God, emotions, and spiritual formation

[David Pettigrew]

Our tradition has always valued feeling God's presence.

Is it still important to seek an emotional experience? Do we still need to cry?

I'm thinking of emotional response to grace in corporate gathering and private prayer. Do we still value experiencing God with our mammalian brain?

[Hans Deventer]

Seek emotional experience? Need to cry? I sure hope the answer is no! Having said that, I sure also hope that there is room for experiences to happen! But I would not want to seek emotions.

[Billie Goodson]

Our tradition has always valued feeling God's presence.

Is it still important to seek an emotional experience? Do we still need to cry?

I'm thinking of emotional response to grace in corporate gathering and private prayer. Do we still value experiencing God with our mammalian brain?

If by "seeking an emotional response" you mean that the actions should be performed with an intent of obtaining an emotional response, then I would say no. I think we should be focused on people having an experience with God, but that cannot be limited to only the emotional level. Having said that, I think we have placed a lot of emphasis on evoking an emotional response from people and we have developed a church/people that have a good feeling about God but no depth of understanding. God is a salve to their emotions just a like a diet to their body or a drug is to their psyche.

When you say "do we still value experiencing God with our mammalian brain?", I am not sure what that means. Studies show that all mammals do not process information in the same manner, so not sure what you mean when you say "mammalian brain". I do think that since the 1800's we have devalued the intellectual experience of God and we reap the fruit of that daily in our churches.

I am probably a minority on this, but it is my opinion.

[Dennis Bratcher]

Our tradition has always valued feeling God's presence.

Is it still important to seek an emotional experience? Do we still need to cry?

I'm thinking of emotional response to grace in corporate gathering and private prayer. Do we still value experiencing God with our mammalian brain?

Is it important to seek an emotional experience. No. That reduces God to a function of chemicals or electrical charges acting on the brain (there is a lot of work in neuroscience being done now to quantify religious experience in terms of chemistry or electrical activity in the brain).

A more relevant question is: Will we have an emotional response when we "feel" God's presence? Yes. At least for some people. Some of the time. Part of our makeup as human beings is emotional, and to exclude emotional response from religious experience is to deny part of who we are (the prayers of the Psalter are intensely emotive prayers).

The complication is that emotions are linked to a wide range of factors, such as prior experience, overall physical and psychological health (which affects body chemistry), immediate physical and psychological state, present circumstances, immediate context, influence of others (the "crowd" factor), conditioning (emotional response can be practiced), personality types, cultural or sociological expectations, etc.

That suggests the expectation of a particular emotional response from a large group of people in a given situation is probably misguided. If it is expected, then we often end up with various kinds of manipulation (the classic "sad story" of revivalism, the deliberate instruction in how to speak in "tongues" in some Pentecostal circles, or the use of gimmicks such as slapping people on the forehead to induce, or signal, being "slain in the Spirit").

Again, is there genuine emotional response to God? Absolutely! But I have become convinced that it is exceedingly personal, will not happen on cue, and cannot be forced. Even then, it can never be used as a criterion for the depth of spirituality or of the validity of any particular context. I have seen too many people in worship who expressed emotion that had little to do with worship, and far more to do with other factors in their life.

On the other hand, perhaps worship is a good place to deal with those other factors and their emotions. Perhaps God meets us where we are and calls us by his grace to move beyond where we are. I think that is a profoundly emotional journey for many.

That is why I get really irritated at the style of worship that insists on forcing happy, hand-clapping "praise" on people from the beginning of a service without ever allowing people to enter worship from the reality of their own lives, without ever allowing the movement from hurt to joy, or as the psalmist says "out of the depths" to "hope in the Lord" (Psa. 130). But then that's so, hmmm, . . . biblical.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[David Gerber]

That is why I get really irritated at the style of worship that insists on forcing happy, hand-clapping "praise" on people from the beginning of a service without ever allowing people to enter worship from the reality of their own lives, without ever allowing the movement from hurt to joy, or as the psalmist says "out of the depths" to "hope in the Lord" (Psa. 130). But then that's so, hmmm, . . . biblical.

I do not always enter His gates with thanksgiving in my heart. I do not always enter His courts with praise. Sometimes the weight of the world is on my shoulders.

it would be my hope that worship is focused on God, acknowledging from whence we have come and trust that God is able to help us at our point of need. Manufacturing emotions is one thing, allowing me to cry during any part of the service is another.

[David Pettigrew]

I guess my point is that our movement has always been very experience oriented, and humans are very much emotional beings. Is it necessarily a bad thing to seek God at the emotional level, as our emotional needs must be met one way or the other.

When I was at SNU, we once had a black preacher by the name of Richard Allen Farmer as a chapel speaker. It's amazing I still recall his name, as I haven't thought about this in years. He spoke of the importance of emotional expression in the black church culture, which rose out of oppression. Worship was an outlet for the difficulties faced throughout the week, and became cathartic in nature, thus the exuberance.

Our people were mostly from the wrong side of the tracks in our formative years. Perhaps something similar was going on, which explains how exuberance in worship became so central to the holiness experience. Did affluence contribute to its demise, and as we are rediscovering the place of the oppressed, does it bear revisiting? I'm speaking from a Western perspective, of course.

[Ryan Plott]

I guess my point is that our movement has always been very experience oriented, and humans are very much emotional beings. Is it necessarily a bad thing to seek God at the emotional level, as our emotional needs must be met one way or the other.

I think our tradition has been experience oriented because we see experience as a vital part of conversion. And by "our tradition" I am speaking of Christianity as a whole. Paul, Augustine, Ignatius Loyola, and John Wesley could serve as examples of this. Encountering God experientially has been a key component in the conversion process of many Christians. It's something that needs to be embraced and honored. It's just that conversion is the beginning of the Christian life, not the end. I don't know if we really should be expecting a mountain-top experience every time we worship.

However, I don't think God really exists to make us happy or well-balanced emotionally. I get really frustrated in my counseling classes because the end goal for modern-day counselors seems to be to make the client avoid all pain and discomfort. We are told to communicate to the client the idea that the greatest way to spend their life is pain free and emotionally fulfilled, not necessarily in our words but in our actions and methods of treatment. This is a false idea, both Scripturally and psychologically. Our emotional needs don't need to be met in order to serve God. I definitely don't think Jesus' emotional needs were met as he was crucified! Viktor Frankl, a Jewish psychotherapist, talks about pain being an integral part of the human condition. I don't want to get to much into it but his book "Logotherapy: Man's Search for Meaning" is a great piece on suffering and he would know, as he was a concentration-camp survivor. As has been pointed out already, sometimes our worship is narcissistic in nature.


When I was at SNU, we once had a black preacher by the name of Richard Allen Farmer as a chapel speaker. It's amazing I still recall his name, as I haven't thought about this in years. He spoke of the importance of emotional expression in the black church culture, which rose out of oppression. Worship was an outlet for the difficulties faced throughout the week, and became cathartic in nature, thus the exuberance.

It's definitely good to express emotion to God. The black church is always a good example of how a marginalized people found hope in the gospel. I love reading and hearing about their experiences.


Our people were mostly from the wrong side of the tracks in our formative years. Perhaps something similar was going on, which explains how exuberance in worship became so central to the holiness experience. Did affluence contribute to its demise, and as we are rediscovering the place of the oppressed, does it bear revisiting? I'm speaking from a Western perspective, of course.

I don't know. Not having the experience that the black church had could definitely be a contributing factor.

This is a really good thread David. Really great questions and ideas. Thanks for posting it!

[Paul DeBaufer]

I don't think God really exists to make us happy or well-balanced emotionally. I get really frustrated in my counseling classes because the end goal for modern-day counselors seems to be to make the client avoid all pain and discomfort. We are told to communicate to the client the idea that the greatest way to spend their life is pain free and emotionally fulfilled, not necessarily in our words but in our actions and methods of treatment. This is a false idea, both Scripturally and psychologically. Our emotional needs don't need to be met in order to serve God. I definitely don't think Jesus' emotional needs were met as he was crucified! Viktor Frankl, a Jewish psychotherapist, talks about pain being an integral part of the human condition.

I have been attending a marriage series at a nearby mega-church lead by Dr. Ronn Elmore (Why is it I want to add James to the end of his name, making him Ronn Elmore James (lol)) who this week told us that in the 20th century emotions have taken primacy in identity o0f self and in all of our relationships and that was just wrong, we are NOT our emotions.

then today I read from Henri Nouwen:

What We Feel Is Not Who We Are

Our emotional lives move up and down constantly. Sometimes we experience great mood swings: from excitement to depression, from joy to sorrow, from inner harmony to inner chaos. A little event, a word from someone, a disappointment in work, many things can trigger such mood swings. Mostly we have little control over these changes. It seems that they happen to us rather than being created by us.

Thus it is important to know that our emotional life is not the same as our spiritual life. Our spiritual life is the life of the Spirit of God within us. As we feel our emotions shift we must connect our spirits with the Spirit of God and remind ourselves that what we feel is not who we are. We are and remain, whatever our moods, God's beloved children.


So, Hank, I am with you in the frustration with Modern therapy, especially the pop, self-help kind that focus on emotion and the avoidance of pain. I think that this therapeutic/pop psychology, self-help crap of identifying the person with emotions leaves God out of the mix.

More on topic: I have had emotional encounters with God. I oft find standing in His presence something that affects all of me, yet there are times when I don't have that emotional experience, but still know I am in His presence.

[Debi Peck]

I think if we aren't very careful, "seeking an emotional experience" can become the goal, instead of "seeking God." If I may speak from very personal experience:

I was raised in the midst of two emotional extremes. My immediate family were not particularly emotional. My dad prided himself on his stoic "Mr. Spock" emotional control. On the opposite side is my dad's extended family who are extremely emotional, especially in religious settings. They were part of a church which pulled out of the Nazarene church. Their services were marked by lots of shouting, running the aisles, loud crying, loud praying, etc. Emotionalism became synonymous with spirituality. The message was that if you were saved, sanctified, "right with God", you would be emotional. Coming from a more emotionally repressive family, I struggled in my relatives' church environment even as a small child.

