of Alpha
Alpha courses appear to be a phenomenal success. My copy of Church Times seems to take on the proportions of the Sunday Times whenever there is an Alpha News insert. Their own publicity suggests that hundreds of thousands of people have taken part in a course in this country, the Commonwealth and beyond. Alpha News is full of good reports and self-publicity, smattered with quotes from ‘academics’, Bishops, and the like. The Alpha Course itself has now become a business operation, with its own staff, teaching materials, sweat shirts, videos and books. Of its type, it is one of the slickest commodifications of the gospel.
I ought to state now that I have not attended an Alpha Course; but I have seen much of the Alpha material. To my mind, it has a number of features that are commendable. First, it is a course, not a ‘hit and run’ exercise in evangelism. A number of evenings, a weekend away and a final supper can facilitate the building up of community relationships. Second, because it is designed to be locally-based, and from the church, it avoids the pitfalls of some itinerant evangelists who might not relate easily to local contexts and churches. Third, there is a wealth of supportive literature to aid enquirers. It is well-marketed, and written and presented in a ‘light’ apologetic style, formed from an evangelical-charismatic basis. A sort of David Watson Jesus Then and Now for the 90’s, but with much more emphasis on the individual, the therapeutic, and a very personable Holy Spirit.
People who attend an Alpha Course seem to enjoy the fellowship and find their faith refreshed. Amongst most, if not all charismatic-evangelical churches, the Alpha Course has now become obligatory; a logo that makes a statement about being in the vanguard of fashionable evangelistic techniques. Yet I do have quite serious reservations about the style, content, approach and results of Alpha. How though, can something apparently so successful be flawed? Three reasons immediately come to mind.
First, there is very little attempt to present the Church as the body of Christ which is the initial repository for the Gospel. The assumption Alpha appears to make – common to a good deal of evangelical apologetics – is that people become Christians first, then think about joining a church. The disassociation is highly problematic. Whilst individual evangelists and various agencies target the millions beyond church structures, the majority of conversions often fail to be properly inculcated in to the church. This is, in part, because these same people are embarrassed by the church, and offer a Gospel that barely mentions it, if at all. Evangelicals tend to have little theology of place, or an appreciation of directional plurality, regarding the church as a collection of people who are in agreement with one another. A focus on the church and sacraments would deepen the course, and ensure the material was more firmly rooted as an arm from within the church, rather than an external agent being used as a go-between. Some Roman Catholic and liberal Anglican churches have ‘tailored’ the course in this way, although the authors forbid this.
Second, the genius of Christianity lies in its contestability. In the relentless appeal to ‘basics’, the course obviates the implicit and explicit paradoxes in the Gospel, as well as its breadth. It offers Christianity as a simple, uncontextual, boundless project that is ‘learned’ through a course offering certain types of knowledge and experience. Any group that offers a course on ‘Basic Christianity’ needs to address who chose the basics, and why certain ‘basics’ were selected and not others. In Alpha, the basics turn out to be an appeal to a largely innerrant Bible, attenuation of a homely and powerful Holy Spirit, and expression of an Evangelical atonement theory. They are not, interestingly, the Trinity, baptism, communion or community, which might be more appropriate for other groups. Moreover, the authors apparently do not like the course being adapted or enculturated. This suggests that a ‘package’ of truth is being sold. Yet Christianity is arguably not something we ‘possess’; like God, it possesses us, but is beyond us too.
Third, the focus on the Holy Spirit is one of over- emphasis. The Spirit on offer obviously arises from a personable, therapeutic, home-counties context that is concerned with the individual. The dynamics of the Spirit’s work in creation, justice, peace, reconciliation and the wider church receive scant attention. This is because the authors of the course reflect an elite, upper-middle class outlook (Eton, Cambridge, Brompton), which, quite naturally, has also enculturated the Gospel. In introducing the Gospel from here, there is inevitably no real social mandate, no prophetic witness and no serious appreciation of theology or ecclesiological breadth and depth.
