"Re-enchantment" with Rod Dreher

The great New Testament Scholar and Anglican Bishop N.T. Wright uses a vivid image in one of his books about how the rationalism of post-Enlightenment Modernity has affected spirituality.  With its insistence on elevating empirical and scientific knowledge to the highest (or even the only) reliable form of knowledge, dispensing with folk wisdom, intuitive, or spiritual forms of knowledge, Modernity was (spiritually speaking) like paving over a green field with concrete.  But, over time, the concrete starts to crack.  A hodge-podge of wildflowers and grass and weeds start to pop through.  

Wright points to various movements - Romanticism, Spiritualism (with its seances), and New Age spiritualities - as reactions to the smothering rationalism.  The spiritual realities - because they really are part of our life and experience - have a way of popping through the concrete.  The Charismatic movement in the churches, the rediscovery of the Mystics through the Spiritual Formation movement, and the resurgence of Traditionalist forms of piety (as with the appeal of the Latin Mass among many younger Roman Catholics) are all Christian expressions of this same "popping through" of the super-natural.  What the Rationalists dismissed as 'irrational' may actually be 'trans-rational' and have an unexpected staying power.

So, in recent decades, as scholars have noted the "paradigm shift" from Modernity into Post-modernity there has been an openness to re-evaluating and even reclaiming the spiritual and purpose-filled dimension to life that goes beyond empirical knowledge.  Nowadays many people are talking - openly and excitedly - about the "Re-enchantment" or "Re-sacralization" of our lives in this world. 

Here is one such conversation between news commentator Emily Jashinsky (of the 'Undercurrents' and 'Breaking Points' web-shows) and Eastern Orthodox Christian author and cultural critic (and personal friend) Rod Dreher about "Re-enchantment."  It is very much worth the watch.

On Spiritual Deliverance (Exorcism)

There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an exessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally pleased by both errors and hail a materialist or a magician with the same delight.

-C.S. Lewis (Preface to The Screwtape Letters)

When I was in seminary at SMU, I was asked in my Word and Worship Class (we studied liturgy) to prepare two liturgies for my final paper, with a running commentary on each. I thought it would be fun to do something different that would stir the biblical imagination of my professor, so I prepared a liturgy for performing an exorcism. That might sound absurd "this day and age" but (no doubt, partly due to the Pentecostal/Charismatic influences in my own faith journey) I felt then, and still do, that the topic of Spiritual Warfare in general and of exorcism in particular requires new attention among United Methodists, and among Christians more generally. I believe I talked a little bit about this in my post on The Exorcism of Emily Rose way back in September 2005 when I first started blogging. Maybe I should say before going further that I realize the word "exorcism" itself calls up a whole series of images - thanks in large part to Hollywood - that may or may not be helpful, and for this reason the language of spiritual "deliverance" may be more useful.

Now preparing this assigned paper I did not undertake lightly, but did much research, especially examining Anglican/Church of England sources (the 'Exeter Report' and related material I found to be especially useful), since they and the Roman Catholics are the only non-Pentecostal Churches that seem to have given this subject much serious attention during the 20th century.

So, I would like to open a conversation on this subject (that is not getting much treatment in blog-land at the moment, so far as I can tell). I think it is important to come to grips with the reality that Christians do believe in what the Nicene Creed calls "the unseen" elements of creation. Whether it is appropriate to call them "supernatural" is debatable, but they are in some sense beyond the material world (and therefore, most likely beyond the purview of the physical sciences). This is of course the reason why Modernity, as an intellectual perspective, taught us to be so skeptical about the unseen realities. But Modernity's hold upon our imaginations is waning, and we can now with fresh eyes look at these questions.

Of course, the reality of "spiritual forces of wickedness" (to quote the United Methodist baptismal liturgy) is quite plain in the Bible, as the numerous accounts of exorcism do demonstrate. In the ancient Church, because Paul equates idol worship with "communion with demons" in 1 Cor. 10, an exorcism was performed on all converts as part of the baptismal ritual (since they were all converting from Paganism). This exorcism actually still exists in our own United Methodist baptismal liturgy, as I have already noted, when the candidate for baptism is asked to reject the "spiritual forces of wickedness and evil powers of this world". So according to both the Bible, and the tradition as it has come to and been passed along by our Church, there are unseen spiritual powers and some of them are set against God and his people (therefore we call them "wicked").