There is no doubt that God's presence was "felt" in these services. God is faithful to people who seek Him. Since my family remained in (or rather, returned to) the Nazarene church, my dad's family made sure we knew we were going to hell. Without going into the whole long story, I'll just mention a couple of strong messages I received as a young child. One was that the only prayer of a sinner God hears is that of one asking forgiveness. The other was that, like I already mentioned, if you were "right with God" you would be "blessed" (read: emotional) in your worship.

Putting all this together in the mind of a young child, I came away with some very wrong perceptions. Although I gave my heart to Jesus when I was four, my relatives said I wasn't a Christian. Experiencing what I now recognize as God's presence as a child who was told she wasn't "saved" and being confused about my salvation, whenever I was in their services and felt "God's presence," I would think I was under conviction. God's "felt" presence became synonymous in my young mind with conviction. When I was about nine years old, emotionally, I shut down.

For most of my life since then, I have "sought God," by which I mean I sought an emotional sense of His presence. I recognize now that due to the spiritual abuse within that other church and within my family, my ability to experience emotion was extremely limited. However, I sought all those years, thinking I wasn't "finding God" because I wasn't experiencing some emotion which church people assured me I would feel. I don't exaggerate at all when I say "seeking God" (seeking what I had been taught was God's presence) led to my emotional and mental breakdown as a young woman. I've been in counseling for a couple of years dealing with this specific issue, relearning how to experience emotion.

Church is the most difficult place for me. Although I have missed very few services in my entire life, it is difficult to go to church Sunday after Sunday and not feel anything. When others around me are praising and worshiping God, raising hands, eyes closed, radiant in God's presence, I feel nothing. My desire and choice to follow God hasn't wavered in all these years. I am as surrendered to God, as "consecrated" as I know how to be. Yet, I still feel nothing.

I say all that just to say: Be careful in emphasizing an "emotional experience." Be mindful and gentle towards those of us who may never experience this, and be sure never to measure our spirituality by our emotional response. I am hopeful that someday I will be emotionally healthy again and be able to experience feeling those wonderful emotions, but if I never do, I am learning to trust God in spite of that.

[Billie Goodson]

Debi and Dennis both said something that struck the same chord with me. Often in our churches we are looking for an emotional indication of the presence of God in someone's life. That can cause some odd responses.

Two stories that relate my perception of how this plays out --

Sitting in a service and worshiping and the worship leader stops singing/leading to chastise the congregation for not "being in the spirit". Unless we were clapping along with the leader, we were not "in the spirit". I cannot clap and sing at the same time. That seems to amaze some people. I can sing (though not well) and tap my foot, or even tap my hand to my side. I can clap and usually maintain rhythm. I cannot sing and clap both hands and stay in rhythm. My singing is probably also effected but since I do that so poorly anyway, it probably goes unnoticed. Seriously, I have tried. I have clapped and tried to sing. My clapping becomes horribly out of rhythm in about 6 beats. So, while I felt I was worshiping before they stopped, it was now pointed out to me that I was clearly not. I never really did get back into worship that day. This leader also had a habit of doing that almost any time they led, we didn't go there much longer.

I once arrived at church with 3 of my daughter having ridden with me. On the way, a topic had been brought up that caused us to arrive at church in a somewhat somber mood. It was a good conversation and I felt it was very relevant to why we sometimes need to be in church. When we got there, I was able to shift from the somber to "happy" mood a little more artificially so I was able to face a greeter with a smile on my face. My teens were not so fortunate. What they were greeted with was "you need to smile so people know that Jesus loves you." Needless to say, my kids still think that person was an insensitive jerk, no matter how hard to try to get them to think differently. He never understood why my kids avoided him after that. The one conversation I had with him about it resulted in him telling me how people come to church to be free from their problems, so if we don't show them the joy of Jesus, we aren't helping them.

Also mixed into those stories is my own personality. When I sense someone is doing something for an emotional response, I will often shut down. Because of many different factors, I tend to be more private personally and will strongly resist public emotions. You push for an emotional response and I will quickly be thinking of something entirely different from what you are talking about. You want my emotions -- you have to engage my brain. I can read a sentence and be moved to tears. I can sing all day and music will seldom do that for me. Yet, we often feel that worship is our singing and clapping. I will appreciate it when we understand that worship is not an action but an act.

So, I think emotional response flows from our experiences with God. You can't be in the presence of God and not be moved. Just how that "moved" is may be different. When I see Jesus, will I dance or in awe of him be still, will I stand in his presence or to my knees will I fall -- I can only imagine. When we find ways to connect people to the Spirit of God, we will see lives changed. To that, we will most likely see emotional responses. When we strive for an emotional response, we are taking a short cut that may yield results, but it is like the seeds on hard ground that might sprout for a season.

[Billy Cox]

Our tradition has always valued feeling God's presence.

Is it still important to seek an emotional experience? Do we still need to cry?

I'm thinking of emotional response to grace in corporate gathering and private prayer. Do we still value experiencing God with our mammalian brain?

Great topic Dave. I don't have time right now to dive in, but want to get in a quick response.

In my experience, the Nazarene church seems very much like the Church of Mister Spock. I think that past fights with charismatic infiltration may have left the CoTN (at least in my experience) very fearful of any public emotion. We are hypersensitive to the mere suggestion that doing 'x' in worship might qualify as emotional manipulation or that by singing 'y' we are trying to 'manufacture an emotional response.'

I have serious doubts that those concerns are well-placed. The main question I have (and I was going to keep this short, d'oh!) is whether publicly expressed emotion is any less 'real' if a preacher or worship leader knowingly or unknowingly provides the right cues.

[David Pettigrew]

Ok, from reading everyone's responses I see two dangers:

1) That we equate "getting happy" with being spiritual.
2) That we equate "getting happy" with being fake.

I have been on both ends of this spectrum. Debi, my own childhood resonates with your experience. And, as I just stated in another thread, I get really bothered, to the point of being angry, when I'm "forced" to stand and sing for extended periods. Like, more than a normal person would, so there's obviously something there.

On the other hand, I fear some of us that have especially rediscovered what it really means to be Wesleyan, and where the AHM may have missed the boat, have perhaps thrown out the emotional baby with the emotionalism bath water.

Great conversation, all.

[Debi Peck]

David, having seen your name on another forum (X-***), I suspect you really do understand where I am coming from. Having also been on both ends, I am trying to find a healthy balance. What I see in my Nazarene church here seems to be really genuine, and that is helping me. There is room for a whole spectrum of worshipful responses, with hands upraised, eyes closed, eyes open, smiles and tears, even a few shouts (mostly from the late-20's to early-30's crowd.) There is also room for us who are not as healthy emotionally and those who simply aren't as emotionally expressive. We are not condemned for our lack of emotion. No, "If you're here this morning and you don't feel God's presence, there's something wrong with you!" excoriating which I grew up hearing. None of the condemnation. There is a healthy appreciation for emotional responses, too, with a recognition that as people draw closer and closer to God, they usually do experience Him emotionally. My pastor and I have spoken at length about this very topic, and he has treated me with such gentleness and respect, helping me work through the many false messages I grew up with in regard to worship.

I long for the day when I can have freedom in worship, freedom to experience God at the emotional level, but, again, if that doesn't happen for me, I can still trust God and trust His word that I am in relationship with Him regardless of what I do or don't feel.

Thanks for bringing this topic up!

[David Gerber]

Ok, from reading everyone's responses I see two dangers:

1) That we equate "getting happy" with being spiritual.
2) That we equate "getting happy" with being fake.

I have been on both ends of this spectrum. Debi, my own childhood resonates with your experience. And, as I just stated in another thread, I get really bothered, to the point of being angry, when I'm "forced" to stand and sing for extended periods. Like, more than a normal person would, so there's obviously something there.

On the other hand, I fear some of us that have especially rediscovered what it really means to be Wesleyan, and where the AHM may have missed the boat, have perhaps thrown out the emotional baby with the emotionalism bath water.

Great conversation, all.

Maybe that is one of the problems. We have equated worship with 'happy' and not with joy. Joy, as far as I have been taught, is not dependent upon my circumstances. I am happy when things are going well. I am happy when I have money in the bank (and pocket). I am happy ___________. I am unhappy when... However, I can be joyful always, regardless of circumstances.

Also, when happy becomes the focus, it becomes a compounded issue. Not everyone gets happy with the same things. Or, I focus on what makes me happy and universalize that for everyone.

Maybe that is the power of the Liturgy.

Also, I refuse to throw out emotional bath water. Seriously, that could be a pretty cool bath time...or not.

[Billy Cox]

Also, I refuse to throw out emotional bath water. Seriously, that could be a pretty cool bath time...or not.

That's the funny thing about bathwater. You don't typically mind soaking in your own bathwater, but soaking in someone else's bathwater is kind of gross. :)

[David Graham]

Good point Billy, while I don't mind basking in my own meaningful experience of God I'm not sure that it is wise to soak (or be forced to soak) too long in another's experience. And yet there is the idea of a "corporate experience" which we can share together when God is particularly "near" us. We run into trouble however, when we expect that same kind of corporate experience again and again or seek to "produce" that "feeling" again.

Blessings,
Dave

[Roland Hearn]

I have no idea what the arbitrary distinction between joy and happiness is. As far as I have seen in application it is one of those weasel word definitions. I've seen a lot of people that claimed joy without happiness and they looked pretty joyless to me too. You show me the person that has genuine joy and I will show you a person that knows what true happiness is. I absolutely dispise that distinction. It seems to me it is the excuse for people that do not know what real joy is. If you equate happiness with being giggly and bouncy then I get it but that isn't what I understand happiness to be.

Definitions:
Happiness: good fortune; pleasure; contentment; joy.
Joy: the emotion of great delight or happiness

[Susan Unger]

I guess my point is that our movement has always been very experience oriented, and humans are very much emotional beings. Is it necessarily a bad thing to seek God at the emotional level, as our emotional needs must be met one way or the other.

