Charismatic Piety: Uncovering the Hidden Impact of the Charismatic Movement

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
D. Wong
{"title":"Charismatic Piety: Uncovering the Hidden Impact of the Charismatic Movement","authors":"D. Wong","doi":"10.1080/0458063X.2022.2085973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If you visited a church affiliated with one of the historic mainline Protestant denominations and looked out into the congregation on any given Sunday morning, chances are that you would not see many hands raised during the singing of songs, hear tongues being spoken, or witness any supernatural healings or other miraculous signs—practices largely considered to be distinguishing markers of Charismatic worship. You might then conclude that the worship of this congregation has remained untouched by the Charismatic Movement. While that is certainly a possibility, the problem with this line of reasoning is that it is based on a presumption that Charismatic worship is readily identifiable by what can be observed— external, visible acts of worship, such as the lifting of hands, the practice of glossolalia, ecstatic praise, singing in the Spirit, and so on. However, those who consider themselves Charismatic do not necessarily worship with such practices, and it is equally possible that the conclusion drawn above is incorrect. Consider, for example, the case of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, once the parish of the infamous Episcopal priest Dennis Bennett whose 1960 public announcement of his baptism in the Spirit is often said to have catalyzed the Charismatic Renewal Movement. Under Bennett’s leadership, St. Luke’s conducted their Sunday services according to the same liturgy that they had used before the Charismatic Movement emerged, despite most of the congregation being Charismatic. In his book Nine O’Clock in the Morning, Bennett recounts how visitors to his parish often expressed their disappointment at how normal and non-Charismatic the service was, wondering where the tongue-speaking was to be found. Such worship escapes the attention of researchers focused chiefly on the visible practices or structures of Charismatic worship—it simply would not register as Charismatic. Yet according to the visitors to Bennett’s church, despite the lack of recognizable “Charismatic” practices at St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, it was clear that something was different. Though disappointed by the lack of charismata, the visitors commented on how evident it was in the otherwise normal service that these worshipers “love God” and remarked, “I’ve never been to a mass where people were so intent on the Lord!” Similarly, John Sherrill describes a Presbyterian church in Parkesburg, Pennsylvania that was influenced by the Charismatic Renewal. Sherrill describes the worship of their Saturday night “Pray and Praise service” as follows: “There are spontaneous prayers, intercessions and thanksgivings from the congregation. Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Episcopalians, as well as Pentecostals come from as far away as Washington, D.C., to pack the basement auditorium in a service that lasts far into the night.” In contrast, on Sunday, Sherrill observes that the services","PeriodicalId":53923,"journal":{"name":"Liturgy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liturgy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0458063X.2022.2085973","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

If you visited a church affiliated with one of the historic mainline Protestant denominations and looked out into the congregation on any given Sunday morning, chances are that you would not see many hands raised during the singing of songs, hear tongues being spoken, or witness any supernatural healings or other miraculous signs—practices largely considered to be distinguishing markers of Charismatic worship. You might then conclude that the worship of this congregation has remained untouched by the Charismatic Movement. While that is certainly a possibility, the problem with this line of reasoning is that it is based on a presumption that Charismatic worship is readily identifiable by what can be observed— external, visible acts of worship, such as the lifting of hands, the practice of glossolalia, ecstatic praise, singing in the Spirit, and so on. However, those who consider themselves Charismatic do not necessarily worship with such practices, and it is equally possible that the conclusion drawn above is incorrect. Consider, for example, the case of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, once the parish of the infamous Episcopal priest Dennis Bennett whose 1960 public announcement of his baptism in the Spirit is often said to have catalyzed the Charismatic Renewal Movement. Under Bennett’s leadership, St. Luke’s conducted their Sunday services according to the same liturgy that they had used before the Charismatic Movement emerged, despite most of the congregation being Charismatic. In his book Nine O’Clock in the Morning, Bennett recounts how visitors to his parish often expressed their disappointment at how normal and non-Charismatic the service was, wondering where the tongue-speaking was to be found. Such worship escapes the attention of researchers focused chiefly on the visible practices or structures of Charismatic worship—it simply would not register as Charismatic. Yet according to the visitors to Bennett’s church, despite the lack of recognizable “Charismatic” practices at St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, it was clear that something was different. Though disappointed by the lack of charismata, the visitors commented on how evident it was in the otherwise normal service that these worshipers “love God” and remarked, “I’ve never been to a mass where people were so intent on the Lord!” Similarly, John Sherrill describes a Presbyterian church in Parkesburg, Pennsylvania that was influenced by the Charismatic Renewal. Sherrill describes the worship of their Saturday night “Pray and Praise service” as follows: “There are spontaneous prayers, intercessions and thanksgivings from the congregation. Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Episcopalians, as well as Pentecostals come from as far away as Washington, D.C., to pack the basement auditorium in a service that lasts far into the night.” In contrast, on Sunday, Sherrill observes that the services
灵恩虔诚:揭示灵恩运动的隐藏影响
如果你参观一个隶属于历史上的主流新教教派的教堂,并在任何一个周日的早晨向会众看,你很可能不会看到很多人在唱歌时举手,听到说方言,或目睹任何超自然的治愈或其他奇迹的迹象——这些行为被认为是灵恩崇拜的显著标志。你可能会得出结论,这个会众的敬拜没有受到灵恩运动的影响。虽然这当然是一种可能性,但这种推理的问题在于,它是基于一种假设,即灵恩崇拜很容易通过可以观察到的东西来识别——外在的、可见的崇拜行为,比如举起双手、练习舌音、狂喜的赞美、在圣灵里歌唱等等。然而,那些认为自己有灵恩的人并不一定以这样的方式敬拜,同样有可能上面得出的结论是不正确的。以圣路加圣公会教堂为例,它曾经是臭名昭著的圣公会牧师丹尼斯·班尼特的教区,他在1960年公开宣布他的圣灵洗礼,经常被认为催化了灵恩复兴运动。在班尼特的领导下,圣路加按照他们在灵恩运动出现之前使用的礼拜仪式来进行他们的周日礼拜,尽管大多数会众都是灵恩派的。班尼特在他的《早晨九点钟》一书中讲述了他的教区的访客如何经常表达他们的失望,因为他们的服务是多么的正常和没有魅力,想知道在哪里可以找到说方言的人。这样的崇拜逃避了主要关注灵恩崇拜的可见实践或结构的研究人员的注意——它根本不会被登记为灵恩崇拜。然而,据贝内特教堂的访客说,尽管圣路加圣公会教堂(St. Luke’s Episcopal church)缺乏可识别的“灵恩派”活动,但显然有些东西是不同的。虽然对缺乏魅力感到失望,但参观者评论说,在其他正常的服务中,这些敬拜者“爱上帝”是多么明显,并说:“我从来没有参加过人们如此专注于主的弥撒!”同样,约翰·谢里尔描述了宾夕法尼亚州帕克斯堡的一个长老会教堂,它受到灵恩复兴运动的影响。谢里尔这样描述他们周六晚上的“祷告和赞美服务”:“会众自发地祈祷、代祷和感恩。长老会教徒、卫理公会教徒、浸信会教徒、圣公会教徒以及五旬节派教徒从遥远的华盛顿特区赶来,聚集在地下室的礼堂里,举行一直持续到深夜的仪式。”相反,在周日,谢里尔观察到服务
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Liturgy
Liturgy RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信