Post-war pop culture and the Church.

We continue our serialisation of ‘Blessing the Church?’, previous instalments of which can now be found here. After last week’s outline of the dramatic social and cultural changes in the West that followed the end of World War II, Dr Clifford Hill now looks at key characteristics of these changes and the impact these had on the Church.

CHARACTERISTICS OF POP CULTURE

Youth-Dominated

Pop culture was essentially a youth culture which rejected the old, the outworn and the outdated. The emphasis was upon a search for new things and the discarding of the old. It was a culture from which, in the early days, the elderly felt shut out and devalued. Even in such things as clothing, the elderly felt disadvantaged as the consumer-driven market sought to satisfy the demands of the young.

The development of new technology in the brave new world emerging after the devastation of World War II reinforced the adulation of new things and led to the development of what was seen as 'the throwaway society'.

On the positive side, the period of reconstruction after the war needed the vitality and creativity of youth. It needed fresh energy, new ideas, unhindered by the failed policies of the past which had dragged the world into two devastating wars in the first half of the century. But the adoption of new ideas needed to be guided by firmly-rooted principles, if confusion and chaos were to be avoided.

Anti-Tradition

Any new movement contains an element of protest and rejection of the past. Pop culture was seeking to develop its own ideology and was therefore challenging traditional values. Inevitably the collected wisdom of the past was questioned as a whole new set of social mores applicable to the present day was sought.

Young people were quick to embrace new ideas and to say that the policies pursued by their fathers had only led the world into the horrors of war, culminating in the nuclear bomb devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The anti-nuclear campaigns of CND linked with the more positive campaigns of the peace movement which produced the 'flower people' and slogans such as 'Make love not war'.

The period of post-war reconstruction needed the vitality and creativity of youth, but this also needed to be guided by firmly-rooted principles if chaos was to be avoided.

On the negative side, it increased awareness of racial differences and stirred passions. The campaign for racial justice had both a negative and a positive side. Positively it affirmed the equality of all peoples regardless of race or colour while at the same time protesting against those traditions and institutions which debarred people on grounds of race, religion or ethnic origin.

The anti-traditionalism of pop culture led to a despising of traditional institutions and even, in extreme cases, to the rejection of professionalism and scholarship. An extreme example was the Cultural Revolution in Communist China which persecuted and degraded teachers, university lecturers and scholars, often parading them through the streets as an act of public humiliation.

In Britain there were not these extremes, but public attitudes towards the professions changed radically. Teachers were no longer held in high esteem, neither were the clergy or any of those who served the public.

Individualism

The worldwide liberation movement of the post-war era spilled over into pop culture, not only in politically-orientated protest movements but also in positive campaigns to alleviate suffering and to serve the world's poor and hungry.

The 'Freedom from Hunger' campaign of the 1960s, the Oxford Campaign for Famine Relief (which became Oxfam) and numerous others all reflected the growing concern of the new generation for freedom, equality and justice. These social values were part of the growing recognition of the worth of each individual and the sanctity of human life. In emphasising these values, pop culture reacted against the wanton sacrifice of life in two world wars. It was also a reaction against what was seen as the oppression the ruling classes exercised over the world's poor and powerless peoples.

This recognition of the worth of each individual had its down side. What began as the pursuit of justice rapidly became a demand for rights. It was rights, not privileges, that changed attitudes towards the Welfare State in Britain. Instead of enjoying the privilege of living in a society where the needs of each individual were cared for by the whole community, these benefits were soon taken for granted.

The younger generation knew nothing of the privations endured by former generations. Instead of thankfulness for the peace and security now enjoyed, the prevailing mood became a determination to obtain the maximum benefits available to each individual. Inner-city areas saw the rise of campaigns for community rights. 'Claimants Unions' sprang up in the 1970s to ensure that individuals were able to claim all their rights and entitlements from the State.

The anti-traditionalism of pop culture led to a despising of traditional values, social mores and institutions.

The campaigns for racial justice and justice for women soon produced minority group rights: feminist campaigns, the gay rights movement and the pro-abortion lobby with the campaign slogan 'A woman's right to choose'. These movements were fundamentally anti-social, in that they contributed towards the breakdown of traditional family life and the downgrading of marriage. They were driven by a destructive spirit in which the only thing that mattered was the philosophy of individualism, in which personal morality and personal relationships are largely determined by the rights, desires and demands of the individual.

The same determinants have played a creative role in the social values emerging from pop culture. They are essentially anti-social and dysfunctional rather than creative of a healthy society. Their end product is the dissolution of society. The underlying lesson is that ethical nihilism leads to social nihilism. Moral anarchy leads to social anarchy.

Personal Involvement

The post-war era of reconstruction that gave rise to pop culture was an age of activity. Pop culture reflected this with all the dynamism of youth. They wanted to get involved personally in the radical changes that were already beginning to move from theory to practical reality by the beginning of the 1960s. Pop culture encouraged young people to get involved in their community, to take to the streets and demonstrate, to take their protests to the town hall or to turn the student union debate into days of action for better grants and living conditions.