When I was at SNU, we once had a black preacher by the name of Richard Allen Farmer as a chapel speaker. It's amazing I still recall his name, as I haven't thought about this in years. He spoke of the importance of emotional expression in the black church culture, which rose out of oppression. Worship was an outlet for the difficulties faced throughout the week, and became cathartic in nature, thus the exuberance.

Our people were mostly from the wrong side of the tracks in our formative years. Perhaps something similar was going on, which explains how exuberance in worship became so central to the holiness experience. Did affluence contribute to its demise, and as we are rediscovering the place of the oppressed, does it bear revisiting? I'm speaking from a Western perspective, of course.Interesting thought. While I can see this as a good reason for why their worship is so expressive, from my own experience [and others'] after a while it seemed to folks that exuberance was the purpose of the service, not a possible by product of one's time with God.

I don't think it bears revisiting as I have heard sermons in which I am told that there is something wrong with me if I am not exuberant enough in the eyes' of the preacher.

[Susan Unger]

When I was about nine years old, emotionally, I shut down.For most of my life since then, I have "sought God," by which I mean I sought an emotional sense of His presence. I recognize now that due to the spiritual abuse within that other church and within my family, my ability to experience emotion was extremely limited. However, I sought all those years, thinking I wasn't "finding God" because I wasn't experiencing some emotion which church people assured me I would feel. I don't exaggerate at all when I say "seeking God" (seeking what I had been taught was God's presence) led to my emotional and mental breakdown as a young woman. I've been in counseling for a couple of years dealing with this specific issue, relearning how to experience emotion.I feel for you greatly. While not as extreme as your situation, I can relate to your experiences in a messed up church/family environment. It is so sad to see the destruction that can occur in what should be the safest place for a person.


Church is the most difficult place for me. Although I have missed very few services in my entire life, it is difficult to go to church Sunday after Sunday and not feel anything. When others around me are praising and worshiping God, raising hands, eyes closed, radiant in God's presence, I feel nothing. My desire and choice to follow God hasn't wavered in all these years. I am as surrendered to God, as "consecrated" as I know how to be. Yet, I still feel nothing. I am with you here, too. Church utterly exhausts me, especially the Sunday AM service, thus leading to it being difficult to go to every Sunday. And I can never say on my FB page like so many others can "Had a great time in Church today!" Then this month it dawned on me, a church in which "others around me are praising and worshiping God, raising hands, eyes closed, radiant in God's presence" is really a church for extroverts. I am am introvert. When I have gone to my friend's Stations of the Cross sevices or the local Episcopal Church in which the only worshipping done is lots of kneeling, praying and taking communion, I have felt like I authentically worshipped. I didn't have any great emotions during these services but just a sense of peace and rest that stayed with me the rest of the day. This fits my introverted self much better.

[Charlotte 'Mercer' Burton]

I think the problem I have with "seeking" an emotional experience with God is that generally, there is a certain emotion or set of emotions that my society implicitly or explicitly tells me are the "right" ones. I am allowed to feel happy, peaceful, thankful, introspective, etc. If I wind up experiencing an emotion or a frame of mind that is not on the list of acceptable responses, though, then I feel like I must be doing something wrong. The problem for me isn't that I don't feel; it's that I feel the "wrong things." There are times when I'm not at peace; instead I'm stressed, drained, hopeless, depressed. And sometimes I don't feel like that's allowed. It seems like if I make it to the end of the service and do not feel happy, or at least at peace, then I must not have really interacted with God right.

I think I generally just dislike feeling like social rules (such as the unspoken rule that says we must feel what those around us feel or that we must appear to have it all together) are turned falsely into moral rules. To me, social rules sometimes seem rather arbitrary, and they are certainly not always the most genuine or loving ways of acting. Yet at many churches it can seem like if I do not follow these social rules closely enough, then I have stumbled morally and am not following or encountering or respecting God as much as I should. This habit of declaring social rules to be moral rules seems to be to be both unbiblical and unloving.

[Kami Tuenning]

...

So, Hank, I am with you in the frustration with Modern therapy, especially the pop, self-help kind that focus on emotion and the avoidance of pain. I think that this therapeutic/pop psychology, self-help crap of identifying the person with emotions leaves God out of the mix .


The Catholic Church was/is the only group I have been aware of in my 48 years which told me that my suffering was not only a necessary part of the human experience, but that it was redemptive. Not in the sense that something was lacking in Christ's self-offering, but because there is something lacking in myself. Suffering affords us a means of grace to know Him, be transformed by Him and to offer ourselves for others, for Him. Having experienced much suffering in the past and present, to make sense of suffering draws us to Him as he teaches us all the lessons of holiness which can only be borne out of pain. I recently watched a YouTube clip of my beloved Fred Rogers. He was appearing as a guest on the Rosie O'Donnell show and offers her a gift he brought for her. A sea shell. Taking the shell in his hand, he dipped the tip of a finger from his other hand into a mug of water sitting on the corner of Rosie's desk. As Mr. Rogers rubbed the water in circular motions across the top of the shell, he began to tell Rosie that sea shells remind him of life. He showed her the shiny wet shell and asked her if she thought it looked more beautiful now than it did when he first handed it to her. Why yes it does, replied O'Donnell. That's because all the sweat and tears of our life make our lives shine like this shell. They bring beauty to our life (forgive my broad paraphrasing!)

With or without emotions, one who has walked through the valley of the shadow of death with God, will stand close to his side. When the rare moments of emotion coincide with profound encounter, it is a small foretaste of what is to come. What is most important is to have fortitude when our emotions are as ice, when we are numb from all senses. That is the place we grow.

[Susan Unger]

The Catholic Church was/is the only group I have been aware of in my 48 years which told me that my suffering was ...redemptive. .The 1990s was the worst decade of my life...even worse than this decade in which I had cancer and abusive doctors. The reason why is because in the 90s, all I heard around me from Christians was that if I was suffering then it was my fault. Either I hadn't prayed enough, given enough on the altar, said yes enough to God, hadn't clapped enough with joy, hadn't rebuked the enemy enough or I had some sin in my life that I hadn't given over to God, blah blah blah. This really depressed me as I knew none of that was true. One day as I was complaining to God about this I felt led to watch some bio of a Catholic saint. It was what I needed at that moment as it helped me to honestly acknowledge how I felt about what was going on around me instead of denying the pain. Redemptive I think is a good word to describe how I felt that day.

[Hans Deventer]

I am with you here, too. Church utterly exhausts me, especially the Sunday AM service, thus leading to it being difficult to go to every Sunday. And I can never say on my FB page like so many others can "Had a great time in Church today!" Then this month it dawned on me, a church in which "others around me are praising and worshiping God, raising hands, eyes closed, radiant in God's presence" is really a church for extroverts. I am am introvert. When I have gone to my friend's Stations of the Cross sevices or the local Episcopal Church in which the only worshipping done is lots of kneeling, praying and taking communion, I have felt like I authentically worshipped. I didn't have any great emotions during these services but just a sense of peace and rest that stayed with me the rest of the day. This fits my introverted self much better.

Amen! That's why I like our services in the Holy Week the best. Not that I enjoy gloom and sadness, but I love the quiet reverence in those services.

[David Gerber]

I have no idea what the arbitrary distinction between joy and happiness is. As far as I have seen in application it is one of those weasel word definitions. I've seen a lot of people that claimed joy without happiness and they looked pretty joyless to me too. You show me the person that has genuine joy and I will show you a person that knows what true happiness is. I absolutely dispise that distinction. It seems to me it is the excuse for people that do not know what real joy is. If you equate happiness with being giggly and bouncy then I get it but that isn't what I understand happiness to be.

Definitions:
Happiness: good fortune; pleasure; contentment; joy.
Joy: the emotion of great delight or happiness

So Roland, don't hold back, how do you really feel about the distinction between 'happy' and 'joy'? "Despise" is pretty strong. I'm going to guess that you are neither filled with joy or happiness at my post.

I did a quick search on one of my Bible programs and found this definition. Seriously, this can't devolve into a Greek/Hebrew discussion as all I have are computer programs with which I have limited understanding. I guess this is for my own defense as to why I posted what I did. To be fair, it appears that some of the words are the same for 'joy' and 'happy'.

The believer's joy is produced within, by the Holy Spirit (Lk 10:21; Ro 14:17; Gal 5:22; 1 Th 1:6). The joy of the pagan is found in God's material blessings (Ac 14:17), but the Christian's joy is unique in that it is an outcome of salvation (Ac 8:8; 16:34) found through trust in God (Ro 15:13).

"The NT often links joy with persecution. Jesus spoke in prayer of the antagonism of the world to him and to his followers and asked that his followers might have "the full measure" of his joy within them (Jn 17:13). The reaction of the early missionaries to persecution was a glowing, inner joy that seemed to deny circumstances (Ac 13:52; cf. 2 Co 7:4; Jas 1:2). In his first epistle, Peter describes the believer's joy despite suffering: "In this [salvation] you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith--of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire--may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls" (1 Pe 1:6-9). The saving work of God within us provides an inexpressible joy, whatever our circumstances."

So, I'll leave the discussion to smarter people than myself.

My apologies for the offense. I think you make a decent point, even if you sound miffed in the process.

[David Pettigrew]

Just last week, I heard a speaker use the phrase I've heard all my life - "If you don't feel THAT, your wood's wet!"

Gee, I hate that phrase.

[Susan Unger]

Just last week, I heard a speaker use the phrase I've heard all my life - "If you don't feel THAT, your wood's wet!"

Gee, I hate that phrase.

Oh my..... :smilies1722:

[and I would hate it for the emotional manipulation, too...which I am sure is a part of your point of your post].

[Dennis Bratcher]

Then this month it dawned on me, a church in which "others around me are praising and worshiping God, raising hands, eyes closed, radiant in God's presence" is really a church for extroverts. I am an introvert.

I have tried to say exactly this in various ways over the years, but this puts it succinctly. To expect a single type of emotional response or physical reaction to something as profoundly personal as an encounter with the living God is to ignore how God has actually created human beings with all their diversity.

I think there is far more truth to this simple observation than we have ever been willing to acknowledge or explore. Perhaps it is another of those areas where we have ignored what science has been saying about human beings to our own detriment.