Now I realize that very many people within my Church will nevertheless find this whole conversation to be absurd, even dangerous, because they do not believe in any sort of evil spirits. As I have said, I believe this in large part comes from an uncritical acceptance of certain tenets of Modernity's worldview that ought to be challenged. I am aware of some new interest in "powers and principalities" in mainline circles, however they often seem not to get to the point of admitting the reality of something like personal entities that occupy the unseen realm (rather talking more about 'systems' - though this may be a 'both-and' case). It might be profitable if some of us would ask ourselves "exactly why do I have trouble believing in this?"

I am reminded of a moment at General Conference at which point an African Methodist pastor stated that certain practices were inspired by the devil. The presiding bishop (an American) scolded him for such 'mud-slinging'/unfriendly language and seemed to totally miss the point that a theological claim had just been made, perhaps one that deserved to be examined rather than simply ridiculed and dismissed. (It is quite plain to me that, of course, General Conference is organized in such a fashion to make 'holy conferencing' - in the sense of deep and probing theological discussion - nearly impossible. Such issues will likely need to be explored through other venues).

The question naturally arises then, if these unseen realities (both God-serving and the wicked) do exist - what does this mean for our own spiritual lives? What interaction do we have - knowingly or (scary thought) unknowingly with these spiritual forces or beings? How should it affect the way we pray? All of these questions make me somewhat uncomfortable, and that is why I think I need to look into them a bit more.

As the writers I engaged pointed out, the language of "demonic oppression" is probably more helpful than "demonic possession." Demonic oppression runs a whole spectrum from simple temptation to the more extreme levels of oppression that have in the past been called "demon possession." This gets us past the fruitless question of whether a water-washed and Spirit-born Christian could be 'possessed' by a devil or not. Clearly, in this way of looking at things, all of us experience various levels of demonic oppression in our life as disciples, and should seek to be equipped to deal with it. We may have already done so without realizing it. (This does not mean, however, that anytime we are feeling tempted it therefore follows that we are being attacked by an evil spirit, since some temptations will simply come from within ourselves).

SO, I propose that The United Methodist Church - her bishops, pastors, and theologians (both lay and clergy, both formally and informally trained) ought to investigate these questions with all due seriousness so as to avoid the near total ignorance and discomfort that now holds sway on the one hand, and also to avoid any kind of paranoia or fanaticism that may come from being un-informed on the other hand (there is a disturbing tendency among some to see a demon under every rock and behind every tree; this is surely unhealthy and perhaps a clearer teaching might help bring clearer discernment on these matters). Perhaps a theological guidebook or pamphlet may be prepared by the General Board of Discipleship in connection with the Aldersgate Renewal Ministry? Perhaps it can even be included in the Book of Resolutions as has been done with similar guilde-line pamphlets.

Our own heritage within the Anglican Tradition will no doubt be especially instructive and appropriate for our use. In the Church of England, each diocese has a designated (and properly trained) exorcist who can be called upon to perform or coordinate any services of deliverance and spiritual healing that are found to be necessary, after due consultation with psychological professionals. The deliverance service is closely related to the healing services that are already becoming popular among United Methodists, thanks in large part to the Charismatic movement.

Just so this doesn't sound any more threatening than it already may for many readers, let me point you to some resources for prayer on this subect with which you may already be familiar:

1. The Lord's Prayer. Most of us pray it every week in the liturgy, and perhaps every day as well. The last petition is of course "but deliver us from evil." The NRSV has it in Matthew 6 as "but rescue us from the evil one" - a clear reference to the devil, the chief of these 'fallen angels' or evil spirits or whatever we want to call them. This is, as my Anglican sources pointed out, quite properly understood to be a 'minor' exorcism.

2. The baptismal vows (see The United Methodist Hymnal p. 34), as I've already mentioned, include elements of an exorcism. It involves the renunciation of demonic powers and then a profession of faith in Jesus as Lord and savior. Because "no one can say 'Jesus is Lord' but by the Spirit of God" (see 1 Cor. 12:3) the Early Church reasoned that once one had sincerely made these vows, then demonic influences could not at that moment have control over them (or they would not have been able to make the good confession). The language has been retained in Baptismal liturgies since the days of the Early Church.

3. The Great Litany in The Book of Common Prayer, 1979 (p. 148-155, a rather long prayer) contains some remarkable prayers for deliverance, including the very second petition:

"From all evil and wickedness; from sin; from the crafts and assaults of the devil; and from everlasting damnation, Good Lord, deliver us!"

4. Many traditional night-time prayers contain petitions for deliverance from spiritual darkness (see, for example #689 in The United Methodist Hymnal) including especially the prayer found in the Order for Compline (again, 1979 BCP) on p. 133:

"Visit this place, O Lord, and drive far from it all snares of the enemy; let your holy angels dwill with us to preserve us in peace; and let your blessing be upon us always; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen."