The negative anti-professionalism of pop culture also included a strong positive element of personal involvement in every kind of activity. It was the age of DIY. Do-it-yourself in home improvement resulted in an enormous industry of tools and provision for the amateur builder. DIY extended to every kind of activity, from making your own music to arranging your own house conveyancing. DIY in education gave rise to the Open University, while DIY in sport and entertainment resulted in a boom in a wide variety of sporting activity, from athletics and field sports to aerobics and keep fit, to climbing and hang-gliding.

Pop culture initiated what was essentially the day of the amateur. Personal involvement plus lots of help from commercial products enabled the amateur to produce results every bit as good as the professional.

Sensuousness

Pop culture rapidly swept away the old Victorian taboos on sex and the expression of emotions. It became a new age of freedom where the emphasis upon individual rights and personal involvement encouraged the exhibition rather than the suppression of the emotions. This was considered psychologically healthy.

The ‘Dr Spock’ generation of demand-fed babies and undisciplined children became the pop culture teenagers: the teeny-boppers who screamed wildly at their pop idols and lost themselves in waves of emotion at rock concerts and gigs. These activities paved the way for the drug-related rave parties of the 1990s.

Pop culture gave rise to a new age of sexual freedom aided by birth control and abortion. Sex education in schools followed the repeal of censorship in the entertainments industry, allowing explicit sexual scenes on TV, film and video, as well as in books and magazines.

As the moral mores of the nations fell apart, so the media's reporting of scandals, details of violence and explicit sex became more lurid, both stimulating and feeding the appetite for the sensuous. Inevitably, intimate media accounts of the lifestyles of pop stars encouraged young people to follow the activities of their idols and imitate their behaviour.

The lesson of post-war pop culture is that ethical nihilism leads to social nihilism. Moral anarchy leads to social anarchy.

Lawlessness

The radical change in the philosophy of education in the post-war era taught children not only to discover things for themselves, but also to question traditional values, leading to the questioning of authority, social norms and religious beliefs. The latter was aided and abetted by the popularisation of liberal theology through books such as Honest to God by John Robinson, the bishop who had defended the publication of Lady Chatterley's Lover, which broke new ground in explicitly sexual literature.

The old norms, moral precepts and social values, together with their foundational religious beliefs rooted in the Judeo-Christian faith, were rapidly crumbling. By the middle of the 1960s pop culture had become an unstoppable band-waggon rolling the nation into a social revolution, the end product of which only the exceptionally far-sighted could see.

The breakdown of moral absolutes left the field wide open for 'situation ethics' in which the rights and wrongs of every action for each individual would have to be sought within the prevailing situation and circumstances. This paved the way for increasing lawlessness, for the lowering of standards of professional conduct, and for radical changes in business ethics and the practices of corporate institutions. Thus the way was open for corruption in politics, industry and commerce leading inevitably to the increase of crime, drugs, family breakdown, child abuse, street violence and terrorism.

Pop culture was a child of revolt. It was born out of a spirit of rebellion, essentially a destructive rather than a creative spirit. Its anti-traditionalism was essentially the rejection of morality, of fundamental belief and of law. It was DIY in the rules of behaviour with a self-centred individualism that was essentially destructive of community. It was social anarchy and the inevitable result of anarchy is the destruction of society.

Power

The 20^th Century ushered in an age of powerlessness. Two world wars in the first half of the century swept millions of men and women from many nations into the horror of modern armed conflict. They had no option but to fight and even those who remained at home were mercilessly bombed in cities throughout Europe, powerless to defend themselves.

The post-war period of reconstruction saw thousands of inner-city communities destroyed as their homes were bulldozed and replaced by tower blocks. Others saw their homes destroyed to make way for motorways which they were powerless to resist.

As radical social changes were enforced by law, foundational social values began to crumble, moral principles were neglected, marriage breakdown increased, the stability of family life was undermined, crime rates soared and a general sense of powerlessness to withstand the onslaught of the forces of social change became widespread. The genie was out of the bottle and no-one had the power to put it back.

Pop culture was a child of revolt. It was born out of a spirit of rebellion, essentially a destructive rather than a creative spirit.

The economic boom years gave way to recession. Powerful commercial enterprises collapsed, bankruptcies increased, mortgage lenders foreclosed on the homes of defaulting house owners. The Englishman's castle was built on sand. People were powerless even to defend their homes.

The sense of powerlessness was increased by Europeanisation. Europe was swallowing up the little island which had fiercely maintained its freedom and independence against all invaders for a thousand years. Norman Tebbit summed it up when he said that the day would come when the 'Chancellor's budget speech would be faxed from Frankfurt'. The politicians, the Government, the Cabinet and the Prime Minister all began to share the sense of powerlessness to withstand the forces of change which were sweeping across the nation. Even the Queen had her 'annus horribilis', being powerless to defend her family from the adulterous and rebellious spirits of the age.

The Charismatic Movement

In the midst of these traumatic social changes and upheaval, a new phenomenon appeared within the Church: the charismatic movement. It did not arise in the immediate post-World War II period - in fact, it had no clear beginnings. There was no mighty outpouring of the Spirit of God as on the Day of Pentecost, no fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit as at the beginning of the Pentecostal movement at Azusa Street in 1906; there was no great revival, no clear move of God resulting in the conversion of multitudes of unbelievers.