It is true that the Gospel is free to all. But it does not follow that it should be sold and marketed as a cheap package deal – a bargain-break weekend for two in eternity. Alpha offers a highly successful ‘trial pack’ (a ‘nice’ version of Christianity), yet one that does not actually relate to what is ultimately on offer, namely the complexity of salvation from within the church. As a locally-based evangelism programme, it is seriously flawed. True, it does recognise that ‘lasting conversions’ are made through local church connections and friendships, with less coming from hyped-up rallies or events that are outside the church. But the weaknesses lie in its theological foundations. It sets its own ‘questions’, and then offers the ‘answers’ to them: a classic technique in apologetics – caricaturing ‘objections’ to faith, then demolishing them. There is little space for people to actually reflect on and vent their own serious social, personal, moral or theological concerns. The appeal to ‘basics’ seems to assume that all Christians are more or less the same underneath, and that their ecclesial expressions are merely cosmetic. They are not: for many they are matters of theological and aesthetic substance.
As a course, it is therefore somewhat prescriptive, a package rather than a pilgrimage. Participants are locked into a hermetically-sealed hermeneutical circle, that keeps more issues out than it actually addresses. It is a confident but narrow expression of Christianity. It stresses the personal experience of the Spirit over the Spirit in the whole church, in all its plurality and depth. It attempts to transform course members in to converts, and then again into church members. Ironically, the skeleton of the course does provide a good template that parishes could adapt and deepen according to need and context. A number of parishes I know have adapted the middle-class presuppositions of the course for their own situations where ‘supper parties’ are not easy formats in which to discuss life and faith. It is odd then, that the authors of the course are against this. Presumably, this is because there is a real bias in the material that is not to be ignored, and is to be protected from dilution. So here we have a technique with fundaments, Patent Pending.
My hunch is that Alpha ultimately does to churches what any revival does. Mostly, it excites and galvanises existing believers, and encourages them to ponder (briefly) the world outside the church. Then to engage with it more openly than they might otherwise, albeit temporarily. However, although this form of apologetics is to be preferred to some itinerant evangelism or mass rallies, insofar as it is locally-based, it has still done little to address the theological vacuity of its parent missiological models. It is still more monologue than dialogue. People are still mostly ‘sold’ a Gospel that is independent of the church – and then the course organisers wonder why the attendees don’t translate into members. It also offers a version of the Gospel that is weak on sin, suffering, atonement, sacraments and sacrifice. True, people have to start somewhere with the claims of the Gospel: milk precedes meat, and you learn to walk before you run. But does the presentation have to be so sugar-coated, crude and narrow? People’s previous experience of the church is deemed to be peripheral, and the selected ‘basics’ presented as central. For example, one cannot imagine receiving any reasonable answer to a question like this: ‘What did God do for me when I was baptised as child?’ Such issues are omitted from the agenda. They are just too complex to form the basis for a discussion about divine action and the graciousness of God.
The danger of a therapeutically-tuned version of the Gospel that is intentionally socially relevant is that it will itself become a fashion-victim. The course comes from the same church – Holy Trinity, Brompton – that introduced John Wimber’s ‘Signs and Wonders’ (miracles are the best form of evangelism: 1984-86), the ‘Kansas City Six’ (1988-90: a group of strange American ‘prophets’, now widely discredited) and the ‘Toronto Blessing’ (RIP, 1994-1996). In their own way, all these phenomena were rather ordinary within the econtext of revivalism and enthusiastic religion, yet they were marketed and sold well, particularly by Holy Trinity, Brompton. They have a shelf-life of between 18-24 months, and in spite of some of the same Bishops and ‘academics’ who promote Alpha (one is placed in this category by virtue of being a Principal of an Anglican Theological College) giving each of these movements their full impramatur, they fizzled out. So what they actually point to, ironically, is the lack of a deeply-formed ecclesial identity and enduring spirituality in these faith-expressions. Without something new to sing about, punters in the pew eventually become bored. ‘Success’ is therefore about being at the forefront of spiritual fashion, riding along on the crest of the latest wave or craze.