My research suggested that this prayer was also especially appropriated for claiming the reality of the Kingdom in and over places that had been particularly affected by evil spirits (in some instances, we might call them 'haunted' or otherwise 'dark' places, though clearly not all alleged hauntings would fall into this category).

5. The mention of Angels in that last prayer brings up the important point that there are also spiritual forces of goodness that are obedient to the will of God and are seeking to uphold and defend us in various ways. St. Michael the Archangel is viewed as chief among them as a sort of general of the heavenly armies. It is within that framework that the following prayer, popular in the Roman Catholic/Anglo-Catholic tradition, may be used profitably (wording slightly altered to be more congeneal to my Evangelical/Protestant sensibilities):

"May St. Michael the Archangel defend us in the day of battle; be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray; and may the Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust down to hell Satan and all wicked spirits, who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen"

Now (with much trepidation) I would like to hear what others may think about these things. Has anyone else taken this further than me? Are there already pastors, bishops, and theologians looking into these issues? I saw that Ben Witherington III recommended a book on the subject called The Dark Sacrament, but I've not yet read it.

The Global South Churches: not our Saviors?

(pictured: Peter Akinola, Anglican archbishop of Nigeria)

The relationship between the Western Churches and those younger churches of the Global South espectially in South America, Africa and Asia is much discussed these days. As has been frequently repeated, Christianity is growing at an amazing pace outside of the West and we should sit back and savor the fact that we are living through a movement of the Holy Spirit of historic proportions. The Next Christendom by Philip Jenkins is one of the most comprehensive treatments of this transition that I know of, though it is written from a somewhat Post-Enlightenment perspective. The author attempts a "secular" analysis of the situation, and is much less inclined than I am to be sympathetic to the character of these young churches.

On the one hand we are very enthusiastic about these young and growing churches: many conservatives and traditionalists in Western Churches (including many United Methodists) see the evangelical vitality and the orthodoxy of the Global South Churches as a sign of hope for the future, and many progressives celebrate the diversity that these new voices bring to the churches (in theory at least, when these new voices are not talking about Biblical innerancy or sexual ethics).

Yet there is good reason for all Western Christians to feel some ambivalence about the impact that the vital churches of the South will have on the faith.

Here are two Christianity Today (CT) articles that outline issues that Westerners, especially evangelicals, may need to come to terms with as we embrace our brethren of the Global South:

1) The First big issue is cultural baggage, especially including Erastianism. Erasianism is the subordination of the Church to the state, and - 4th of July "worship services" aside - is something very foreign to most American Christians.

Are two stories from one Denomination that illustrate this Erastian baggage: The Anglican Mission in the Americas (AMiA) is an outreach of the Anglican Church in Rwanda that was started by Anglicans on both continents who felt that the Episcopal Church in the USA was no longer a viable Anglican presence in North America because doctrinal innovation had carried it outside of the Anglican Tradition. So the AMiA is a conservative and evangelical alternative Anglican Group in the USA that it ultimately under the oversite of an African Archbishop.

CT tells us of an instance when Rwandan Church leaders, at the behest of the Rwandan President, instructed a US congregation to un-invite a planned fund-raising key-note speaker. The event was raising funds for a school in Rwanda, and the speaker was known for being critical of the government there. Anglican leaders in Rwanda felt this could put an unnecessary strain on their relationship with the government.

Another illustration of the cultural baggage (covered in the same CT article) that can surprise Americans in the AMiA occured at a Denver Church, when members of the American congregation were asked to bow before a visiting Ugandan King, just as they would have done back in Uganda!

2) The second major issue that Western evangelicals might be ruffled by is actually theological. This may come as a surprise since, especially in the mainline churches, many conservatives and evangelicals look to the Global South churches to help them re-assert the orthodox faith in Churches that are seen as having lost a clear handle on their own doctrinal standards and ethical convictions (especially with regards to sex and family).

And it is true that on issues like miracles (past and present), or how the atonement works, or the nature of Biblical authority, or the danger of hell to unbelievers, Western evangelicals and Global South believers will often have very similar views, both in firm opposition to many of the "classic liberal" views that have developed in the West as an attempt to accomodate the faith to Modernity.