Most charismatic leaders today trace the beginnings of the movement to the middle or late 1960s. But the first really recognisable signs of a movement did not occur until the early 1970s, when home-based fellowships or 'house churches' began to proliferate.

Whatever date we assign to the beginnings of the charismatic movement, it has to be acknowledged that pop culture was already a firmly established part of the social scene. The destructive effects of the spirit of rebellion could clearly be seen, biblical belief was under attack, traditional morality was in rapid decline, so too was church attendance. The Church, especially in inner-city areas, was in the full flight of retreat with a high closure rate of redundant church buildings, especially in areas of immigrant settlement.

It was against the background of spiritual atrophy and moribund institutionalism in the mainline churches that the charismatic movement emerged. It was born out of the womb of frustration with the status quo, rather than through a notable move of the Spirit of God.

A Genuine Move of God?

The charismatic movement came to birth at a time when the spirit of moral and social rebellion was triumphing in the battle with traditionalism in the secular world. This was the time when the most socially destructive Acts of Parliament were put on the Statute Book. It was a time when it seemed as though the whole nation was intent upon overturning past tradition and rejecting the social values and moral precepts of their forefathers. This was the spirit of the age in which the charismatic movement emerged and there is good evidence for the contention that many of the social characteristics of that period were birthed into it, the significance of which we are only now beginning to see.

We may go farther and ask the question, 'Was the charismatic movement a move of God? Was it actually initiated by the Lord Jesus, the Head of the Church?' It is not easy to give an unequivocal affirmative to that question due to its lack of a clear beginning and the fact that it was not rooted in the conviction of sin, repentance and revival.

The charismatic movement was born out of the womb of frustration with the status quo, rather than through a notable move of the Spirit of God.

There was not even a great wave of renewal sweeping through the Church or a 'holiness' movement characterised by self-denial, humility and self-sacrificial suffering with the major emphasis upon the cross. These are the characteristics of the present-day Church in China which has arisen out of the flames of persecution and martyrdom of the saints. In China there was no spectacular outpouring of the Spirit in any one place to mark the beginning of the period of great spiritual awakening now sweeping through that nation, but there were all the marks of authentic New Testament spirituality, including a willingness to die for the faith.

The charismatic movement, by contrast, had none of these marks and it is for this reason that we may fairly ask whether it was the creation of God or man. In fact, it bore many of the social characteristics of the Western nations in which it arose. It developed in an environment of easy affluence and it offered a form of spirituality which appealed strongly to the rising new middle classes seeking quick self-advancement and status in the new post-war social order.

Before offering an answer to the question of origins, we will look at the characteristics of the charismatic movement under the same headings as we used when looking at pop culture.

Next week: The charismatic movement as a child of pop culture.

First published in 1995, as part of chapter 2 of ‘Blessing the Church?’ (Eagle Publishing, pp10-39). Revised November 2017.

A child of the age: we continue our new series on the origins of the charismatic movement.

“Ephraim mixes with the nations...Foreigners sap his strength, but he does not realise it. His hair is sprinkled with grey, but he does not notice”. (Hosea 7:8-9)

Since the days of the Industrial Revolution, Britain has been a class-dominated society, the product of twin forces of industrialisation and urbanisation, which broke the power of the landowners and the old social order of feudalism. This was replaced by the new social classes of entrepreneurs, industrialists, skilled craftsmen and unskilled workers.

The latter formed a new class of landless peasants at the mercy of the owners of industry, who not only controlled the means of production but also owned the houses which their workers rented from them. Thus, from the earliest days of industrialisation, the British working classes saw themselves as the powerless ones who had to fight for survival against their economic oppressors. The seeds were sown of the class warfare which bedevilled British industry for 200 years, the legacy of which is still with us today.

Political Upheaval: The People vs the Privileged

The beginning of the 20^th Century saw the Labour movement beginning to become an organised political force, but it took two world wars in the first half of the century to break the social mould. The Atlee Government of 1945 was the first Socialist administration to obtain real power in Britain. Their legislative programme of social reform and reconstruction was to have far-reaching consequences which changed the face of Britain for the rest of the century.

The creation of the Welfare State with its boasted objective of caring for each individual from the cradle to the grave was designed to eliminate poverty and ensure justice for all. This objective was fully in line with the prevailing mood throughout the world which saw the post-war generation striving for freedom, justice, self-determination, equality and prosperity for all.

The post-war generation strove for freedom, justice, self-determination, equality and prosperity for all.

In industrial societies this was expressed in various forms of socialism, while in non-industrial societies it was anti-colonialism and anti-imperialism. Marxism in various forms spread right across the world as an expression of the aspirations of the poor and oppressed. This was in harmony with the rise of black consciousness in societies dominated by whites and the rise of nationalism in countries dominated by foreign nationals or alien ethnic groups.

In retrospect, the 20^th Century may be seen as a period of ‘the people versus the privileged’; a revolution of the oppressed against rulers and oppressors; a struggle for justice and freedom for all.