I have no data to support it, but I suspect that many, if not most, "worship leaders" are extroverts by the very nature of what they do. I do know that it is hard for extroverts to relate to introverts since they have difficulty comprehending how introverts function.

A complicating factor is social conditioning, in which younger people are conditioned to participate in group events in exuberant ways (sports, concerts, etc.). There is a point at which group dynamics overrides personal preferences. We (the Church) have simply not done much work on these factors in religious experience.

An interesting stat: Only about 35-40% of the general population in America are introverts, yet about 60-65% of those considered "gifted" (defined primarily in terms of IQ) are introverts. Not sure what the means in terms of the Church, just interesting (several sources, for example, here (http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/introvert.htm) and here (http://talentdevelop.com/articles/GiftIntrov.html)).

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Paul DeBaufer]

Two years ago our church rented the facilities to a youth group from a very Pentecostal type church for their winter retreat (we are not that far from the snow and skiing).
Friday evenings we had Celebrate Recovery (CR) and that's when this group began to arrive. We were actually hosting a concert for CR which because of rules was for over 18 only. Anyway, this group came in and used our old choir room (the rest of the week-end they had several more). When I would go down that way, which I did to invite the adults to the concert, I heard rhythmic, hypnotic music and the kids were sequestered to that room, while the adults rotated through to be the leaders. this continued on until after I left after 11 pm.

On Sunday they went up to the snow. They had the facilities until Monday late afternoon. Well Monday morning I went in to work, my office was the tech booth and this group had the multi-purpose room. I had the roll down window coverings down but could hear what was going on. the leader was up on stage with the loud, hypnotic music playing telling these kids about the response he was looking for from them. More than a little weirded out by the manipulation of an emotional response I left for the main office for a while. When i got back the emotional manipulation was getting what I perceived as more frenzied. It wasn't long until kids were falling on the floor, crying, shaking, speaking in tongues, full-on emotional responses.

All in all I believe that the emotional responses from these kids had been manipulated. This after an entire weekend of filling these kids with expectations and that IF they are true believers then they will show it through one of these extreme emotional responses.

I find emotional response reprehensible. However, I do not want to go so far as to discount genuine, spontaneous emotional response to God. But as has been mentioned sometimes emotional responses are forced by a wrong teaching that it is necessary IF one is saved.

[Susan Unger]

An interesting stat: Only about 35-40% of the general population in America are introverts, yet about 60-65% of those considered "gifted" (defined primarily in terms of IQ) are introverts. Not sure what the means in terms of the Church, just interesting (several sources, for example, here (http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/introvert.htm) and here (http://talentdevelop.com/articles/GiftIntrov.html)).

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

This explains to me why I have often felt underappreciated in church, or even unwanted. My gifts don't fit the extrovert mold.

[Paul DeBaufer]

This explains to me why I have often felt underappreciated in church, or even unwanted. My gifts don't fit the extrovert mold.

I understand this intimately. And for me when I force myself over that threshold to be assertive I feel I come off as a jerk (which over the years i have become comfortable with).

[Roland Hearn]

So Roland, don't hold back, how do you really feel about the distinction between 'happy' and 'joy'? "Despise" is pretty strong. I'm going to guess that you are neither filled with joy or happiness at my post.

I did a quick search on one of my Bible programs and found this definition. Seriously, this can't devolve into a Greek/Hebrew discussion as all I have are computer programs with which I have limited understanding. I guess this is for my own defense as to why I posted what I did. To be fair, it appears that some of the words are the same for 'joy' and 'happy'.

The believer's joy is produced within, by the Holy Spirit (Lk 10:21; Ro 14:17; Gal 5:22; 1 Th 1:6). The joy of the pagan is found in God's material blessings (Ac 14:17), but the Christian's joy is unique in that it is an outcome of salvation (Ac 8:8; 16:34) found through trust in God (Ro 15:13).

"The NT often links joy with persecution. Jesus spoke in prayer of the antagonism of the world to him and to his followers and asked that his followers might have "the full measure" of his joy within them (Jn 17:13). The reaction of the early missionaries to persecution was a glowing, inner joy that seemed to deny circumstances (Ac 13:52; cf. 2 Co 7:4; Jas 1:2). In his first epistle, Peter describes the believer's joy despite suffering: "In this [salvation] you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith--of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire--may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls" (1 Pe 1:6-9). The saving work of God within us provides an inexpressible joy, whatever our circumstances."

So, I'll leave the discussion to smarter people than myself.

My apologies for the offense. I think you make a decent point, even if you sound miffed in the process.

Absolutely agree but how is that different from happiness? I will tell you why I use such strong language. I have been in the church my whole life and watched people defend emotionless, victory-less, judgmental, condescending, rejecting, isolating spirituality by saying things like, "my world is so filled with trouble and despair but at least I have the joy of the Holy Spirit." And it means absolutely nothing in the way they live their lives or interact with others. I have known deep trouble, despair and emotional agony in my life but it is the process of rediscovering the centrality of Christ in my life that restores joy and every time he does happiness is a part of the equation. I think the distinction is an arbitrary one that allows us to mean something else other than "joy." Perhaps we can define the two by saying something about the one being a deep emotion and the other being a more superficial one but that is why I say it is arbitrary. What does that joy look like that does not have happiness? What difference is it making in our lives. Give me a troubled, joyous, happy people every time over people going through a routine ritualised procession of faith that is soulless.

[Roland Hearn]

I'm an introvert. Absolutely and completely, ask anyone that knows me deeply. I have pastored for 25 years overcoming the limitations that can create and using the benefits it offers. Every time I am with a group of people I leave completely exhausted. We had a church Hangi last night with over 70 people, more than half I had never met before, we were doing it to build relationships. I spent the night with constant conversations in my head about how to interact with people in a way that would be warm and inviting. So I know what it is to be an introvert. I am not convinced that there is a link between being an introvert and the kind of worship I respond to.

[Dennis Bratcher]

Absolutely agree but how is that different from happiness? I will tell you why I use such strong language. I have been in the church my whole life and watched people defend emotionless, victory-less, judgmental, condescending, rejecting, isolating spirituality by saying things like, "my world is so filled with trouble and despair but at least I have the joy of the Holy Spirit." And it means absolutely nothing in the way they live their lives or interact with others. I have known deep trouble, despair and emotional agony in my life but it is the process of rediscovering the centrality of Christ in my life that restores joy and every time he does happiness is a part of the equation. I think the distinction is an arbitrary one that allows us to mean something else other than "joy." Perhaps we can define the two by saying something about the one being a deep emotion and the other being a more superficial one but that is why I say it is arbitrary. What does that joy look like that does not have happiness? What difference is it making in our lives. Give me a troubled, joyous, happy people every time over people going through a routine ritualised procession of faith that is soulless.

I appreciate the background for your aversion to a distinction between "joy" and "happiness." Within that context I would tend to agree.

However, on a broader scale I think this is a false dichotomy between "victory-less, judgmental, condescending, rejecting, isolating spirituality" and "happy people," or between "people going through a routine ritualised procession of faith that is soulless" and "troubled, joyous, happy people." Most people, I suspect, who have any kind of vital Christianity, are somewhere between these two poles at any given time.

I do think that joy and happiness are different things, that a person can have joy and not be especially happy at the moment. And I do think that "happy" has far more of an emotional component, which means it is temporary and transitory, while joy is more a characteristic of a person, more of a state of mind. Or as C. S. Lewis talked about it, joy is a commitment to a journey, following that deep desire of the soul for God, for a "home-country" in which we do not yet live, a longing that evokes at the same time both a profound sense of peace as well as pain, an ache for that which we do not yet possess fully.

C. S. Lewis, who wrote a lot about his own journey to joy (Surprised by Joy, The Pilgrims Regress, or the collected excerpts of his writings that was named The Joyful Christian) made such a distinction, although he tended to define joy in a specific sense. For Lewis, happiness was associated with pleasure, while joy was a commitment of life to something beyond ourselves.

Now, I understand that Lewis' is a more specialized sense of joy than we usually talk about. Still, I think it provides a good example of a legitimate distinction between joy (Jews might say shalom) and happiness. That is why I don't think we can interchange "joy" and "happiness" in Galatians 5:22 (or Rom 14:17, 15:13). Yet I would be quick to acknowledge that Scripture does not make the same distinction that Lewis does, at least not by specific terms, and often uses the same word to refer to joy (in the deeper sense) and happiness (in a circumstantial sense), without necessarily collapsing the two ideas.

I guess all that says that I think I understand why some people make the distinction between joy as an inner state and happiness as an emotional response to circumstance. Yet I also agree that happiness and joy certainly go together. That is, as long as we do not begin to impose legal criteria that demand that they always look the same. My experience says that they do not and will not.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Roland Hearn]

I appreciate the background for your aversion to a distinction between "joy" and "happiness." Within that context I would tend to agree.

However, on a broader scale I think this is a false dichotomy between "victory-less, judgmental, condescending, rejecting, isolating spirituality" and "happy people," or between "people going through a routine ritualised procession of faith that is soulless" and "troubled, joyous, happy people." Most people, I suspect, who have any kind of vital Christianity, are somewhere between these two poles at any given time.

And vital Christianity is the issue. It is something, as you have seen, that I feel strongly about precisely because I have seen, not once but at a pandemic level, the claim to joy without the capacity to know happiness as a rational for lifeless spirituality. Of course we are dealing with semantics so whatever those words convey to a person is probably what they mean. I have spent, however, the majority of my ministry working with people that struggle with depression at some level and witnessed the discovery of real joy in their salvation and in the process open the door to genuine happiness.


I do think that joy and happiness are different things, that a person can have joy and not be especially happy at the moment. And I do think that "happy" has far more of an emotional component, which means it is temporary and transitory, while joy is more a characteristic of a person, more of a state of mind. Or as C. S. Lewis talked about it, joy is a commitment to a journey, following that deep desire of the soul for God, for a "home-country" in which we do not yet live, a longing that evokes at the same time both a profound sense of peace as well as pain, an ache for that which we do not yet possess fully.