However, there are other issues upon which they may find themselves in profound disagreement. Our second CT Article deals with what beliefs are most common among the world's Pentecostals. This article is dealing then with trans-denomination trends that are associated specifically with the Pentecostal/Charismatic renewal movements. This is relevant to our discussion here since, as was discussed at length in The Next Christendom (mentioned above), the Global South Churches have, across denominational lines a Charismatic tone to their common life more so than Western Churches. Presumably then (though this was not the specific focus of this study) it will follow that Global South Christians, regardless of denominational affiliation, will follow these trends far more often than Western Mainline Christians. If this turns out to be the case, it will distress many American Evangelicals within mainline churches who are looking to the Global South for theological leadership.

SO, according to the articles what trends do we see when we ask what do Pentecostal believers the world over hold MOST in common?

Tongues? According to the CT article, while most Pentecostals/Charismatics speak in tongues, a great many do not. Miracles? According to the study that CT is reporting around 85% of Pentecostals worldwide believe that miracles still happen today, as in Biblical times. However the percentages are much higher when asked about central tenants of "prosperity gospel":

"As common as belief in miraculous gifts, however, is faith in the prosperity gospel. Renewalists overwhelmingly agree that "God will grant material prosperity to all believers who have enough faith." In Nigeria, 95 percent of Pentecostals agree with that statement, and 97 percent agree that "God will grant good health and relief from sickness to believers who have enough faith." In the Philippines, 99 percent of Pentecostals agreed with the latter statement."

The Church catholic has traditionally held that material prosperity may very often be a hindrance to true spiritual growth (as in the Biblical story of the Rich Young Man) and encouraged Christians to simplicity and even voluntary poverty. The decline of faith in many of the wealthiest nations of the world seems to support the words of Jesus after that encounter: it is "easier for a camel to pass through the the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God" Matt. 19:24.

The Church has traditionally held that God is more interested in forming our eternal spirits in virtue (which may involve temporal hardship, see for example 2 Cor. 4:17) than he is interested in blessing us with temporary material wealth (though he may do that as well in some instances). To use a rather mundane example: God may be interested in blessing me with a front-row parking spot at the super-market, but he may be even more intersted in making me into a patient person, which might be better effected by giving me a back-row spot. This traditional emphasis of "cross-bearing" for the sake of sanctity is often completely missing from "prosperity gospel" preaching (no doubt, this is one reason why "prosperity" is so popular).

So, why am I writing all this? Basically I want to caution myself, and anyone else who reads my blog - especially evangelicals within Mainline denominations - who may be apt to somewhat idealize the state of the Church in the Global South. We should not be tempted to denegrate all theology and spirituality that is "Western" (and in turn get on board some "Global South" fad) simply because we are more familiar with our own failings than with those of our distant brethren. We all have failings. I don't forsee any "quick fixes" for the health of the Church - it has always been a people in the wilderness, and this always involves spiritual dangers and theological pitfalls. Our call is to walk steadily through this wilderness - knowing that the Church as a body will always have problems while we are in the wilderness - but we walk, following the glorious presence of our God, led by the Word of his lips, and moved by the Breath of his mouth, into his ultimated Promised Land.

Southern Baptist Seminary bans "Charismatic" teaching

My dad tells a story of when he was in the navy stationed in Italy. One day he and a friend went into a beautiful old Roman Catholic Church to pray and have a look around. While inside they watched a very old nun shoo-ing a white bird, that looked suspiciously like a dove, out of the church with a broom. He and his friend just looked at each other not missing the powerful symbolism of how the old established churches had neglected the Spirit of God.

That story came to mind when I read that Southwestern Seminary's leadership had voted to ban any teaching or preaching that was favorable to Charismatic experiences, in particular speaking in tongues (even as a private experience), a decision similar to that of the International Mission Board because of which I was very critical of the IMB. The seminary's only board member that voted against the ban lamented the "charisphobia" that this decision represents.

I wonder which is worse: attributing activity to the Holy Spirit which he has clearly not taken (as when some church leaders - even bishops - claim that the Spirit is leading the church in a direction contradictory to the clear teachings of the New Testament and unanimous tradition of the Church) or banning the work of the Spirit when it does show up because it threatens the control of church leadership and the status quo (as has happened pretty much anytime a Spirit-led renewal has broken out). Now I know the SBC does a lot of good ministry and brings more people to know Jesus Christ than probably any American denomination (except perhaps the Assemblies of God, a pentecostal denomination), but this ban is part of a trend in the wrong direction on the part of the SBC. I hope that young charismatic Baptists will challenge this move in an appropriate manner.