By the middle of the century this movement reached a peak of political consciousness as it combined with the post-World War II period of reconstruction and the anti-war/pro-peace movement. During the 1950s and early 1960s the political expression of these aspirations reached its height with the achievement of independence in most of the former European colonial territories. In Asia, India, the Middle East, Africa and South America the face of the world changed; the global map had to be redrawn.

Social Change: The Birth of Pop Culture

During this same period a new movement was birthed, particularly in the USA and Europe: an ideological and social movement destined to have as far-reaching effects as its political counterpart. It was what sociologists have termed 'pop culture'; a spontaneous, youth-dominated, ideological movement expressing the hopes and aspirations of the post-war-generation in the rich industrial nations of the West.

The prevailing economic and social conditions in these nations were ripe for just such an ideological movement. The post-war reconstruction period required massive building programmes of houses, offices, industrial plants and roads. The demand for labour was high which, in Britain, brought immigration from former colonies. But, even more significantly, it increased the wages of working people and opened up lifestyles beyond the imagination of former generations.

In Britain, for the first time in history, young people were able to command high wages. Even school leavers were able to go straight into unskilled work with large pay packets at the end of the week. Almost overnight a new consumer class was born with high purchasing power and minimal social responsibilities. These were young single people with no families to support, no mortgages, but with money in their pockets.

‘Pop culture’ developed as a youth-dominated ideological movement expressing the aspirations and hopes of the post-war generation in the West.

A free enterprise economy quickly adjusted to produce goods satisfying to this new consumer group. The market became youth-dominated, with clothing fashions, records, hi-fi equipment, motorbikes, youth festivals, fast-food joints and a wide variety of material goods and activities designed to meet the desires and fulfil the demands of rapidly changing pop fashions.

Public awareness of the birth of this new ideological movement dawned as a rude awakening. It came in 1956 with the arrival in Britain of an American film, Rock Around the Clock, featuring Bill Haley and a new strain of music known as 'rock'n'roll'. The film was screened in a cinema at the Elephant and Castle, in south-east London. The largely teenage audience ripped up the seats and rocked in the aisles which sent shock waves through the nation. It was soon followed by a multitude of home-grown youth musicians, skiffle groups, guitarists and rock bands.

The age of DIY had arrived. Young people did not simply want to be passive audiences, they wanted to do it themselves, either by being performers or at least joining actively in the physical activity of dancing, jiving, rocking and rolling, dressing up as Teddy boys or Mods and Rockers, driving in their motorcycle gangs and generally terrorising the older generation. The latter hailed the birth of pop culture with a dread of the future, believing the whole world to have gone mad.

Educational Change

An important agent in creating the social conditions which gave rise to pop culture was the education system which, during this period, experienced radical and far-reaching changes generated by a new educational philosophy. A new breed of teachers was produced in the post-war period, many of them with Marxist leanings, or at least strong socialist principles.

They rejected the 'chalk and talk' Victorian methods of teaching which relied heavily on learning by rote. The new philosophy centred upon the 'discovery method' of education. Instead of an active teacher instructing a passive class of pupils, children were encouraged to discover facts for themselves.

This meant that they no longer sat still and were punished for speaking; they were encouraged to work in groups, to carry out little research projects in the library, the countryside or the city streets. Physical punishment was seen as degrading and offensive to the rights of children. This in turn had its effect upon family life and discipline in the home, as well as social behaviour on the football terraces and in the streets.

A new breed of teachers was produced in the post-war period, many of them with Marxist leanings, or at least strong socialist principles.

Legislative Change

The ideological revolution which spawned pop culture was aided, strengthened and, in many ways, made socially effective, by legislation. Many far-reaching social reforms were effected in a 20-year period following World War II.

It may be questioned whether they were responsible for the social revolution which has taken place in Britain in the second half of the 20^th Century or whether they simply reflected changing social values. It is probably a chicken-and-egg situation in which both are true, as the one influenced the other.

The first major ideological reform was the repeal of the Witchcraft Act in 1951 followed by the Obscene Publications Act (1959). These were followed in the 1960s by a string of measures effecting far-reaching social reform, dealing with race relations, capital punishment, homosexual acts, abortion and the discarding of censorship in publications and public entertainments.
All these measures reflected the desire for freedom of choice and a society reputedly coming of age where people were able to make their own assessment of right and wrong, the good and the harmful.

Pop culture developed into a powerful social movement which created a society based upon 'situation ethics' rather than moral absolutes. In essence, it was both hedonistic and individualistic. It was a society leaving behind the restrictions of the past and moving into new eras of individual freedom. Society was sailing into uncharted waters, driven by the strong winds of moral anarchy. Such a philosophy could only end in social anarchy - a society in which everyone does that which is right in their own eyes.

Coming up: Over the next three weeks we will look at characteristics of pop culture and how these infiltrated and shaped the Church.

Originally published in 1995. Revised Oct/Nov 2017.

We begin to serialise an older classic on the charismatic movement.

We are pleased this week to begin re-publishing ‘Blessing the Church?’, which was written in the mid-1990s as an in-depth response to the ‘Toronto Blessing’ and the perceived excesses of the modern charismatic movement.