A key to this is the singling out of the spiritual as an ‘event’ which can be transformed into a commodity. This means that Miracles and Blessings suddenly acquire an identity that makes them stand out from the crowd, like a designer label on a handbag or a pair of trainers. An ordinary blessing won’t do anymore: it must be the ‘Toronto Blessing’. Prayer for healing is old hat: ‘Signs and Wonders’ is where the action is, and God is deemed to be. Prophecy is interesting, but have you heard the Kansas City Six perform? So it is with Alpha. An ordinary catechetical course will no longer suffice – evangelical-charismatic consumers are buying a name and an identity. And the Alpha authors will not tolerate imitations or adaptations of their Gospel: it is salvation by copyright.
It will be interesting to see how many attending the courses, then ‘making a decision’, or having a numinous experience, are actually members of their local church in two years time. My guess is that for all the hype, triumphalism and talk, this course is mainly about ‘refreshing’ charismatic-evangelical identity. It does not address the world in all its pain, ambiguity and profusion – so it won’t actually change it, in spite of the claims.
Revd Dr Martyn Percy,
The average evangelical Christian isn’t really allowed to be private about their faith. Depending on your church, you’re meant to do evangelism: that’s right, talk about your faith and invite others to church to be “converted”, if at all possible. It was conceded that God would do the “converting”, not us, but still there was pressure to bring people into the Kingdom. One minister even imposed numerical targets.
So imagine the relief we felt when Alpha came along. All you had to do was invite someone to supper at church. To be honest, even this felt awkward. With the guest speaker Jonathan Aitkin (who incidentally was really good) I summoned up the courage to invite a former boss to hear him. The boss refused, citing extreme distaste at being in the presence of a former and disgraced ex-con Tory Cabinet Minister. Oh well, his loss.
My experience of Alphas was generally very good in a couple of ways. People really pulled together to make the parties happen, re-arrange the church space into a middle range restaurant experience and I loved the camaraderie of effort.
I also enjoyed the group discussions with people allowed to ask questions. It felt healthy and reasonably genuine, and not like we were prescribing Answers.
Churches are odd places with people dressed in funny garb doing odd things. Alpha was one of many “initiatives” designed to lower the barriers to entry. Others include coffee and donut areas with the now ubiquitous bar made from pallets. Some even have actual bars serving alcohol, although this would discourage me from inviting my alcoholic friends.
The actual fitting out can be adjusted on the urban chic spectrum, according to local taste. Mainly it’s upper middle class, so quite shabby chic then.
I never encountered anyone outside this category, nor an overtly non straight person.
Alpha ignores that vast swathes of non evangelical non weekly church-going people already have faiths. They already ask deep spiritual questions and have just as much legitimacy before the throne of God as anyone else. Alpha assumes what WE have is better, and no one expects to learn from THEM. What makes us different to entitle us to assume this? If we’ve received more grace, then we ought to reflect on that and change our attitude.
On one Alpha course I lead the band on the Holy Spirit weekend. An invited delegate reflected back to me at the end of the weekend that she thought we were authentic. Unfortunately I still don’t think I was myself.
When something is heavily packaged it can lose its very authenticity or local flavour. Of course Alpha has long been at risk of this. But Alpha is something to Do, a place for us to work out our salvation. If you want to put off evangelicals repeating it, good luck with that!
I have seen correspondence from one from this “ neck of the woods” asserting that their association with it made them feel “ like an elite Christian”.
Therein lies a significant difficulty in my book.
We shouldn’t feel like ‘elite Christians’ – that is indeed the last thing we should feel, the sin trap of pride lies behind it.
That was exactly why the early charismatics caused a lot of annoyance, because they often gave that impression, of somehow being superior to ‘ordinary’ Christians who were somehow second rate.
Is there an almost 2,000 year old problem setting the balance between:- 1) individual salvation vs. Church community life and sacraments 2) Reason vs. Emotion 3) Wild Church vs. programme driven Church?
Alpha has been helpful for a lot of people and turned lots of lives around. I think there is much to celebrate within it.