C. S. Lewis, who wrote a lot about his own journey to joy (Surprised by Joy, The Pilgrims Regress, or the collected excerpts of his writings that was named The Joyful Christian) made such a distinction, although he tended to define joy in a specific sense. For Lewis, happiness was associated with pleasure, while joy was a commitment of life to something beyond ourselves.

I defer to the brilliant mind of Lewis but as you can see by the final line in this statement it is a distinction created not a necessary one. And if that is the definition people are working with I concede. However, I see happiness as enveloping the full range of emotions that includes pleasure but also includes deep soul peace. For me at the core of the issue is being able to identify yourself as Christ's and not as one battered by circumstance -in the latter happiness is transitory in the former it is a condition of life. It remains not beyond the need to process but always available.


Now, I understand that Lewis' is a more specialized sense of joy than we usually talk about. Still, I think it provides a good example of a legitimate distinction between joy (Jews might say shalom) and happiness. That is why I don't think we can interchange "joy" and "happiness" in Galatians 5:22 (or Rom 14:17, 15:13). Yet I would be quick to acknowledge that Scripture does not make the same distinction that Lewis does, at least not by specific terms, and often uses the same word to refer to joy (in the deeper sense) and happiness (in a circumstantial sense), without necessarily collapsing the two ideas.

Well it certainly provides an example of the distinction but legitimacy is the issue under debate. And I appreciate your honest reflection on the biblical understanding. It is that point that started me down the road to these strong feelings. I don't believe that genuine spirituality requires of us to live in a hyper, or even actively positive, emotional state. I do however believe that effective processing of the issues that trouble us, and in some cases it is not a quick thing, brings us to a point where happiness is restored. Is it possible to say that in those moments there is joy without happiness, well perhaps but I just haven't worked out exactly what that means. I know in my own case in my deepest despair I have been able first to find confidence, faith and trust prior to joy but when I arrive at joy there is not a long journey to a sense of well being. For me that is happiness at its core. It is my contention, as well as my observation, that for many the maintaining of this distinction brings with it no responsibility to discover the fullness of understanding that is involved in an integration of the two. There is a declaration of the one without the discovery of the other and it is in that place that the polarisation that I characterised becomes a reality. Yes, I will grant that my characterisation was extreme.


I guess all that says that I think I understand why some people make the distinction between joy as an inner state and happiness as an emotional response to circumstance. Yet I also agree that happiness and joy certainly go together. That is, as long as we do not begin to impose legal criteria that demand that they always look the same. My experience says that they do not and will not.

I understand the distinction in the positive sense but I think we rob ourselves of the genuine vitality of our relationship with Christ when we maintain that distinction. I have been on a quest in my life and ministry for vital, transformational spirituality and I have observed consistently that the distinction is often perpetuated to the mitigation of that reality.

[Susan Unger]

I am not convinced that there is a link between being an introvert and the kind of worship I respond to.

My church really is a good fit for extroverts. Preservice, we are strongly encouraged/expected to socialize especially with visitors. Then we have "exuberant worship" in which we are strongly encouraged to express our love for God through hand waving and other bodily expressions. Next comes the welcome time in which we are again expected to socialize with others especially visitors, making plenty of small talk. After church is more of the same. I come home utterly exhausted and collapse on the couch thanking God that I don't have to talk to another soul for the next 24 hours.

Meanwhile, at my friend's RCC services and at the EC services, one is strongly encouraged/expected to praying silently from the time one enters the sanctuary until the service starts. During the Peace, one does talk with others but a long chat is not expected. After the service, socializing is done outside of the sanctuary leaving me free to pray silently inside if I wish. And while many extroverts I am sure have waxed eloquently over the joys of the Eucharist, no one at the EC service has encouraged or expected me to be "exuberant" through hand waving, body swaying, etc while I participate. I can go back to my seat and pray silently some more or just think inwardly about the joy of meeting with God during communion.

For me, as I am still working through decades of emotional wounds, I have little energy reserves required for being in a church designed for extroverts. What energy I do have is spent on working through my issues through prayer and bible reading. I realized this summer that whilewhat my church does IS important, especially for the unchurched who come looking for God's love in a tangible way, it is not something I can give right now. Going to a meditative service is what I can do and will leave energize. Right now as I am healing it is what ministers to me more.

I suspect that one day once I am healed, this won't be as big an issue for me. While I don't know much about your life, I wonder if maybe the difference between how I respond and how you do would be because you have more energy reserves needed for being around others than I do?

[Sarah Smith]

I'm not a weeper generally, but when the Holy Spirit moves me to tears they come quickly and easily.

I love to clap, but nerve damage in one hand makes it painful, so seldom do.

But the quickest way to drive me OUT of a church is to make me feel you are using techniques to try and elicit emotion.

That is HIS job, not yours.

And while happiness might get me giggling, joy is so deep in my soul I just stand or sit breathless, and you will probably never even know I was overwhelmed by it.

And since it is an intimate moment with my Savior, there is no reason you need to know.

[David Gerber]

Absolutely agree but how is that different from happiness? I will tell you why I use such strong language. I have been in the church my whole life and watched people defend emotionless, victory-less, judgmental, condescending, rejecting, isolating spirituality by saying things like, "my world is so filled with trouble and despair but at least I have the joy of the Holy Spirit." And it means absolutely nothing in the way they live their lives or interact with others. I have known deep trouble, despair and emotional agony in my life but it is the process of rediscovering the centrality of Christ in my life that restores joy and every time he does happiness is a part of the equation. I think the distinction is an arbitrary one that allows us to mean something else other than "joy." Perhaps we can define the two by saying something about the one being a deep emotion and the other being a more superficial one but that is why I say it is arbitrary. What does that joy look like that does not have happiness? What difference is it making in our lives. Give me a troubled, joyous, happy people every time over people going through a routine ritualised procession of faith that is soulless.

Thanks for the background, and I would tend to agree with you. And if I am reading you correctly, some of your aversion is based on your experience, an experience that I do not share. So, when we talk about the terms, we are not only bringing in our definitions, but our experiences which make defining terms difficult. Thank you for taking the time to help me understand.

While I am an extrovert, I have often been offended by "if that don't get you going your wood's wet" kind of things. oh well, thanks for the insights. I'm not sure what this will mean for me in the future uses of these words, but it will give me pause.

[Roland Hearn]

My church really is a good fit for extroverts. Preservice, we are strongly encouraged/expected to socialize especially with visitors. Then we have "exuberant worship" in which we are strongly encouraged to express our love for God through hand waving and other bodily expressions. Next comes the welcome time in which we are again expected to socialize with others especially visitors, making plenty of small talk. After church is more of the same. I come home utterly exhausted and collapse on the couch thanking God that I don't have to talk to another soul for the next 24 hours.

Meanwhile, at my friend's RCC services and at the EC services, one is strongly encouraged/expected to praying silently from the time one enters the sanctuary until the service starts. During the Peace, one does talk with others but a long chat is not expected. After the service, socializing is done outside of the sanctuary leaving me free to pray silently inside if I wish. And while many extroverts I am sure have waxed eloquently over the joys of the Eucharist, no one at the EC service has encouraged or expected me to be "exuberant" through hand waving, body swaying, etc while I participate. I can go back to my seat and pray silently some more or just think inwardly about the joy of meeting with God during communion.

For me, as I am still working through decades of emotional wounds, I have little energy reserves required for being in a church designed for extroverts. What energy I do have is spent on working through my issues through prayer and bible reading. I realized this summer that whilewhat my church does IS important, especially for the unchurched who come looking for God's love in a tangible way, it is not something I can give right now. Going to a meditative service is what I can do and will leave energize. Right now as I am healing it is what ministers to me more.

I suspect that one day once I am healed, this won't be as big an issue for me. While I don't know much about your life, I wonder if maybe the difference between how I respond and how you do would be because you have more energy reserves needed for being around others than I do?

While I feel strongly about a distinction between joy and happiness I feel equally strongly about manipulative services. I have for the best part of two decades instructed my worship leaders to never tell people how they are to worship except making it clear when there is an expectation to stand. I refuse to have a time in worship where people are forced to greet each other. I think if people can't do that naturally out of their own sense of God's love forcing them to doesn't mean much. While I dare say the commotion of people intermingling prior to the service is not the same environment as the quiet prayerful environment you describe each service I am a part of is designed to move people to an interactive encounter moment, not through manipulation (although possibly it is true that any design can be called manipulation) but by structuring the service to impact both the head and the heart. As far as hand clapping or hand raising is concerned I want a service where those who desire such are free to and those that do not don't feel compulsion. I think that is what we have primarily achieved. In that environment I have witnessed genuine expressions of joy, like someone shouting or someone quietly remaining in prayerful pose. Most of our people are of the quiet reflective type, in fact a majority probably don't even sing out loud. I want to be a part of something where people are free to encounter God in a way that is meaningful to them but I have no doubt that the way we do it would not work for everyone. We do however have an age range of some 60-70 years and a predominance of introverted people, all seem extremely "happy" with the way they are experiencing God in this environment.

[Susan Unger]

While I feel strongly about a distinction between joy and happiness I feel equally strongly about manipulative services. I have for the best part of two decades instructed my worship leaders to never tell people how they are to worship except making it clear when there is an expectation to stand. I refuse to have a time in worship where people are forced to greet each other. I think if people can't do that naturally out of their own sense of God's love forcing them to doesn't mean much. While I dare say the commotion of people intermingling prior to the service is not the same environment as the quiet prayerful environment you describe each service I am a part of is designed to move people to an interactive encounter moment, not through manipulation (although possibly it is true that any design can be called manipulation) but by structuring the service to impact both the head and the heart. As far as hand clapping or hand raising is concerned I want a service where those who desire such are free to and those that do not don't feel compulsion. I think that is what we have primarily achieved. In that environment I have witnessed genuine expressions of joy, like someone shouting or someone quietly remaining in prayerful pose. Most of our people are of the quiet reflective type, in fact a majority probably don't even sing out loud. I want to be a part of something where people are free to encounter God in a way that is meaningful to them but I have no doubt that the way we do it would not work for everyone. We do however have an age range of some 60-70 years and a predominance of introverted people, all seem extremely "happy" with the way they are experiencing God in this environment.