When it was published in 1995, ‘Blessing the Church?’ made a seminal contribution to the debate on the direction of the charismatic movement, as well as to teaching on deception within the Body of Christ. Though written in response to a particular set of circumstances more than 20 years ago, its message stands the test of time. Though a great deal has changed since the 1990s, sadly even more has stayed the same.

We will be serialising the book over the next eight weeks and commend it to you warmly.^1,2 We believe it should be foundational reading for all who are interested in understanding the background of the contemporary charismatic movement, and so the shape it is in today. Indeed, it is commended to any believer who is passionate about seeing the Body of Christ grow and flourish as Messiah Jesus intended.

Dr Frances Rabbitts

Managing Editor, Prophecy Today UK

Blessing the Church? Introduction

Rev Dr Clifford Hill

Few observers of the Church scene would deny that the 1990s proved to be a critical period for the charismatic movement.

The publication of books and articles speaking about a crisis within the movement proliferated. Hank Hanegraaff in Christianity in Crisis (Harvest House, 1993) carried out extensive research of the teaching given by a number of prominent charismatic leaders. He looked at their statements in comparison with Scripture and found that many of them were contrary to the Bible.

There was growing anxiety, not simply among reformed evangelicals, but among many within the charismatic movement, concerning a serious drift away from biblical principles. Of course, there will always be differences of interpretation and textual exegesis. But differences in interpretation cannot account for statements which are directly contrary to those found in the Bible.

The charismatic movement has been a tremendous blessing to millions of Christians who have found a new freedom in worship and a deeper personal relationship with God which has strengthened their faith and enabled them to participate more actively in the work of the Gospel.

However, the emphasis upon personal experience which broke the icy grip of traditionalism in most branches of the Church has also had its down side, as charismatics have been carried along on waves of excitement into deeper realms of experience. Any movement or teaching which offers the believer a deeper personal experience with the living God is highly attractive. Yet when experience parts company with sound biblical teaching, there is grave danger for the believer. There is strong evidence that this is what happened within the charismatic movement during the 1990s and, in various waves and guises, has continued since.

When experience parts company with sound biblical teaching, there is grave danger for the believer. 

The Toronto Blessing

The wave of spiritual experience that began in 1994 known as the ‘Toronto Blessing’ has received worldwide publicity. In Britain a number of books were on the market within months of the first appearance of the phenomenon. These offered uncritical and excited accounts of what was variously described as ‘revival’, ‘pre-revival’, ‘times of refreshing’, the ‘impartation of supernatural power’ and numerous other descriptions.

There were many published accounts of the benefits of the 'blessing' in the lives of believers. Many testified that they had been drawn into closer communion with God, a deeper commitment to prayer, to Bible study and renewed love for Jesus. At the same time there were many accounts of bizarre phenomena such as making animal noises and uncontrollable physical manifestations including screaming and vomiting which many charismatics did not believe could be the work of the Holy Spirit.

At the height of the Toronto Blessing many churches gave scant attention to the preaching and expounding of the word of God. In some cases, this was enforced due to the preacher becoming overcome by physical convulsions which rendered him incapable of speech. Many charismatics shook their heads and said surely God would not hinder the proclamation of his own word! Others were greatly excited by these strange activities and participated enthusiastically in the 'receiving meetings' where the emphasis was upon receiving 'more of God'.

Divisive Effect

In Britain, the Toronto Blessing resulted in the most widespread and deep-rooted division to hit the Church for many years. This division was not between believers and unbelievers, or between evangelical and liberal; it was a division among charismatics themselves. It brought division in the families of believers, it divided prayer groups, it brought division and splits within congregations and it divided church from church even within the same denomination.

In Britain, the Toronto Blessing resulted in the most widespread and deep-rooted division to hit the Church for many years. 

There is evidence of thousands of Spirit-filled believers leaving their churches and being forced to seek other places of worship or simply meeting in little ad hoc house fellowships, or even going nowhere while nursing the hurts of rejection by leaders who refused to hear any questioning of the bizarre activities in their congregation. This division contrasts strangely with the experience of the disciples recorded in Acts chapters 2-5, when, from the Day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit brought sweet unity, love and sharing among the believers.

Background to ‘Blessing the Church?’

It was out of a deep concern for love and unity in those churches which have experienced the renewing power of the Holy Spirit in recent years that two leadership consultations were called at Bawtry Hall in Yorkshire in January and March 1995. It was out of the papers given at those consultations and the subsequent discussion that ‘Blessing the Church?’ arose.

Its strength lay in the fact that all the writers were not only evangelical preachers of many years' experience, but that they were each convinced of the presence, the power and the activity of the Holy Spirit in the Church today, and that spiritual gifts may be exercised by all believers. All wrote, therefore, from within the charismatic movement, not as hostile observers from outside.

All the writers – Clifford Hill, Peter Fenwick, David Forbes and David Noakes - had been involved in leadership in the charismatic movement from the early days. We wrote, not in the spirit of judgmental-ism, or indeed with a negative critical attitude. Rather we wrote out of a deep concern, for the Church in which we had leadership responsibilities and for the future direction being taken by the charismatic movement.