Some have argued that charismatics ought to "let Baptists be Baptist," but I don't buy this. Since when was "being Not-Charismatic" somehow constituative to being Baptist? Classically, the SBC is congregationalist in polity, allowing each congregation freedom in doctrine and practice. If, in practice, the mission board and the seminaries become "top-down" doctrinal filters for the convention, then the SBC finds itself moving toward becoming a denomination with certain confessions or creeds. This is fine with me (I think those are vital things to have - one reason that I am not Baptist), but it does turn the question of who is really "being Baptist" on it's ear, I think. Unlike some of my fellow Methodists who are (sadly) more than happy to do so, attacking the SBC is not at all my point. I have many personal connections to SBC churches and have been greatly enriched by those ministries. My point is simply "cracking down" on the Charismatic movement, which if judged by its fruit in so many lives and churches must clearly be seen as a work of the Holy Spirit, is wrong.

The United Methodist Church (in spite of her many shortcomings) has, like several of the older more liturgical churches, actually (ironically) done a better job on the whole (we certainly have plenty of examples of "charisphobia") of integrating the blessings of the Charismatic movement into the life of our denomination. The Aldersgate Renewal Ministries, which are affiliated with the UMC's General Board of Discipleship is a ministry that focuses on teaching congregations to explore and use ALL of the charismata in the life of the local church (in a responsible manner consistent with our tradition), through various annual seminars and events and it is one of those few "official" ministries that I am really proud of.

100 Years of Pentecostalism!

That's right, this week is the centennial of the Azusa Street Revival where at a small holiness church (remember them, Methodists? whoops!) in Los Angeles, something special happened. Many people experienced the outpouring of the Spirit of God in a new way and a new sort of revival broke out. Now, 100 years later, Pentecostals together represent one of the largest groups of Christians in the world, and by far the fastest growing. I guess it is somehow fitting that I, a United Methodist with Anglo-Catholic leanings, found myself at a house prayer and praise meeting last night with a bunch of Pentecostal Christians. And, of course, it was a wonderful atmosphere for worshiping our common Lord together.

And we all, no matter what our leanings, owe alot to the Pentecostal movement. Certainly we should rejoice that our Pentecostal brethren have led hundreds of millions to know and experience Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Whether we be Roman Catholic, Mainline/liturgical Protestant, or Evangelical Protestants, or whatever, we have all been profoundly influenced by this work of God and its many aftershocks:

There is a renewed intrest in spiritual gifts in many of our churches that brings with it greater involvement and greater sense of purpose among Christian people. There is an increased expectation, even in liturgical services, of really meeting with, and communing with the Spirit of God in our worship. In many of our denominations the Charismatic Movement, has taken hold and become a source of life for many. In my own denomination the Aldersgate Renewal ministries holds annual seminars and conferences on spiritual gifts and life in the Spirit, and serves as an officially sponsered (by the General Board of Discipleship) rallying point for Charismatic United Methodist Christians of all sorts. Movements like these will, in my estimations, be crucial for the re-invigoration of our churches.

So, while I realize "Pentecostalism" is easy for outsiders (and insiders) to criticize since there are so many different folks that go by that name, today is a day to "rejoice with those who rejoice" over a mighty work that God has wroght in our world.

Pat Robertson again apologizes for remarks

Charisma Magazine reports that Pat Robertson has apologized for his remark claiming that Ariel Sharon's stroke came as judgment from God for Sharon's giving up the occupation of the Gaza strip. I don't usually follow Pat Robertson too much, but I don't think this apology was widely reported. In the future, perhaps Pat Robertson could hire some PR guys to screen out such stupid comments before they air them. Just a thought.
http://www.charismamag.com/a.php?ArticleID=12569

Southern Baptist Mission Agency Bans Tongues

The International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist convention has voted to bar new missionaries who speak in tongues as a "private prayer language."

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/002/1.21.html

I think this decision is interesting for various reasons:

The article seems to imply that public tongues (with an interpretation) would still be acceptable; but in my (limited) experience of charismatic and neo-pentecostal worship, most people speak in tongues to themselves while they pray or sing and public interpretation is relatively rare.

I wonder what it means that a mission agency is banning something that many Christians experience as or believe to be a move of the Spirit? Church history shows that this is often how new denominations form; the Methodists were run out of the Anglican Church and the Holiness/Pentecostals were run out of the Methodists over disagreements about which unusual behavior was and was not a move of the Spirit.

Maybe more tangibly: since neo-pentecostalism is the fastest growing form of Christianity, especially in Africa, South America and Asia, I wonder how this policy will affect Southern Baptist missions and evangelism (if it does).