I think I could enjoy a service like that.

[Billy Cox]

I find emotional response reprehensible. However, I do not want to go so far as to discount genuine, spontaneous emotional response to God. But as has been mentioned sometimes emotional responses are forced by a wrong teaching that it is necessary IF one is saved.

How do we know that the emotional response, however it comes about is not genuine?

I'm not saying it is, but I find a visceral rush to judgment to be a red flag. Are we like the people who on the day of Pentecost accused the 120 believers of being drunk?

[Dennis Bratcher]

How do we know that the emotional response, however it comes about is not genuine?

I'm not saying it is, but I find a visceral rush to judgment to be a red flag. Are we like the people who on the day of Pentecost accused the 120 believers of being drunk?

Perhaps that "visceral rush to judgement" has more to do with experience than you are allowing (a factor lacking in Acts). I agree that we cannot make judgments based solely on past experiences. But then past experience is data that become necessary factors in making judgments. And even outright prejudice often has a kernel of truth based in experience. The mistake of prejudice is not that it based on an experiential truth, but in generalizing that specific experience to include all similar situations or people without further data.

The plain reality is that we in the CofN have overused and overemphasized emotion from its beginning, whether from the Pentecostal strands of our tradition, the excesses of some brands of revivalism, or simply the influence of shallow theology combined with cultural factors (there have been several studies done on the influence of Southern Gospel on evangelicalism). I have experienced a range of all of those factors throughout my life in the CofN, in some cases far worse than others (ah, the stories that could be told).

That does not mean that we should allow such realities to become their own prejudice, or that we should try to exclude emotion based on perversions of it. But then neither can we simply pretend that those realities, and their consequences, have not and do not exist. At the very least that calls for wisdom and prudence, aspects not always employed well in our history.

Here the observation of George Santayana might be worth taking to heart: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Billie Goodson]

Perhaps that "visceral rush to judgement" has more to do with experience than you are allowing (a factor lacking in Acts). I agree that we cannot make judgments based solely on past experiences. But then past experience is data that become necessary factors in making judgments. And even outright prejudice often has a kernel of truth based in experience. The mistake of prejudice is not that it based on an experiential truth, but in generalizing that specific experience to include all similar situations or people without further data.

The plain reality is that we in the CofN have overused and overemphasized emotion from its beginning, whether from the Pentecostal strands of our tradition, the excesses of some brands of revivalism, or simply the influence of shallow theology combined with cultural factors (there have been several studies done on the influence of Southern Gospel on evangelicalism). I have experienced a range of all of those factors throughout my life in the CofN, in some cases far worse than others (ah, the stories that could be told).

That does not mean that we should allow such realities to become their own prejudice, or that we should try to exclude emotion based on perversions of it. But then neither can we simply pretend that those realities, and their consequences, have not and do not exist. At the very least that calls for wisdom and prudence, aspects not always employed well in our history.

Here the observation of George Santayana might be worth taking to heart: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

Ever wonder about those folks that rant against kids being all about clapping and dancing then pine for the days when people used to run the aisles with hankies and shouting?

On the Santayana quote -- seems it should be modified -- "Those who pine for the past would condemn it if they saw it now"...

[John Kennedy]

Ever wonder about those folks that rant against kids being all about clapping and dancing then pine for the days when people used to run the aisles with hankies and shouting?

On the Santayana quote -- seems it should be modified -- "Those who pine for the past would condemn it if they saw it now"...

I worked with a guy whose favorite response to unsettling change was, "Nothing's like it used to be. Never was."

[Marsha Lynn]

Just last week, I heard a speaker use the phrase I've heard all my life - "If you don't feel THAT, your wood's wet!"

Gee, I hate that phrase.

I think the statement needs to include something about lighting your fire to include the wet wood part. ;)

I used to fight the "I'm So Happy" war but it has been a long time since anyone tried to insist that I be happy or visibly blessed and when it does happen it doesn't get under my skin. It just makes me glad they aren't a regular part of my worship experience.

Back when we sang "O Say but I'm Glad," it drove me crazy. By the time "The Happy Song" came along, it made me smile every time, particularly the part where Nazarenes declared they would dance "a thousand miles because of [His] great love." ;) Somehow that song made it easier to look past the trouble in and around my soul and realize that at some level I could still smile because God was still on the throne. It helped a lot that no one associated with that song ever scolded us for not telling our faces about our inner happiness.

Then again, I think I'm a lot happier now than back in the days when we sang "O Say but I'm Glad." There might be a connection between the change of music and the change of attitude.

[John Kennedy]

As a church music person, some of my unhappiest memories are about pastors who were determined to conjure up enthusiastic worship come hell, high water, or the elements. Had one who didn't want to sing a particular song because it didn't have enough 'torque'. Never have figured out exactly what that was all about. Had another one whose sweet spot was 'under the spout where the glory comes out'.

I suspect, in some cases, they had problems with causal relationships - if enthusiasm was the result of something, why not turn it around and use it as a cause.

[Billy Cox]

The plain reality is that we in the CofN have overused and overemphasized emotion from its beginning, whether from the Pentecostal strands of our tradition, the excesses of some brands of revivalism, or simply the influence of shallow theology combined with cultural factors (there have been several studies done on the influence of Southern Gospel on evangelicalism). I have experienced a range of all of those factors throughout my life in the CofN, in some cases far worse than others (ah, the stories that could be told).

That does not mean that we should allow such realities to become their own prejudice, or that we should try to exclude emotion based on perversions of it. But then neither can we simply pretend that those realities, and their consequences, have not and do not exist. At the very least that calls for wisdom and prudence, aspects not always employed well in our history.

Here the observation of George Santayana might be worth taking to heart: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."


And to be fair, most of my experience with the Nazarene church has been in the sterile, post-emotionalism hangover days. I have seen the occasional spasm of emotionalism, as during my college days when the Pfeiffer singers pumped the congregation with the song 'Blessed Assurance' umpteen times until a couple of otherwise sedate people were running around in the sanctuary praising God.

At the time, I judged the music group for being manipulative, but today I'm not so sure that I should have been so judgmental. Who am I to say that someone's unusual method of publicly praising God was just some kind of manufactured frenzy or manic episode. What if that expression was real and my quiet condemnation was giving the devil a foothold? (so to speak)

What if we have put to death emotionalism and replaced it with fear of feeling and contempt for less sophisticated forms of worship?

[Dennis Bratcher]

And to be fair, most of my experience with the Nazarene church has been in the sterile, post-emotionalism hangover days. I have seen the occasional spasm of emotionalism, as during my college days when the Pfeiffer singers pumped the congregation with the song 'Blessed Assurance' umpteen times until a couple of otherwise sedate people were running around in the sanctuary praising God.

At the time, I judged the music group for being manipulative, but today I'm not so sure that I should have been so judgmental. Who am I to say that someone's unusual method of publicly praising God was just some kind of manufactured frenzy or manic episode. What if that expression was real and my quiet condemnation was giving the devil a foothold? (so to speak)

Just to place it in context, Don Pfeifer came out of the Four Square church (http://www.foursquare.org/landing_pages/4,3.html), if I remember correctly. I have seen a couple of doozie stunts he pulled in revival services (one I have recounted here before without using names), enough to conclude that your initial judgment was probably accurate. At the time he was into "signs and wonders" and the services were orchestrated toward a certain outcome (which in one case was a spectacular failure, the single worst service I have ever attended because of what it did to some people; I may tell the story sometime). I'm not sure how the later Pfeifers evolved (this was in the late 1980s).

None of that says that God did not use him. That is the nature of grace. But some of it was very clearly manipulative.


What if we have put to death emotionalism and replaced it with fear of feeling and contempt for less sophisticated forms of worship?

I do not doubt that there is some overreaction, just as there has been a similar reaction against legalism, so that we have trouble talking about morals or ethics today (although this problem doesn't get as much attention). Yet we do learn from experience, sometimes perhaps too well. Much of what Jesus had to say about Pharisees related to their attempt to avoid the same mistakes that caused the exile. So the question is valid.

On the other hand, perhaps the Holiness movement of the nineteenth century frontier was itself an overreaction to the familiar and (for the frontier) rather tame forms of worship imported from England and the Continent. Combine that with other cultural shifts, and the emotionalism from the AHM that we use as a benchmark might have been way off center. Maybe what we put to death was that exaggerated overreaction and what we ended up with was a correction that put us closer to some middle-of-the-road balance.

Also, is it possible that some of what passes for spiritual emotionalism today is itself influenced by cultural expectations imported from the group dynamics of sports and music concerts that is creating yet another overreaction back the other direction? I suspect that we are not returning to nineteenth century spirituality but are creating a new cultural response that has a significantly different shape.

I just get tired of people telling me to act a certain way in worship (not that you did so!). And it is revealing that it is always people saying to be more emotional or expressive, never to be more reserved (ever hear a cheerleading squad tell the crowd to calm down?). I just don't buy that emotional outbursts of whatever sort are that critical, necessary, or all that genuine if they have to be forced, commanded, or worked up. If worship is authentic, people will respond from where they are according to who they are without needing to be told or taught. As I mentioned in another post, encounter with God is a profoundly personal experience that elicits a personal response, even if in corporate worship.

Why are we not content to just let God work with people, and let people worship and respond in their own way?

I recall one pastor (now a DS) who spent 20 minutes at the start of a service talking about freedom of worship. He went to great lengths to make the point that everyone ought to worship in their own way, and that this church encouraged people to do so. Then, he concluded by instructing the people to get on their feet, get their hands together, and get happy. So much for freedom of worship!

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[David Pettigrew]

At the time he was into "signs and wonders" and the services were orchestrated toward a certain outcome (which in one case was a spectacular failure, the single worst service I have ever attended because of what it did to some people; I may tell the story sometime). I'm not sure how the later Pfeifers evolved (this was in the late 1980s).

Dennis B.

I'd love to hear your story.

I was on staff at a church that had a singing group come sing regularly. Our church had gone through a very ugly split, with the former pastor "planting" a church less than five miles away. He and his group came to our church, however, when this group came to sing.