The prime purpose in writing was to draw attention to what we considered to be a serious drift away from biblically-based teaching into the realm of experientialism. This led to the pernicious practice of using contemporary 'revelation' as the basis for doctrine and the justification for the formulation of new teaching and practice within the Church which has no biblical foundation.

We wrote out of deep concern for the Church and for the future direction being taken by the charismatic movement. 

Each of the writers undertook in-depth research examining our own teaching and practice and a searching re-evaluation and re-assessment in the light of biblical scholarship. Our study of the Bible led each of us to extend our personal re-evaluation to include current practices across the whole spectrum of the charismatic movement and to an examination in some detail of the underlying teaching. It is out of the fruit of this examination that this book was written. It contains a message which we believe to be of vital importance in these days.

We recognise our own failings as leaders and our proneness to go astray in days when there are enormous pressures from the world around us and when we do not see very much to encourage us from the fruit of our labours. We therefore wrote in a spirit of love and humility under the deep conviction that the Bible provides us with the only standard of truth that can guard us against error, false doctrine, wrong practices and unrighteous behaviour.

Dangers Facing the Church

It is our earnest hope that what we have written will be received by our brothers and sisters in Christ in the same spirit of love and humility in which we have written – today, as much as when it was first published.

Inevitably, in our examination of contemporary teaching in the charismatic movement we had to note those leaders who were most closely associated with its propagation. Our task, however, was not to make accusations against brothers in Christ, but rather to contend for the faith which we all hold to be precious and to warn where we saw teaching which is seriously at variance with Scripture. Such teaching opens the door to all kinds of error and aberrant practices.

There is grave danger today of the Church being infiltrated by New Age teaching and the charismatic movement is not immune from this danger. Neither is it immune, if it drifts away from a strict adherence to the Bible as the plumb-line of divine revelation and truth, from straying into the realms of cultic activity.

Our warnings are sounded in days of great danger for the Church. In the Western industrialised nations, we are faced with the continuing onslaught of secularism and rising hostility to the Gospel in the context of increasing lawlessness and social decay. On the world scene Islamic fundamentalism and the use of violence to achieve their objectives is a continuing menace to the spread of the Gospel and is resulting in many thousands of Christian martyrs each year.

Yet the worldwide Church continues to grow through tremendous spiritual awakenings in many of the poorest nations. The greatest threat to their faith is the spread of Westernisation and what we in the West have come to recognise as ‘pop culture' - the culture of easy affluence, sensuous self-indulgence and acquisitive materialism driven by moral and spiritual anarchy.

Our warnings are sounded in days of great danger for the Church. 

It is in the context of the contemporary world situation and our deep desire to see the re-evangelisation of the Western nations, our own longings for revival and our unshakeable belief in the activity of the Holy Spirit among us in the Church today that we wrote ‘Blessing the Church?’.

We call to our brothers and sisters in Christ to recognise the dangerous situation which still faces us; and to recognise also that our emphasis upon the experiential within the charismatic movement has led us away from the doctrinal basis of the faith which our forefathers held to be of supreme importance. We therefore plead for a re-examination of current teaching and practice among charismatics in all branches of the Church and a recognition that the Bible provides us with the only plumb-line of truth.

Our analysis required examining the teaching of a number of those who minister within the charismatic/evangelical churches. Inevitably in so doing we had to name names. Our purpose was to compare what was being taught with what the Bible says. Our aim was not to discredit these men or to invalidate their ministries. Rather, it is still our hope that what we have written will contribute to the ongoing theological debate within the charismatic movement.

Although this book was written against the background of the debate on the Toronto Blessing, its scope is much wider. All the writers saw Toronto as merely the latest step in a continuing process of an overemphasis upon experience and a neglect of sound biblical teaching. We therefore attempted to look at the antecedents of Toronto rather than the phenomenon itself.

What Will Follow

What we undertook was essentially to re-trace our steps to the early days of the charismatic movement. We looked at the introduction of different teachings, beliefs and practices at different stages in its development.

Over the next seven weeks Prophecy Today UK will re-publish this work, starting with an examination of the rise of the movement in the context of the social history and secular culture in which it gained momentum. Subsequent articles will examine restorationist beliefs, the Latter Rain Revival movement of the 1940s in North America and its influence on charismatic doctrine, and the development of the charismatic movement itself – including its direction and the kinds of prophecies that have come through it.

Our writers draw many penetrating insights from Scripture which illuminate the Church’s situation during the 1990s – and which undoubtedly still have relevance today.

Next week: A child of the age? The socio-cultural background of the charismatic movement.

First published in 1995. Updated and serialised October 2017.

Notes

1 If you are interested in purchasing a paper copy, limited numbers are still available on Amazon at the time of publishing.

2 We have revised the text where necessary to update it for 2017 web publication, but have tried to keep these revisions minimal.

In the next of our series on the relevance of the message of the prophets for today, Fred Wright looks at Isaiah and his call for a return to the Word of God.

