Is revival possible-likely-necessary?

I’m at the final stages of prepping for a talk at church tomorrow morning on revival.  People fed in some questions last week and I’m wondering whether to just work through them or set out on a dialogue and see where it leads.  

• Will revival happen in our lifetime?

• What revivals have happened in the past?

• Why should we expect a revival to happen?

• Does revival start with a person or an event?

• Does revival start in our hearts?

• What does it mean?

• Will we know when it is happening or only afterwards?

• Has revival started? 

• How do you reconcile ‘living on the cusp’ with normal life?I particularly liked this one, from Sue, which gave me a chance to map some of the key issues for me.

‘As a new Christian I was told that revival was people ‘kneeling in the streets and crying out to God.  I don’t think this is the only way. But what will revival look like? ‘

Dayspring has really existed for somewhere between 12 and 15 years.  When we started people in the UK were hot for revival (by which they meant an intervention by God which would result in many people finding faith–a change in the spiritual climate).  I’m not sure whether or not I was surprised to realise that revival is so deeply part of the Dayspring DNA. I’m not even sure whether it’s a good thing.  According to Earl Creps ‘the longing for revival is a core component (a “chromosome”) of Pentecostalism’.  It’s hard to disagree with him when he says that ‘a massive outpouring of the Spirit is precisely what the American [and British] church needs today.  In truth, everything else has been tried’. 

Creps is well aware that there are structural implications.  He writes on the EC scene from a distinctively Pentecostal perspective.  I like him because he’s almost as old as me but still up for it!

Reflecting on Creps, Pomocostal queried whether the word ‘revival’ was actually unhelpful.  Good point.  I’m just disappointed that the posts I’m referencing are two years old.  I’ll try and post after our morning event tomorrow on vocabulary and see if I can tie up revival talk with the issue of vision inflation.

Postcharismatic prayer ministry

Interesting, though not totally reflective, discussion going down at robby mac looking at a couple of classic prayer ministry models.  In the red corner is the Soaking prayer model, from Toronto, and in the blue corner is the Wimber Five Step model.  I added a few comments myself, really hoping that people would be willing to consider a Both and… approach and mean it.  Robby McAlpine is one of the few bloggers who is currently looking at postcharimatic praxis.

Back to work

Holiday’s over.  What with spending time with grandkids, conoeing, cycling and stuff, I only managed one big read–and a big read it was.  Alistair Campbell’s diaries, The Blair Years.  I enjoy reading about political process more than the issues and this was certainly about process.  A few things which were really interesting:  the strong relationship between Campbell and Blair, Campbell’s obvious commitment to his kids and, most of all, the fact that Campbell was trying to find a way of resigning almost from the time he started in the job.  Then of course there are the issues of government and media.  Not a useful book for analysis but I found it well worthwhile in reflecting on relationships.  Just a bit heavy for a sunbed!

For Pentecostal read charismatic.

I have come across a whole area of thoughtful study out there which I never new existed.  As part of my research I am reading into the whole area of Pentecostal and Charismatic studies and have come across a rich vein of very thoughtful stuff from a guy called Jamie Smith, speaking at Northwestern University.  He looks at the synergy between pentecostal spiirituality/theology and postmodernism (I know he isn’t the only one but its great to be able to listen to a lecture while driving) and also makes a case for a particular pentecostal worldview.  In the Uk we would call it a charismatic worldview but don’t let that put you off.

Occulture

I’ve just been reviewing Christopher Partridge, The Re-enchantment of the West and found some useful material which supplements, and to some extent raises questions about Heelas and Woodward’s conclusions.  In no particular order here are separate posts on

·         Occulture

·         Secularisation and New Age Spiritualities

·         Re-enchantment

Partridge broadens the core meaning of occult, as referring to secret, restricted knowledge leading to direct experience of the divine to include a ‘vast spectrum of beliefs and practices sourced by Eastern spirituality, Paganism, Spiritualism, theosophy, alternative science and medicine, popular psychology (usually Jungian), and a range of beliefs emanating out of interest in the paranormal.’  It is not so much of a system as a general heading of cultural ingredients.  For example it is not he whole Buddhist dish that people want which can be stirred into the occultural stew to create one’s own dish according to one’s taste.

It is not a worldview but a resource on which people draw.

Oxymornic to describe alternative spirituality because very much part of the consumer culture.

Has not been McDonaldized.  It is the animals and vegetables rather than the burgers and chips.

New age Occulture

New age spiritualities are eclectic, pluralistic and lacking in homogeneity.  However sacralisation of the self and eclecticism do function as metanarratives.

Truth is the experience of reality in the present moment.

The role of guru, channelling, sacred text or astrology is not to provide an external authority. But as aids on the journey within.

Romanticising the pre-modern—feeling of authenticity generated by promotional literature adorned with symbols and illustrations which have the look of antiquity

Pagan Occulture.

Paganism a religion based on nature worship and other indigenous traditions

Differentiated from new age occulture

1.       Pagans reject the New Age’s overly optimistic view of reality.

2.       Pagans draw on Western esotericism

3.       More ritualistic

4.       Often requires a high level of commitment

5.       Pagans are less individualistic.

6.       Great emphasis on responsibility to others

7.       Pagans are less expensive

However the fact that they are confused suggests that they are drinking from the same conceptual pool.  Faeries are either manifestations of life force or spirits of the Pagan dead.  Both show interest in divination.

NB the pagans want to be seen as different from Satanists but share the same western occultural framework.

1                    The same deities appear

2                    Overlap between Satanism and ‘left-hand path paganism both emphasise, carnal desire, self-development and the will.

3                    Some Satanists do see themselves as Pagan.

4                    There is some interest among pagans in adopting Satan.

5                    Both share distrust of or antipathy to Christianity.

6                    Both celebrate the body and sexuality.