While "in the spirit", one of the singers said she had a message from God that there was a spirit of unforgiveness present in the service. Of course, the group knew the situation fully well. I remember thinking "No duh, Sherlock".

(the group may or may not have been the one mentioned by Billy and Dennis ;) )

At camp meeting last summer, the speaker spent every message haranguing us about how it used to be when Nazarenes would get happy and shout and run the aisles, and that our problem today was we were too concerned with what people thought. We should just make idiots out of ourselves and not care what we looked like.

During each worship service, a special needs girl would dance wildly during the music, especially during the altar service. I thought it was strange but harmless.

I found out later from a person with platform responsibilities that the speaker had told him he needed to do something about that girl - she was getting out of control! As near as I could tell, she was the only one taking him to heart.

I apologize if these stories have been confusing. I'm doing my best to protect the guilty.

[Dennis Bratcher]

I'd love to hear your story.

It's not a pleasant story and I don't relish reliving it. I have some good memories of revival services. As a twelve year old, I made my first solid commitment to God in a revival service. But this one still brings a deep sadness.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Billy Cox]

At camp meeting last summer, the speaker spent every message haranguing us about how it used to be when Nazarenes would get happy and shout and run the aisles, and that our problem today was we were too concerned with what people thought. We should just make idiots out of ourselves and not care what we looked like.

This reminds me of that ghastly song, "Undignified". ugh!



I will dance
I will sing
To be mad
For my King
Nothing Lord
Is hindering
This passion in my soul
Chorus:
And I'll become
Even more undignified than this
Some may say
It's foolishness
But I'll become
Even more undignified than this
Leave my pride
By my side
And I'll become
Even more undignified than this
Some may say
It's foolishness
But I'll become
Even more undignified than this
Than this
La, la, la, la, la, HEY!
La, la, la, la, la
La, la, la, la, la, HEY!
La, la, la, la, la
It's all for You my Lord!

[Billy Cox]

As a church music person, some of my unhappiest memories are about pastors who were determined to conjure up enthusiastic worship come hell, high water, or the elements. Had one who didn't want to sing a particular song because it didn't have enough 'torque'. Never have figured out exactly what that was all about. Had another one whose sweet spot was 'under the spout where the glory comes out'.


'Torque' eh? wow...

[Tami Martin]

This reminds me of that ghastly song, "Undignified". ugh!

Well...that was an interesting song...made me think of David, but surely I am mistaken because David danced nekkid or at least in his skivvies. And when I think of the congregation I worship, with who are primarily grandparents, I just shudder.

[Jon Bemis]

At camp meeting last summer, the speaker spent every message haranguing us about how it used to be when Nazarenes would get happy and shout and run the aisles, and that our problem today was we were too concerned with what people thought. We should just make idiots out of ourselves and not care what we looked like.

I've known a few folks who have perfected that look. Didn't realize it was a mark of spirituality.

[Larry Parsons]

I was at camp meeting years ago, the evangelist told me tonight people will shouting and running the asile. He play on thier emotion and see this happen at other time and I knew what they were doing. We are emotional people and we like preacher who will work on our emotion but the trouble with this we don't really grow spiritual.
Larry

[Dennis Bratcher]

I was at camp meeting years ago, the evangelist told me tonight people will shouting and running the asile. He play on thier emotion and see this happen at other time and I knew what they were doing. We are emotional people and we like preacher who will work on our emotion but the trouble with this we don't really grow spiritual.
Larry

Yes.

And we haven't even touched on the addictive effect of emotional highs. Physically, the body begins to crave the adrenalin and other brain chemicals released in high emotional states (or in the face of danger, as in extreme sports). In fact scientists describe emotions in terms of chemicals in the brain. But that's a different topic.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Larry Parsons]

Just to place it in context, Don Pfeifer came out of the Four Square church (http://www.foursquare.org/landing_pages/4,3.html), if I remember correctly. I have seen a couple of doozie stunts he pulled in revival services (one I have recounted here before without using names), enough to conclude that your initial judgment was probably accurate. At the time he was into "signs and wonders" and the services were orchestrated toward a certain outcome (which in one case was a spectacular failure, the single worst service I have ever attended because of what it did to some people; I may tell the story sometime). I'm not sure how the later Pfeifers evolved (this was in the late 1980s).

None of that says that God did not use him. That is the nature of grace. But some of it was very clearly manipulative.



I do not doubt that there is some overreaction, just as there has been a similar reaction against legalism, so that we have trouble talking about morals or ethics today (although this problem doesn't get as much attention). Yet we do learn from experience, sometimes perhaps too well. Much of what Jesus had to say about Pharisees related to their attempt to avoid the same mistakes that caused the exile. So the question is valid.

On the other hand, perhaps the Holiness movement of the nineteenth century frontier was itself an overreaction to the familiar and (for the frontier) rather tame forms of worship imported from England and the Continent. Combine that with other cultural shifts, and the emotionalism from the AHM that we use as a benchmark might have been way off center. Maybe what we put to death was that exaggerated overreaction and what we ended up with was a correction that put us closer to some middle-of-the-road balance.

Also, is it possible that some of what passes for spiritual emotionalism today is itself influenced by cultural expectations imported from the group dynamics of sports and music concerts that is creating yet another overreaction back the other direction? I suspect that we are not returning to nineteenth century spirituality but are creating a new cultural response that has a significantly different shape.

I just get tired of people telling me to act a certain way in worship (not that you did so!). And it is revealing that it is always people saying to be more emotional or expressive, never to be more reserved (ever hear a cheerleading squad tell the crowd to calm down?). I just don't buy that emotional outbursts of whatever sort are that critical, necessary, or all that genuine if they have to be forced, commanded, or worked up. If worship is authentic, people will respond from where they are according to who they are without needing to be told or taught. As I mentioned in another post, encounter with God is a profoundly personal experience that elicits a personal response, even if in corporate worship.

Why are we not content to just let God work with people, and let people worship and respond in their own way?

I recall one pastor (now a DS) who spent 20 minutes at the start of a service talking about freedom of worship. He went to great lengths to make the point that everyone ought to worship in their own way, and that this church encouraged people to do so. Then, he concluded by instructing the people to get on their feet, get their hands together, and get happy. So much for freedom of worship!

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

Somewhere betwween 12-15 years ago I visit and I believe it was the last CotN that Don Pfeifer pastor before he retire. Believe me it was wild service and even at age of 70 something he was urge it on. I believe these type of worship service involve a peer preasure because if you not worshiping like they do you will feel out place. I remember my first revival that had with a Nazarene preacher who very successful pastor in started curch's. Anyway he told me during the revival if you want your people to shout and etc you have to do it. I don't know if you would call this manuipultion or not.
Don could have came from the 4 square church but before he became a Nazarene he was with the Church of Christ of Christains Union.
Thanks
Larry

[Dennis Bratcher]

Don could have came from the 4 square church but before he became a Nazarene he was with the Church of Christ of Christains Union.

Now that you mention it, I think this may be right.

A quote I wrote down from a service, which I have on tape:


There is no movement of the Spirit in the churches I visit. I have to generate it.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Marsha Lynn]

This reminds me of that ghastly song, "Undignified". ugh!

I sang part of that song once in a rare vocal performance, but it wasn't in church. At the time I was slipping and sliding down a steep wooded hillside mostly on my behind because I didn't have the footing to negotiate it on my feet. I was definitely laying some pride aside as I provided much merriment for my more sure-footed companions who had gone before me and were standing at the bottom of the hill watching and laughing. I'm sure it was holy laughter in keeping with the song of worship on my lips. And the song definitely brought new levels of hilarity to the laughter. :rolleyes:

Honestly, though, I don't have a problem with the song. Sometimes we do indeed need to lay our pride aside and allow people to look on us with scorn as we lose ourselves in worship. Do you deem it "ghastly" in general or only when foisted onto a group of worshipers as something for all to breezily include in their testimony? I haven't encountered it enough in church to have bad associations with it.

Marsha

[Dale Cozby]

Lawyers, accountants, actuaries, engineers, and a whole host of personalities types like these are not prone to outwardly emotional outbursts. Does this make them less Christian? less spiritual? well...some might argue about lawyers, but for the most part I don't think so.
I had never seen my dad cry until an hour after his mother died and I went to find him outside...crying. I was 14 yrs old. Since then I have seen him cry, but not very much.

That said, perhaps the true measure of spiritual formation is only found in the heart between the person and the Creator.
Man judges by outward appearance but God judges by the heart.

Let those who weep cry and wail do so unto the Lord, and let those who stand in stoic silence do so unto the Lord.

[Billy Cox]

Honestly, though, I don't have a problem with the song. Sometimes we do indeed need to lay our pride aside and allow people to look on us with scorn as we lose ourselves in worship. Do you deem it "ghastly" in general or only when foisted onto a group of worshipers as something for all to breezily include in their testimony? I haven't encountered it enough in church to have bad associations with it.


I put it in the ghastly realm because it's just silly to sing about being undignified when we are all quite dignified, thank you. Or there are the occasions where we sing about 'lifting holy hands', 'dancing' or 'clapping' when we are most assuredly doing none of those things.

[John Kennedy]

My Dad used to say that it wasn't important how high you jumped, the crucial question was how straight you walked when you hit the ground. I'm probably the only person on this thread who has known people who were much better at high than straight.

[John Kennedy]

A very high profile Nazarene evangelist of 50+ years ago used to tell the story of another evangelist of that era who was well-known in the Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia area (one of two brothers).

He was coming to the close of his message and suddenly backed away from the pulpit, turned his face heavenward and began dolefully singing, "Go tell Aunt Rhoda, go tell Aunt Rhoda, go tell Aunt Rhoda, the old gray goose is dead."

According to the story teller people began streaming to the altar. He told the story in a tone that was half humorous and half earnest and approving. Being young, but not altogether stupid, I didn't choose to question him more closely about his opinion of this.

I think some of these people had been so powerfully impressed that a full altar was the epitome of God's approval that they implicitly adopted an 'end justifies the means' strategy - I'd almost characterize it as 'mistaken' rather than 'malicious' manipulation.