Isaiah ben Amoz, according to the superscription of the prophecies bearing his name, lived during the turbulent rule of three kings - four if we include the apostate Manasseh (whom in Rabbinic tradition had Isaiah put to death by being sawn asunder). His messages of warning, impending judgment, salvation and restoration are as relevant today as they were in the late 7^th Century BC.

Time of Skewed Priorities

Uzziah's death around 742 BC seems to have had a remarkable effect on Isaiah and opened the way for his commissioning (Is 6:1). The death of Uzziah marked the end of a period of wealth, strength and glory, as the shadow of Assyrian aggression fell over the land. Materialism and self-interest had overshadowed spiritual considerations; the wealthy had dispossessed the poor and the venal nature of the courts meant that there was no redress (Is 5:8-10, 10:1-4, cf Micah 2:1f, 3:1-3).

The national religious leaders and the believing community had become so involved with themselves that they raised little or no protest, centring their thoughts only upon lavish ritual and a misguided belief that their assumed special position with God protected them from all external matters (Is 1:10-20, cf Micah 3:9-11).

Isaiah was commissioned at a time when materialism and self-interest had overshadowed spiritual considerations.

This mirrors the situation today within the believing Christian community; little is said about the plight of the poor within the nation and minimal attention is paid to the suffering church in real and concrete terms. What concern is being shown for the remnant in the Middle East, Libya and other persecuted areas today?

Modern Rebellions

At the present time there has been a dangerous shift of emphasis, especially among charismatics, to focus attention on personal 'felt needs' and pragmatism, rather than on the scriptures and on seeking the Lord in prayer and intercession.

Isaiah's initial complaint was that Israel did not know their own Lord (Is 1:2-3). Even two of the dumbest animals, the ox and the ass, are in a better position than the people. The ox rejoices in the knowledge of his master and even the donkey knows his place of security, comfort and nourishment.

The people, on the other hand, are in rebellion. Though they have received nourishment and been made great by the Lord (Heb = gadal has several applications, 'make great' being an appropriate use here), they have turned away. This begs the question, what in our modern context is rebellion?

There has been in a shift in the Church, especially among charismatics, towards personal 'felt needs' rather than the scriptures and seeking the Lord.

Departure from Scripture

One important manifestation of rebellion is a move away from the scriptures and their authority.

Similarly, today there is a departure from the scriptures, as seen in the ministry of some charismatic leaders, both in the UK and USA. The Old Testament is regarded by some as a record of divine revelation to Israel and therefore ipso facto located in time and space; likewise, the New Testament is regarded as revelation to the early Church. The scriptures are seen simply as a record of events that involved an interaction between God and man at a specific time. The consequences of such a viewpoint inevitably lead to deviant teaching.

When looking at any written sources one should always look for internal testimony. The scriptures quite clearly express their own divinely given authority. Two passages of special application are Luke 4:4, where Jesus refers to the Old Testament writings with the preamble "it is written", and in John 10:35, where he states bluntly that the scriptures cannot be broken, that is to say they have an eternal application.

Paul claimed divine authority for his own writings (1 Cor 2: 4, Rom 1:11) which was endorsed by Peter (2 Pet 3:15). As there was no canon of New Testament writing for the first believers, they drew their understanding from the Hebrew scriptures. It is interesting that the early Jerusalem church also continued in their Judaic practices.

One important manifestation of rebellion in the Church is the move away from Scripture and its authority.

Pathway to Error

The trend of departure from the scriptures was noted in the mid-1970s by the one-time vice-president of Fuller Theological Seminary, Harold Lindsell. Lindsell's two books, The Battle for the Bible (Zondervan, 1976) and The Bible in Balance (1979), sounded an early warning that some evangelicals and Pentecostals were departing from their traditional stance on the scriptures.

In Isaiah's time the drift away from the Lord and his instructions on worship and devotion, which were given by divine revelation through the law and the prophets, was typified by reliance on self, elaborate rituals and occult practice (Is 2:6, 8:17f). A move away from the scriptures today may lead believers into the same errors.

History and Experience

Christianity is both an historical and experiential faith. Historicity (or historical truth) enables our faith to be objective, in that it has sources that may be studied, researched, analysed, and tested. Without historicity we are left with subjectivity which centres around emotions, bias and experiences that may only be compared with similar experiences that have little or nothing to draw upon outside of the events themselves.

Wolfhart Pannenberg suggests that the history of Israel (and this may include the early church) consists of a series of special events "that communicate something special which could not be got out of other events. This special aspect is the event itself, not the attitude with which one confronts the event" (Revelation in History, p132, London, 1969). Following Pannenberg, we can suggest that, as the events of salvation fall into this category, and the scriptures are a record of these events, the casual attitude towards the scriptures exhibited in some charismatic circles can only lead to a lack of knowledge of God (Is 1:2).

There is little doubt that the church needs the prophetic revelation of the quality of Isaiah today and the full operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

The Austrian philosopher Freidrich Heer, writing in the late 1960s under the shadow of nuclear conflict, suggested that the Christian church had withdrawn from the historical process (God's First Love, London 1970). By this, Heer meant that the Church had chosen to concentrate upon its inner self rather than real and concrete events. In turn, this irresponsibility towards the Jew, the other person, and even the Christian was the ultimate cause of past catastrophes in human behaviour and might well be the cause of a final catastrophe in the future. By the historical process we mean events involving mankind, including current affairs.