The third point above is a v good one. The cosmos, and the complexity of human life (law, justice, conscience, love, meaning, language), points to a designer.
Nobody queries the existence of a Czech brewer when sipping a top class pilsner with a magnificent yeasty taste, a gentle fizz and a creamy head. Barley-brewer-beer points to a creator, and I think the evidence for design in creation should be discussed a lot more.
It’s interesting looking at this from a children’s ministry perspective. The two main strands in children’s ministry are: Do we see children as empty pots needing to be filled or do we see them as people with their own spiritual experiences, insights and thoughts that can contribute to the life of the church? It seems to me that to some extent Alpha sees adults before conversion as empty pots needing to be filled. Yes there can be discussion but there is an underlying feeling that there is going to be a right answer. (I haven’t done Alpha but have read some of the material.)
This forum is usually about abuses in church and is a space for survivors to connect with one another.
Whatever you think of the alpha course, this is fairly off-topic to the central concerns of this blog. I would prefer to return to the issues at hand and would like to see more written about the misuse of church funds to make huge payouts
‘the misuse of church funds to make huge payouts.’
Could you expand on this? Are you objecting to churches compensating people who have been abused within them, or by their clergy?
I have yet to see the church making huge payouts to abuse victims!
I should have been clearer – I was thinking of the recent gigantic payoff to Andrew Handley in Blackburn.
Thanks for the clarification, I agree.
Any Church teaching, including Alpha, can be experienced as abusive by some. The conservative theological assumptions of Alpha fit poorly with LGBT+ Christians and others with a more inclusive approach. The topic is worthy of discussion on the blog which focusses on the use and abuse of power in the Church.
Many of us have seen how “ideas have consequences”. We rightly celebrate the abusive drug addict or drinker who turns their life around on embracing the core idea of the New Testament. The Church is right to remember that positive witness. But there is also a problem to reflect upon, sometimes seen with fundamentalist leaders who have a messianic complex.
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” applies only to one person. The clay-footed leadership bully, who ignores national law and Church rules, plus biblical principles of natural justice, is an absolute menace. Leaders, who are utterly obsessed with their own authority, often gather servile lackeys around them, preferring to exclude anyone who flags up unanswerable questions on bullying or threatens to blow the whistle.
The reference above to children’s ministry almost moves us towards evidential vs. presuppositional apologetics. It’s a good point! The Kingdom of God within us, and everyone an image bearer possessing dignity, draws us to central arguments for belief around creation and conscience. Alpha in my experience is free flowing around circumscribed questions, and I cannot remember if it normally hits the science-theology interface.
A growing issue is the number of sincere and convinced believers who spurn the institutional Church. That used to puzzle me, but a look at ‘House of Survivors’ website on the Blackburn cover up helps me see why lots of Christians have had their fill of cover ups by senior Anglican leaders.
Hmmmmm. If you’ve met one LGBT Christian, you’ve met one LGBT Christian. I am one such. I did alpha in a so-called “inclusive” church.
I have written previously about the queerphobic abuse I experienced in that church. The way alpha was delivered was not a particular problem to me.
There are a multitude of issues that need addressing to make the C of E and other denominations significantly safer for LGBTQ Christians. I wouldn’t bother including alpha on the list.
Having read Martyn’s piece in full, I wish I could sit and talk with him for a while; although I don’t speak the same ecclesiastical language as he does, I sense an agreement with what he’s saying in many ways. Alpha is a package – and its a good package, of a particular form of evangelical Christianity which, for me, rings true. BUT, as Martyn and others rightly say, it raises all manner of questions which aren’t addressed, often to do with wider areas of denominational tradition or practice, which a lot of people are likely to have.