I guess the reason I emerged (there's that word again) from that 'culture' without a lot of cycical bitterness was because I came to see them as not particularly reflective about the implications of what
they were doing. It was a different world.

[Marsha Lynn]

My Dad used to say that it wasn't important how high you jumped, the crucial question was how straight you walked when you hit the ground. I'm probably the only person on this thread who has known people who were much better at high than straight.

There was a point in my life when I was convinced that the higher a person jumped the less faith I should put in their walk. It has now been long enough since I have been around any "jumpers" that I would be more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Back in those days a guaranteed method to shut down my emotional response was to stir up the emotions of the crowd. I think there is something within me that feels obliged to keep my head when those around me start losing theirs.

It has been a long time since I have seen runaway emotion expressed in a service. As I mentioned in another thread recently, the lack of "spirit" is one of the most frequent reasons given me by passing church shoppers for not sticking around my local church. I think I'm okay with being part of a slightly stodgy church, even if it means we don't snag many wandering sheep.

Marsha

[David Pettigrew]

I put it in the ghastly realm because it's just silly to sing about being undignified when we are all quite dignified, thank you. Or there are the occasions where we sing about 'lifting holy hands', 'dancing' or 'clapping' when we are most assuredly doing none of those things.

You haven't lived until you've been forced to sing Chris Rice's Cartoon Song in corporate worship. Yes, it really happened.

[Marsha Lynn]

You haven't lived until you've been forced to sing Chris Rice's Cartoon Song in corporate worship. Yes, it really happened.

Oh, yuck. That would indeed be ghastly.

I love Chris Rice's music and once saw him in concert. He, of course, had to do the cartoon song and expressed some dismay about it being so inescapable. Something about "Michael W. Smith has 'Friends' and I have the 'Cartoon Song'."

I always cringed back when it was more current and that was the only point of recognition I could find in trying to identify Chris Rice to someone. I felt like identifying him with that one song he did for fun amidst his more substantial offerings was almost worse than not identifying him at all.

By the way, "Untitled Hymn" is a Chris Rice song that has been well received when we have tried it as a congregational.

[David Pettigrew]

Oh, yuck. That would indeed be ghastly.

I love Chris Rice's music and once saw him in concert. He, of course, had to do the cartoon song and expressed some dismay about it being so inescapable. Something about "Michael W. Smith has 'Friends' and I have the 'Cartoon Song'."

I always cringed back when it was more current and that was the only point of recognition I could find in trying to identify Chris Rice to someone. I felt like identifying him with that one song he did for fun amidst his more substantial offerings was almost worse than not identifying him at all.

By the way, "Untitled Hymn" is a Chris Rice song that has been well received when we have tried it as a congregational.

What really made it special was that it took place during a so-called "youth revival", though most of the congregation present were quite elderly. The person leading worship literally made copies of the lyrics from the inside CD cover and distributed them, popped the Rice CD in the church PA system, and waved their arms like the choir director at a Billy Graham crusade as we sang. Ah, small churches.

[Billy Cox]

You haven't lived until you've been forced to sing Chris Rice's Cartoon Song in corporate worship. Yes, it really happened.

Been there done that... I was on staff as a worship band leader at the time. I was a good sport and played along, but it was one of many moments that convinced me that life is too short to spend it making someone's else's idiot-visions a reality.

[Billy Cox]

What really made it special was that it took place during a so-called "youth revival", though most of the congregation present were quite elderly. The person leading worship literally made copies of the lyrics from the inside CD cover and distributed them, popped the Rice CD in the church PA system, and waved their arms like the choir director at a Billy Graham crusade as we sang. Ah, small churches.

I remember thinking that the cartoon characters used in the song were a bit dated. I'll have to ask my 11 year-old daughter whether she knows who Yogi Bear is or whether she can sing the Smurfs theme song. I would wager that she would look at me with that preteen blank stare that puts joy in my heart. :)

The most recent cartoon in the song is 'Beavis and that other guy', and it is the butt of a joke.

[Larry Parsons]

A very high profile Nazarene evangelist of 50+ years ago used to tell the story of another evangelist of that era who was well-known in the Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia area (one of two brothers).

He was coming to the close of his message and suddenly backed away from the pulpit, turned his face heavenward and began dolefully singing, "Go tell Aunt Rhoda, go tell Aunt Rhoda, go tell Aunt Rhoda, the old gray goose is dead."

According to the story teller people began streaming to the altar. He told the story in a tone that was half humorous and half earnest and approving. Being young, but not altogether stupid, I didn't choose to question him more closely about his opinion of this.

I think some of these people had been so powerfully impressed that a full altar was the epitome of God's approval that they implicitly adopted an 'end justifies the means' strategy - I'd almost characterize it as 'mistaken' rather than 'malicious' manipulation.

I guess the reason I emerged (there's that word again) from that 'culture' without a lot of cycical bitterness was because I came to see them as not particularly reflective about the implications of what
they were doing. It was a different world.
John, I was born and raise in the very culture that you are speaking of. If the altar wasn't line you didn't have a success service. I think you will still see that attitude in many churches that is found in the States that you have mention. Yet one Nazarene evangelist who live back in those day told that he did believe in long altar calls. If people wasn't ready to come to altar after he finish preaching he wasn't going waste his time begging them.
Thanks
Larry

[Susan Unger]

Here's a good book for introverts and church - Introverts in the Church: Finding Our Place in an Extroverted Culture by Adam McHugh. I haven't read it yet but it sounds good.

[Sarah Smith]

Billy--one sure tip to manipulation is when you are either a musician or do the bulletin and at the meeting to plan the service are specifically told "we'll do this song here and get folks fired up to do anything. Then I'll lay the idea of building a bigger building on them." Another is being told to put out lots of boxes of kleenex since "we haven't had a good cry in this church in a while and I think it is time."

[Houston Thomas]

The Pfiefers, "Undignified", and Chris Rice's Cartoon Song in Worship have nothing on these Unitarian Universalists. Nothing.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOYt9rwdrgk

[Roy Richardson]

Amen. IMHO, too meany peole seek the emotional experience and not the transformative experience. They run to the emotional experience for a fix instead of seeking the deep, grinding process of transformation. Emotional experience also caters to our instant gratification culture. Sadly, too many pasoters and evangelists have catered to the emotional experience and conditioned people that it is a required element of experiencing God.

[Debi Peck]

Amen. IMHO, too meany peole seek the emotional experience and not the transformative experience. They run to the emotional experience for a fix instead of seeking the deep, grinding process of transformation. Emotional experience also caters to our instant gratification culture. Sadly, too many pasoters and evangelists have catered to the emotional experience and conditioned people that it is a required element of experiencing God.

Roy, I think you hit the nail squarely on the head!! Pushing the "thanks" button just wasn't enough. In my own journey, it's precisely that "transformative experience" which I have finally come to value and see as where my focus needs to be. I loved your description of it as a "deep, grinding process." It's painful, and sometimes painfully slow, but SOOOO worth it.

Thanks, again for posting this. It really is quite profound.

[David Pettigrew]

The Pfiefers, "Undignified", and Chris Rice's Cartoon Song in Worship have nothing on these Unitarian Universalists. Nothing.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOYt9rwdrgk

Why doesn't the Nazarene Holy Spirit have this much rhythm?

[John Kennedy]

Why doesn't the Nazarene Holy Spirit have this much rhythm?

No longer being Nazarene I make it a point to avoid appraisals of the type you are requesting. But, surmising that we spent our formative years hanging out with a lot of the same kind of people in the same kinds of churches, I would venture that the UU church scene (YOUTUBE?) should at least indicate that appearances can be deceiving.
I grew up with the idea that emotion was probably indicative of unction - the more you displayed, the more you had. It almost reminds me of the situation related on another forum where the poster spoke of seeing a number of women dressed in what could probably best be described as 'severe modesty'. Having been raised CHM, she assumed they were also of that persuasion.
However, when she got acquainted with them, she discovered that they were plural wives and members of a fundamentalist polygamist Mormon group.
Flip Wilson's character, Geraldine, to the contrary notwithstanding, what you see ain't necessarily what you get.

[Gina Stevenson]

Which button to push, John ... which button to push .......

While it sounds funny, there's something pathetic about it, too ... so into "modesty," yet sharing things way too intimate to be shared with a "group." Weirdly sad.

[Billy Cox]

Amen. IMHO, too meany peole seek the emotional experience and not the transformative experience. They run to the emotional experience for a fix instead of seeking the deep, grinding process of transformation. Emotional experience also caters to our instant gratification culture. Sadly, too many pasoters and evangelists have catered to the emotional experience and conditioned people that it is a required element of experiencing God.

Roy, I am curious as to how you know people's motivations. I'm not saying they are anything but accurate, but I am often intrigued when someone claims to know *why* someone makes their decisions.

I have no trouble believing that some church leaders have identified ways to manufacture a desired emotional response, but does that automatically mean that the people on the other end of that are just spiritual thrill-seekers?

[Houston Thomas]

Why doesn't the Nazarene Holy Spirit have this much rhythm?

I know, right!?! Did you see the older gentleman in the front? I'm guessing he was the 'pastor.' He was getting down!

While I posted that video in a joking manner, there is something cool about a community where 'spontaneous' celebrations are welcomed, affirmed, and enjoyed. And a place that can laugh at itself is a good thing.

[Kelly R Davis]

A great read on this theme of God, emotions, and spiritual formation is Dallas Willard's book: "Renovation of the Heart"

[Billy Cox]

A great read on this theme of God, emotions, and spiritual formation is Dallas Willard's book: "Renovation of the Heart"

I have seen Dallas Willard's name mentioned in connection with the post-congregational narrative, but I have not read any of his books. What does he say that would resonate with people who have jettisoned the institutional church?

Based on frequent sermon references to 'Spirit of the Disciplines' and 'Renovation of the Heart', I had almost dismissed Willard as a neo-legalist or works-righteousness advocate.

[Carolyn Franklin]

Jesus wept. What was wrong with his emotion?
gc

[Billy Cox]

Jesus wept. What was wrong with his emotion?
gc

It totally disrupted the worship service. ;)