The failure of the Church to stand for righteousness and justice, which establish the throne of God in a nation (Ps 97:2; Prov 16:12), is a direct cause of its ineffectiveness in missions both at home and overseas.

Lack of Theological Training

The inherent danger of a move away from the Bible is exacerbated by a lack of proper theological training of leaders and Bible study in some new independent churches. The move towards the pragmatic notion that 'if it works then it's OK', accompanied by practices that have no biblical foundation, inevitably leads to a man-created security and dependency upon experience rather than on God. The fact that something works does not mean that it is an initiative of the Lord.

At a recent Christian gathering it was suggested by an international speaker that there was now no real need for a full-time ministry as it was virtually redundant; the Holy Spirit was doing it all. The notion that teaching and intercession are of less importance than experiential gatherings leaves believers in a vulnerable position as they have no means of testing the spirit, neither will they be able to reach maturity.

Meaningless Worship

Isaiah lamented that the people were about to depart into exile because of their lack of knowledge (of the Lord) (Is 5:13 cf). In a similar way, the prophet brings the painful rebuke of the Lord (Is 1:10-20) that the people were involved in religious activity (worship) that was meaningless. The lives of the worshippers were making their offerings unacceptable. We may well ask ourselves today if our worship – regarded as a sacrifice of praise – is acceptable to God? What, in reality is being worshipped - God or an idea about God?

The failure of the Church to stand for righteousness and justice, which establish the throne of God in a nation, is a direct cause of its ineffectiveness in mission.

There is a lack of respect for God (in opposition to Ps 5:7; Prov 1:7, 8:13, 9:10, 14:27) which is so vividly illustrated in some worship meetings. It is alarming to realise that some leaders feel that they are in a position to elevate their opinions over those who wrote the scriptures under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (2 Tim 3:16), especially those who were personally acquainted with Jesus!

With them, we find ourselves in a position where not only is our activity of worship unacceptable, it is despised by the Lord (Is 1:11). A convergent tension is that the worship service often centres around the event rather than the reason for the event; the worship and adoration of the Lord. Isaiah pleads with the people to walk by the light of the Lord as they have forsaken the ways of their own people. By the expression 'your people' is meant the people living under God's rule.

This call to return to the ways of the Lord rings powerfully in our ears today as we may observe all manner of alien practices finding their ways into Christian activities in similar manner to the tensions faced by Isaiah (2:6).

Leaders as Babes

Isaiah laments that the leaders were as babes (Is 3:12) which reflects the leadership situation in some circles today. The lack of theological training which we have already noted among charismatic leaders has caused a double tension.

First, there has been a move to pragmatism instead of working from a biblical base. Secondly, many leaders have expended their energies on management of resources and programmes that owe more to secular management studies and psychology than to theology and pastoral practice.

Professor Carson, in Hermeneutics, Authority and Canon, remarks that the diminishing authority of the scriptures reflects the 'anti-authoritarian' position generally taken in the Western world. The other side of the coin is that, within the circles of those who have departed from the scriptures whilst giving lip service to them, there has been a strong line taken on the authority of the leader and his opinions.

In much modern worship there is a lack of respect for God, and services often centre around the event itself, not the worship and adoration of the Lord.

Ways Out Offered

For every proclamation of impending disaster, the Lord spoke through the prophet to offer a way out, and continually points to repentance, restoration and redemption. Throughout the writings of the prophet the reiteration of the Lord's promises to David may be found. "Come now let us reason together" (NIV), or "reach an understanding" (JPS) declares the Lord (Is 1:18).

The loving call of the Lord echoes through the centuries to the believing community today. How can one enter into a meaningful dialogue with the Lord unless one has something more than an existential knowledge of what is assumed to be his power? A part of the current battle for the Bible is knowing the character of God.

Hope for Refining

When Isaiah received his commission (Is 6:1f) it was with the knowledge that he would need to be faithful as his message would be ignored (Is 6:9ff). The people were blind and deaf, suffering a wholesale deception that they were in some way inviolable.

Isaiah, throughout his long ministry, nourished a hope – often frustrated, that the calamities would be as refiner's fire from which a purified remnant would emerge who would put their trust in the Lord (Is 1:24-26, 10:20f). The unswerving dedication of Isaiah and the other prophets was due to their knowledge of the character of God. The question for the intercessor is what will God do at this time to refine his Church?

There is little doubt that the Church needs prophetic revelation of the quality of Isaiah today and the full operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The painful lesson to be gained from the prophecies of Isaiah is that there needs to be reliance on the revealed character of God, which can only be found through the scriptures and in prayer. Worshipping an idea about God can only lead to disaster.

Judah ignored the warnings and were taken into exile by the Babylonians in 587 BC, from whence came the lament "How can we sing the Lord's song in a strange land" (Ps 137). Christians who leave the scriptures might well find themselves in a strange land, albeit the land in which they dwell.

First published in Prophecy Today, Vol 12 No 5, September 1996. Revised July 2016.