Good example – people such as I and my wife, brought up in a ritualistic, rather nominal (to evangelicals) rural parish had been pushed through the mill of infant baptism, then confirmation, and launched into life with a delusion that, so long as you obeyed the rules, attended communion at least three times a year, including Easter and kept your behavioural nose clean, you were a Christian and would have the golden pass at the Pearly Gates. (Forgive the satirical stereotype, please – you’ll see why.) It therefore came as a very rude awakening to learn, through college evangelical fundamentalism and a Calvinistic Railway Mission respectively, to discover quite the opposite; that we were bound for Hell unless we threw ourselves on a strict mercy and accepted a whole new outlook on life. The rituals we’d gone through counted for nothing. And, for both of us, the sense of betrayal – by a ‘church’ whose ceremonies were worthless eternally – was immense. We still feel it over fifty years later.
Now yes, that’s pretty blunt. Some people may be offended by it – (if the cap fits….) but that is exactly how it seemed to us and, to be honest, still does at times. So how is Alpha, or any other ‘basics’ course going to handle that kind of prior experience?
I’ve tried to adapt to or accept the sacramental view of faith, and found it doesn’t really work for me; neither can the concept of ritual, or ‘belonging’ which seems to go with more Anglo-Catholic, inclusive or moderately high church strands of the CofE – perhaps I’ve been too successfully indoctrinated into a very narrow religious outlook which, ultimately, I can’t escape – much as I wish I could at times.
As Steven Lewis and Martyn both comment – the kind of typical ‘package deal’ Alpha defines doesn’t give room for that kind of questioning. It deals in certainties, not the more difficult imponderables, such as where does actual life come from, the destiny of an unsaved (never mind unbaptised) baby, the relationship between the Holy Spirit and other religions, and a good many more. And the questions won’t go away – they stay lifelong. Yet we claim to be the people who know the answers – but won’t talk about them. And if we aren’t given the chance to talk them through, how do people learn?
“Would you like to go out to dinner? I know a really great place. I can see you’re hungry, and so am I. It would be great to spend some quality time together. So, I’m thinking…. McDonald’s.”
Most Fridays for a number of years I took my kids to McDonald’s. I’d had a long hard week and hadn’t really finished my work, but it was time to stop and spend time with them. We all loved it. The food was tasty. To be honest it was never completely satisfying, but it was simpler than having to cook myself, and the Happy Meals seemed to go down a treat, along with the various plastic toys that came with their food.
I still remember those times fondly, and so do they. To be honest, the nutritional value of our meals out there (and other similar venues which are available) was not particularly high. Ok, so rather poor I admit, but none of us regret that, and I’m glad I stopped work and spent time with my family. Everyone misses out if you don’t.
Is Alpha a bit like this? It’s not an ideal spiritual menu, but basic fodder with plenty of additives to make you keep going back. It’s the setting for what could be, but not a complete meal.
Would I go back and be with my kids in that place? Yes I would. It was the best I could have done with what I had and knew back then. Even though I know chopped carrots and celery are better nutritionally, nothing like McDonald’s could have kicked off our weekend in the same way.
Alpha is a start. It creates an interim community. Maybe it’s a parody of one, maybe not. Obviously we can’t rely on this for our whole Christian lives together, and we can’t keep on living on the same diet healthily.
Alpha is intentional, a ritual from a manual. It sits in the canon of other religious activities we do. Is it antagonistic to the heart of Christianity or is it symbiotic?
My own sense is that if it’s anything good, that’s because committed random souls administering its elements leave a mark by their love and care.
Well said, Steve.
I agree. (but avoid McDonalds. )
A hidden gremlin, with charismatic-evangelical activity in general, and not just with Alpha alone, is how shallow emotionalism can drain people. Lots of Church members feel used and abused over time, to the point where they seek to radically fix greater personal control of time and/or finances.
Some clergy or congregations can cynically exploit people, then sadistically or sarcastically cast them aside. Have Anglican Bishops fully woken up yet to the scale of ministry trainee or junior clergy abuse? The latest Church Times has lots of ‘House for Duty’ jobs. Reality is biting by degrees.
Mythologies, about Church ill-treatment of people being historical, being primarily about the sexual abuse of children and being fixable by registers (or names sheets to do with those deemed vulnerable), just does not cut the mustard with lots of former Church members.
It used to upset me when I saw buildings being sold off and diocesan downsizing. But a leaner and more honest Church is the hope of the future.